Is it me or there seem to be signs that FIFA executive committee members are irritated at the negative attention that UK papers have brought to them? Will they punish England's bid because of the media, or does the discovery of fraud aid England's bid? It seems like Sepp is impressed with England, and who's not, because England can definitely host a very good tournament. But considering the fraud associated with this votes, and the fact that FIFA members have been embarassed seem like it will come back to bite England. I hope England gets it, coz I don't intend going to Russia 8 years from now, because of the language, weather, etc. But I fear for their bid, I think FIFA's corrupt members are angry and they will show them who's the boss.

the European country that pays the most will get it

should be russia

then again

england seem to want to arrange meetings between the fifa voters and beckham

I think its pretty much a given that England will get it.

Ok even mighty Blatter couldn't help SA in 2006 so maybe the vote will be another surprise for him, but i don't think so...

Ä wrote:the European country that pays the most will get it

should be russia

then again

england seem to want to arrange meetings between the fifa voters and beckham

There are yet to realise that Beckham won't win them votes. These FIFA guys are not interested in Beckham's autographs, they are working for their own interests. The problem with England's bid is the fact there's not going to be a lot infrastructure to be built from scratch, and that's where the other countries (voters) benefit. The deal is that I vote for you and you will give me a chunk of your infrastructure building contracts. So Russia has an edge on this one, since FIFA likes making the governments to spend money on even senseless things. I would hate Russia if they were to win this, I want to come to England.

Antarion wrote:I think its pretty much a given that England will get it.

Ok even mighty Blatter couldn't help SA in 2006 so maybe the vote will be another surprise for him, but i don't think so...

It's clear Blatter prefer England, but the other voters are very good at surprising all of us. BBC says:

"I think there are some people at Fifa who aren't very impressed with what England have done, whereas before they were when England were keeping quiet.

The media might ruin this for England, they think this is cricket.

what will the legacy in SA be of YOUR World Cup ?

Ä wrote:the European country that pays the most will get it

should be russia

then again

england seem to want to arrange meetings between the fifa voters and beckham

Why should it be Russia?

It should be the country with the best facilities and infrastructure who should win it.

Russia is promising to pump billions into it, and build all sorts of new stadia. For that reason, it's in with a chance, because we all know FIFA loves the idea of creating a legacy.

In England, we already have the stadia and infrastructure to host the World Cup if it happened tomorrow, so whilst that fact should be appealing to FIFA because it's safe, they won't be able to sew their name into the fabric of a World Cup in England like they'd be able to do in Russia.

It's not so different from the 2012 Olympic Games bidding - Paris was 2/7 odds on favourite to take it because it had the venues and facilities. London had nothing tangible to show for itself, other than it being London and promises of massive regeneration.

London of course went onto win, and now the Olympics will forever be attributed for the legacy it has/will leave in East London.

So, I wouldn't be surprised if the Russkies won it, irrespective of media intrusion or who pays the most.

Blatter and Co. have seen how much symbolic influence FIFA has had in SA, and the apparent social regeneration they can all slap each other on the back on having created. Russia could be their European project.

Ä wrote:what will the legacy in SA be of YOUR World Cup ?

Except for the stadiums, nothing. In fact we are left with stadiums that we can't afford to maintain, because the maintenance is very expensive and no team is willing to move in to them. This world cup was a very expensive exercise that only have emotional and spiritual benefits. Sure we spent a lot of money on infrastructure, and created many jobs, but almost all those jobs are gone. IF England doesn't build new stadiums and other infrastructures, then they don't need the WC.

rza wrote:

Ä wrote:what will the legacy in SA be of YOUR World Cup ?

Except for the stadiums, nothing. In fact we are left with stadiums that we can't afford to maintain, because the maintenance is very expensive and no team is willing to move in to them. This world cup was a very expensive exercise that only have emotional and spiritual benefits. Sure we spent a lot of money on infrastructure, and created many jobs, but almost all those jobs are gone. IF England doesn't build new stadiums and other infrastructures, then they don't need the WC.

