Hope Morocco get it simply for the time zone reasons
Unfortunately though as Killer says; nine new Stadiums will have to be built and will have to be built with a minimum capacity size... As proven with Brazil, these Stadiums arent being used properly once the World Cup is over and will simply become hollow shells of what they were originally meant for when first built or adapted
Guess thats the beauty of that extremely dangerous stand at the Russian Stadium as guess that'll be removed once the competition is over, yet it shouldnt be a case of having to build a Stadium which then doesnt get used to full capacity once the Tournament is over as completely defeats the object of trying to raise the game in said country
For that reason its got to be the United States who wins it for me
Hadnt realized it was going up to 48 Countries from 2026(Scotland might actually Qualify)
16 groups of 3 teams Top 2 go through to knockout stages
That sounds rubbish. Teams more bothered about trying not to lose, a massive Group Stage to only knock out the bottom few teams etc, bet it doesn't really get going until the knockout stages (even more than normal).
FIFA have said its to stop dead rubbers towards the end of the groups.
So going into the last game even the team bottom of the group have a chance
If they were that bothered about dead rubbers they could just work the group matches so that the lesser sides played each other in the 1st or 2nd match.
48 teams is a joke. Will be some absolute dross managing to qualify.
Hadnt realized it was going up to 48 Countries from 2026(Scotland might actually Qualify)
16 groups of 3 teams Top 2 go through to knockout stages
That sounds rubbish. Teams more bothered about trying not to lose, a massive Group Stage to only knock out the bottom few teams etc, bet it doesn't really get going until the knockout stages (even more than normal).
FIFA have said its to stop dead rubbers towards the end of the groups.
So going into the last game even the team bottom of the group have a chance
If they were that bothered about dead rubbers they could just work the group matches so that the lesser sides played each other in the 1st or 2nd match.
48 teams is a joke. Will be some absolute dross managing to qualify.
An uninspiring choice really, but no surprise given
a) the way WCs have to be spread around the FIFA confederations b) the ridiculous size of the World Cup now making it hard for any single country to host it, especially developing ones
Wembley Stadium 90,000 Twickenham Stadium 82,000 Old Trafford 75,731 Millennium Stadium 74,500 Murrayfield Stadium 67,144 London Stadium 66,000 Emirates Stadium 60,432 Celtic Park 60,411 Etihad Stadium 55,097 Anfield 54,074 St James' Park 52,404 Hampden Park 51,866 Ibrox Stadium 50,817 Stadium of Light 49,000 Villa Park 42,573 Stamford Bridge 41,841 Goodison Park 40,394 Hillsborough Stadium 39,732 Elland Road 37,890
Doesn't take into account Spurs' new stadium, MK Dons being able to add a tier, or any new developments in the next 12 years.
We are by far and away the best equipped place to host a 48 team world cup, 20+ stadiums to choose from, all in close proximity (imagine having to travel from Miami to Vancouver, or Southern Mexico to Quebec for games) and with decent infrastructure too. It's a no brainer, unless you want bundles and bundles of cash in brown envelopes
Out of curiousity... Who has automatically Qualified for the 2026 World Cup?
Will it be all three Nations of just the United States as they've the majority of the Stadiums being used
All three.
Guess it wont make much difference to the current Qualifying Format for CONCACAF
With an increase to 48-teams; CONCACAF will now get six entries rather than three so will now just be interesting to see who else can qualify with two of the big hitters out the way; be a good chance for Jamaica again
Wembley Stadium 90,000 Twickenham Stadium 82,000 Old Trafford 75,731 Millennium Stadium 74,500 Murrayfield Stadium 67,144 London Stadium 66,000 Emirates Stadium 60,432 Celtic Park 60,411 Etihad Stadium 55,097 Anfield 54,074 St James' Park 52,404 Hampden Park 51,866 Ibrox Stadium 50,817 Stadium of Light 49,000 Villa Park 42,573 Stamford Bridge 41,841 Goodison Park 40,394 Hillsborough Stadium 39,732 Elland Road 37,890
Doesn't take into account Spurs' new stadium, MK Dons being able to add a tier, or any new developments in the next 12 years.
