Sepp Blatter resigns, FIFA ExCo members face extradition

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
62,099
New York City
TomRicardo said:
 
Oh Sure.
 
The US' bid is completely different than everyone else's in that they don't really even look at what stadiums or cities need upgrades.  They actually have multiple stadium cuts.  All praise the NFL and College Football.
 
The US is most certainly game ready to host something like the world cup. They have the stadiums, the transportation, and the lodging already set.
 

Laser Show

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 7, 2008
5,096
I'll be home in a few minutes to link but FS1 just tweeted that those who headed the Qatari World Cup committee are being warned to not travel to the US.
 
EDIT: Linky goodness
 
https://twitter.com/AmericasPregame/status/605842559940722689
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
20,773
Row 14
Infield Infidel said:
 
South Africa got a exception because they wouldn't have gotten to ten otherwise, then I guess they ditched it after Brazil, or Putin said Putin stuff and they let him have two in Moscow.
 
 
I totally forgot that South Korea and Japan EACH had ten stadiums, and SK couldn't even use the Seoul Olympic stadium because they were building a new stadium in Seoul. Not a huge deal since Suwon and Incheon are nearby but it would have been cool to use an Olympic stadium
 
Well to be fair Russia only has like four of the stadiums for 2018 built already (3 were built in the last 5 years).  They seriously went into the bid with only 1 stadiums existing with the needed specs.
 
Nothing to see here.  (They haven't even broken ground on some of the stadiums).  I do enjoy one of the host cities is the last piece of Germany (really Poland) still claimed by Russia after the Potsdam Conference
 
 
Edit - Two of the stadiums in Russia will not be up to FIFA's requirements for the bids because Russia can't afford the stadiums in the current economic climate.  A solution Russia is toying with is using prison labor.  Nothing to see at all
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
It would not surprise anyone to find out that rather than spend and/or build another stadium, Putin invaded THE Ukraine just for the stadium in Kiev.
 
Apr 7, 2015
332
soxfan121 said:
It would not surprise anyone to find out that rather than spend and/or build another stadium, Putin invaded THE Ukraine just for the stadium in Kiev.
Disagree. If there's one country that is comfortable building glitzy, opulent, mansions and creating labor camps, it's Russia. If there's one world leader who can afford it, it's Putin, especially if we're talking about Europe.
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
GraysonGrandeGonads said:
Disagree. If there's one country that is comfortable building glitzy, opulent, mansions and creating labor camps, it's Russia. If there's one world leader who can afford it, it's Putin, especially if we're talking about Europe.
 
Well played, sir.
 

McBride11

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
22,258
Durham, NC
Can Oliver do a special live show to night? I will turn in just to watch him walk around in those Adidas wing shoes while chugging Bud Light Lime. Waiting til Sunday will be so hard.

Can someone explain why Mexico can't host a WC? Or why Canada isnt an option for 2022? Is the infrastructure required for women's WC that much different?
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
15,648
California. Duh.
McBride11 said:
Can Oliver do a special live show to night? I will turn in just to watch him walk around in those Adidas wing shoes while chugging Bud Light Lime. Waiting til Sunday will be so hard.

Can someone explain why Mexico can't host a WC? Or why Canada isnt an option for 2022? Is the infrastructure required for women's WC that much different?
Well, Oliver said he would eat/drink/wear all the products from the advertisers if they helped force Blatter out.  There's no proof they were involved in his resignation at this point.
 
The Women's World Cup in Canada is being held entirely on artificial turf fields, despite massive protests from the players. I don't see any way that they would allow that to happen for the men's World Cup.  There are also fewer teams in the Women's World Cup, so fewer stadiums are needed.
 
Mexico held the World Cup in 1970 and 1986.  They would be capable, but would likely have to build or massively renovate most of their stadiums.
 

Dummy Hoy

Angry Pissbum
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2006
8,262
Falmouth
cjdmadcow said:
 
I think your suggestion that England wouldn't be capable of providing the necessary infrastructure for a 2022 WC to be a bit off the mark. During the original bidding process for 2018 England's bid was widely considered to be the best technically and that they would have little trouble along those lines.
 
