Beren Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 pointless Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Don't see whats wrong with it tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I find it a good option. They'll be in the group with five teams, so once each round lne team needs to play a friendly instead of a qualifier. Adding France makes it all much more neat and easy and France gets a decent amount of matches without being in the actual qualifiers. Poland and Ukraine struggled with arranging frinelies when they arranged it. It's basically a pre-arranged set of friendlies rather than anything else, and it gives teams the same advantage. (I.e France playing shit teams and not just Brazil over and over again in Abu Dhabi or some shit.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DebuchyAndTheBeast Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 As good a thread as any... @SkySportsNews UEFA change the rules for Euro 2016 - hosts France will play qualifiers but there'll be no points at stake in their games! http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-W6ti67rs4b0/T1UBjzMY3-I/AAAAAAAAAz8/4nRiPiADOI8/s1600/ed-nortan-laptop.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I say it's a stupid idea. Why must they insist on making things more complicated than they should be? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 They're making them less complicated, man. France now will have an agreed upon set of friendlies with the nation that normally would not be able to play (in a five nation group). This instead of both France and said nation having to try and arrange a friendly on the same date when most other nations are already busy with qualifiers. This due to the issue other host nations have had to do just that during past qualifiers. It's sensationalism to say "UEFA have changed the rules". They've just made it easier for the host nation to maintain their International schedule as well as kind of making it fairer on other teams in that France will still potentially have to play minnows instead of just competing in friendlies against Brazil and such. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henke Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 They're making them less complicated, man. France now will have an agreed upon set of friendlies with the nation that normally would not be able to play (in a five nation group). This instead of both France and said nation having to try and arrange a friendly on the same date when most other nations are already busy with qualifiers. This due to the issue other host nations have had to do just that during past qualifiers. It's sensationalism to say "UEFA have changed the rules". They've just made it easier for the host nation to maintain their International schedule as well as kind of making it fairer on other teams in that France will still potentially have to play minnows instead of just competing in friendlies against Brazil and such. Now that you've put it like that it actually makes sense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomson Mouse Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Can imagine a winter break will be a permanent fixture after this. I'm all for a winter break tbh. As long as it comes right after the christmas fixtures. Trouble is it would mean decreasing the number of teams in the league and less teams = less fixtures = less cash. So i don't see it happening, unless they start the season in July. I could see some clubs loving a winter break. They'll piss off to Asia, Australia etc for warm weather friendlies and will rake in money. Just the top clubs though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 They're making them less complicated, man. France now will have an agreed upon set of friendlies with the nation that normally would not be able to play (in a five nation group). This instead of both France and said nation having to try and arrange a friendly on the same date when most other nations are already busy with qualifiers. This due to the issue other host nations have had to do just that during past qualifiers. It's sensationalism to say "UEFA have changed the rules". They've just made it easier for the host nation to maintain their International schedule as well as kind of making it fairer on other teams in that France will still potentially have to play minnows instead of just competing in friendlies against Brazil and such. Now that you've put it like that it actually makes sense. Aye. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorJ_01 Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Shut up Kaizero. fuck uefa Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leffe186 Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 My first reaction was "Que?", but it does make sense. I don't think it's a coincidence that Platini has made this happen when it's France who benefit, but there you go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 bit daft really imho. The real problem when hosting isn't so much the lack of competitive game time, hosts normally do fairly well in tournaments regardless of that its the ranking points dip thats really the kicker and this doesn't really solve that issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/24/qatar-2022-world-cup-185-nepalese-workers-died-2013 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leffe186 Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 He vowed that the tournament will not be built "on the blood of innocents". Too fucking late, pal, it already is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 and all that will be conveniently swept under the carpet and ignored along with their own reports on the country which recommended against going there and the numerous less than pleasant laws on the books there its all to bring more qutar cash into fifa delegates pockets. Fucking sick of the same corrupt shit over and over again from them and they act above the law Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 They're making them less complicated, man. France now will have an agreed upon set of friendlies with the nation that normally would not be able to play (in a five nation group). This instead of both France and said nation having to try and arrange a friendly on the same date when most other nations are already busy with qualifiers. This due to the issue other host nations have had to do just that during past qualifiers. It's sensationalism to say "UEFA have changed the rules". They've just made it easier for the host nation to maintain their International schedule as well as kind of making it fairer on other teams in that France will still potentially have to play minnows instead of just competing in friendlies against Brazil and such. Now that you've put it like that it actually makes sense. Aye. Damn your logic Kaizero! (Made me look a tad foolish). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 A high-ranking FIFA employee has been quoted as telling the Welt am Sonntag newspaper that taking the 2022 World Cup away from Qatar is a “serious option.” The employee, who was not named by the paper, said the final meeting of FIFA's Executive Committee this year would be decisive in determining whether it can take place in the Gulf state, adding: “That would allow enough time for the tournament to be reassigned.” The decision in 2010 to award the World Cup to Qatar has provoked significant controversy. A “workers’ charter” was announced in recent days to protect migrant employees who have been brought in to build infrastructure, but The Observer published an editorial on Sunday that said “at least 400 labourers have died on Qatar's building sites as the nation's prepares to host the World Cup” and that is “only a fraction of the true number of lives lost.” There have also been serious concerns raised over the temperatures in the Gulf state. FIFA has insisted no decision has yet been made as to whether the World Cup will be moved to the winter, but the organisation’s secretary general, Jerome Valcke, has said it will not be played in June-July and president Sepp Blatter also favours a change in schedule. Yet moving the tournament presents a number of obstacles, including disruption to domestic leagues, a clash with the 2022 Winter Olympics and potential objections from TV broadcasters. The FIFA employee added: “We have our backs against the wall in terms of finding the right date. There isn’t a solution in sight, even if the tournament does not take place in the summer.” Die Welt am Sonntag adds that a report into potential corruption in the World Cup voting process is due to be released this year. Qatar has firmly denied any wrongdoing. Despite the concerns, the chairman of FIFA's medical committee, Michel D'Hooghe, told the German newspaper that “all problems will be solved” and said: “We still have eight years left.” That, according to the article, is the general feeling among many members of FIFA’s Executive Committee, and D'Hooghe added: “The 2022 World Cup is a huge chance for Qatar.” http://espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/1717697/qatar-lose-2022-world-cup-fifa-employee-claims?cc=5901 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 The location of these two world cups pisses me off every time this thread is bumped. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Australia would be a great location. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LesPaul Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 I'm not even English and I think it's a crime that there hasn't been a world cup in England since 1966 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henke Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Australia would be a great location. Agreed on this, i'd love to see the '22 World Cup be re-awarded to the Aussies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Matches would kick off at shite o'clock. No thanks. Also, football in cricket grounds would be odd. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henke Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Wouldn't be much different to Japan / Korea and that was one of my favourite world cups. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pata Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 Australia would be a great location. Agreed on this, i'd love to see the '22 World Cup be re-awarded to the Aussies. Australia would be horrible unless they are happy to have all the games between midnight and noon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 In theory, it'd go to America anyway given that they came 2nd in the vote. 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