Football (World Cup 26)

[charlierc]

1 hour ago, lost said:

After wondering why ITV splashed out on a decent studio and the beeb didn't we found out where the money went instead with a strange begging advert at half time 🙅‍♂️

 

If FIFA wanted a showpiece final to sell the game to the yanks they completely failed but its their own fault for allowing Argentina’s gamesmanship all tournament. Hopefully that's going to go away with Messi's retirement.

We've been here before though, no? Italia 90 was before my time but Argentina were seen there as playing ends justify the means anti-futbol and had 2 players sent off in the final itself. Which suggests this isn't exactly a new phenomenon. 

[lost]

9 minutes ago, charlierc said:

We've been here before though, no? Italia 90 was before my time but Argentina were seen there as playing ends justify the means anti-futbol and had 2 players sent off in the final itself. Which suggests this isn't exactly a new phenomenon. 

 

Yeah I get that though the rules were supposedly changed after players like Van Basten were kicked out of the game. If they were getting the yellows and reds earlier in the tournament and not getting anywhere near the final you would hope that would make them change their tactics.

[kaosmark2]

FIFA refs were supposedly under instructions to try and let the game flow and not call too many early fouls. I still think Argentina took advantage of that more than there being direct refereeing bias (albeit that Nico Williams goal getting ruled out stank a bit). I didn't like the contradictory goals ruled out/not ruled out in the Egypt vs Argentina game but I think that was the worst one there.

 

Also bits of Portugal looking like they got favourable treatment, albeit they were so dire that they didn't get far enough for it to be picked up on.

 

Enzo Fernandez should've got a yellow early and could've got a red for that challenge on Rice early vs England, and Alexis McAllister definitely should have got a yellow for that early challenge in the final, but I don't think I'm feeling conspiratorial about it. The FIFA reffing stuff I really didn't like was rescinding red card bans. Not just Balogun in the tournament but chronic rapist should've been banned for the whole group stage. Albeit if he had been I suspect Portugal win that group instead of draw their way into 2nd place.

[Ben7amin_]

Disallowed goal for Spain was very very soft at best -It always shocks me in recent years how players like Nicolas Otamendi in this case completely throw them selves to the floor banking everything on winning the foul. Bad enough players dont stay on their feet attacking wise - even worse when defenders do it. 

 

In balance  il also say given the letter of the law -   Cucurella  should have been sent of for the mouth cover while talking to Messi.  Not sure anyone will feel to bad on a missed red card against Argentina. I suspect this is what a lot of the agro at the end was about. 

   

 

 

Edited July 20 by Ben7amin_

[lost]

6 minutes ago, Ben7amin_ said:

Disallowed goal for Spain was very very soft at best.

 

We all watched the replay and yes Otamendi basically grabs the defender and then throws himself on the ground.

 

I was in a group of 6 and nobody could explain why it didn't go to VAR. Its stuff like that that fuels the conspiratorial theories. We were all told VAR was introduced to stop things like that happening but then when its not used for something like that but is to give the Switzerland forward a second yellow for diving, its hard to put it down to incompetence.

 

[charlierc]

Guess it's time for overall reviews then. What did we all make of the tournament as a whole?

 

It's a curious one in some respects because at previous World Cups, the off pitch stuff has quietened down when the football started but this felt different. It felt like the off pitch stuff really festered during this one in a different way. 

 

Some of the football was good, though I think the last 3 World Cups before this one had more of a high quality spectacle. 

[kaosmark2]

I did a few of my thoughts in my continental round-up but:

 

f**k hydration breaks and f**k an extended half-time show in the final. If the weather for that particular match is blazing hot, sure, hydration breaks will be necessary, but please try and have them as an exception not a default.

 

I really hate the "best 3rd place team" nonsense - and this applies to the Euros as well - it imbalances things in favour of groups that happen later, and I think it reduces jeopardy in the final game a lot more. I also think we got a lot more draws in opening games between teams that were expected to get out of the group (Brazil-Morocco, Netherlands-Japan), because if you get that 1 draw, you know 4 points almost guarantees you through.