You seem to be forgetting that there are already 10 stadia with a capacity over 40,000 (incl.Wembley) and that's before any upgrades and only includes two other stadia in London. If FIFA asked England to host a WC tomorrow, we could do it without too much difficulty. You have a decent geographical spread - missing the south coast & the west country but maybe they could be accommodated by Southampton and the Millenium stadium in Cardiff. 
 
Wembley
Old Trafford
Emirates
City of Manchester
St James' Park
Stadium of Light
Anfield
Villa Park
Stamford Bridge
Goodison Park
 
Not that I think England have a cat in hells chance of ever getting the WC in my lifetime but you'd be wrong to dismiss it purely because of lack of facilities because that's not the case. It's just that politically we are isolated and have few friends outside of Europe - and I'd question some of them as well!
 
England's bid had 15 stadiums, including a few that would have been renovated as well as a few yet to be built.
 
 
 
 
Sunderland (Stadium of Ligh
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
SoxFanInCali said:
Well, Oliver said he would eat/drink/wear all the products from the advertisers if they helped force Blatter out.  There's no proof they were involved in his resignation at this point.
If you think Oliver is going to pass up the opportunity for this bit, I'm not sure what to tell you. I fully await him in an oversized Adidas track suit funneling BL Limes next episode.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
15,648
California. Duh.
Papelbon's Poutine said:
If you think Oliver is going to pass up the opportunity for this bit, I'm not sure what to tell you. I fully await him in an oversized Adidas track suit funneling BL Limes next episode.
Oh, I'm sure he will make the most of it, just pointing out that none of the advertisers actually did anything (that we know of).
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
20,773
Row 14
McBride11 said:
Can Oliver do a special live show to night? I will turn in just to watch him walk around in those Adidas wing shoes while chugging Bud Light Lime. Waiting til Sunday will be so hard.

Can someone explain why Mexico can't host a WC? Or why Canada isnt an option for 2022? Is the infrastructure required for women's WC that much different?
 
Both Canada and Mexico plan to bid in 2026 when everyone in Europe and Asia (Australia as well) are prevented from bidding.
 
Canada was the only country who bid for the woman's world cup so they were going to get it even if they held the matches in a parking lot (Zimbabwe was going to then realize they have way too many problems to try to host a woman's world cup).
 
They are only playing on six fields, only three of which they could play a men's World Cup game on.
 

Beomoose

is insoxicated
SoSH Member
May 28, 2006
21,494
Exiled
I never cease to be amazed by just how friggin happy Europeans are that our DoJ is bulldozing the FIFA leadership. I haven't seen this many non-American people chanting "USA USA" in a long while.
 
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
TomRicardo said:
 
Both Canada and Mexico plan to bid in 2026 when everyone in Europe and Asia (Australia as well) are prevented from bidding.
 
Canada was the only country who bid for the woman's world cup so they were going to get it even if they held the matches in a parking lot (Zimbabwe was going to then realize they have way too many problems to try to host a woman's world cup).
 
They are only playing on six fields, only three of which they could play a men's World Cup game on.
Aren't they all turf fields as well?
 

moly99

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 28, 2007
939
Seattle
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
But Blatter trying to pry some of the control of world football from the western power centers is a part of his legacy that I don't necessarily disagree with.
 
This is like saying that Mobutu Sese Seko was just fighting the good fight against European imperialism in Zaire. Nevermind the fact that Jack Warner and his friends were embezzling money from their impoverished countries and working with western corporations to doing so.
 
SoxFanInCali said:
Yeah, that's why I thought Australia makes more sense. Never hosted before, a place the game has grown a lot in the last generation, and another Southern Hemisphere country would be preferable to Japan again, in my opinion.
 
Australia is another white majority country. The specific federation it is in doesn't matter. There will still be outrage from the Arab world if Australia is chosen as the replacement host.
 
If 2022 is moved out of Qatar it has to go to a country like Turkey or Morocco. Even Iran would be better than Qatar. It may treat women as second class citizens and imprison gays (just like Qatar) but at least it is a real country instead of a city state.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,550
KPWT
Laser Show said:
I'll be home in a few minutes to link but FS1 just tweeted that those who headed the Qatari World Cup committee are being warned to not travel to the US.
 
