World Cup - Should bids be organized by continents? [ENDS 20/02/2011]

[Grig]

World Cup - Should bids be organized by continents?

ENDS: 20/02/2011

Controversy is always prevalent in any sporting bid. However, this year's world cup bidding has been some of the most controversial. The world cup goes by a system of awarding bids to countries of a specific continent. For example, European countries such as London could not have made a bid for the 2022 tournament. As always there are two arguments on this debate.

Some say it's great that countries such as Qatar and South Africa have a chance to get a bid. It also denotes the diversity of the game and the fact that the game can expand into unchartered territories. It would mean more new fans and more players of the game. This symbolizes development in infrastructure and generally giving the host city/ nation some longer term benefits to it.

Others argue, that this is all a sham and that the world cup should be organized not by continents, but rather by the country which is more prepared to host such a world wide sporting event. Many argue that cities such as London were deprived of an extra bidding chance for 2022, due to their location. They also argue that Qatar is not a sporting nation and does not have the sporting 'culture' or infrastructure for such an event.

The Olympics does not follow such a system officially. However, the reality is that they too are now going by awarding the games to cities. In the past it has been known that some 'first time' organizing countries have been unprepared and havoc was caused.

This debate can be approached in many angles and can really delve into what should be the solution to such a problem, if there really is a problem in the way bidding in structured.

[JackBuddy]

They should be chosen on merit. Fifa only want to extend their reach of power.

[AgnesIO]

We were deprived of the 2022 bid as you cannot bid on two world cups in a row - it wasn't because we were in Europe or anything?

The FA went for Qatar as they are extremely wealthy.

[Grig]

We were deprived of the 2022 bid as you cannot bid on two world cups in a row - it wasn't because we were in Europe or anything?

The FA went for Qatar as they are extremely wealthy.

From Wiki:

In October 2007, FIFA ended its continental rotation policy. Instead countries that are members of the same confederation as either of the last two tournament hosts are ineligible, leaving Africa ineligible for 2018 and South America ineligible for both 2018 and 2022.[1] Other factors in the selection process include the number of suitable stadiums, and their location across candidate nations. Voting is done using a multiple round exhaustive ballot system whereby the candidate receiving the fewest votes in each round is eliminated until a single candidate is chosen by the majority.

Basically, it always had a continental rotation policy, now increased to a confederation policy, which is more or less the same thing as they are split into continents. Hence, restrictions on how many times a continent can bid. So yes, one of the major reasons was because you were in Europe, hence why not European or South American country could bid.

[ChickenFaces]

It makes sense for there to be a lot of cultural diversity. Of course no matter where you are, the World Cup is still going to get an amazing turnout, I suppose in some places better than others. The continental rotation policy did seem a bit general to me as Europe has so many countries, but it didn't really change much when they instituted the confederation policy. Countries that haven't gotten a chance to host the World Cup should have a bit more priority over other countries, but on the other hand some countries aren't socially, politically, or economically stable enough to host such a huge event, especially in the time we're currently in.

[Eoin247]

Ok, i agree to a certain extent with some aspects of this. I think it is a good thing that countries from all around the world can have a chance to host the world cup. However I don't agree that countries such as Qatar, that have absolutely no good reason to host the world cup (Apart from having lots of cash), should host it. There are just so many things wrong with Qatar getting to host that i don't know where to begin.

Firstly I only think that a country with a reasonable amount of culture/history with soccer should be allowed to bid. At least Russia can say they’re ok with regards to this. Qatar on the other hand cannot. Their team hasn’t even qualified for a single world cup before. Did you know that at the moment it is against the law for a female to attend a soccer match? You would think they would have to change this to host the world cup right? Even if they do alter it, i can guarantee you that women of the country will still be forbidden and restricted in this way (amongst many other ways). Not to mention that homosexuality is punishable by five years in prison, and this is something that they are very unlikely to change for the world cup. So what exactly are women and gays going to do in Qatar? Will they simply not go?

Also Qatar will have to construct 12 brand new stadiums, all to be within a 20 mile radius. They will later be dismantled after the tournament. What an absolute waste. Not only is doing this completely wrong, but shows that Qatar doesn’t even plan to make soccer part of their culture/history in the future.

The fact that Qatar is too hot for the world cup is also blatent. The temperature during soccer games will reach 50 degrees celcius.

To conclude on Qatar ( I’ve just touched on the tip of the iceberg really), they have been shown to be terrible hosts before. In 2006 Qatar managed to host one of the worst ever hosted Asian games.

So i believe that it’s a great thing that countries from all around the world can have a chance to bid for the world cup. But, they must meet certain requirements and have a culture and history that involves soccer.

[Conservative,]

I think it should be based on the merit of the bid.

If England is the best place to hold it, then Germany. So be it. We shouldn't have this stupid policy of being equal - because quite frankly, Qatar will be - without doubt - an epic failure. Even if they CAN build stadiums with cooling systems so players and fans don't pass out from the heat - the laws are ridiculously strict so basically every football fan will be arrested.

As I said - the best bid should win. The only restrictions I'd impose is that when a country wins - they can't bid for the next 2 tournaments - giving other countries a chance to give it a go.

The current system just means that potentially - the best hosts are deprived of winning. Like England could be the best hosts for 2022 - but we couldn't bid for it.

[Banana Pancakes]

The World cup bids DO need to be sorted by continent. If the world cup was given out by merit the whole time the same countries would be hosting the World Cup every so often. In poorer countries there is a huge support for football, even more than in westernized countries such as the UK and Spain. The chance for them to host a world cup should not be taken away from them. Everyone's complaining that the WC shouldn't have been given to Qatar and in a sense I agree, but that's no reason to why it should be awarded to the UK. Our bid was fairly beaten by Russia.
As we saw last year, 2010 was an amazing World Cup in a country that no one expected to see it hosted. If it continues to be sorted by continents then there will be the opportunity for this to be seen again. Think how many South African's would have had the chance to see the WC if it was hosted in the US or Western Europe.

[Eoin247]

We were deprived of the 2022 bid as you cannot bid on two world cups in a row - it wasn't because we were in Europe or anything?

The FA went for Qatar as they are extremely wealthy.

The FA is corrupt and has many problems and it has been showing in recent years. With regards to Qatar, i can only conclude that bribes were involved really.