We are by far and away the best equipped place to host a 48 team world cup, 20+ stadiums to choose from, all in close proximity (imagine having to travel from Miami to Vancouver, or Southern Mexico to Quebec for games) and with decent infrastructure too. It's a no brainer, unless you want bundles and bundles of cash in brown envelopes
Stadiums are not exactly a problem for the USA either though. Yes obviously the travelling time would increase but when you have 3-4 days between a game, it's not really an issue to hop on a private jet for a couple of hours. NBA players do it almost every other day for 7 months.
I'd like to think fifa could arrange the draw so that travelling time for the group games was kept to a minimum.
Wembley Stadium 90,000 Twickenham Stadium 82,000 Old Trafford 75,731 Millennium Stadium 74,500 Murrayfield Stadium 67,144 London Stadium 66,000 Emirates Stadium 60,432 Celtic Park 60,411 Etihad Stadium 55,097 Anfield 54,074 St James' Park 52,404 Hampden Park 51,866 Ibrox Stadium 50,817 Stadium of Light 49,000 Villa Park 42,573 Stamford Bridge 41,841 Goodison Park 40,394 Hillsborough Stadium 39,732 Elland Road 37,890
Doesn't take into account Spurs' new stadium, MK Dons being able to add a tier, or any new developments in the next 12 years.
We are by far and away the best equipped place to host a 48 team world cup, 20+ stadiums to choose from, all in close proximity (imagine having to travel from Miami to Vancouver, or Southern Mexico to Quebec for games) and with decent infrastructure too. It's a no brainer, unless you want bundles and bundles of cash in brown envelopes
A combined England | Scotland | Wales bid would certainly stand a good chance I think, even if you included Northern Ireland (You'd need to increase Windsor Park) yet could see the other Home Nations being against the idea as they'd no doubt come out with the usual crap saying that their individual identities would be at stake
Come on, this looks amazing, tempted already by going to games in Canada and the north east of the US.
People forget there is a growing football culture in the US, and an emerging one in Canada, can't think of better hosts. You only have to look at Seattle where the Sounders average 44,000, or Atlanta where its around 50k to see its a sport on the up
3 AM football it is then... Oh and Mexico get a third world cup and US a second on home soil in relatively quick succession. There should be a rule that you can't even apply to host for at least 10 tournaments once you win a bid.
Come on, this looks amazing, tempted already by going to games in Canada and the north east of the US.
People forget there is a growing football culture in the US, and an emerging one in Canada, can't think of better hosts. You only have to look at Seattle where the Sounders average 44,000, or Atlanta where its around 50k to see its a sport on the up
Yer, but when a 90 year old BWP is there best player ever (statistically) the game is still shit
Wembley Stadium 90,000 Twickenham Stadium 82,000 Old Trafford 75,731 Millennium Stadium 74,500 Murrayfield Stadium 67,144 London Stadium 66,000 Emirates Stadium 60,432 Celtic Park 60,411 Etihad Stadium 55,097 Anfield 54,074 St James' Park 52,404 Hampden Park 51,866 Ibrox Stadium 50,817 Stadium of Light 49,000 Villa Park 42,573 Stamford Bridge 41,841 Goodison Park 40,394 Hillsborough Stadium 39,732 Elland Road 37,890
Doesn't take into account Spurs' new stadium, MK Dons being able to add a tier, or any new developments in the next 12 years.
We are by far and away the best equipped place to host a 48 team world cup, 20+ stadiums to choose from, all in close proximity (imagine having to travel from Miami to Vancouver, or Southern Mexico to Quebec for games) and with decent infrastructure too. It's a no brainer, unless you want bundles and bundles of cash in brown envelopes
A previous issue we had was that FIFA like the games to be spread around the country which would limit the number of games held in one city (e.g. only one venue in Manchester, only 2 in London) which is annoying as most of our big venues are concentrated in a small number of locations, reflecting the population distribution - London could have 5 venues even without Twickenham!
As a result the likes of Plymouth would have been considered for games. The Millennium Stadium certainly helps as that can cover the Bristol area as well.
didn't someone from the fa answer the question as to why we have never had it? simply we wouldnt pay enough in bribes to the greedy cnuts at fifa.