EDIT: Linky goodness
 
https://twitter.com/AmericasPregame/status/605842559940722689
 
 
I am incredibly happy (damn near giddy) and proud that the US government has taken the lead on this, but I am wondering when other political considerations start to impact how far the Obama Administration can let the DoJ go with this. I would love to see the 2022 WC moved, but the US relationship with Qatar is deep and longstanding and there are investments there that we cannot allow to be threatened, for example: 
 
 
 
CENTCOM's main headquarters is located at MacDill Air Force Base, in Tampa, Florida. A forward headquarters was established in 2002 at Camp As Sayliyah in Doha, Qatar, which in 2009 transitioned to a forward headquarters at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar to serve American strategic interests.
 
I can't see the US walking from the investment in the CENTCOM HQ or all of the facilities at Al Udeid, especially because the UAE, Bahrain or Kuwait would likely be reluctant to fuck over their cousin by providing alternatives. I don't see how the sheiks in Qatar can allow the US DoJ to engineer taking their World Cup away while the jets keep launching from Al Udeid and CENTCOM continues to lay his head on their territory. It would just be too much of a direct insult to maintain the relationship as it exists right now. 
 
 
* To expand without going totally stupid V&N, I think the hallmark of American foreign policy in the 21st century is our nation enjoying the buzz of flexing our might overseas only to wake up the next morning wondering why we are hungover and have a beer gut. We are good at using our power to change things, but not good at foreseeing the consequences or impact of our actions. Arresting Qatari princes and taking their world cup might be a long term net loss for the US. I I disagree with the intelligent arguments upthread about why it would be best to leave the 2018 WC in Russia. That would certainly be the best outcome for World Soccer and the World as a whole, but I am frankly more concerned about narrow American foreign policy interests and US soccer.
 
The current US/NATO relationship with Putin's Russia is not going to get much worse, he already has Snowden, we are already equipping and training a nation he is fighting a shooting war with and actively colluding with the Saudis to destroy his economy. Taking the ill gotten and murderous world cup away from our enemy is better for the US than taking away the ill gotten and murderous world cup of our dastardly friends in the Gulf. In purely soccer terms, creating a split in UEFA is probably a net good thing for US Soccer and MLS, so I sincerely hope we push for a new FIFA head who committed to targeting 2018 WC corruption and more likely to go after Putin than the Qataris. 
 


SoxFanInCali said:
Well, Oliver said he would eat/drink/wear all the products from the advertisers if they helped force Blatter out.  There's no proof they were involved in his resignation at this point.
 
The Women's World Cup in Canada is being held entirely on artificial turf fields, despite massive protests from the players. I don't see any way that they would allow that to happen for the men's World Cup.  There are also fewer teams in the Women's World Cup, so fewer stadiums are needed.
 
Mexico held the World Cup in 1970 and 1986.  They would be capable, but would likely have to build or massively renovate most of their stadiums.
 
 
 
With that said, if a 2022 re-bid comes up, I wonder if the US would consider a co-bid with Mexico to make this look less like America stealing the World Cup from the third world. You can certainly make an argument that Azteca is the best place to host a final on the continent. 
 
M

MentalDisabldLst

Guest
Infield Infidel said:
I totally forgot that South Korea and Japan EACH had ten stadiums, and SK couldn't even use the Seoul Olympic stadium because they were building a new stadium in Seoul. Not a huge deal since Suwon and Incheon are nearby but it would have been cool to use an Olympic stadium
 
But if you reduce the amount of redundant construction by re-using previously-built structures originally promised to be re-usable and that would contribute economically after the Olympics or WC, that would reduce the opportunities for graft.
 
You're clearly not ready to run a confederation.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,267
SoxFanInCali said:
Oh, I'm sure he will make the most of it, just pointing out that none of the advertisers actually did anything (that we know of).
 