Sorry to hear the fact that FIFA acted like a travelling circus, exploiting SA for all it could before moving out. Unfortunately, that is what they do. And they will do the same to Russia given half the chance.

I don't think it's to be a bad thing to give it to countries without perfect infrastrucutre.
There are countries that really benefit from such an event. Others don't. But it shouldn't be the defining criteria.
Lets see what happens in Poland/Ukraine after 2012. The biggest problem for those countires is probably the stadiums which will be half empty then most of the times, but infrastructure and tourism may well benefit.

Anyone got a list of which cities Russia plan to use - I'm wondering how far East they're thinking of going..

Antarion wrote:I don't think it's to be a bad thing to give it to countries without perfect infrastrucutre.
There are countries that really benefit from such an event. Others don't. But it shouldn't be the defining criteria.
Lets see what happens in Poland/Ukraine after 2012. The biggest problem for those countires is probably the stadiums which will be half empty then most of the times, but infrastructure and tourism may well benefit.

Ukraine is already a "Thailand of Europe" with sex tourism being no1 motivation to go there, I don't think EC will change it, except for the fact that for 1 month Kiev and other cities will be one big brothel. And from what I've read, infrastructure will improve not as much as expected, so don't expect too many positive changes. Not sure what they will do with their stadiums as well (except Donetsk I guess).

I believe some new stadiums will serve our local teams nicely (like in Poznan), but we will definitely struggle with a few others, as teams in Gdansk or Wroclaw aren't progressing as it was planned. But despite our terrible results in european competition and overally low level of our league, there's a growing fans interest in local football, so we should do okay in that aspect.

But as we aren't a high interest country for tourists, I don't believe most of them will be here after visiting us during EC 2012. And again, our infrastructure is getting better, but we will be far off early plans (especially regarding roads).

2018 will probably be in Spain. 2022 will probably be in Qatar, according to a brazilian paper that investigated corruption involving the Brazil bid for 2014.


I read only part of the story and don't remember the source though.

Spain should never in a million years be award the 2018 cup

rza wrote:

Ä wrote:what will the legacy in SA be of YOUR World Cup ?

Except for the stadiums, nothing. In fact we are left with stadiums that we can't afford to maintain, because the maintenance is very expensive and no team is willing to move in to them. This world cup was a very expensive exercise that only have emotional and spiritual benefits. Sure we spent a lot of money on infrastructure, and created many jobs, but almost all those jobs are gone. IF England doesn't build new stadiums and other infrastructures, then they don't need the WC.

Seems like you're talking about Portugal after Euro 2004 (It really isn't that fun, it's very sad...)

Noah and the Bale wrote:...Sorry to hear the fact that FIFA acted like a travelling circus, exploiting SA for all it could before moving out. Unfortunately, that is what they do. And they will do the same to Russia given half the chance.

I don't blame Fifa as i didn't blame Uefa in my country's case. They didn't force it on us. Our government did.

Rosicky wrote:Spain should never in a million years be award the 2018 cup

I really hope not, considering they're not alone and we'll not benefit much (if anything) from it. They need us to get it, they don't need us to do it.

Can someone explain why they need you to get it? They didn't in '82, without mentioning the obvious arguments against joint hosts...

England's 2018 World Cup bid has been "significantly harmed" by a newspaper investigation into the bidding process, says a key member of the campaign team.

A member of the Fifa executive committee previously claimed there would be no backlash against England.

But it now seems the Sunday Times probe into two members of the committee has left England with a mountain to climb ahead of the vote on 2 December.

"It has significantly harmed England's bid," a senior member told BBC Sport.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/9157121.stm

This doesn't look good, I think the English media have messed the bid. Everybody knew that FIFA is corrupt, but did the media really had to expose them at the expense of the bid? I feel sorry for the bid team.