World Cup 2018 goes to Russia

677 posts in this topic

I've actually got nothing against Qatar getting it. I thought their approach was brilliant.

 

 

homosexuality is illegal and punished by whipping

Shhhh!!! Or the BDSM scene will drain out of the GBV.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to stick my neck out here and mention 'politics' and 'sport' in the same breath. Russia has become a criminal state, and has been referred to as such by foreign business people/investors and politicians, it has also simultaneously reverted to its old authoritarian ways. I suppose FIFA uses the 'politics and sport argument don't mix' argument quite conveniently to its advantage.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's going to be temps in the 40s C during the day, my suggestion is that all the games be played through the night hours, when it might be only temps in the 30s C. That's my plan to block the sun.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In Quatar's bid, they said they will donate the stadiums to other countries when it's over which is quite decent of them, don'T know how that will work though, maybe they have IKEA as consultants, buy one FIFALA stadium, get one free or something.

 

A few problems I foresee is that Quatar is a country where homosexuality is illegal and punished by whipping, womens rights are marginal at best it is also alcohol free, so the chances of seeing drunken blonde Holland fans in miniskirts is negligable.

 

Qatar, alcohol free?

 

alcohol is available in Qatar! It is available in the Hotels, resteraunts, and nightclubs

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I would have loved Australia to have won, but I do think that Qatar hosting is logical and perhaps the best result not only for the sport but also a very good result for the future of society.

 

Ideally that would be nice.

However look at the Olympics in China and how that was going to open China up.

Too early to tell about South Africa but that doesn't look to have improved since the last WC.

Anyone honestly think that 2014 is going to make it any better for the poor of Brazil?

Anyone believe that if England had hosted 2018 then a lot of the inner cities would have been rejuvenated for any longer than it took to host the tournament?

People need to be honest and see that hosting the World Cup doesn't make it better for the disadvantaged in those countries it merely allows the country to look better from the outside until the tournament is over.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, both Obama ("the wrong decision") and the Germans ("the mood in the host country is important...it's not the right solution" - the manager, Bierhoff) have already had a go at 2022 .

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

People need to be honest and see that hosting the World Cup doesn't make it better for the disadvantaged in those countries it merely allows the country to look better from the outside until the tournament is over.

 

I think that is a bit short-sighted.

 

Hosting the world cup will not stop a third world country been a third world country, but it can make a lasting impact on many thousands of lives.

 

Any investment in infastructure is there after the games have finished and people have gone home as with investment in the inner cities . Of course this investment does not start at the start of the games - it would start years before.

 

Look at Russia - armies of workers will be needed to get it ready for years before hand so it's not simply jobs and tourist income for a month but an input of money over a long period.

 

Also, particularly for the host nation, in the years proceeding the games much investment would be made in sport so talent can be found, local sport clubs ect taking kids off the street.

 

By doing this it has a lasting effect by breaking the typical cycle many innner cites families get trapped into. I think this was the main stay of the English bid - because the infastruture was already there, they were not only going to do this in England but around the world.

 

(probably just as well England didn't win - the way we are playing at the moment we could do without helping to improve the game in the rest of the world!!)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of us live in Munich. A city which owes a massive amount of it's success to the infrastructure put in place for the 72 Olympics. 38 years later and the effects are still being felt.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think that is a bit short-sighted.

 

Hosting the world cup will not stop a third world country been a third world country, but it can make a lasting impact on many thousands of lives.

 

Any investment in infastructure is there after the games have finished and people have gone home as with investment in the inner cities . Of course this investment does not start at the start of the games - it would start years before.

 

Look at Russia - armies of workers will be needed to get it ready for years before hand so it's not simply jobs and tourist income for a month but an input of money over a long period.

 

Also, particularly for the host nation, in the years proceeding the games much investment would be made in sport so talent can be found, local sport clubs ect taking kids off the street.

 

By doing this it has a lasting effect by breaking the typical cycle many innner cites families get trapped into. I think this was the main stay of the English bid - because the infastruture was already there, they were not only going to do this in England but around the world.

 

(probably just as well England didn't win - the way we are playing at the moment we could do without helping to improve the game in the rest of the world!!)

 

What makes you think that England is the better choice in terms of infrastructure?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Qatar, alcohol free?

 

alcohol is available in Qatar! It is available in the Hotels, resteraunts, and nightclubs

 

What about football stadiums? What's the law sponsorship and advertising alcohol?

 

At the very least, I can't imagine the winners of the world cup not wanting to spray each other with champagne. Spraying mineral water all over the place just isn't the same...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What makes you think that England is the better choice in terms of infrastructure?

 

read my post again - I didn't say it was th best -> I just said it was there. I didn't think there would be an argumnet over that - even fifa had that conclusion - "England could host the world cup tomorrow"

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ideally that would be nice.

However look at the Olympics in China and how that was going to open China up.

Too early to tell about South Africa but that doesn't look to have improved since the last WC.

Anyone honestly think that 2014 is going to make it any better for the poor of Brazil?

Anyone believe that if England had hosted 2018 then a lot of the inner cities would have been rejuvenated for any longer than it took to host the tournament?