 
He tweeted this picture out today, with caption "Champagne"
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,051
Papelbon's Poutine said:
Aren't they all turf fields as well?
They are all turf, but they can be converted to grass.
Scott's offered to waive the $3M cost to put grass into the 6 playing stadiums, as did other companies, but FIFA declined (they said that it would lead to inconsistency between the playing and practice surfaces, and they didn't want to pay $6M to get all 18 facilities because you know $6M would put a big dent in the $338M in profit from the men's WC.)
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,267
Do you think that if they took the WC away from Qatar they would still allow them a spot?
 

CaptainLaddie

dj paul pfieffer
SoSH Member
Sep 6, 2004
37,067
where the darn libs live
Gunfighter 09 said:
With that said, if a 2022 re-bid comes up, I wonder if the US would consider a co-bid with Mexico to make this look less like America stealing the World Cup from the third world. You can certainly make an argument that Azteca is the best place to host a final on the continent. 
Fantastic point and idea.  Azteca would absolutely be the best place in North America to host a final, and it could happen yesterday.
 

Infield Infidel

teaching korea american
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,463
Meeting Place, Canada
Marcotti had a good story too
 
Other than badly needed reform, the main question facing the next FIFA president and his executive committee will be Russia 2018 and Qatar 2022. In addition to the ongoing Swiss investigation, there's also the Garcia report, which, as of right now, less than a dozen FIFA officials have actually seen (counting the guys who wrote it).
Whoever takes over will be under overwhelming pressure to make it public. And at that stage, all bets are off. All it takes, under FIFA regulations, for the executive committee to call a revote is an appetite to do so and evidence of political interference or corruption. The threshold of evidence is so low, we've been abundantly past it for some time.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
15,648
California. Duh.
CaptainLaddie said:
Fantastic point and idea.  Azteca would absolutely be the best place in North America to host a final, and it could happen yesterday.
Other than the whole 7,000+ ft. elevation and horrible pollution, yeah.  Throw in mid-July weather and it would get ugly.
 

Titans Bastard

has sunil gulati in his sights
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 15, 2002
14,467
SoxFanInCali said:
Other than the whole 7,000+ ft. elevation and horrible pollution, yeah.  Throw in mid-July weather and it would get ugly.
 
The elevation and pollution is a problem, but it is rarely extremely hot in Mexico City because of the elevation.  The average high in July is 74 F.  The all-time record high for July is only 86 F.  (The average low is 54 F, although that likely wouldn't matter as the the final would be played in the early afternoon for European TV purposes.)  It's actually hottest in April and May (80 F).
 

Spacemans Bong

chapeau rose
SoSH Member
I agree that the US hosting 2022 would look pretty bad to the rest of the world. There's already people who don't really know the US Department of Justice who think all these guys will get off because they're rich (like the Football Ramble people, who tend to take a big picture view of things). If the US got the cup I think people would assume it's a quid pro quo and you can win elections in FIFA by acting as champion of dispossessed post-colonial states. It can't be Qatar for all the reasons bought up but it should probably go somewhere that's not part of the Anglosphere. Japan is good, Mexico is good, it would be good to get another World Cup out of South Africa or Brazil, and maybe you can get away with Germany.
 
But one of the legacies of FIFA is that the Sir Stanley Rous era was pretty Eurocentric. It was clean, but he was a vigorous defender of apartheid-era South African and Rhodesian football, and that was a time when black African and Asian teams had an almost impossible route to the World Cup finals. That's sort of the legacy that Havelange and now Blatter exploit.
 
 
SoxFanInCali said:
Other than the whole 7,000+ ft. elevation and horrible pollution, yeah.  Throw in mid-July weather and it would get ugly.
 
The World Cups in 1970 and 1986 were pretty good, and the Azteca itself has hosted two of the better World Cup finals and two all-time great games in Italy 4, West Germany 3 and the Maradona vs. England game.
 
Edit: just to back up what Titan said, if you check out all the cities in Mexico that have hosted World Cup matches, only Monterrey has an average July high that would be a problem (94). Everywhere else would be pretty comfortable - 85 in dry heat...I really liked playing rugby in that kind of weather. Plus altitude wasn't a huge problem because other than Monterrey, every city was at least 4,000 feet above sea level.
 

