Beyond Football - Freestyle Football Forum
Soccer => Soccer Forum => Topic started by: Adi on Jul 12, 2008, 07:27: AM
-
What do you all think?
I don't think a country has ever lost its right to host the World Cup. It looks bad for South Africa though. The hosts are supposed to have their stadiums ready a summer before the tournament starts (Confederations Cup) so that everything can be tested out. South Africa says they won't be able to have everything ready and won't be able to host the Confederations Cup.
FIFA has named three unknown countries as possible backups if South Africa doesn't improve their situation. I have a feeling the three countries are England, USA, and Australia or Spain.
-
If South Africa steps down well then obviously they won't host it, but if they don't then I think they can hold onto it, I doubt FIFA will take it away from them unless THEY are the ones who say they can't manage to host it.
I'm going negative on this one though. :down:
-
i hope they do. would be very sad for all south africans
-
This would be good for Africa but it sucks for us regular football fans. I'd much rather go to Spain to watch the World Cup or have it hosted here in the US.
-
The only REAL reason that FIFA are concerned about 2010 is because of the amount of violence and gang warfare going on down there. People are getting stabbed,shot, and murdered in broad daylight and have the police are corrupt. That's y FIFA isnt sure about the tourney because they fear for the players safety. Imagine if South Africa gets kicked out of the tournament by a controversial E.T goal. They'd have to give that player/team bodyguards to make sure no1 tries to murder him.
Only time will tell
-
Oh yes, they will, I think, my Instinct said that, oohhhh yaayyy :pimp:
-
The only REAL reason that FIFA are concerned about 2010 is because of the amount of violence and gang warfare going on down there. People are getting stabbed,shot, and murdered in broad daylight and have the police are corrupt. That's y FIFA isnt sure about the tourney because they fear for the players safety. Imagine if South Africa gets kicked out of the tournament by a controversial E.T goal. They'd have to give that player/team bodyguards to make sure no1 tries to murder him.
Only time will tell
I'm sorry but I don't agree with you.
South Africa's crime rate did not drastically rise within the last fee years. When FIFA choose South Africa they were well aware of the security conditions. They still decided to give them the tournament. They would not change their mind right now about that.
If the tournament gets moved, it's going to be because of the delay in stadium and transportation development. The country needs to be ready quite some time before the tournament starts (usually a year) so that everything can be tested. South Africa said that the stadiums won't be ready by next summer to test them for the Confederations Cup. And that's why it's a problem.
-
The only REAL reason that FIFA are concerned about 2010 is because of the amount of violence and gang warfare going on down there. People are getting stabbed,shot, and murdered in broad daylight and have the police are corrupt. That's y FIFA isnt sure about the tourney because they fear for the players safety. Imagine if South Africa gets kicked out of the tournament by a controversial E.T goal. They'd have to give that player/team bodyguards to make sure no1 tries to murder him.
Only time will tell
I'm sorry but I don't agree with you.
South Africa's crime rate did not drastically rise within the last fee years. When FIFA choose South Africa they were well aware of the security conditions. They still decided to give them the tournament. They would not change their mind right now about that.
If the tournament gets moved, it's going to be because of the delay in stadium and transportation development. The country needs to be ready quite some time before the tournament starts (usually a year) so that everything can be tested. South Africa said that the stadiums won't be ready by next summer to test them for the Confederations Cup. And that's why it's a problem.
They still decided to give them the tournament BECAUSE South Africa promised that they would crack down on the level of gang violence in the country.
The stadiums is another setback
-
this is kinda stupid to me. South Africa will host the tournament. they have hosted other large sporting events and there have been no problem. the FIFA president himself stated that there have been no discussion of a new host for the tournament. there is only one stadium that wont be ready a year before the tournament starts.
-
Sepp Blattter then again isnt the brightest bulb in the bunch from my opinion.
-
Sepp Blatter is a fucking idiot. :angry:
-
I hope yes
-
Sepp Blatter is a fucking idiot. :angry:
soooooooooooooooooo true
-
Blatter's Plan B
FIFA president Sepp Blatter has confirmed for the first time that there is a 'plan B' for the host nation of the 2010 World Cup.
The tournament is due to take place in South Africa - the first World Cup to be staged in Africa - but concerns over continued security problems in the area have led to reports FIFA might look for new hosts.
However, while Blatter admits that there is an alternative in place, he remains confident the World Cup will go ahead as planned unless there is a 'natural catastrophe'.
'I would be a very negligent president if I hadn't put away in a drawer somewhere a plan B,' said Blatter.
'However, only a natural catastrophe would change things.
'If we had to activate the plan B, we would take our decision after the Confederations Cup.'
Next year's Confederation Cup is set to be held in South Africa and will act as a dry run for the World Cup a year later.
-
i think south africa will keep it, but if not it will not go to england or spain i think because last worldcup was already in europe
-
Yeah but it will have to go to a country who is already capable of having the world cup. It will still take preparations but a country like spain or england wouldn't have as much to do as say.....Mexico