My proposal for method of allocating future World Cup host countries:
I would immediately put an end to the invidious, corruption-prone and discredited process of 'bidding' for the rights to host the FIFA World Cup.
1) World Cup to be held in each continent of the world on mutually agreed regular rotation every 4 years. Starting in Europe.
2) Potential hosts in each continent to formally submit expression of interest to region's governing body ( i.e. UEFA). Governing body to consider merits of each potential host country based on set criteria, agreed and published in advance - process completely transparent and reason for final decision published in full.
3) As part of process, an element of public vote would be implemented allowing fans to have a say in which country hosts the World Cup in their region.
4) Hosts for 2018 & 2022 World Cups to be changed and decision for new hosts to be based on the above procedure.
No more gravy train for faceless FIFA 'officials'.
That's it for now
If I Became The Next FIFA President #1
posted on 3/6/15
Your voting process sounds like Eurovision, all the neighbours voting for each other.
Why not have seeds, those who are most eligible who are put into a bowl, along with the others, whilst somebody pulls out a ball, the host of the next World Cup. If an in-seeded nation wins, it is taken out of the bowl for say 32 years, after they host. If a seeded nation wins, they go back in after 16 years, eventually increasing the chances and frequency of seeded nations.
Nations which aren't seeded can apply to be a seeded nation if they meet the criteria after having hosted the cup. This not only puts more emphasis on the nation meeting the criteria for the cup they're hosting but also gives an incentive to keep to that level, thus improving the nation's infrastructure and of course drawing more kids to the game, in countries not considered to be at the top in terms of football.
posted on 3/6/15
comment by 李贝 If anyone can, Emre Can... And don't call me Schürrle (U3979)
posted 9 hours, 27 minutes ago
Europe should host it every 2 world cups - it's the place that's far and away most suited for it, both in terms of time difference, being situated centrally, in terms of no ridiculous weather troubles, and the most money and infrastructure to host a sporting tournament. Only other country that comes close is the USA but time difference is a bit of a killer there. If Japan play in Pasadena there's a 16 hour time difference.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? It's a World Cup. WORLD. The problem I've always had with people who want the WC held in specific places is that there's an elitist feeling that only Western, developed countries should have the WC. Even after the success of South Africa and Brazil. No legs just rotate it around Canada, Germany and Australia every 3 years until other countries get to their level.
posted on 3/6/15
World cup or not. I'd like it to go to nations developed enough that they can complete preparations with minimal loss of life. If that means that it has to go between Canada and Germany for the next 50 years then so be it.
posted on 3/6/15
I also despise that attitude BK.
These nations who aren't developed will prosper after hosting a World Cup, the potential revenue allows them to pour money into getting their stadia up to standard, they don't have the revenues of the so called elite, so how can they ever catch up, without it?
posted on 3/6/15
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 3/6/15
comment by 李贝 If anyone can, Emre Can... And don't call me Schürrle (U3979)
posted 13 hours, 28 minutes ago
Europe should host it every 2 world cups - it's the place that's far and away most suited for it, both in terms of time difference, being situated centrally, in terms of no ridiculous weather troubles, and the most money and infrastructure to host a sporting tournament. Only other country that comes close is the USA but time difference is a bit of a killer there. If Japan play in Pasadena there's a 16 hour time difference.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is a world cup, it is for everyone, not Europe.
posted on 3/6/15
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 2 hours, 55 minutes ago
World cup or not. I'd like it to go to nations developed enough that they can complete preparations with minimal loss of life. If that means that it has to go between Canada and Germany for the next 50 years then so be it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What about the contractors killing people on their worksites.
They are western contractors, so we should not give Western countries world cups because of their deadly contractors.
Only fair, right?
posted on 3/6/15
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 2 hours, 17 minutes ago
comment by TCW (U6489)
posted 2 hours, 55 minutes ago
World cup or not. I'd like it to go to nations developed enough that they can complete preparations with minimal loss of life. If that means that it has to go between Canada and Germany for the next 50 years then so be it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What about the contractors killing people on their worksites.
They are western contractors, so we should not give Western countries world cups because of their deadly contractors.
Only fair, right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
IDGAF who. I care that it happens. If it's happening in Qatar but not in Europe, and the companies are the common denominator, then practically speaking, give it to the countries where people will die less.
I've had the contractor debate with you so much now MUDD. You know where I stand on all of this.
posted on 3/6/15
I just find it odd that when people die on work sites outside "Europe and the West" it is the countries fault.
However, when people die on work sites in the "UK and the West," it is the contractors fault.
It is fascinating logic
posted on 3/6/15
I don't blame Qatar for the deaths directly. But I do blame them for allowing the construction companies the freedom to operate as they do. Over here there is more regulation and enforcement, and when a death does occur there are often serious repercussions.
Anyway as I said i'm just more concerned with as few people dying for the world cup as possible. It's pretty clear that fewer people would die building the world cup if another venue had been chosen - so with hindsight I would say, well that's a no brainer.