2026 World Cup
Comments
-
Hope the US get it.0
-
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 me1 -
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.paulie8290 said:
FIFA have said its to stop dead rubbers towards the end of the groups.North Lower Neil said:
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).paulie8290 said: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
So going into the last game even the team bottom of the group have a chance
48 teams is a joke. Will be some absolute dross managing to qualify.1 -
United bid has won!
Yes!!!!3 -
Russia
Qatar
USA
What oil rich countries with questionable morals are eligible for selection for 2030?4 -
Scotland?sam3110 said:Russia
Qatar
USA
What oil rich countries with questionable morals are eligible for selection for 2030?15 -
Scotland would still f*ck it up.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
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.paulie8290 said:
FIFA have said its to stop dead rubbers towards the end of the groups.North Lower Neil said:
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).paulie8290 said: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
So going into the last game even the team bottom of the group have a chance
48 teams is a joke. Will be some absolute dross managing to qualify.0 -
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 ones2 -
Spain have pumped the gaffer0
-
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 used0 - Sponsored links:
-
All three.ForeverAddickted said: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 used2 -
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 envelopes5 -
Visas for Iran fans not a problem if they qualify? Trump will be long gone by then I suppose anyway.2
-
Guess it wont make much difference to the current Qualifying Format for CONCACAFThe Red Robin said:
All three.ForeverAddickted said: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
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 again0 -
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.sam3110 said: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
I'd like to think fifa could arrange the draw so that travelling time for the group games was kept to a minimum.2 -
So 48 teams, divided by 16 groups, played across 3 countries.
Sounds absolutely shit.14 -
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 stakesam3110 said: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 envelopes0 -
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 up8 -
Would Iran / North Korea want to enter Qualification in the first place...CharltonMadrid said:Visas for Iran fans not a problem if they qualify? Trump will be long gone by then I suppose anyway.
They're not exactly best friends with the United States0 -
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.2
- Sponsored links:
-
usa citizens were 2nd most bought tickets for 2018 world cup, so a growing trend and there country isn't even in it.
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.0 -
The US will put on amazing world cup. Britain is well equipped to host a tournament tomorrow, so is the USA. Easily.2
-
Yer, but when a 90 year old BWP is there best player ever (statistically) the game is still shitRothko said: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 up1 -
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!sam3110 said: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
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.0 -
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.
0 -
Domestic flights in the US are a piece of piss, super frequent and loads of competition on most routes.
Pick a coast and go to games on it4 -
and what about Canada and mexico?, plus most fans tend to want to follow their own nationRothko said:Domestic flights in the US are a piece of piss, super frequent and loads of competition on most routes.
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 94.0 -
What times were the games in 94?
Looking at all evening kick offs our time surely, might be quality.
6, 8, 10pm kick offs our time or similar?0 -
Countries tend to be based in one region though. At least for the group stages anyway.palarsehater said:
and what about Canada and mexico?, plus most fans tend to want to follow their own nationRothko said:Domestic flights in the US are a piece of piss, super frequent and loads of competition on most routes.
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 94.0 -
a 7.45 kick off in la would be 3.45 in the morningNorth Lower Neil said:What times were the games in 94?
Looking at all evening kick offs our time surely, might be quality.
6, 8, 10pm kick offs our time or similar?0