 

Red cards getting rescinded/suspended is absolute nonsense. Whether we're talking CR7 before the tournament or Balogun within it. Apply your own rules you twats.

 

VAR was done much much better than the last world-cup, and much much better than the PL. Maybe slightly worse than the CL even if I feel the CL gives soft pens too much. I'm mostly talking speed here - the decisions were done much faster and even the stuff I think was unfair (Egypt v Arg anyone?) was resolved quicker. I also like that the refs vocally explained the decision on the pitch through a mic.

 

Visas/ability to stay for players and that referee was really sh*t. I know the USA is at war with Iran, but the Iranian football team played arguably the 2nd best football from Asia despite all the f**kery. That referee also deserves a lot of credit, and I hope he's given a SF or the final next tourney. And it was really highlighted by the USA allowing Partey in (along with all the other rapists), while Canada didn't. If you're going to host a world cup, you have to host a world cup.

 

The triple-host thing stopped feeling real after Mexico lost at the Azteca. Partially because there were no other games outside USA (why? Surely each should have a QF), but also with stuff like the USA getting their own anthem sung in the build-up to the final. I know Americans love to sing their anthem all the time, but if they're going to do that, get Mexico and Canada involved - and not just with some dull Bieber playing acoustic guitar nonsense. 

 

I don't like the "seeding the top 4 to not meet if they win their groups" thing. I know that tennis does this, but honestly, I don't want complex fancy draws done by a computer, I want "winner group A plays runner-up group B" with each group being randomly pulled teams from 4 different continents. I know there's been "top seed (hosts + FIFA rankings" for decades, but I want it to get more random not more seeded - and more transparent in the draw process.

 

I did mostly enjoy it, but the off-field stuff really felt so f**king American. And I'm not just talking about Trump, I'm talking the half-time show, the countdowns to kick-off, the stadia, the terminology (I'm so sick of hearing about "ties").

 

I think overall, it was a sample of what happens if we let America dictate football (or soccer as they want to call it), and most of the world is rightly upset by that. I don't think the USA have done themselves favours in people's opinions of them. I think I go back to SKorea/Japan and South Africa as world cups that felt culturally meaningful. But I did enjoy watching it generally.

Edited July 21 by kaosmark2

[charlierc]

9 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

I did a few of my thoughts in my continental round-up but:

 

f**k hydration breaks and f**k an extended half-time show in the final. If the weather for that particular match is blazing hot, sure, hydration breaks will be necessary, but please try and have them as an exception not a default.

 

I really hate the "best 3rd place team" nonsense - and this applies to the Euros as well - it imbalances things in favour of groups that happen later, and I think it reduces jeopardy in the final game a lot more. I also think we got a lot more draws in opening games between teams that were expected to get out of the group (Brazil-Morocco, Netherlands-Japan), because if you get that 1 draw, you know 4 points almost guarantees you through.

 

Red cards getting rescinded/suspended is absolute nonsense. Whether we're talking CR7 before the tournament or Balogun within it. Apply your own rules you twats.

 

VAR was done much much better than the last world-cup, and much much better than the PL. Maybe slightly worse than the CL even if I feel the CL gives soft pens too much. I'm mostly talking speed here - the decisions were done much faster and even the stuff I think was unfair (Egypt v Arg anyone?) was resolved quicker. I also like that the refs vocally explained the decision on the pitch through a mic.

 

Visas/ability to stay for players and that referee was really sh*t. I know the USA is at war with Iran, but the Iranian football team played arguably the 2nd best football from Asia despite all the f**kery. That referee also deserves a lot of credit, and I hope he's given a SF or the final next tourney. And it was really highlighted by the USA allowing Partey in (along with all the other rapists), while Canada didn't. If you're going to host a world cup, you have to host a world cup.

