And the world cup goes to...Qatar?

[jez29]

I imagine some of you are paying attention to the World Cup 2018 and 2022 announcements that have just been made in Zurich. Russia will host in 2018, which I can understand (this coming from an Englishman who has just watched his country lose the bidding). But Qatar in 2022? That is surely a risk too far. Its fair enough to take football to the Middle East, but a nation with 1.5 million inhabitants and no footballing history to speak of? I'm astounded. Maybe things will change in 12 years, but if you'd told me yesterday that Qatar would win I'd have had you packed off to the asylum.

Since most English football forums will currently be exploding in apoplectic fury (and this is the only forum I'm actually on regularly) I was just wondering what other, perhaps more sensible people think about this (well maybe not sensible, but you know what I mean). Are Russia and Qatar the best choices?

 

[Cpt_Oblivious]

Hehe. I like the decision because I've always wanted to go to Russia and I might be able to get a deal of some sort going over there

As for us English hosting it? Nah. We're going to screw up the Olympics already, we don't need more opportunities to embarrass ourselves internationally.

 

[nolongerhere]

Well, Russia seems a pretty damn good choice. They have good stadiums, a pretty good team, and quite a lot of fans in the country. While I would have preferred England as it would be easier for me to go see the football, I'm not concerned about the ability of Russia to host a good World Cup. About Qatar, I know nothing.

Edit: Just looked them up. Never qualified for a World Cup, and their biggest stadium holds 50,000 people. They have a few which hold 25000 to 20000. I'm guessing that there will be a number of stadiums constructed between now and 2022.

 

[Jamieson 90]

I think thats just it though isn't it. No one would think of Qatar, maybe thats what they want to change. Got to say im annoyed England did win it as well but nothing you can do about it now I guess.

 

[BritishWeather]

I watched it live and am pretty pissed. England was/is the best choice. It's just the French/Swiss trying to get money. FIFA are corrupt and run by a load footballing nations e.g south Africa (rugby) etc etc. There was a guy voting who was from trindad and Tobago, what a load of subjective shit.

 

[El Poncho]

I had to look up where Qatar was when I had seen it won.

Also I would have preferred England to win it, then I could go see the World Cup without having to get a flight to another country.

 

[Jay D Gee]

Russia makes sense but I can see the news now about corruption of the votes.

Qatar is just because they wanted the tournament in the middle east and they promised the most development.

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

First of all, let's get this out of the way:

RUSSIA, YEAH, I get to see the World Cup, WOOOO!

Now I can actually contribute. I believe Russia won due to the horrible timing of the FIFA corruption scandal article in England and due to Spain/Portugal and Belgium/Netherlands being dual bids.

Also, wht not Qatar? Really? They obviously have money, they will obviously get shit done (unlike us) - why not?

 

[jez29]

Well, Russia seems a pretty damn good choice. They have good stadiums, a pretty good team, and quite a lot of fans in the country. While I would have preferred England as it would be easier for me to go see the football, I'm not concerned about the ability of Russia to host a good World Cup. About Qatar, I know nothing.

I wanted Russia to win if England couldn't. Its certainly riskier than the other three 2018 bidders (England, Spain/Portugal and Holland/Belgium) but football is greatly improving there and considering western Europe has held 10 world cups to eastern Europe's 0, I think its a good thing. I did just read an article on a football site condemning the decision since (and I quote) 'journalists who question the powerful are given crippling beatings or assassinated'. Politics is certainly murkier there and we should question it, but this article just smacked of a sore loser going on a rant.

As for Qatar, I just cannot understand it. Two friendlies played there recently between Brazil and England, then Brazil and Argentina both produced what was widely regarded as dull, disinterested crowds, and this for some of the world's highest-profile teams. There's many more reasons why its an amazing choice. Don't get me wrong, if they pull it off it could provide a massive boost for the region and I really want it to succeed, but for now I find the decision a bizarre one.

 

[Liberaliter]

They wouldn't pick England, FIFA likes to choose crappy developing countries.

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

They wouldn't pick England, FIFA likes to choose crappy developing countries.

