londonjambo Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Jack Warner's stinging criticism of England's 2018 World Cup bid has surely prompted the organisers into action. He criticised the bid for not bringing out heavyweight supporters such as David Beckham or Prince William. But the FA have today announced appointments which will surely make Mr. Warner eat his words. Seldom could two names strike fear into the hearts of England's competititors than the two names announced this afternoon. I fear the opposition ought to give up now .... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/8305599.stm :10900: GC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandylejambo Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 its in the bag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hearts Heritage Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 The delegates will be up to their eyes in Hookers and gin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mighty Thor Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 That'll keep Jack the lad happy! I'm sure he'll experience some fantastic 'hospitality' from the English bid team going forward! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwull22 Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Wouldn't surprise me if the 2014 cup ended up in England, to be honest the World Cup should always be held in Europe. Germany Italy Spain and England are the only places large enough and are proper football countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Excellent. Karren Brady can woo the leery old git; Paul Elliott can get ****ed (as he did on a wonderful New Year's episode of the much missed Under The Moon), and talk about how well "Samp-er-doria" are doing in Italy. I hope we get the World Cup: it's our only prospect of ever going into the event with a good, as opposed to outside, chance of winning it. But if you ask me, Mexico, the US and Russia all stand a better chance of getting it, for various reasons - and the head of Televisa, who more or less control Mexican football, is big buddies with Joao Havelange, who still pulls FIFA's strings pretty often. Mexico is where I think it'll end up at present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 just promise to give him a couple of thousand of tickets for his family to sell on the black market then he will happily endorse Englands bid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samster Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 just promise to give him a couple of thousand of tickets for his family to sell on the black market then he will happily endorse Englands bid. Exactly. His family allegedly made ?1m from reselling 2006 WC tickets on the balck market. His response when chanllenged on this by the BBC: "Go **** yourself". Nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Exactly. His family allegedly made ?1m from reselling 2006 WC tickets on the balck market. His response when chanllenged on this by the BBC: "Go **** yourself". Nice. Meanwhile, Trinidad and Tobago's players - national heroes who reached the World Cup for the first time ever, held Sweden and scared the living daylights out of England - were promised substantial bonuses by the association Warner is head of. To my knowledge, they never got them: all the while he and his family were doing the above. Is there some kind of rule in FIFA whereby the less integrity you have and more corrupt you are, the more likely you are to become very influential? It sure seems that way with filth like Warner, Blatter, Havelange or Ricardo Teixeira. The latter is Havelange's son in law: so naturally, he's the head of the Brazilian football federation. Said federation renamed their national championship the "Joao Havelange Cup", and sold the national team's souls to Nike. This famously cost them the 1998 World Cup Final, and has prevented Brazilians from watching their team in friendlies, because they're invariably played overseas. FIFA's slogan is 'For The Good of the Game'. You could've fooled me. People on here think the SFA is the most corrupt association in football: but really have no idea how lucky they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swanyl Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Wouldn't surprise me if the 2014 cup ended up in England, to be honest the World Cup should always be held in Europe. Germany Italy Spain and England are the only places large enough and are proper football countries. what about brazil, mexico and argentina???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwull22 Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 what about brazil, mexico and argentina???? They cant afford the stadiums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Its been a long time baby Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Wouldn't surprise me if the 2014 cup ended up in England, to be honest the World Cup should always be held in Europe. Germany Italy Spain and England are the only places large enough and are proper football countries. Russia and France are bigger than all the countries you mention for a start. Only in Europe? Proper football countries? How many times have Brazil, Argentina and Uraguay won it between them? You dont know what you taking about. There already is a comp that is only held in Europe by proper footballing countries as you call them! Spain won it 2 years ago (Spain,smaller than Russia and France) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 They cant afford the stadiums. Mexico quite clearly can. Brazil are hosting it in 2014 - and barring something very strange, Argentina will be jointly with Uruguay in 2030. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwull22 Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Russia and France are bigger than all the countries you mention for a start. Only in Europe? Proper football countries? How many times have Brazil, Argentina and Uraguay won it between them? You dont know what you taking about. There already a comp that is only held in Europe by proper footballing countries as you call them! Spain won it 2 years ago (Spain,smaller than Russia and France) France is more of a Rugby country. Brazil Argentina and Uraguay are 3rd world countries are 3rd world countries and are dangerous for visiting fans, Russia also is dangerous for visiting fans and has no internal infrastructure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Brazil are holding the World Cup and the Olympics in the same decade .... not bad for a 3rd world country! You can bet your bottom dollar their Olympics will be twice as good as the British one as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 France is more of a Rugby country. Brazil Argentina and Uraguay are 3rd world countries are 3rd world countries and are dangerous for visiting fans, Russia also is dangerous for visiting fans and has no internal infrastructure. No. Part of France - mainly parts of the West, centred around