its decision day

Oh well, we can now look forward to black players being subjected to booing and monkey noises every time they touch the ball in 2018 and in 2022, games played in 50 degrees heat and fans not able to enjoy a beer. Lovely!
 
You know, it's kinda weird but in a roundabout kind of way I can see why Russia got it. Now bribery allegations aside the logical conclusion would seem to be this. England would have said something like this to the FIFA delegates.

"We have great stadiums here, Old Trafford, The Emirates, Wembley, St James' Park, Villa Park. We have great transport links, we have great hotels for the players to stay in, we have very good training facilities and we have plenty of people here who would benefit from other people buying merchandise"

Then along come Russia with theirs

"Listen we don't have the stadiums England have and the other things aren't as up to scratch as England BUT we are cash rich and between now and 2018 we can build those things. We just need a reason to do it, which giving us the WC would be"

Now looking at that could it really be argued that Russia don't deserve it given they are prepared to make those preperations, I mean, just imagine how nice those new stadiums could be given the time they have and the money they have. Now they have eight years to build these stadiums and get the transport links sorted and all the rest of it. So again if I were a FIFA delegate I would find it difficult not to award Russia the World Cup.

Qatar is the real puzzler though. I know I know, bribery, but think about it, it's going to be 105 degrees over there. It should really have gone to the USA because it would benefit them hugely. I mean, Man United go over there most summers for pre season and the stadiums are very good. I know they aren't specifically catered for football (soccer) games but still.
 
You know, it's kinda weird but in a roundabout kind of way I can see why Russia got it. Now bribery allegations aside the logical conclusion would seem to be this. England would have said something like this to the FIFA delegates.

"We have great stadiums here, Old Trafford, The Emirates, Wembley, St James' Park, Villa Park. We have great transport links, we have great hotels for the players to stay in, we have very good training facilities and we have plenty of people here who would benefit from other people buying merchandise"

Then along come Russia with theirs

"Listen we don't have the stadiums England have and the other things aren't as up to scratch as England BUT we are cash rich and between now and 2018 we can build those things. We just need a reason to do it, which giving us the WC would be"

Now looking at that could it really be argued that Russia don't deserve it given they are prepared to make those preperations, I mean, just imagine how nice those new stadiums could be given the time they have and the money they have. Now they have eight years to build these stadiums and get the transport links sorted and all the rest of it. So again if I were a FIFA delegate I would find it difficult not to award Russia the World Cup.

Qatar is the real puzzler though. I know I know, bribery, but think about it, it's going to be 105 degrees over there. It should really have gone to the USA because it would benefit them hugely. I mean, Man United go over there most summers for pre season and the stadiums are very good. I know they aren't specifically catered for football (soccer) games but still.

Yea, I've heard this argument as well. Giving Russia the World Cup will give them a reason to modernize some of their infrastructure and build new facilities. It can indeed become a blessing rather than a curse.
 
Russia was given the Summer Olympics back in 1980 and I remember not being able to watch. I always wanted to see their take on the games, especially in 1984 when Los Angeles got the games. Would have been nice if the USA had decided to go to the games instead of boycotting them.
 
I don't it is the temperature of Qatar that is in question, I will assume that that all the matches would be played at the time where the sun is not the issue, i.e. mid to late evening. The issue is like some countries like Holland and Belgium wanted to co-host the tournament, yet an even smaller country like Qatar on its own, gets it......strange indeed
 
You know, it's kinda weird but in a roundabout kind of way I can see why Russia got it. Now bribery allegations aside the logical conclusion would seem to be this. England would have said something like this to the FIFA delegates.

"We have great stadiums here, Old Trafford, The Emirates, Wembley, St James' Park, Villa Park. We have great transport links, we have great hotels for the players to stay in, we have very good training facilities and we have plenty of people here who would benefit from other people buying merchandise"

Then along come Russia with theirs

"Listen we don't have the stadiums England have and the other things aren't as up to scratch as England BUT we are cash rich and between now and 2018 we can build those things. We just need a reason to do it, which giving us the WC would be"

Now looking at that could it really be argued that Russia don't deserve it given they are prepared to make those preperations, I mean, just imagine how nice those new stadiums could be given the time they have and the money they have. Now they have eight years to build these stadiums and get the transport links sorted and all the rest of it. So again if I were a FIFA delegate I would find it difficult not to award Russia the World Cup.

Qatar is the real puzzler though. I know I know, bribery, but think about it, it's going to be 105 degrees over there. It should really have gone to the USA because it would benefit them hugely. I mean, Man United go over there most summers for pre season and the stadiums are very good. I know they aren't specifically catered for football (soccer) games but still.

i agree with your england bit,except villa park.....its a shit hole right in the middle of a slum
 
Back
Top