 

The triple-host thing stopped feeling real after Mexico lost at the Azteca. Partially because there were no other games outside USA (why? Surely each should have a QF), but also with stuff like the USA getting their own anthem sung in the build-up to the final. I know Americans love to sing their anthem all the time, but if they're going to do that, get Mexico and Canada involved - and not just with some dull Bieber playing acoustic guitar nonsense. 

 

I don't like the "seeding the top 4 to not meet if they win their groups" thing. I know that tennis does this, but honestly, I don't want complex fancy draws done by a computer, I want "winner group A plays runner-up group B" with each group being randomly pulled teams from 4 different continents. I know there's been "top seed (hosts + FIFA rankings" for decades, but I want it to get more random not more seeded - and more transparent in the draw process.

 

I did mostly enjoy it, but the off-field stuff really felt so f**king American. And I'm not just talking about Trump, I'm talking the half-time show, the countdowns to kick-off, the stadia, the terminology (I'm so sick of hearing about "ties").

 

I think overall, it was a sample of what happens if we let America dictate football (or soccer as they want to call it), and most of the world is rightly upset by that. I don't think the USA have done themselves favours in people's opinions of them. I think I go back to SKorea/Japan and South Africa as world cups that felt culturally meaningful. But I did enjoy watching it generally.

Quite the lengthy opinions indeed.

 

I do agree though that there was a bit too much American overkill. Its curious in a way because from anecdotes, the 1994 tournament was happy just to let the sport do the talking without an aggressively US influence, save for Diana Ross famously missing an open goal as part of the opening ceremony. Which is hilarious foreshadowing in retrospect given Baggio's skied penalty at the other end of that tournament.

 

It's probably a good thing the next World Cup will mostly be in Europe, although even there, FIFA's attempt to leverage Saudi Arabia the 2034 tournament feel on-the-nose with the bizarre gifting of single games to Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay. I'd have preferred a South American 2030 tournament to celebrate 100 years since it began then Europe in '34. But obviously I don't have the power to bend things that way.

 

There's a lot there though that lends to a theory that this is the one where the wall between off-pitch and on-pitch drama collapsed. At previous tournaments, there's been a lot of negativity in the build-up but when the football started, we largely moved on. Qatar still had a lot of it hang over, but nothing like this scale. The Balogun situation was a scandal that Infantino should be questioned harshly for, the treatment of Iran was a joke, letting the US pick and choose who could come in felt like an indulgence nowhere else would get and as said, the half-time show was an irrelevance.

 

And yet some of the games were still good. I think the last 3 World Cups had better football but the last 32 & 16 were really good going, and while the quarters were a let-down, the semis were compelling drama. Shame the final was a bit of a turkey but think we can just blame Argentina pushing the line too far for that.

[charlierc]

World Cup 2026: Gavi does not think Paredes should be suspended - BBC Sport

 

Given this is the guy Paredes wrestled to the ground and tried to choke by the bib, that is quite the unexpected defence. I don't think it should be enough though - frankly Paredes was lucky to even make it to the end of extra-time and his post-game antics were justified in getting a ban. Especially as it turns out he actually was not sent off after the game, which it feels he should've been.

 

In other international football news, apparently the Italian FA has had discussions with Pep Guardiola. Which would be quite the coup if they can bring him in and be even more awkward if, even with Pep, they fail to make the next World Cup.

[pink_triangle]

 

 

On 21/07/2026 at 11:29, kaosmark2 said:

I did a few of my thoughts in my continental round-up but:

 

f**k hydration breaks and f**k an extended half-time show in the final. If the weather for that particular match is blazing hot, sure, hydration breaks will be necessary, but please try and have them as an exception not a default.