Excuse me?

So, which countries exactly did you mean by "crappy developing countries"?

 

[Toriver]

If South Africa can pull off a World Cup, Qatar can, as far as development goes. I think they'll make an exception on the booze rule for the event. If they don't, they'll have to deal with a whole world of angry sober fans, which in many cases can be scarier than angry drunk fans. I'm just more concerned with lodging and yes, the weather. What are they thinking putting the World Cup in a country that tops 50 degrees in the summer, and then expecting practically an entire tournament of players who aren't accustomed to such conditions to play? They had better have a LOT of cold water and sports drinks on hand for both athletes and fans to stave off dehydration. The FIFA voters got dazzled by the presentation (or backroom deals) and didn't see that not-so-minor factor.

And what would have been so wrong with having the US host in 2022? So the government wasn't going to throw oodles of its own money into the project. People should know by now that with those kinds of things, we usually go the private investment route and end up with world-class facilities. Not to mention that we've already got a truckload of perfectly good stadiums as it is, that can be easily converted to house a soccer match. Soccer is really starting to gain attention and popularity in the US, and it would have been a really good gesture by FIFA to allow us to host the event to gain more (potentially wealthy) US supporters for the sport and maybe finally turn the Big 4 sports (baseball, football, basketball, hockey) into the Big 5. But, FIFA just wanted their money from the government and Qatar was willing to open up its taxpayers' wallets. *sigh*

Oh, and congrats to Russia. I'm sure they'll put on a good show in 2018. They were the favorites anyway, weren't they?

 

[jez29]

If South Africa can pull off a World Cup, Qatar can, as far as development goes. I think they'll make an exception on the booze rule for the event. If they don't, they'll have to deal with a whole world of angry sober fans, which in many cases can be scarier than angry drunk fans. I'm just more concerned with lodging and yes, the weather. What are they thinking putting the World Cup in a country that tops 50 degrees in the summer, and then expecting practically an entire tournament of players who aren't accustomed to such conditions to play? They had better have a LOT of cold water and sports drinks on hand for both athletes and fans to stave off dehydration. The FIFA voters got dazzled by the presentation (or backroom deals) and didn't see that not-so-minor factor.

The heat problem is apparently going to be solved on the pitch using solar-powered air-con, cooling the pitch and the stands, but they'll still be a massive degree of acclimatisation for players. As for fans outside the stadium, tough luck. When it comes to alcohol, it will be legal to drink during the tournament but alcohol will only be on sale at official fan parks.

I can see your point with South Africa, they pulled off a good world cup this summer in the face of serious criticism, but there's a major difference between SA and Qatar: South Africa has a much bigger population who like football. Qatar has absolutely nothing going for it in terms of its footballing pedigree. Its team are ranked 113 in the world and will almost certainly be dumped out in the first round unless they improve massively in the next 12 years. Half of its entire population could fit into all 12 planned stadiums (only four of which currently exist, and even these require large expansion), so how do they plan on getting packed houses for the matches? SA struggled with that, so how the hell are Qatar going to manage it?

For me, Australia would have been the best choice for 2022. It would have brought football to a new country. Thats all Qatar has. On top of that, Australia is sporting mad, has the stadiums and infrastructure and the World Cup would leave a lasting legacy for the country. The US would have been good too, but it did have it in 1994 so perhaps it should wait a little longer for the next one.

 

[Liberaliter]

They wouldn't pick England, FIFA likes to choose crappy developing countries.

Excuse me?

So, which countries exactly did you mean by "crappy developing countries"?

Qatar.

 

[SalamanderJoe]

I have never even heard of Qatar. Please don't judge me. I got an A in GCSE Geography and I still did haven't heard of it!! Aparently they won it because the stadiums they hope to make will have re-usable materials. That is a good idea honestly.

 

[Dags90]

Qatar.

Qatar has one of the highest GDP per capita in the world. Is you crazy?

They've got the money, they're even planning on making the stadium cooled. They're going to sell alcohol at official retailers only (a massively smart move). I don't really see the big deal other than "Wait, where is that country again?"