stripeyfox Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 5 minutes ago, Detroit Blues said: United States - Canada - Mexico bid wins vote 134 - 65. Comfortable in the end. Money talks in FIFA. I'm sure it will be a great World Cup but it would be better if it was just one host country rather than three!
SouthStandUpperTier Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 48 teams spread over 3 countries. Talk about overkill.
Dan Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 Complete overkill. Another pretty dreadful idea. USA or Mexico go alone in a 32 team World Cup and you're laughing. Canada, lovely place but totally unnecessary having them in this. Awful side, by and large not interested in football, probably even less into it than USA. I mean it's not Qatar level farcical but it's no good really. Awful for your travelling fans.
stripeyfox Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 48 teams 16 Groups! Look forward to the Group P clash between Botswana and Bhutan 3 teams per group, so only two group games each. But that is still 48 matches in the first round to eliminate 16 teams taking us to a knockout round of 32 It might be good when we get down the last 32 knockout round but the group stage has got massive potential to be shit
SouthStandUpperTier Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, stripeyfox said: 48 teams 16 Groups! Look forward to the Group P clash between Botswana and Bhutan 3 teams per group, so only two group games each. But that is still 48 matches in the first round to eliminate 16 teams taking us to a knockout round of 32 It might be good when we get down the last 32 knockout round but the group stage has got massive potential to be shit 3 teams per group also means one team in each group gets royally shafted, as they can only play one group game at a time, leaving one team sat watching the final group game between 2 teams that know what result/score they need to advance. Edited 13 June 2018 by SouthStandUpperTier 2
Samilktray Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 I don't want to sound all overly patriotic and cringey but can someone explain how countries are getting another world cup before we've had a second go? I'm just curious as to the actual thinking behind this
Dan Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 3 team groups simply cannot be allowed to happen. I am genuinely amazed they haven't realised how it can't work. 1
SouthStandUpperTier Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 2 minutes ago, Samilktray said: I don't want to sound all overly patriotic and cringey but can someone explain how countries are getting another world cup before we've had a second go? I'm just curious as to the actual thinking behind this
stripeyfox Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 2 minutes ago, Samilktray said: I don't want to sound all overly patriotic and cringey but can someone explain how countries are getting another world cup before we've had a second go? I'm just curious as to the actual thinking behind this We bid for 2006 and lost out to Germany We bid for 2018 and lost out to Russia We didn't bid for 2026 Rumour is that we could bid for 2030
Samilktray Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 Just now, stripeyfox said: We bid for 2006 and lost out to Germany We bid for 2018 and lost out to Russia We didn't bid for 2026 Rumour is that we could bid for 2030 Yeah I know we didn't bid for this 1 but we don't seem to be very good at this world cup bidding stuff
stripeyfox Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 4 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said: 3 team groups simply cannot be allowed to happen. I am genuinely amazed they haven't realised how it can't work. This. It is crazy. Apart from the possibility of collusion like you mentioned the chances of a three way tie are massively increased. So far FIFA have been cagey on how teams will be separated. Infantino suggested that teams could take penalty shoot outs at the end of each group game (regardless of score) to act in the event of a tie breaker. Which is also shit
stripeyfox Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 1 minute ago, Samilktray said: Yeah I know we didn't bid for this 1 but we don't seem to be very good at this world cup bidding stuff I guess we didn't grease enough palms!
Samilktray Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 I'll be 35 by the time this world cup comes around, pretty grim
Dan Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 2 minutes ago, stripeyfox said: This. It is crazy. Apart from the possibility of collusion like you mentioned the chances of a three way tie are massively increased. So far FIFA have been cagey on how teams will be separated. Infantino suggested that teams could take penalty shoot outs at the end of each group game (regardless of score) to act in the event of a tie breaker. Which is also shit Uuuuurgh I could actually see them doing that. Disgusting what they're doing to this competition. Greatest sporting competition on earth. Largely up for debate now.
Detroit Blues Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 (edited) 37 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said: Complete overkill. Another pretty dreadful idea. USA or Mexico go alone in a 32 team World Cup and you're laughing. Canada, lovely place but totally unnecessary having them in this. Awful side, by and large not interested in football, probably even less into it than USA. I mean it's not Qatar level farcical but it's no good really. Awful for your travelling fans. I think ya'll are over-reacting on your geography. Canada is only hosting 10 games in 3 cities, two of which are Toronto and Montreal. These cities are < 1,000km from 5 of the USA's east coast host cities. This is the same distance between England's group stage matches in Russia (985km from Volograd to Novgorod, 1675km from Novgorod to Kaliningrad). The only Canadian city that is going to be miserable is Edmonton. I would assume the teams in Edmonton's group would play in seattle (1300km), but the other city that is closest would be denver (2,000km). Edmonton is also not as sexy a city as Toronto or Montreal. I would assume they'll organize the group stage games in locations that make sense. You won't be flying from the west coast to the east coast and back. If you think of the bracket like this: Each of the four quadrants can be split up like this: So until you get to the semifinals, the travel won't be too bad. Edited 13 June 2018 by Detroit Blues 1
SouthStandUpperTier Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 4 minutes ago, Detroit Blues said: I think ya'll are over-reacting on your geography. Canada is only hosting 10 games in 3 cities, two of which are Toronto and Montreal. These cities are < 1,000km from 5 of the USA's east coast host cities. This is the same distance between England's group stage matches in Russia (985km from Volograd to Novgorod, 1675km from Novgorod to Kaliningrad). The only Canadian city that is going to be miserable is Edmonton. I would assume the teams in Edmonton's group would play in seattle (1300km), but the other city that is closest would be denver (2,000km). Edmonton is also not as sexy a city as Toronto or Montreal. I would assume they'll organize the group stage games in locations that make sense. You won't be flying from the west coast to the east coast and back. If you think of the bracket like this: Each of the four quadrants can be split up like this: So until you get to the semifinals, the travel won't be too bad. 3
RowlattsFox Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 Spreading it over 3 countries is one thing but ****ing about with 48 teams and 3 team groups is taking the piss. Ruining it. On the plus side, quite depressingly I will be 40 in the summer of 2026 so seems like an ideal birthday gift to myself.