 

I really hate the "best 3rd place team" nonsense - and this applies to the Euros as well - it imbalances things in favour of groups that happen later, and I think it reduces jeopardy in the final game a lot more. I also think we got a lot more draws in opening games between teams that were expected to get out of the group (Brazil-Morocco, Netherlands-Japan), because if you get that 1 draw, you know 4 points almost guarantees you through.

 

Red cards getting rescinded/suspended is absolute nonsense. Whether we're talking CR7 before the tournament or Balogun within it. Apply your own rules you twats.

 

VAR was done much much better than the last world-cup, and much much better than the PL. Maybe slightly worse than the CL even if I feel the CL gives soft pens too much. I'm mostly talking speed here - the decisions were done much faster and even the stuff I think was unfair (Egypt v Arg anyone?) was resolved quicker. I also like that the refs vocally explained the decision on the pitch through a mic.

 

Visas/ability to stay for players and that referee was really sh*t. I know the USA is at war with Iran, but the Iranian football team played arguably the 2nd best football from Asia despite all the f**kery. That referee also deserves a lot of credit, and I hope he's given a SF or the final next tourney. And it was really highlighted by the USA allowing Partey in (along with all the other rapists), while Canada didn't. If you're going to host a world cup, you have to host a world cup.

 

The triple-host thing stopped feeling real after Mexico lost at the Azteca. Partially because there were no other games outside USA (why? Surely each should have a QF), but also with stuff like the USA getting their own anthem sung in the build-up to the final. I know Americans love to sing their anthem all the time, but if they're going to do that, get Mexico and Canada involved - and not just with some dull Bieber playing acoustic guitar nonsense. 

 

I don't like the "seeding the top 4 to not meet if they win their groups" thing. I know that tennis does this, but honestly, I don't want complex fancy draws done by a computer, I want "winner group A plays runner-up group B" with each group being randomly pulled teams from 4 different continents. I know there's been "top seed (hosts + FIFA rankings" for decades, but I want it to get more random not more seeded - and more transparent in the draw process.

 

I did mostly enjoy it, but the off-field stuff really felt so f**king American. And I'm not just talking about Trump, I'm talking the half-time show, the countdowns to kick-off, the stadia, the terminology (I'm so sick of hearing about "ties").

 

I think overall, it was a sample of what happens if we let America dictate football (or soccer as they want to call it), and most of the world is rightly upset by that. I don't think the USA have done themselves favours in people's opinions of them. I think I go back to SKorea/Japan and South Africa as world cups that felt culturally meaningful. But I did enjoy watching it generally.

I’m sure it will go to 64 teams so the 3rd place thing won’t matter soon. I am ok with the extra games, nobody forces anyone to watch a group game they don’t want to.

 

In terms of quality it was enjoyable and pretty similar to last World Cup. Also like the last World Cup seemed to be less idiotic fan behaviour.

 

VAR was much better and i think overall increased referee leniency improved the game. One of the highlight in the punditry was Rooney who seems to be the most sensible British pundit.

[Dazrigby88]

Awful World Cup, spoiled by American corporate greed, blatant refereeing bias, and trasparent political interference. I hope they never allow another tournament to take place on US soil, although I'm wise enough to know that's not realistic as mony talks, especially with FIFA!

[kaosmark2]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

I’m sure it will go to 64 teams so the 3rd place thing won’t matter soon. I am ok with the extra games, nobody forces anyone to watch a group game they don’t want to.

 

In terms of quality it was enjoyable and pretty similar to last World Cup. Also like the last World Cup seemed to be less idiotic fan behaviour.

 

VAR was much better and i think overall increased referee leniency improved the game. One of the highlight in the punditry was Rooney who seems to be the most sensible British pundit.

Yeah, I did say when talking about continental performances a page or two ago that I'm sure it will go to 64 in the next 1-3 tournaments, and I hope it stays there. It's not even more extra games for players!

 

Agree on VAR (Arg vs Egypt + disallowed Spain goal aside)

 

Rooney being the most sensible British pundit surprised me, as I've watched quite a lot of CL on TNT this year, and he's been fairly dull and flat there.

