Quote: (05-28-2015 06:47 AM)kosko Wrote:
Quote: (05-28-2015 06:35 AM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:
Quote: (05-28-2015 06:09 AM)kosko Wrote:
Quote: (05-28-2015 05:07 AM)britchard Wrote:
Why should the USA get to host in emergency over the UK? We have better stadiums and atmosphere, a real football culture and there wouldn't be this silly business of teams having 5 hour flights for their next game.
USA just has a easier setup. In the summer no American football conflicts and it has 30 stadiums that could be used with proper hotel, highway, and airport access. This list below does not even include many college stadiums either, just mostly big NFL stadiums that would be empty in June/July.
Houston
Dallas (Arlington)
Phoenix (Glendale)
Chicago
New York (New Jersey)
Miami
Tampa Bay
San Francisco (Santa Clara)
Boston
Denver
Pasadena or Stanford
Washington DC
^^^^
All those cities could host in June/July of next year even if needed. Very little work would need to be done and it would not conflict with other soccer clubs as would happen in the UK since no MLS facilities would be used aside from Foxborro in Boston, you would also have to lay down sod in Boston but that takes 6 days max to do.
The USA was put as a permanent "Plan B" when South Africa was awarded the games just in case they couldn't pull it off. Plus no BS politics, If the UK was awarded emergency games then France and Germany and maybe other UEFA nations would start moaning and crying.
There is no football played in the UK during this time either.
To be honest, British stadia are far better suited to football, having been built for this very purpose.
There's also the fans to think about; European WC are just better from a time of match and travel point of view for most of the fans wealthy enough to attend at shortish notice. As we Europeans make up more of the teams, especially at the cutting edge, it makes more sense.
As for the others bitching a moaning; well we haven't had a WC for 50 years. Italy had 90, France had 98 and Germany 06.
Either way it is a moot point as said; this is a non Europe WC.
Okay thanks for the correction as I assumed UK clubs still played as MLS oddly did last year during the WC.
Dont you worry the UK will pay dearly when it wants to host again when UEFA is in rotation to host. The reality is you don't need to sell snow to a polar bear with Europe and soccer. FIFA saw a big upsurge from USA '94 and there is still much more room to grow in the USA market. Any large EURO nation can host a WC but your not growing markets which is what corrupt FIFA has been attempting to do. USA TV will big cash money for TV rights relative to its population and viewer base.
Logistics are also much better in the USA. Yes the UK has short travel time and better Stadiums but the peons and plebs live very close to many UK Stadiums. To get a security plan in place would be more complex in the UK versus America where most Stadiums are in the middle of parking lots in the suburbs off the main highway. Its easier to put security on the ground in the most militarized country on earth on short notice. London had a difficult time with security and logistics for the Olympics due to the reality far to many people live close together in that region.
FIFA will need some PC play it safe nation next to host. Bets are that Canada with our third world level stadiums will likely get the nod. They are nudging either Australia or Canada to host but I believe Australia is out of rotation now due to switching federations.
I don't understand how you can say the USA has better stadia and logistics over the UK when it comes to football.
All of the Premier league clubs have large capacity stadiums with experienced ground staff and brilliant grass to play on. We're talking decades of experience here.
Wembley is not a football stadium at at heart so its pitch can be shit due to relaying and ripping up the turf constantly.
London has several large international level clubs with large stadiums right next to tourist hot spots, hotels and train networks.
The same goes for Greater Manchester and Scotland where the big teams reside.
Security is not a risk in the UK. Compared to the USA the UK is an incredibly easy affair. How many guns, gangs and nutjobs roam the streets of the USA?
We have one of the best police forces when it comes to managing crowds and violent idiots. All the US police do is get the gas and guns out. What sort of crowd control is that?
As a matter of fact the UK would have to be the best place in the world to host a World Cup outside of Germany.
- English
- Safe
- Plenty of transport links
- National game is loved
- A lot of places to drink, eat and party
The USA is too big and too violent compared to the UK and very costly.