Celtic Park or Hampden would be refurbished, and rightly so. Both great grounds.
World Cup 2030
- Thread starter maniak
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
I don't think nostalgia will count for much in making this decision.
England should apply and should get it especially since it will be 64 years, by 2030, since England last hosted it and 12 years since Europe will have last hosted it.
England should apply and should get it especially since it will be 64 years, by 2030, since England last hosted it and 12 years since Europe will have last hosted it.
Parkhead is fine. Hampden is horrid. They should do a Wembley and just bin it and build a new Hampden.
There's still about 20 grounds I'd pick ahead of Parkhead though, in it's current condition.
Last edited:
Morocco are desperate to host the WC and Africa is due another go - but the new format makes it difficult for most countries to host alone and I think most future bids will probably be combined.
Most people dont realise how close Morocco is to Spain geographically so logistically it will be pretty easy - in fact the Spanish Super Cup was played in Morocco this year.
But as well as the Morocco/Spain/Portugal bid - they are also considering a North Africa 'Maghreb' bid with Morocco/Algeria/Tunisia apparently but Id say the Euro/Africa bid has more chance.
Looks like Argentina-Uruguay are also going to bid (although with 2026 in North America I think South America have less chance) and England are looking into putting together a British bid.
Casablanca is closer to Lisboa than Barcelona. In terms of travel for teams and fans it would be perfect.
Not to mention the weather is guaranteed to be good but bearable for footballers unlike Qatar and cities are amazing.
Hampden’s not ‘horrible’, and they’re refurbishing it. Plus, it’s big. Where else are they going to host the games if they need at least 2 in Scotland?
While I'm not familiar with the state of railway travel in Scotland, it's not indispensable that people travel by train. Planes, coach, car rental are all possibilities that surely can accomodate the needs of travelling tourists. I can imagine lots of Europeans could even take a ferry and come with their own vehicle from the continent.
I think we also have to be careful with the standards we expect from host countries. If absolutely everything has to be top of the line (hotels, transport infrastructure, stadiums, weather, football culture, political climate, country size, distance for European fans) then we would end up with a rotation of the U.S, France/Germany and Japan/China every 4 years. Yes Qatar, is a massive mistake from FIFA for so many reasons, but I think Brazil and Russia have shown that you can organize a top tournament even if you have deficiencies in some areas.
For the record, I think all the mentioned bids would would work very well. I think Portugal and Morocco deserve to host WC matches and bidding together with Spain would give them a good chance.
A UK bid would be fantastic. Think of the venues involved filled to the brim. But the FA needs to change their modus operandi this time. England could massively benefit from having the Welsh, Scots and eventually Irish doing some of the lobbying. They don't carry the same political connotations as an Englishman would.
Last edited:
International travel is basically just a few hours on top of continental travel. You may need a couple more days overall.
I don’t know, it takes two days for me to recover from US to Poland flight. Going from Europe to Australia is also 24 or more hours.
Also you are neglecting the cost. Costs £100 to go from one end of Europe to another but £250 or more to go to Asia, Australia or America.
You can have regional groups with 4 in Western Europe, 4 in Middle East/Eastern Europe, 4 in east Asia, 4 in Pacific US, 4 in Atlantic US, etc
And then have the next rounds being a few hours away, etc
No one is suggesting 1 game in London followed by 1 in Auckland
As for the costs, the tickets are so expensive nowadays that the flight is a small fraction
Very reliable news today in Portugal reporting this will be the case. Argentina/Uruguay and Spain/Portugal/Morocco will be the two strong bids.
Most surprising thing about it is Spain still believe they'll be a country by then.
The Castile/Catalonia/Basque Country/Andalusia/Portugal/Morocco World Cup will be a pain in the arse to say
???
That's quite interesting, but I'm still expecting Fifa to somehow hand in to China.
World Cup 2030: British and Irish federations to discuss potential tournament bid
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47164514
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47164514
South American bid is in: Chile joined Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay in the joint bid.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47248082
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47248082
There is a historical reason for this one to be sucessfull.
Should be in South America. Games across the whole of CONMEBOL would be pretty cool to be honest.
From the Pacific to the Atlantic ocean. 
I'm in.
I'm in.Wouldn't be against it at all. Argentina obviously providing bulk of stadiums, Chile upgraded a few for Copa America in 2015 and obviously final would be at upgraded Centenario. Not sure what Paraguay would provide bar their national stadium in Asuncion.
Should be in the UK. Some of the best stadiums in the world especially by then and if some of these stadiums are upgraded nobody will die.
The 2022 WC would be perfect for England to be holding and should be doing so.
Wonder if the other 6 CONMEBOL countries would like that 4 countries cup. I believe CONMEBOL is only getting 6 spots, at a least for 2026. So that leaves 2 spots for Brazil, Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Peru, Bolivia.
with his work ethic, I don't think that he will be coming to the end of his career.
Depends how many stadiums are being provided. To me if you're just providing one stadium you shouldn't get an automatic slot so I'd have Paraguay qualifying. Guess same would apply for Uruguay although would be a bit of a problem for the whole bid if the country hosting the final didn't play in the tournament.
Has it been decided how many stadiums Canada are providing for 2026?
Should? Why?
After all the first one was made in South America?
Nothing more fair than returning to the starting point. And it’s not only on South America where there are problems. There were less violence problems in Brazil than in former European WC’s.
Yes, it's 3 from Canada and 3 from Mexico, and the stadiums are also set. The ones we don't know are the host cities the US, since they have so many bid cities.
Who cares where the first one was made?
UK has waited ages for a World Cup. Has the best stadiums. By then Everton and Liverpool should have new stadiums. Maybe a few other clubs too.
I wasn’t talking about violence problems. I was talking about the deaths from the people helping construct these stadiums. South America isn’t strict on health and safety. 8 people died constructing stadiums in Brazil. That’s 8 too many.
And how many people you think die building stadiums on other continents? Anyway no reason to dismiss your opinion because it looks both of us have strong arguments to defend each position. Chill.
Chill?
I am chilled. I was explaining to you why the UK should get it. Being the first ones to get it is no reason. For me the countries in South America and other continents should improve their health and safety regulations before bidding for world cups. Nobody should be dying building football stadiums.
The UK has had a lot of new stadiums build in the last decade or so. I don’t recall anyone dying building them.
There was a death at Wembley for example:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7073251.stm
Wait, what?
Surely, finally will be England.
- Best stadia
- Highest attendances
- Infrastructure
- Commerically most lucrative
- Highest level of safety
All these things were noted by McKinsey & Co. management consultants in the report FIFA had them do regarding the 2018 bidders.
- Best stadia
- Highest attendances
- Infrastructure
- Commerically most lucrative
- Highest level of safety
All these things were noted by McKinsey & Co. management consultants in the report FIFA had them do regarding the 2018 bidders.
Infrastructure & Safety? If that’s a big factor they should hold it in Japan.
15 years ago in a freak accident? Bit of a different situation surely.
So what did McKinsey Say about Qatar 2022 in the same categories?
The "most lucrative" hosts for FIFA are the ones that let them get away with more things, specially regarding lucrative infrastructure (stadium, airports, hotels, transporte) contracts.
how about UK & Ireland
If Uruguay (plus some other SA country) wants it and put a serious bid in the table, then they should get it.
I've given up hoping for a world cup back in the UK, it's beyond long overdue, and anyone who wants to argue that is a bit daft.