Three countries on World Cup standby

[teppic]

South Africa always did look like an odd choice for a host nation for me. Can anyone really say that it is safe for players and supporters? It looks like the security concern has been masked with the fact that a stadium might not be ready.

FIFA claim that 3 countries are on standby for a last minute step in.

Germany today said they are not one of them.

Who could be the others? England could be ready. France too.

I would go back to 1994 as countries ready to host the tournament. Before that the stadia was not up to scratch.

So America, France, Japan and Korea are obvious as they held a tournamnt recently and would be ready to host one at short notice.

Places like Austria are out as I'm sure that World cup stadiums need to be a certain size and 30,000 capacity as at most EURO2008 venues is too small.

Thoughts?

 

[TsarDiniyar]

South Africa always did look like an odd choice for a host nation for me. Can anyone really say that it is safe for players and supporters? It looks like the security concern has been masked with the fact that a stadium might not be ready.

FIFA claim that 3 countries are on standby for a last minute step in.

Germany today said they are not one of them.

Who could be the others? England could be ready. France too.

I would go back to 1994 as countries ready to host the tournament. Before that the stadia was not up to scratch.

So America, France, Japan and Korea are obvious as they held a tournamnt recently and would be ready to host one at short notice.

Places like Austria are out as I'm sure that World cup stadiums need to be a certain size and 30,000 capacity as at most EURO2008 venues is too small.

Thoughts?

am i right in thinking it alternates between europe and the rest of the world? i'd put my money on USA

 

[moyes_bringin_it_back]

South Africa always did look like an odd choice for a host nation for me. Can anyone really say that it is safe for players and supporters? It looks like the security concern has been masked with the fact that a stadium might not be ready.

FIFA claim that 3 countries are on standby for a last minute step in.

Germany today said they are not one of them.

Who could be the others? England could be ready. France too.

I would go back to 1994 as countries ready to host the tournament. Before that the stadia was not up to scratch.

So America, France, Japan and Korea are obvious as they held a tournamnt recently and would be ready to host one at short notice.

Places like Austria are out as I'm sure that World cup stadiums need to be a certain size and 30,000 capacity as at most EURO2008 venues is too small.

Thoughts?

Defo England. Due to new Wembley being ready. Maybe host a game in Cardiff too if required?

Certainly do have the stadia now. Plus the fact is - this countries already putting together a bid.

Maybe switch dates to give SA more time to prepare?

All depends....

 

[FCConnecticut]

Hosting it in the USA would really highlight the ridiculousness of the MLS's season running during a Wold Cup. Still, at least this way the MLS players wont have to lie to their manager to go see a match!

 

[teppic]

am i right in thinking it alternates between europe and the rest of the world? i'd put my money on USA

it alternates between europe, africa, north/south america and asia.


but any country can be selected for a standby.

if england are selected it wouldn't affect their 2018 bid! that would be sweeeeeet!!

 

[TX Bill]

USA or England for me.

I'd love to see it back here but I'm guessing we'll have to wait a few more tournaments.

 

[Jamo Martinez]

According to the Spanish press, Australia is pencilled in as a standby if South Africa doesn't get it's act together

 

[Dom1878]

I think Australia, im going to the World Cup in my Gap Year, so i hope its in Europe somewhere....

 

[teppic]

i think the standby country will have little notice. less than a year. is oz ready for that? i think japan or korea would be more likely than oz. but i think it will either be the US or the UK.

 

[Reidy's Bottle Of Grecian]

mexico have stood in at very short notice before and could no doubt do it again, and what about spain, italy, argentina, portugal. blurter wont want to bring it here full stop.

 

[teppic]

hmmm.. my only concern with a plave like mexico is that the stadium criteria is so much stricter these days. they would surely have to do major work on stadia to pull it up with regulation.

argentina with the greatest respect cannot afford to host a world cup. their economy is still wafer thin.

italy suffers from the problem of stadiums being municipal and quite decrepit. portugal and spain i'm sure could easily host the tournament.

 

[Rich316]

england will get it

 

[Reidy's Bottle Of Grecian]

san siro...decrepit, new juve which would be ready......decrepit, new torino......decrepit, bari was consructed for '90 world cup, sampdoria and others are all fairly new as well.

argentina....economy wafer thin, and s.a. is booming isnt it.

mexico........as i said stood in and gave us a fantastic world cup.

spain, plenty of top notch stadia there too.

australia, certainly has enough stadiums just not enough cities to host it.

i think the states would be 1 of the favs. although i wouldnt want it there.

england ? blurter would never bring it here, he'd be more likely to do a euro world cup with groups in capital cities across europe.

 

[teppic]

san siro...decrepit, new juve which would be ready......decrepit, new torino......decrepit, bari was consructed for '90 world cup, sampdoria and others are all fairly new as well.

argentina....economy wafer thin, and s.a. is booming isnt it.

mexico........as i said stood in and gave us a fantastic world cup.

spain, plenty of top notch stadia there too.

australia, certainly has enough stadiums just not enough cities to host it.

i think the states would be 1 of the favs. although i wouldnt want it there.

england ? blurter would never bring it here, he'd be more likely to do a euro world cup with groups in capital cities across europe.

i think we are agreeing... but, italian stadiums are not owned by the clubs and are in a poor state. many don't even have backs on the seats. these days that is not good enough for safety regulations.

mexico did hold a great world cup, but that was 24 years before this current world cup. again, they will miss out because of the high standards of stadium quality.

the argentinians did not even put a bid in when fifa wanted to go to south america. same with brazil. they just can't afford everything that goes with 90 minutes of action on the pitch. it costs hundreds of millions of pounds to be ready for the tournament.

south africa is the point of this debate. i think the country is too poor to provide adequate protection for players and fans. it was an odd decision off the bat to host the tournament there in the first place.

my top choices would be spain, portugal, USA, korea, japan, UK.

oz would be cool, but they have never hosted a major football tournament and would not have my confidence to be ready in a matter of months for it if they were chosen. (sorry mcbain!)

 

[Philw]

mexico........as i said stood in and gave us a fantastic world cup.

Never knew they were a stand in. Who was supposed to host it??