[charlierc]

World Cup 2026: Gianni Infantino tells Fifa critics to 'meditate, pray or watch football' - BBC Sport

 

Oh good, he's got a messiah complex

[Neil]

Bring back blatter's corruption, much better then infantino's stupidity.

[Suprefan]

On 23/07/2026 at 00:51, Dazrigby88 said:

Awful World Cup, spoiled by American corporate greed, blatant refereeing bias, and trasparent political interference. I hope they never allow another tournament to take place on US soil, although I'm wise enough to know that's not realistic as mony talks, especially with FIFA!

 We got facilities like no other. This is the only country that could handle a 48 or 64 team tournament on its own btw. Everywhere else has to be joint bids. Be more concerned over the private equity thing thats in motion now. Infantino just doesnt care about what happens as long as his pockets are lined.

 

 

ANYWAY, since I missed this thread completely, I went to a couple of matches. Iran vs New Zealand and Spain vs Austria. I went back in 94 with my dad as a kid and had to return the favor all this time later. Good times were had. Did not get killed on ticket pricing since all these years of ticket buying experience and knowing locations and such helped. Plus knowing about the ticket drops and such. I bought one match blind. The knockout round one because the groupings had been revealed so I was crossing my fingers when the draw happened that the choices would be solid. The other was priced so low that you couldnt pass it up and was def seen as not sexy per say, but it was exciting. Here are some photos.  Freddy was def a psy op tho. ( and no, i wasnt cheering for usa )

[lost]

9 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

 Be more concerned over the private equity thing thats in motion now. Infantino just doesnt care about what happens as long as his pockets are lined.

 

 

Could be an empty threat but there is actual talk of UEFA breaking off. You could of just witnessed the last world cup with every country included.

[charlierc]

24 minutes ago, lost said:

 

Could be an empty threat but there is actual talk of UEFA breaking off. You could of just witnessed the last world cup with every country included.

Uefa and FIFA have clearly had a very strained relationship for some time. It would be a nuclear option for Uefa to decide they're quitting FIFA but FIFA are doing a good job at trying to push them away. The fact Uefa and South America's governing body CONMEBOL may have some support for going against what FIFA wants could help - a World Cup without European or South American teams feels like a tough sell. Not an impossible one, but without the two confederations that have produced every World Cup winner would absolutely not get the same TV and sponsor cash.

[Suprefan]

20 minutes ago, lost said:

 

Could be an empty threat but there is actual talk of UEFA breaking off. You could of just witnessed the last world cup with every country included.

 

I hope Uefa goes through with it. They were already trying to get votes to oust Infantino after the Balogun incident. Concacaf and Comnebol could just merge together if they absolutely had to and figure something out. But if things were ok then Concacaf is getting the short end because essentially getting 2 automatic spots for Usa and Mexico was a big thing for those teams. If they joined Comnebol they would actually have to make an effort in qualifying. Afcon is really the key since Infantino has them wrapped around his finger and are the only reason he couldnt get voted out. But yeah, this stinks for everything overall. I mean Uefa could just create their own tournament anyway. You invite winners/selections from other confederations for a tournament. Say its 32 teams and 12 are from the outside?  3 from Concacaf, Comnebol, Afcon and Asia/Oceana. Thats reasonably balanced without making it seem that Uefa teams are getting denied a chance if theres still 20 spots to qualify for.

[charlierc]

47 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

We got facilities like no other. This is the only country that could handle a 48 or 64 team tournament on its own btw. Everywhere else has to be joint bids. Be more concerned over the private equity thing thats in motion now. Infantino just doesnt care about what happens as long as his pockets are lined.

