FIFA rankings

[BigColSutherland]

So. There is no huge home market to play to. There is no heritage to play to. And seeding Qatar will grossly skew the quality of groups, to a far greater extent than has ever occurred before. No country has EVER been awarded a WC without having demonstrated its ability to qualify for the finals under its own steam. This should be an absolute standard.

Not quite true Billy. Italy in 34 and Japan in 02 both got it without having previously qualified. But I take your point, Qatar is an effing shambles.

[wilts rover]

I doubt that anyone who knows anything about football (and many who don't) would disagree with you Billy that Qatar should never have been awarded the World Cup. But unfortunately they have and they should be given the opportunity to do it as well as possible. As the qualifying criteria for Qatari citizenship is how good you are at sport, don't be surprised if they actually turn out a Brazil B team.

[RedJ]

And that would complete the farce.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Col

Fair point about Japan, although of course, they WERE on a rapidly improving curve. They'd won the Asian Cup in 1992, missed out in the final qualifying match for the 94 WC when they conceded an equaliser in injury time in their final qualifying game. And they went in to qualify for WC98. Add into the pot the fact that South Korea had regularly qualified and that there was booming interest in football in that part of the world and I have no problem at all with WC02 going there.

As for Italy in WC34...ate alreight. If we're being daft about it, Uruguay had never qualified before they hosted WC1930. I'd meant to say "post-war" in my post. I'm currently beating my genitalia with brambles to atone for my error.

[wilts rover]

Post war World Cups have been held in those powerhouses of international football, Switzerland and Mexico whose record is so good they have had it twice. All very nice holiday destinations I'm sure but hardly great footballing pedigrees.

[VivaRovers]

Mexico only held it in 1986 because Colombia who initially won the bid could not guarantee they would be ready to host in time.

Also England held it in 1966 having only won three matches in the four tournaments they'd played in previously, meaning they were as much a 'powerhouse of international football' in terms of World Cup finals performances in 1966 as Switzerland had been in 1954.

[BillyStubbsTears]

The point is that Mexico, Switzerland, England all had respectable international sides who had proved themselves capable of qualifying for World Cups under their own steam, and all had strong footballing heritage and domestic interest.

By neither of those measures does Qatar shape up. It does have a f**k load of money though.

[VivaRovers]

Agree completely BST

A bid process for a June/July football event has been won by a country in which it is too hot to play football in June/July. It is as blatant an example of money over sense/logic as there is... and FIFA have plenty of examples to pick from.

[BillyStubbsTears]

There's another issue on the placing of WC54 with Switzerland. With the then policy of alternating WCs between South America and Europe, it was the latter's turn in 54. But when the decision was made (late 40s?) most countries in Europe were physically or economically devastated by WWII or recent civil wars/revolution or not part of FIFA. Switzerland was pretty much the only country available to host the finals.