FIFA World Cup

[Si]

We're going to the World Cup!

We're gonna qualify for a World Cup!!!!

 

Si, man. I fucking HAAAAAAAAAAAATE how much I don't care this week. I feel fucking nothing. I still don't even have a team picked. Fucking non qualifying cunts.

[emoji38] get behind crazy Mitro.

[Mikky]

Late KO times 

[mrmojorisin75]

48 teams?

 

Can't wait for Canada v Armenia opening game

 

48 teams?  holy fuck, FIFA really going for broke now on the bribes front...perhaps the net is closing in

[Kaizero]

100% the right choice by FIFA, for once. These nations need to do very little to be able to host a tournament compared to Morocco, which would probably need to build five to six stadiums.

 

Also in favour of the US getting 60 matches compared to Mexico/Canadas 20.

[TRC]

Get in, I'll finally get to a World Cup!

[AyeDubbleYoo]

100% the right choice by FIFA, for once. These nations need to do very little to be able to host a tournament compared to Morocco, which would probably need to build five to six stadiums.

 

Also in favour of the US getting 60 matches compared to Mexico/Canadas 20.

 

Not sure why that is so important really, who cares how many stadiums they need to build? Assume it means less profit for FIFA, which is probably a major reason.

 

I think it's a good choice but I don't really get why people assume the WC should just go to the country who is already the most established.

[Kaizero]

100% the right choice by FIFA, for once. These nations need to do very little to be able to host a tournament compared to Morocco, which would probably need to build five to six stadiums.

 

Also in favour of the US getting 60 matches compared to Mexico/Canadas 20.

 

Not sure why that is so important really, who cares how many stadiums they need to build? Assume it means less profit for FIFA, which is probably a major reason.

 

 

Makes the nations run at a horrible loss and leaves massive empty ghost stadiums that fall apart.

 

https://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2015/02/02/world-cup-stadiums-brazil-south-africa-fifa-white-elephants

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I think Morocco were predicting over £4bn profit.

 

Fair point about the legacy.

[Deuce]

100% the right choice by FIFA, for once. These nations need to do very little to be able to host a tournament compared to Morocco, which would probably need to build five to six stadiums.

 

Also in favour of the US getting 60 matches compared to Mexico/Canadas 20.

 

Not sure why that is so important really, who cares how many stadiums they need to build? Assume it means less profit for FIFA, which is probably a major reason.

 

I think it's a good choice but I don't really get why people assume the WC should just go to the country who is already the most established.

 

It’s a tough one, because those who are already established also generally carry the least baggage. But you do want to see new places get a shot. And there aren’t too many places that fit the bill. But I do think Morocco is one of those places.

 

[afar]

This is great news, fantastic for Canada, first time in ever they'll qualify Hopefully get to see some games if they play in Calgary, would need a new stadium here though, so more likely that if they come to Alberta it'll be Edmonton which is 500 miles away from me.

[sbnufc]

Average ticket for this will be $420 apparently

[Kaizero]

I think Morocco were predicting over £4bn profit.

 

Fair point about the legacy.

 

Both Brazil and South Africa predicted profit, they got massive losses - and the cost of arranging a match in one of their stadiums costs more than the team playing their get through ticket sales. It's just not good to give such a massive tournament to a country that doesn't need a massive infrastructure lift. In Brazil's case, that wasn't the stadiums - more the general infrastructure needed to modernize their cities for such an event.

 

It's just how it made no sense for a joing Norway/Sweden Euro bid. Most people into football in both countries (myself included) wants that to happen, but we have no teams that would even fill half of the stadium sizes that would need to exist to host it - after the EC - so even if we'd get an upswing, it'd mean a longtime loss, which is why our politicians scrapped the idea because they are fun ghouls.

[Guest neesy111]

I think Morocco were predicting over £4bn profit.

 

Fair point about the legacy.

 

Profit for Fifa, not the host country.

[Kaizero]

100% the right choice by FIFA, for once. These nations need to do very little to be able to host a tournament compared to Morocco, which would probably need to build five to six stadiums.

 

Also in favour of the US getting 60 matches compared to Mexico/Canadas 20.

 

Not sure why that is so important really, who cares how many stadiums they need to build? Assume it means less profit for FIFA, which is probably a major reason.

 

I think it's a good choice but I don't really get why people assume the WC should just go to the country who is already the most established.

 

It’s a tough one, because those who are already established also generally carry the least baggage. But you do want to see new places get a shot. And there aren’t too many places that fit the bill. But I do think Morocco is one of those places.

 

I generally agree it'd be cool to see new places. But also don't want to watch it in places with poor human rights (Qatar) and in places where it's bound to create a negative legacy economically for the hosts, which sadly puts a fair few places out of competition beyond those who have some sort of infrastructure already in place. The latter > the former, though, naturally.

 

I think the best way for nations like that is to spread the burden with joint bids instead of single bids. Just read the Norwegian FA delegate voted for the US option mainly due to the same concerns I have.

[TRC]

Alphonso Davies will tear you all apart.

[B-more Mag]

Can't wait to be a training site with no matches!

[TRC]

Average ticket for this will be $420 apparently

 

Is that inflated massively due to boxes/ corporate?

[Flip]

Average ticket for this will be $420 apparently

 

Is that inflated massively due to boxes/ corporate?

 

Has to be. Best non-hospitality seats for group stages are $210 this time around.

[Ameritoon]

Someone I know at US Soccer said they can hardly get Mexico on the phone and most Canadian cities want to drop out because of FIFA’s insane demands. Pretty amazing FIFA is on their way to destroying the one thing they did well

[54]

Hopefully we go in for a bid in 2030, as it'll be the 100 year anniversary of the World Cup and it'd make sense if it was hosted at the home of where football was invented.

[Kaizero]

Hopefully we go in for a bid in 2030, as it'll be the 100 year anniversary of the World Cup and it'd make sense if it was hosted at the home of where football was invented.

 

To be honest, as it's the 100th year anniversary of the World Cup, it'd make sense for Uruguay to host it.

[Tooj]

Hopefully we go in for a bid in 2030, as it'll be the 100 year anniversary of the World Cup and it'd make sense if it was hosted at the home of where football was invented.

Uruguay/Argentina joint bid with Uruguay hosting the final.

[Flip]

Hopefully we go in for a bid in 2030, as it'll be the 100 year anniversary of the World Cup and it'd make sense if it was hosted at the home of where football was invented.

 

To be honest, as it's the 100th year anniversary of the World Cup, it'd make sense for Uruguay to host it.

 

Uruguay and Argentina are most probably going to co-host it.

[Guest firetotheworks]

The U.S and Mexico re-hosting the world's biggest football tournament before England, Spain, and Italy(ish)

 

I get the whole doing a continent at a time thing, but it's still a joke like.

[Guest]

The U.S and Mexico re-hosting the world's biggest football tournament before England, Spain, and Italy(ish)

 

I get the whole doing a continent at a time thing, but it's still a joke like.

 

No doubt this new format and more teams is a way of more joint bids.