urban.spaceman Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 41 minutes ago, stripeyfox said: 48 teams 16 Groups! Look forward to the Group P clash between Botswana and Bhutan 3 teams per group, so only two group games each. But that is still 48 matches in the first round to eliminate 16 teams taking us to a knockout round of 32 It might be good when we get down the last 32 knockout round but the group stage has got massive potential to be shit Hey, my beloved Botswana could surprise a few people! I mean, they've only ever qualified for one competition - AFCON 2012 - in which they lost all their games... But... With a squad made up of players from the Township Rollers, Mochudi Centre Chiefs, Police XI and the Botswana Defence Force FC, they could do well. 1
stripeyfox Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 21 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said: Hey, my beloved Botswana could surprise a few people! I mean, they've only ever qualified for one competition - AFCON 2012 - in which they lost all their games... But... With a squad made up of players from the Township Rollers, Mochudi Centre Chiefs, Police XI and the Botswana Defence Force FC, they could do well. And it's Botswana Defence Force, Botswana Defence Force FC, are by far the greatest team the world has ever seen!
MC Prussian Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 I'd have rather seen the 2026 World Cup given to either the US or Canada alone. Canada more than anything have some lovely football and/or Canadian Football stadiums to offer, the World Cup has never been held up there before, and the country and the people are just lovely. Halifax, Québec, Montréal, Hamilton, Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Saskatoon, Calgary, Vancouver and Victoria could've all been used as host cities. Still hoping Canada put in a separate bid sometimes soon.
urban.spaceman Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 4 minutes ago, stripeyfox said: And it's Botswana Defence Force, Botswana Defence Force FC, are by far the greatest team the world has ever seen! They're very good at stopping trophy hunters.
stripeyfox Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 https://resources.fifa.com/image/upload/voting-results-for-the-2026-fifa-world-cup.pdf?cloudid=vpnl19m2xr8zk50mnor3 Breakdown of the voting
Bert Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 On 07/04/2017 at 10:51, Finnegan said: England shouldn't get anywhere near hosting a world cup, anyway, I don't know why the English get so whiny and entitled over this. Should go to developing footballing countries where there's a genuine market for expanding the base or the game. Japan/Korea was the right idea, Australia should have gotten 2020 too. Canada is a pretty good shout, to be fair. What's the point of another major sporting tournament coming to the UK? In recent memory the UK has hosted two rugby world cups, a couple of champions league finals, Euro 96, the Olympics, a cricket world cup with another just round the corner and probably plenty I'm missing. Basically, everything except the world cup which at least you HAVE hosted before. England have only hosted the World Cup once, 52 years ago. This will be Mexicos third time and the second time for the USA. France have hosted both the World Cup and the European championships in the last twenty years. Everyone knows England should be hosting this World Cup but Russia weighed in with a massive bribe. All the other sporting events you e named that have been hosted in the U.K. are absolutely irrelevant to being able to host the football World Cup. The 2026 was never going to be a European host anyway but for me If they've given it to Canada why couldn't they have hosted it alone? Plenty of time to get stadiums built. I'm also not really sure that football needs to be expanded any further, it's the biggest sport worldwide.
Finnegan Posted 13 June 2018 Posted 13 June 2018 1 minute ago, Bert said: England have only hosted the World Cup once, 52 years ago. This will be Mexicos third time and the second time for the USA. France have hosted both the World Cup and the European championships in the last twenty years. Everyone knows England should be hosting this World Cup but Russia weighed in with a massive bribe. All the other sporting events you e named that have been hosted in the U.K. are absolutely irrelevant to being able to host the football World Cup. The 2026 was never going to be a European host anyway but for me If they've given it to Canada why couldn't they have hosted it alone? Plenty of time to get stadiums built. I'm also not really sure that football needs to be expanded any further, it's the biggest sport worldwide. For what it's worth, I wouldn't have given it to Mexico or the USA and I agree, why couldn't Canada just do it alone?
Recommended Posts