Bosoxen

Bounced back
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 29, 2005
10,186
tims4wins said:
Can we get the US DoJ to investigate the NFL's handling of Deflategate?
 
Would you please shut the fuck up about that, already?
 
Titans Bastard said:
 
The elevation and pollution is a problem, but it is rarely extremely hot in Mexico City because of the elevation.  The average high in July is 74 F.  The all-time record high for July is only 86 F.  (The average low is 54 F, although that likely wouldn't matter as the the final would be played in the early afternoon for European TV purposes.)  It's actually hottest in April and May (80 F).
 
What he said. Let's not pretend it's worse than Qatar. Even with the elevation and less than ideal air quality, it's still an infinitely better location for a World Cup final.
 
Don't get me wrong, it would make it a lot easier for any of us to go to the final if it were held at Jerry World or the new Giants stadium, but I'd buy tickets to go see the final at Azteca in a cocaine heartbeat.
 

fletcherpost

sosh's feckin' poet laureate
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,187
Glasgow, Scotland
Funnily enough, i wouldhave no problem with England getting the World cup in 2022 or the USA, but England haven't had it in a while and they do have much of the required infra structure and it would be a blast really, cos it's a small country, that loves the game and it would be well attended. Mexico do a good world Cup too.
 
In fact I just don't want it to be in Qatar. Scotland are playing Qatar in Edinburgh and there's already plans for a boycott and some sort of protest. The Daily Ranger cover it somewhat.  http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/scrap-scotland-v-qatar-match-5805128
 
It has to be said the SFA are run by fuckin bawbags and halfwits and have hurt the game in Scotland for donkeys and this fixture with Qatar is to me something of an embarrassment, but I'm so used to this kind of thing with the SFA.
 
Nice to see Some Murica Flagwaving in this thread though...always gives me a smile.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
20,773
Row 14
Bosoxen said:
you please shut the fuck up about that, already?
 
 
Yes.  They are not even comparable.  It is retarded to bring it up.
 
England can't have 2022 if they don't take away Russia's 2018 (which would probably help Russia because they can't even afford to build the stadiums)
 
M

MentalDisabldLst

Guest
fletcherpost said:
Nice to see Some Murica Flagwaving in this thread though...always gives me a smile.
 
We deserve it so rarely, we gotta take it however it comes.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
11,890
Washington, DC
Gunfighter 09 said:
With that said, if a 2022 re-bid comes up, I wonder if the US would consider a co-bid with Mexico to make this look less like America stealing the World Cup from the third world. You can certainly make an argument that Azteca is the best place to host a final on the continent. 
 
With the caveat that this comes from my experience in UN negotiations rather than how FIFA associations think, developing countries don't automatically consider Mexico the third world.
 
And I think any U.S. attempts to host a re-bid, even a joint one, would lose a ton of goodwill. Politically it would be snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
 

fletcherpost

sosh's feckin' poet laureate
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,187
Glasgow, Scotland
Bosoxen said:
 
Phrasing
 
 
Any native of the proud nation that brought FIFA to it's knees has a right to submit clunky phrasing for 40 days and 40 nights on any message board anywhere in the free world.  It's called Fletcher's Edictum
 

Bosoxen

Bounced back
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 29, 2005
10,186
singaporesoxfan said:
With the caveat that this comes from my experience in UN negotiations rather than how FIFA associations think, developing countries don't automatically consider Mexico the third world.
 
No one should consider Mexico third world. Anyone who does is a dunce.
 
fletcherpost said:
Any native of the proud nation that brought FIFA to it's knees has a right to submit clunky phrasing for 40 days and 40 nights on any message board anywhere in the free world.  It's called Fletcher's Edictum
 
I am not one to question the great Fletcher. Let the Edictum be the law of the land.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
11,890
Washington, DC
moly99 said:
 
This is like saying that Mobutu Sese Seko was just fighting the good fight against European imperialism in Zaire. Nevermind the fact that Jack Warner and his friends were embezzling money from their impoverished countries and working with western corporations to doing so.
 
