Pilko Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 Don't think we'll get it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Russia and USA imo. I just know the US is going to get 2022 just to force me to go there again instead of getting to visit some fun new country. Really have no desire to go to Russia whatsoever even if they do end up hosting as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubaricho Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Really would love to get the 2022 but I doubt it'll happen to be honest. I think it'll go to Australia. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Don't see how they could justify giving it to Australia with their non-existent footballing/transportation infrastructure. I suppose crazier things have happened. As long as it's not Qatar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Don't see how they could justify giving it to Australia with their non-existent footballing/transportation infrastructure. I suppose crazier things have happened. As long as it's not Qatar. I'm really not botherd about the 2022 bid to be honest, I'm more concerned about us getting 2018, though if I could choose the 2 winners, it would be US and Australia. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Don't see how they could justify giving it to Australia with their non-existent footballing/transportation infrastructure. I suppose crazier things have happened. As long as it's not Qatar. I'm really not botherd about the 2022 bid to be honest, I'm more concerned about us getting 2018, though if I could choose the 2 winners, it would be US and Australia. Now that would be an odd WC logistically. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubaricho Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Don't see how they could justify giving it to Australia with their non-existent footballing/transportation infrastructure. I suppose crazier things have happened. As long as it's not Qatar. Like give it to South Africa? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 SSN's worst "Breaking News" ticker ever...."David Beckham says England has the best bid". Really?? I thought he was going to say, "Well actually I quite like the Holland/Belgium bid". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Doesn't Russia span like 8 time zones? Going to be a nightmare keeping track of what time the games are on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foluwashola Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 England & USA please Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Village Idiot Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Don't think Russia will be scheduling games in Vladivostok, probably all will we arranged west of the Urals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Village Idiot Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Apparently we are sending in Cronaldo to Zurich to convince the judges on Thursday. Not sure how to feel about this... He dropped out after picking a knock in the Clásico. We can't do it without his pecs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpal78 Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Nice to see so many people in this country willimg to turn a blind eye to corruption so long as we get to see some s**** like Togo versus Ukraine at St James' Park That's right keep on convincing yourself that the BBC program will end of corruption in FIFA and those criticizing it are just turning a blind eye to corruption. Have a look at BBC's statement "Delay until after the bid was not an option once it became clear that the winning nations might have been chosen by officials with a proven track record of corruption. The programme has uncovered new evidence linking current, long-serving members of the FIFA executive committee with systemic corruption." So what did they seek to achieve by screening it before the vote? Were they really expecting that somehow FIFA would suspend voting because of BBC's allegation? Don't be naive man. There would not have been an material difference (in terms of stopping corruption) had BBC screened the show after the vote. The only thing achieved by screening before the vote was to damage England's chances and get some cheap sensationalism for BBC, nothing else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Apparently we are sending in Cronaldo to Zurich to convince the judges on Thursday. Not sure how to feel about this... He dropped out after picking a knock in the Clásico. We can't do it without his pecs He dropped out of a meeting because of injury? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 As if the BBC were trying to stop the corruption. Their reporter spent the majority of the documentary just shouting accusations at people Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 SSN's worst "Breaking News" ticker ever...."David Beckham says England has the best bid". Really?? I thought he was going to say, "Well actually I quite like the Holland/Belgium bid". SSN is fucking shit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 I don't think we were in line to get it even before Panorama. And if a precondition for hosting the World Cup is that all criticism of FIFA must be suppressed, f*** 'em. Countries such as Russia and Qatar (respectively numbers 140 and 121 on the Press Freedom Index 2010) are precisely where it belongs. http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-index-2010,1034.html fucking hell, i agree with you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Village Idiot Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Apparently we are sending in Cronaldo to Zurich to convince the judges on Thursday. Not sure how to feel about this... He dropped out after picking a knock in the Clásico. We can't do it without his pecs He dropped out of a meeting because of injury? I presume he's just pissed off. Poor form but he (or any other football celeb) wasn't going to make any difference at this point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Russia would have bribed everyone in FIFA. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Nice to see so many people in this country willimg to turn a blind eye to corruption so long as we get to see some s**** like Togo versus Ukraine at St James' Park That's right keep on convincing yourself that the BBC program will end of corruption in FIFA and those criticizing it are just turning a blind eye to corruption. Have a look at BBC's statement "Delay until after the bid was not an option once it became clear that the winning nations might have been chosen by officials with a proven track record of corruption. The programme has uncovered new evidence linking current, long-serving members of the FIFA executive committee with systemic corruption." So what did they seek to achieve by screening it before the vote? Were they really expecting that somehow FIFA would suspend voting because of BBC's allegation? Don't be naive man. There would not have been an material difference (in terms of stopping corruption) had BBC screened the show after the vote. The only thing achieved by screening before the vote was to damage England's chances and get some cheap sensationalism for BBC, nothing else. Do you think the people implicated in the program didn't know about the allegations already and would have voted for England if only the program had been shown later? There's a case for saying it should have been shown as soon as possible, but not later. If anything this will improve England's chances. You're the corrupt FIFA official. Do you: Sulk about the program and vote against England just because of it, knowing it will only increase suspicion that you're self-serving and corrupt and encourage more journalists to come after you. Vote for England even if you fancied a nice Summer holiday on the Costa del Sol hoping it will show just how impartial and incorruptible you are and get those nasty people who want to stop you getting rich from backhanders off your back for a bit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpal78 Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Nice to see so many people in this country willimg to turn a blind eye to corruption so long as we get to see some s**** like Togo versus Ukraine at St James' Park That's right keep on convincing yourself that the BBC program will end of corruption in FIFA and those criticizing it are just turning a blind eye to corruption. Have a look at BBC's statement "Delay until after the bid was not an option once it became clear that the winning nations might have been chosen by officials with a proven track record of corruption. The programme has uncovered new evidence linking current, long-serving members of the FIFA executive committee with systemic corruption." So what did they seek to achieve by screening it before the vote? Were they really expecting that somehow FIFA would suspend voting because of BBC's allegation? Don't be naive man. There would not have been an material difference (in terms of stopping corruption) had BBC screened the show after the vote. The only thing achieved by screening before the vote was to damage England's chances and get some cheap sensationalism for BBC, nothing else. Do you think the people implicated in the program didn't know about the allegations already and would have voted for England if only the program had been shown later? There's a case for saying it should have been shown as soon as possible, but not later. If anything this will improve England's chances. You're the corrupt FIFA official. Do you: Sulk about the program and vote against England just because of it, knowing it will only increase suspicion that you're self-serving and corrupt and encourage more journalists to come after you. Vote for England even if you fancied a nice Summer holiday on the Costa del Sol hoping it will show just how impartial and incorruptible you are and get those nasty people who want to stop you getting rich from backhanders off your back for a bit. You reasoning only stands if there was a way to unearth the motivation behind every vote. Otherwise the said FIFA official who is pissed off at BBC would happily vote against England and justify the vote on so many other plausible grounds. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leffe186 Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Bizarre. Just got in, switched on Fox Soccer and Morgan Freeman was on, apparently playing Nelson Mandela. That's what it looked like anyway. "I'm sorry, I missed a page". Nice work Morgan, that's the bid scuppered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leffe186 Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 I like that he keeps referring to Mr Sepp Bladder. Here comes Barack... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ameritoon Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Didn't know this was one. Too lazy to get out of bed to a tv with FSC on it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leffe186 Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Didn't know this was one. Too lazy to get out of bed to a tv with FSC on it. Don't bother. Although they did just show the Donovan goal against Algeria! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now