 

 

ANYWAY, since I missed this thread completely, I went to a couple of matches. Iran vs New Zealand and Spain vs Austria. I went back in 94 with my dad as a kid and had to return the favor all this time later. Good times were had. Did not get killed on ticket pricing since all these years of ticket buying experience and knowing locations and such helped. Plus knowing about the ticket drops and such. I bought one match blind. The knockout round one because the groupings had been revealed so I was crossing my fingers when the draw happened that the choices would be solid. The other was priced so low that you couldnt pass it up and was def seen as not sexy per say, but it was exciting. Here are some photos.  Freddy was def a psy op tho. ( and no, i wasnt cheering for usa )

Some decent seats and looks like a nice adventure. I have a friend who saw England's group games and the Dallas stadium looked cool at least. Plus I've never been to California but did think SoFi Stadium looks nice. I guess you'd want it to be for that kind of money.

 

With the private equity thing going on, given Infantino is already getting criticised for his chumminess with Trump, choosing to hand the keys to a company controlled by Jared Kushner's brother is not exactly going to help. He's consistent in choosing terrible choices ngl, not least given this reminds me of deals FIFA had in the 90s/00s that nearly bankrupted the organisation when the companies underpinning them collapsed. Some have pointed out as well Infantino tried this in 2018 with his Club World Cup plans but had to stop them after a backlash, though whether a similar backlash will have a similar effect this time is another matter given the confidence he's unfortunately developed.

Edited Tuesday at 20:57 by charlierc

[kaosmark2]

15 hours ago, Suprefan said:

 We got facilities like no other. This is the only country that could handle a 48 or 64 team tournament on its own btw. Everywhere else has to be joint bids.

This line is actually just wrong. There's very few, but England could handle 48 (albeit would need UK for 64), Germany can handle 48, Brazil probably could. Many other countries would end up with white elephant stadia, but please leave the American exceptionalism out of this.

 

Also, I like joint-bids. Spain+Portugal+Morocco is a great joint tournament. I'm just irked that the Arg+Uruguay+Paraguay is tacked on instead of being a separate tournament to rig 2034 towards the Saudis (who can afford the white elephant stadia and infrastructure spend).

[balti-pie]

England and Germany could both handle a 48 team world cup starting next week, if it were needed. Spain and France might need a bit of advance notice of a year or two, Italy would need lots of advance notice and a lot of money for their knackered stadiums, but other pairings of countries could manage it as well - Poland and Ukraine in due course, Turkey and Greece, pan-Scandanavia etc etc plus the spectre of the co-hosts having to get on would be very entertaining!

[Suprefan]

6 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

This line is actually just wrong. There's very few, but England could handle 48 (albeit would need UK for 64), Germany can handle 48, Brazil probably could. Many other countries would end up with white elephant stadia, but please leave the American exceptionalism out of this.

 

Also, I like joint-bids. Spain+Portugal+Morocco is a great joint tournament. I'm just irked that the Arg+Uruguay+Paraguay is tacked on instead of being a separate tournament to rig 2034 towards the Saudis (who can afford the white elephant stadia and infrastructure spend).

 

You lot were all "what does America do with all these stadiums" well, the answer was clearly given. And again, air conditioning. Funny enough that Spain won the tourney and only played 2 matches outdoors the entire way. Lets put it into perspective that no Nfl stadium is below 60,000 capacity which is a nice thing to have because you arent having to put any big matches in smaller settings. And theres 32 options available. If Fifa allowed for bleacher seating to be used in stadiums for matches then you would have multiple venues with over 90 - 100k capacity. England only has Wembley, we got a dozen. Oh, and theres tailgating? You guys just go to the pub for a minute before the match. We got crazy folk drinking  and eating outside in the car park regardless of the weather at 7am for a 1pm game. Go watch the people tailgate at nfl games in december in the snow. 
 

 

21 hours ago, charlierc said:

Some decent seats and looks like a nice adventure. I have a friend who saw England's group games and the Dallas stadium looked cool at least. Plus I've never been to California but did think SoFi Stadium looks nice. I guess you'd want it to be for that kind of money.