 
But the general idea of shifting football power to the developing world remains a good one, and I think that was DDB's point. And there were concrete examples of this under Blatter - for example, breaking away from the idea that Europe gets to host every other World Cup with the 2010 South Africa / 2014 Brazil cups.
 
I'd agree with suggestions on changing how money is divided. But as for suggestions in this thread to change the one country one vote system within FIFA - what's the alternative? If you weight votes by population or even population of the football playing public, the Africa-Asia bloc would still retain power, just that the power shifts within the bloc.
 
 
moly99 said:
Australia is another white majority country. The specific federation it is in doesn't matter. There will still be outrage from the Arab world if Australia is chosen as the replacement host.
 
If 2022 is moved out of Qatar it has to go to a country like Turkey or Morocco. Even Iran would be better than Qatar. It may treat women as second class citizens and imprison gays (just like Qatar) but at least it is a real country instead of a city state.
 
Agree that moving the World Cup to Australia would cause just as much outrage. Not sure how mollified the Arab world would be if a World Cup went to regional non-Arab rivals like Turkey or Iran though. Morocco would be a good choice.
 
Apr 7, 2015
332
singaporesoxfan said:
 
 
Not sure how mollified the Arab world would be if a World Cup went to regional non-Arab rivals like Turkey or Iran though. Morocco would be a good choice.
 
Would they be able to have enought stadia though? Wouldn't they need to co-host with Algeria/Tunisia or Portugal/Spain though?
 

dirtynine

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 17, 2002
8,443
Philly
Why not Mexico? Well, Mexico puts on an undeniably great World Cup. If that and regional rotation were the main criteria, I'd say they had a great shot.  But since they've hosted twice already in the past 50 years, it doesn't seem right to go back yet. Here's the cumulative list of hosts:

Mexico: 2 (2 post-war)
Germany: 2 (2 post-war)
Brazil: 2 (2 post-war)
France: 2 (1 post-war)
Italy: 2 (1 post-war)
USA: 1 (1 post-war)
Spain: 1 (1 post-war)
Sweden: 1 (1 post-war)
Switzerland: 1 (1 post-war)
England: 1 (1 post-war)
Argentina: 1 (1 post-war)
Chile: 1 (1 post-war)
South Africa: 1 (1 post-war)
Japan: .5 (.5 post-war)
South Korea: .5 (.5 post-war)
Uruguay: 1 (0 post-war)

Mexico's only peer as far as frequency is Germany, and even then you could say that parts of Germany have only hosted once. Brazil has two now, but their first was in 1950, generations ago. Mexico has had two since 1970. Now, I could see scenarios where joint hosts include Mexico: either a Can/US/Mex Cup, or a Mex/Latin America/Caribbean Cup. But I'm not sure the entire country, solo, would be the right choice to host again so soon.

If 2022 is in play, I'd favor Turkey (for geopolitical reasons) or Australia (though they're CAF, they were OFC until recently and are, in practicality, separate world region deserving of being included in the rotation). Depending on how that worked out, England and the USA (or a North American joint bid) should split 2026 and 2030 in some order.

In general, the concept of joint or regional bids - which FIFA has traditionally disliked - open up many more exciting (and politically palatable) possibilities for hosting. I hope that's an idea that's embraced.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,267
Bob Ley said on ESPN Radio this morning that he doesn't think America wants to be seen as a driving force behind taking away the first World Cup from an Arab country, so he'd be surprised if something happened.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
20,773
Row 14
dirtynine said:
Why not Mexico? Well, Mexico puts on an undeniably great World Cup. If that and regional rotation were the main criteria, I'd say they had a great shot.  But since they've hosted twice already in the past 50 years, it doesn't seem right to go back yet. Here's the cumulative list of hosts:

Mexico: 2 (2 post-war)
Germany: 2 (2 post-war)
Brazil: 2 (2 post-war)
France: 2 (1 post-war)
Italy: 2 (1 post-war)
USA: 1 (1 post-war)
Spain: 1 (1 post-war)
Sweden: 1 (1 post-war)
Switzerland: 1 (1 post-war)
England: 1 (1 post-war)
Argentina: 1 (1 post-war)
Chile: 1 (1 post-war)
South Africa: 1 (1 post-war)
Japan: .5 (.5 post-war)
South Korea: .5 (.5 post-war)
Uruguay: 1 (0 post-war)

