WC 2018 & 2022 Bids

**WexCar** · 28/10/2010, 4:16 AM

Well we'll know the hosts of the 2018 & 2022 WC's in 5 weeks, who do you think/hope will win out?

For the 2018 bid things seem to be gettin nasty between the Russians & English while Spain/Portugal & Netherlands/Belgium bids seem to be stayin out of the spotlight a bit.
Personally I'd prefer to see the Spanish/Portugese bid win out, even though I wouldn't usually be in favour of joint bids, but I think the Russians will win out.

For 2022 Australia, Japan, Korea Republic, Qatar and the USA have bid. I'd be fairly confident Qatar, Japan & Korea Republic wont be awarded the WC for quite obvious reasons, so that just leaves the US & Australia.
I'd prefer Australia to win this one but I have a feeling that the US will win the bid.

**bennocelt** · 28/10/2010, 8:55 AM

Actually a lot of people think Qatar might get it. They have guaranteed FIFA they will make a shed load of money for them and they have also got about 5 definite votes from Europe in exchange for voting for the Spain/Portugal vote. Despite Qatar been a small country their bid wasnt bad.
Hate the way the English bid always goes on about the home of football and how passionate British football fans are. I remember when they had the euros and most of the grounds were half empty.

**Closed Account 2** · 28/10/2010, 11:31 AM

I'd like to see it go to Russia or England in 2018 and then go to Australia in 2022.

But I think it will go to Portugal & Spain, and Qatar as there seems to be some sort of deal done there.

I really don't want to see a joint bid win as I don't think they work very well. I also have my doubts about how they will distribute the venues. The Luz and Alvalade stadiums in Lisbon will probably be used as will the Dragao in Porto, but that seems to be all the Portguese venues they've shortlisted. This means already Lisbon is the double venue city (usually World Cup Hosts are only allowed to have one city with two venues e.g. Paris, Joburg) so will they then only use the Bernabeu in Madrid (not the Calderon or new Atletico Stadium) ? And only use the Nou Camp in Barcelona (not the El Prat Espanyol Stadium, which actually seems to have much better views than the Nou Camp) ?

Where will the other venues be ? I'll guess they'll have one in Valencia, but will that new stadium be built ? One in Seville at the Olympic style stadium (one used for Celtic v Porto a few years ago) with the massive running track around it ? I think there are a lot of questions over venues in that bid, and a lot of the peripheral stadiums being mentioned (e.g. Celta Vigo, Anoeta in San Sebastian, Zaragoza) would need massive re-developments, it could be touch and go given the Spanish Economy.

England would be the safe bet, most of the stadiums are ready now, only Nottingham Forest, Bristol and Plymouth need significant work and even then there are other stadiums that could step in if needed (Wolverhampton, Middlesboro, Southampton, Derby etc) - the big issue is rail transport, it's slow and hideously expensive in the UK, but that aside it's a financially safe bid.

Russia by contrast would need significant investment in stadiums, but that shouldnt be too much of a problem as some of the big clubs (Zenit, Lokomotiv, Rubin, Spartak) are already building new stadiums (or in the case of Lokomotiv have already built it) and the Federal Government can easily afford to fit the bill for the rest of the stadium construction. Having the World Cup in Russia would leave a legacy in country of over 140m.

I think the logistics of holding the World Cup in Qatar would be problematic. The size of the country (roughly equivalent to Jamaica, almost half the size of Slovenia) and the fact 10-12 stadiums need to be built (in addition to hotels, airports etc) in such a small location could be problematic. The Qatari goverment have a bottomless pit of money to throw at the bid/event, but I don't know how they could circumvent size/space issues and also heat issues. Temperature highs in June / July are around 41-42°C, this would make Orlando in 1994 look like a crisp winter afternoon, and could be a serious hazard to players training and playing in such heat. At these sorts of temperatures there are signficant risks to fans (dehydration, sunstroke etc) in and around the stadium, I know there are plans to conteract the heat, but is it realistic to do this in a 70,000 seater open air stadium ?

**Dodge** · 28/10/2010, 11:44 AM

Love the way the English media tried to paint the Qatar/Spain&Portugal voting arrangement in a negative light while completely forgetting to mention that the US pulled out of the 2018 race wihin an hour of England pulling out of the 2022 race.

not sure if the CONCACAF vote will swing it for England but its a start.

My guess is England 2018, USA 2022

**bennocelt** · 28/10/2010, 3:15 PM

Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo

I really don't want to see a joint bid win as I don't think they work very well.

I think the logistics of holding the World Cup in Qatar would be problematic. The size of the country (roughly equivalent to Jamaica, almost half the size of Slovenia) and the fact 10-12 stadiums need to be built (in addition to hotels, airports etc) in such a small location could be problematic. The Qatari goverment have a bottomless pit of money to throw at the bid/event, but I don't know how they could circumvent size/space issues and also heat issues. Temperature highs in June / July are around 41-42°C, this would make Orlando in 1994 look like a crisp winter afternoon, and could be a serious hazard to players training and playing in such heat. At these sorts of temperatures there are signficant risks to fans (dehydration, sunstroke etc) in and around the stadium, I know there are plans to conteract the heat, but is it realistic to do this in a 70,000 seater open air stadium ?