 

With the private equity thing going on, given Infantino is already getting criticised for his chumminess with Trump, choosing to hand the keys to a company controlled by Jared Kushner's brother is not exactly going to help. He's consistent in choosing terrible choices ngl, not least given this reminds me of deals FIFA had in the 90s/00s that nearly bankrupted the organisation when the companies underpinning them collapsed. Some have pointed out as well Infantino tried this in 2018 with his Club World Cup plans but had to stop them after a backlash, though whether a similar backlash will have a similar effect this time is another matter given the confidence he's unfortunately developed.

 

Sofi is great.  Getting there was really easy as our public transit stepped up with transport options. $1.75 each way on a bus that left you 2 blocks from the stadium. 5 billion dollars well spent. Except for the pitch dimensions. When they were even building it they mentioned hosting world cup matches. But didnt have the foresight to be compliant. Dont know how it got past them. Thats also part of the reason a couple other indoor stadiums didnt get used or they turned down fifa. Las Vegas didnt want to spend the money to modify their seating to fit the field. Arizona said no due to the financials, same as Minnesota. I wish Tampa had said yes or been considered  because it wouldve been amazing to see everyone wondering why the hell theres a pirate ship at one end of the field. They couldve shot the cannons after a goal! Do wish they had considered the Rose Bowl for an opening match just for historic purposes and to have 90,000+ in a stadium along with the setting by the mountains. Theres always 2038 I guess. Or just watch the Olympics since theyre using Sofi for the swimming events which is going to look incredible. 

[kaosmark2]

1 hour ago, Suprefan said:

 

You lot were all "what does America do with all these stadiums" well, the answer was clearly given. And again, air conditioning. Funny enough that Spain won the tourney and only played 2 matches outdoors the entire way. Lets put it into perspective that no Nfl stadium is below 60,000 capacity which is a nice thing to have because you arent having to put any big matches in smaller settings. And theres 32 options available. If Fifa allowed for bleacher seating to be used in stadiums for matches then you would have multiple venues with over 90 - 100k capacity. England only has Wembley, we got a dozen. Oh, and theres tailgating? You guys just go to the pub for a minute before the match. We got crazy folk drinking  and eating outside in the car park regardless of the weather at 7am for a 1pm game. Go watch the people tailgate at nfl games in december in the snow. 

"I'm American, we do everything bigger and better cos we're so great".

 

Noone here was saying America was going to do nothing with those stadia, it's known they're used for other sports. I explicitly didn't say America was going to have white elephant stadia like Saudi or a lot of other countries.

 

Seriously, you're just speaking from ignorance. You're bragging about your own culture that has no history of football, while being completely ignorant of every country that does.

 

And you're not even responding to what I said, you're responding to what you've read (or imagined) not even on this forum.

[pink_triangle]

I do actually think Europes dominance is bad for the game and finding ways to spread the wealth would be good, this to me doesn’t seem like that.

[charlierc]

7 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

This line is actually just wrong. There's very few, but England could handle 48 (albeit would need UK for 64), Germany can handle 48, Brazil probably could. Many other countries would end up with white elephant stadia, but please leave the American exceptionalism out of this.

 

Also, I like joint-bids. Spain+Portugal+Morocco is a great joint tournament. I'm just irked that the Arg+Uruguay+Paraguay is tacked on instead of being a separate tournament to rig 2034 towards the Saudis (who can afford the white elephant stadia and infrastructure spend).

We say that with the Saudis, I already have a feeling the 2034 WC is going to end up downgraded from the plans the Saudis proposed given recent downsizing in other PIF products or counting up the financial waste from various other projects like Neom or LIV Golf. And that's before we get into the financial ramifications of this ME war currently going on, which is likely to have after effects for years even if it stops today.

 

England would handle 48, yeah. Maybe an England-France joint bid for 2038 if it reaches 64? Especially after the Germans turned down the offer to do a joint bid.