With FIFA having received a total of '11 formal expressions of interest' to bid for the 2018 and/or 2022 FIFA World Cups, Road to 2010 wonders: How do the candidates stack up?
England's fine newspaper the Guardian Unlimited does the work for us, with an interactive map digesting the pros and cons of all 11 bids for the '18/'22 Cups.
The 11 bids are from Australia, Belgium and the Netherlands, England, Indonesia, Japan, Korea Republic, Mexico, Qatar, Russia, Spain and Portugal, and the USA.
Here's a small dosage of the Guardian's analysis. For more, please click here and enjoy the full article.
Australia
Pros - Has a proven track record in hosting major tournaments, such as the 200 Olympics, the 2003 Rugby World Cup and the 2006 Commonwealth Games. Bid will not want for money or influence thanks to their chief football powerbroker, billionaire property developer Frank Lowy. A perceived boost to the moderately successful A-League would also be a boon for FIFA.
Cons - The time difference with Europe, the largest and most lucrative television audience for football, is the biggest problem and that may be accentuated should UEFA and FIFA succeed in their legal bid to open the bidding to subscription channels. A lack of purpose-built football stadia is also a problem.
USA
Pros - The likely voting pact between England's bloc and CONCACAF (the Confederation of North, Central American and Carribbean Association Football) gives the United States a good chance of securing the 2022 Cup. Top class infrastructure, stadia and transport links also work in their favor, as does a perceived positive impact on the ailing MLS.
Cons - Hosted the finals as recently as 1994, a dull tournament remembered for draconian regulations imposed by TV companies ignorant of the tempo of football regarding the intake of fluids and the amount of time the ball spent in play. Brazil 2014 may work against another bid from the Americas.
No comments:
Post a Comment