I thought the Belgium/Holland Euros and Japan/Korea world cup were decent enough and very well run?

Apparently each stadium will have cold air pumped into it, or something technical like that. And they say that their world cup would be the best for the fans since the amount of travel between games would be virtually nil.

**Closed Account 2** · 28/10/2010, 4:51 PM

Euro 2000 was a bit smaller in terms of scale though, there werent the same number of teams as at a World Cup and most of the countries were a day or so's drive away (exception being Turkey) due to the spread of qualified teams and the central-ish location of Belgium and Holland. Japan & Korea was ok, but the venues were split evenly, the path to the final was locationally rigged (i.e. Korea were to played all their games in Korea, Japan (becoming Turkey) all in Japan) - this meant the hosts were always playing at home (it also meant group winners and runners up from the same group could have met at the semi final stage - usually it's only at the final stage); i.e. we could have met Germany in the semis again had we beaten Spain and then Korea. I'm note sure how this approach would work given Portugal only seem to have 3 out of 10/12 stadiums.

I understand the Qataris are trying to develop some sort of air / solar coolant system, but I have no idea if this will work in an open topped stadium. The differential between the above-stadium air (naturally hot) and the in-stadium air (electronically cooled) will surely mean the cold air will simply drain away. Additionally I'm not sure how the impact of strong sunlight will be minimised. Some games could be played at night or in the afternoon, but even then the sun will be powerfull and also in the group stages they can have 3 kickoff times each day, which would mean a kick off occuring during the hottest, most exposed (in terms of sunlight) part of the day.

**Closed Account 2** · 17/11/2010, 5:04 PM

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/...tionreport.pdf

PDF of the official summary of the bids.

**Bluebeard** · 28/11/2010, 11:53 PM

Reading one of the US papers this morning suggested that, thanks to an Asian deal, the Spain / Portugal bid now has 8 votes, requiring 12 to win it. Of course, these deals are often scuppered on the day of the actual vote. Supposedly, all Asian voters will back them but I doubt that will happen, as it is suggested that it is in return for a vote for Qatar. 2018 still looks like being England V Russia, though I would lean towards Spain Portugal myself.

2022 is seen by many as being a straight fight between the US and Qatar. I really thought Australia would be the big challenge to the US, but it seems that they have lost ground. The "Deal" is spoken of here a bit, but what is interesting is the US man at the deciding committee (Blazer?) has recently started spouting big love for Russia and Putin on his blog - this could be making things more interesting. Plus, one of the three Concacaf voters who would be expected to back the US bid is Jack Warner, and his is an interesting approach to such things, generally. Seeing as Hyundai has recently thrown a big deal into FIFA lasting until 2022 (hmmm) there may be more to the South Korean bid too. The US has the advantage of the most available seats of any bid though (nearly 5m).

My preference is for Spain / Portugal and USA (selfish reasons for the latter). My feeling is it will probably be Russia for Europe's WC. 2022 is absolutely up in the air I think. Qatar possibly to shade it (pun intended), but it may be moved elsewhere by 2018...

**Dodge** · 29/11/2010, 1:01 AM

I despise the way the English media speak abotu the Iberain/Qatar deal, yet simply don't mention that England left the 2022 bidding on the same day that the US left the 2018 bidding. Co-incidence?

**Closed Account 2** · 29/11/2010, 2:57 PM

To be fair that was a deal between most of the countries that 2018 was going to Europe and 2022 to Asia / North America. Prior to that all contries had pretty much been bidding for both 2022 and 2018, but the reality was if 2018 went to Europe 2022 would definately be outside of Europe, and if 2022 went to say Asia then 2018 was very unlikely to have also been given to Asia. I'm suprised the USA pulled out of 2018 since they would have been unaffected by a bid win for Asia or Europe.

I have a feeling it could be a closed shop between Spain / Portugal and Qatar, though the senior American on the FIFA exec was saying they (exec) need to discuss credit and economic viability of infrastructure for each bidder. Presumably, this could be a problem for Spanish stadiums in need of work (Nou Camp, Mestalla, etc).

**ifk101** · 02/12/2010, 10:46 AM

It's looks like England have it in the bag.

**Dodge** · 02/12/2010, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by ifk101

It's looks like England have it in the bag.

Latest informed guess I saw had Iberia, Russia and England neck&neck with Blatter holding the key. Most saying England's presentation was by far the best (Russia to come at 11) but I'd imagine the decision already made

**pineapple stu** · 02/12/2010, 11:08 AM

Paper this morning saying Putin wasn't travelling over with the Russian bid? Might be a bit of a blow?

**Dodge** · 02/12/2010, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Paper this morning saying Putin wasn't travelling over with the Russian bid? Might be a bit of a blow?

Well the idea was that him not travelling showed they weren't as confident as previously thought (ie if they knew they'd get it, he'd mae the most of it politically)

The decision has already been made. The presentations and who turns up are just dressing