People need to be honest and see that hosting the World Cup doesn't make it better for the disadvantaged in those countries it merely allows the country to look better from the outside until the tournament is over.

 

There are many advantages to countries and their cities hosting these events. Money, tourism, business, etc...

which amounts to billions.

 

I guarantee you that China is enjoying more business and tourism because of the Olympics

 

The Same for South Africa...Looked to improve?

 

Brazil is poor? You might want to look at it's economy, it has an emerging economy...

 

Yes, there are people in most countries at a disadvantage but the preparation portion provides thousands of jobs for the people of these countries.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Many of us live in Munich. A city which owes a massive amount of it's success to the infrastructure put in place for the 72 Olympics. 38 years later and the effects are still being felt.

 

I disagree. Munich's success is down to German/Bavarian industry, hard work, and ... well, Germanness. The infrastructure may have helped, but not "massively". Munich would hardly be a backwater had it not been for the Olympics.

 

All these decisions to give backwards countries the Olympics and the World Cup are bloody stupid-minded foolishness. Same with giving Obama the Peace Prize hoping he ends up deserving it... How much of Greek's debt is down to their Olympics? An Olympics few people went to I might add, due largely to cynical price gouging and other forms of corruption.. South Africa?.. Pppff... Please... If anything the WC was BAD for something more important than everything else - the truth. The media just flat out didn't report the horrible things going on in SA leading up to the WC so as not to put a damper on their little showing at the big international ball... Brazil? Maybe some drug-dealers and other murderous criminals will get locked up for a couple years.. But things won't improve there either..

 

Oh well, at least they're not in the Euro...

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The economic aspect of Olympics and World cup football cannot be compared. Among recent hosts, the economy of the city has gone downhill after hosting the Olympics (except Barcelona). It has got better for countries hosting the world cup.

 

EDIT - As for 2022, Qatar may have a great plan but I would have preferred a country with a realistic chance of qualifying (probably Australia) to host the event.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I disagree. Munich's success is down to German/Bavarian industry, hard work, and ... well, Germanness. The infrastructure may have helped, but not "massively". Munich would hardly be a backwater had it not been for the Olympics.

 

All these decisions to give backwards countries the Olympics and the World Cup are bloody stupid-minded foolishness. Same with giving Obama the Peace Prize hoping he ends up deserving it... How much of Greek's debt is down to their Olympics? An Olympics few people went to I might add, due largely to cynical price gouging and other forms of corruption.. South Africa?.. Pppff... Please... If anything the WC was BAD for something more important than everything else - the truth. The media just flat out didn't report the horrible things going on in SA leading up to the WC so as not to put a damper on their little showing at the big international ball... Brazil? Maybe some drug-dealers and other murderous criminals will get locked up for a couple years.. But things won't improve there either..

 

Oh well, at least they're not in the Euro...

 

So you are saying that the WC and Olympics should only go to rich G8 countries?

 

Greece was already in debt even before the Olympics in fact years before the Olympics they had massive debt. Check on the price on when they started building their underground tram system, that took 20 years to build...Just the upkeep alone on their historical monuments takes years and billions for upkeep.

 

South Africa had a higher crime rate in certain areas of their big cities most notebly Johanansburg and Pretoria. The increase in numbers and training in Police forces kept crime under wraps...

 

Again, Rio De Janario has a drug problem but mostly in the favelas and as the economy improves more money is being spent to rid the drug dealers and built new housing. Lets face it, Rio is an international city with millions of tourists. You will always have a certain drug problem and crime there.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole country is hosting the World Cup, unlike one single city in the case of Olympics.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Brazil is poor? You might want to look at it's economy, it has an emerging economy...

 

So does china, doesnt mean most people don't live in abject squalor...

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just read Qatar would have to build 9 of the 12 proposed stadiums.

Irish money traders, investment bankers and financial consultants, now's the time to learn how to lay bricks!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand the rationale. It's all about globalization - bringing the world closer together, etc.. Which I can actually understand. The whole system is just so obviously corrupt tough that it's kind of nauseating - especially the idea that negative aspects of the countries are downplayed or not reported at all so as not to tarnish their big day at the ball*. The whole thing reeks of giving a student an 'A' first, and hoping he deserves it later..

 

Should they all go to G8 countries? Not sure.. I would never have gone to SA. I would have liked to, because I hear so many great things about it. But the crime... Brazil - same thing pretty much.. Qatar?.. Qatar?!! WTF... Russia is a country that very much interests me - but I'd never go there either what with the corruption, price gauging, police-bribing, etc..

 

* I remember reading an article in The Guardian years ago by a while guy who was carjacked and then ass-raped, getting AIDS in the process, while travelling in South Africa. Such an article would NEVER in a bazillion years have been reported within two years of the start of their WC. That cheating of the truth in the name of cultural and economic PC is what I find most disgusting in the whole thing.

 

Half the (predominantly) left-leaning types who think Qatar is a good idea wouldn't stop for a sec to think how bad for global warming it will be to have to AC a bunch of stadiums in the desert... Etc etc..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now