2018 - russia - hooligans/racism 2020 - all over europe/ non traditional but a one off 2022 - qatar - horrendous human rights laws and no alcohol extremely difficult to get to 2024 - only germany and turkey bid for it, germany would be class for those attending/ turkey would likely to see one of the most violent tournaments in history, galatasaray games people get shot. 2026 - usa/mexico/canada will all qaulify so 45 teams remain
the list of stadiums has been released;
Canada toronto, quebec, alberta
mexico monterray, mexico city, jalisco
usa la, new york, washington, dallas, kansas, denver, houston, baltimore, atlanta, nashville, seattle, san francisco, boston, cincinnati, miami, orlando
nigh on impossible to plan for until the group stage is drawn as huge distances between them, not like france where you could base yourself and travel around, also would be ridiculously expensive to attend.
edit a time difference of;
gmt -5 to -7 so games at shit times cant wait already.
Comments
Unfortunately though as Killer says; nine new Stadiums will have to be built and will have to be built with a minimum capacity size... As proven with Brazil, these Stadiums arent being used properly once the World Cup is over and will simply become hollow shells of what they were originally meant for when first built or adapted
Guess thats the beauty of that extremely dangerous stand at the Russian Stadium as guess that'll be removed once the competition is over, yet it shouldnt be a case of having to build a Stadium which then doesnt get used to full capacity once the Tournament is over as completely defeats the object of trying to raise the game in said country
For that reason its got to be the United States who wins it for me
48 teams is a joke. Will be some absolute dross managing to qualify.
Yes!!!!
Qatar
USA
What oil rich countries with questionable morals are eligible for selection for 2030?
a) the way WCs have to be spread around the FIFA confederations
b) the ridiculous size of the World Cup now making it hard for any single country to host it, especially developing ones
Will it be all three Nations of just the United States as they've the majority of the Stadiums being used
Twickenham Stadium 82,000
Old Trafford 75,731
Millennium Stadium 74,500
Murrayfield Stadium 67,144
London Stadium 66,000
Emirates Stadium 60,432
Celtic Park 60,411
Etihad Stadium 55,097
Anfield 54,074
St James' Park 52,404
Hampden Park 51,866
Ibrox Stadium 50,817
Stadium of Light 49,000
Villa Park 42,573
Stamford Bridge 41,841
Goodison Park 40,394
Hillsborough Stadium 39,732
Elland Road 37,890
Doesn't take into account Spurs' new stadium, MK Dons being able to add a tier, or any new developments in the next 12 years.
We are by far and away the best equipped place to host a 48 team world cup, 20+ stadiums to choose from, all in close proximity (imagine having to travel from Miami to Vancouver, or Southern Mexico to Quebec for games) and with decent infrastructure too. It's a no brainer, unless you want bundles and bundles of cash in brown envelopes
With an increase to 48-teams; CONCACAF will now get six entries rather than three so will now just be interesting to see who else can qualify with two of the big hitters out the way; be a good chance for Jamaica again
I'd like to think fifa could arrange the draw so that travelling time for the group games was kept to a minimum.
Sounds absolutely shit.
People forget there is a growing football culture in the US, and an emerging one in Canada, can't think of better hosts. You only have to look at Seattle where the Sounders average 44,000, or Atlanta where its around 50k to see its a sport on the up
They're not exactly best friends with the United States
the issue is the size of the 3 countries it is massive distances and a huge cost.
the 48 team bit i don't know how much difference it will make to Europe or whether Africa and Asia get more teams in.
As a result the likes of Plymouth would have been considered for games. The Millennium Stadium certainly helps as that can cover the Bristol area as well.
2018 - russia - hooligans/racism
2020 - all over europe/ non traditional but a one off
2022 - qatar - horrendous human rights laws and no alcohol extremely difficult to get to
2024 - only germany and turkey bid for it, germany would be class for those attending/ turkey would likely to see one of the
most violent tournaments in history, galatasaray games people get shot.
2026 - usa/mexico/canada will all qaulify so 45 teams remain
the list of stadiums has been released;
Canada
toronto, quebec, alberta
mexico
monterray, mexico city, jalisco
usa
la, new york, washington, dallas, kansas, denver, houston, baltimore, atlanta, nashville, seattle, san francisco, boston,
cincinnati, miami, orlando
nigh on impossible to plan for until the group stage is drawn as huge distances between them, not like france where you
could base yourself and travel around, also would be ridiculously expensive to attend.
edit a time difference of;
gmt -5 to -7 so games at shit times cant wait already.
Pick a coast and go to games on it
with a major wc flights to new york with 6 months notice dont think you would get change out of £5/600.00
also as others have said they only hosted it in 94.
Looking at all evening kick offs our time surely, might be quality.
6, 8, 10pm kick offs our time or similar?