Toulouse - is a rugby country. But FFS: the World Cup was dreamt up by a Frenchman, and the European Championship was also dreamt up by a Frenchman! Meanwhile, if you had it your way, football would never spread anywhere, and billions of people would be disenfranchised from watching the best players - as they already are in the club game - because they happen to live in a poor country. Brilliant. The World Cup brings investment into a country: just watch Brazil's international profile rise over the years ahead. It'd be even better for Uruguay in 2030 too, as their crumbling infrastructure and stadia will finally be able to be modernised. Since USA 94, the game's popularity has improved rapidly in the US, as has the quality of their side. Mexico's two tournaments were both very good, whereas many in Europe haven't been. FIFA will look to achieve similar things in places like Russia or even Australia in the years ahead; and so they should. And dismissing three nations who between them, have won the World Cup nine times, two of whom were at the forefront of the birth of modern football and contested the first ever final, is completely risible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 just promise to give him a couple of thousand of tickets for his family to sell on the black market then he will happily endorse Englands bid. IMO that's why Jack will [bOLD]not[/bOLD] want the World Cup in England, his family will stand a much better chance of making their money if it's held in another country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 IMO that's why Jack will [bOLD]not[/bOLD] want the World Cup in England, his family will stand a much better chance of making their money if it's held in another country. Namely, Mexico: Warner's CONCACAF mates. Looking back, it's incredible to think he was one of the handful of delegates to support our hopeless 2006 bid really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Seeger Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Wouldn't surprise me if the 2014 cup ended up in England, to be honest the World Cup should always be held in Europe. Germany Italy Spain and England are the only places large enough and are proper football countries. I can't tell if this post is sarcastic or not. If not, do you honestly beleive Asia, South America and Africa have nothing to give to football? The world cup is all about different cultures coming together for a month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Mexico have hosted the WC twice since England last did so. I would guess that it will be England for 2018 and Australia for 2022 or vice versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Mexico have hosted the WC twice since England last did so. I would guess that it will be England for 2018 and Australia for 2022 or vice versa. It doesn't work like that I'm afraid. Money talks, louder with FIFA than almost anyone else. Mexico 2018 and Russia 2022 is what I reckon at present - and that Mexico have held it twice since England last did is irrelevant when set against the deals certain delegates will do with Televisa and the Mexican federation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 It doesn't work like that I'm afraid. Money talks, louder with FIFA than almost anyone else. Mexico 2018 and Russia 2022 is what I reckon at present - and that Mexico have held it twice since England last did is irrelevant when set against the deals certain delegates will do with Televisa and the Mexican federation.We will have to disagree on that one, as I think that Madrid has a better chance than Mexico if there is to be a Latino / Hispanic influence on the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Shaun - I've just checked up on the bidding countries - Mexico has already pulled out. (from the Wiki page) Mexico pulled out of the bidding process on September 28, 2009. Justino Compe?n y Decio de Mar?a, president of the Mexican Football Federation, announced the withdrawal citing a lack of funding both from within the Federation and through third parties, thanks largely to the contemporary global recession. It is thought that the age of Mexico's stadia meant that they would have required significant investment to meet FIFA's standards. Thirteen new stadiums had been proposed, including venues in Monterrey, Guadalajara, Ciudad Ju?rez, the Laguna region, and Mexico City Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Spackler Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Is it just me or is that caption below Karren Brady's picture on the BBC article a wee dig at her perhaps not being as svelte as she once was? "Brady's appointment beefs up England's World Cup bid team". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Shaun - I've just checked up on the bidding countries - Mexico has already pulled out.(from the Wiki page) Mexico pulled out of the bidding process on September 28, 2009. Justino Compe?n y Decio de Mar?a, president of the Mexican Football Federation, announced the withdrawal citing a lack of funding both from within the Federation and through third parties, thanks largely to the contemporary global recession. It is thought that the age of Mexico's stadia meant that they would have required significant investment to meet FIFA's standards. Thirteen new stadiums had been proposed, including venues in Monterrey, Guadalajara, Ciudad Ju?rez, the Laguna region, and Mexico City Oooh, thanks for that: talk about being out of the loop! It kinda backs up what bigwull said too, which is even more embarrassing... :o Hmm. I wonder what Warner will do now? Support the US maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Wouldn't surprise me if the 2014 cup ended up in England, to be honest the World Cup should always be held in Europe. Germany Italy Spain and England are the only places large enough and are proper football countries. Spain is bidding jointly with Portugal so they presumably don't think they're big enough. France is a proper football country with more players than England and substantially more registered players than England or Italy. http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/bigcount/registeredplayers.html But the very idea that it must be held in a "proper football country" is questionable. Part of FIFA's mission is to keep promoting the game in new parts of the world. The very fact that Australia, for example, isn't a proper (association) football country is as much of a reason to take the world cup there as to avoid it. I reckon we'll get one in the far eastern time zone and one in Europe and Englands chances will be partially down to how willing FIFA are to go for a co-hosted tournament again after the awkward Japan/South Korea tournament. It's worth noting however that an English tournament would probably be more spread out than a Belgo-Dutch one. And the Iberian bid is no more spread out than the proposed London 2012 Olympic football tournament Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.