Mexico's only peer as far as frequency is Germany, and even then you could say that parts of Germany have only hosted once. Brazil has two now, but their first was in 1950, generations ago. Mexico has had two since 1970. Now, I could see scenarios where joint hosts include Mexico: either a Can/US/Mex Cup, or a Mex/Latin America/Caribbean Cup. But I'm not sure the entire country, solo, would be the right choice to host again so soon.

If 2022 is in play, I'd favor Turkey (for geopolitical reasons) or Australia (though they're CAF, they were OFC until recently and are, in practicality, separate world region deserving of being included in the rotation). Depending on how that worked out, England and the USA (or a North American joint bid) should split 2026 and 2030 in some order.
 
If Russia keeps 2018, England cannot have a World Cup until 2030.  Australia can pick 2022 bid if Qatar loses it.  It is really going to be between Mexico, Canada, the US, and Australia/NZ(?)
 
Being Russia already is not going to be able to build enough stadiums with capacity for World Cup (and remembering Sochi is it is probably going to be a lot worse to what they are admitting to already) I really doubt if Qatar loses the cup FIFA would risk going anywhere that can't turn around the stadiums quickly.
 
That really leaves US and Mexico.  Australia and New Zealand would have to build a couple of stadiums as well as expand some.  Canada would definitely need to build stadiums and expand a bunch.
 

Billy Jo Robidoux

Shoveltowner/Jerkface
SoSH Member
Jan 6, 2003
2,868
Cape Cod
DrewDawg said:
Bob Ley said on ESPN Radio this morning that he doesn't think America wants to be seen as a driving force behind taking away the first World Cup from an Arab country, so he'd be surprised if something happened.
 
The US should push to have 2022 hosted by Israel.
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
32,066
Alexandria, VA
Bosoxen said:
 
No one should consider Mexico third world. Anyone who does is a dunce.
 
Or a time traveler.  Mexico was part of the third world under the original definition, as were Ireland, Switzerland, and Sweden--and anyone else not allied with the First World (NATO) or the Second World (the Soviet bloc).  
 
But, yeah, Mexico's a fully industrialized economy that has no place on a modern list of third world nations.
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
5,859
One interesting 2022 possibility is China -- the WC would stay in Asia, avoid Western/Colonial powers, and go somewhere new, and we know the Chinese can build lots of shiny stuff very quickly.  Weren't the Beijing Olympics generally considered a logistical success?  China is also a huge relatively untapped soccer market that all the big multinational corporate sponsors would love to get more exposure to.  And IIRC, the scuttlebutt at the time was that China was pissed that Qatar won 2022 because they wanted the U.S. to get 2022 so they could get 2026 (Qatar 2022 blocked Asia from hosting again until probably 2034).  
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
15,648
California. Duh.
Titans Bastard said:
 
The elevation and pollution is a problem, but it is rarely extremely hot in Mexico City because of the elevation.  The average high in July is 74 F.  The all-time record high for July is only 86 F.  (The average low is 54 F, although that likely wouldn't matter as the the final would be played in the early afternoon for European TV purposes.)  It's actually hottest in April and May (80 F).
True, but if I remember from my couple of visits there, it's pretty humid in July and there is a good chance of thunderstorms that time of year.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,267
Anyone know what time Blazer's stuff is supposed to be unsealed today?
 
Apr 7, 2015
332
SumnerH said:
 
Or a time traveler.  Mexico was part of the third world under the original definition, as were Ireland, Switzerland, and Sweden--and anyone else not allied with the First World (NATO) or the Second World (the Soviet bloc).  
 
But, yeah, Mexico's a fully industrialized economy that has no place on a modern list of third world nations.
Does Mexico have potable water?  That's pretty high up there in requirements for a first world nation.
 
edit: My mistake. Looks like it has the similar intermediate risk of infectious disease as Croatia, Estonia, Hungary, and the like.