Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: Doubt over South Africa 2010 could see USA host

  1. #1

    Default Doubt over South Africa 2010 could see USA host

    Today is the tomorrow that you worried about yesterday - Edith Bunker

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    854

    Default

    Canada 2010!!


  3. #3
    Administrator bettermirror's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Fraser Valley, British Columbia, Canada.
    Posts
    2,863

    Default

    poborsky only scored 8 goals in 118 games? fantastic player, but i thought he was an offensive midfielder!

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    east side, , Canada.
    Posts
    1,288

    Default

    quote:Originally posted by marktci

    Canada 2010!!

    ya all 60 games could be played at Pogey Park.

  5. #5

    Default

    I hope South Africa manages to remain as host. A backup plan is needed and the US would be an alternative. The idea of Germany hosting it again should be discarded. It would be an absolute disgrace to hold the Cup twice in a row in the same country. It should be in a different continent but if that were not possible at the very least another Euro country.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    5,433

    Default

    Geez...I agree with Grizz in that they should keep SA if at all possible, but why do we always have to keep the US as the automatic back-up plan, as is always mentioned in the media? Couldnt England (or England/Scotland... drool), Spain, Italy et al... all step in a flash and draw full houses of rabid fans in proper fottball stadiums?? USA didnt host all that long ago either, and they seem to get every third Olympics as well, so that's well enough for the next century by my estimation.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    ottawa, , Canada.
    Posts
    427

    Default

    obviously South Africa and Africa is not ready to host such a major tournament,
    that is what you get when decisions are made blindly it was given to South Africa not on merits but to appease the African voting members.they cried when it was given to Germany.
    They felt they should have awarded the world cup then based on what?
    this is going to cost FIFA and the European community a Fortune
    there would probably be cutback to other confederation by FIFA where project and programs will have to be put on hold hence delaying the development of soccer in the other confederations.
    what are the criteria required for a country to host the tournamant
    South Africa might have been the only choice out of Africa but FIFA bribery and coruptions will syphon quite a big chunck of the budget.
    IF FIFA really wanted to new confederation co-host by Australia and New Zealand would have been a better choice without being afinancial drain on FIFA money allocation.
    the decision was made before Australia was moved to the Asian group could this has something to do with getting oceania out of the way
    Austarlia has fared well hosting high profile games including the olympics.
    How did Africa done financially when they hosted the u-20 tournaments.
    IF Fifa bankrolled those too then they are more naive than I thought.
    this was a political decision and we will all be paying for it
    except Africa of course.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Belleville, Ontario, Canada.
    Posts
    542

    Default

    I always thought the Egyptian bid was better anyways. All the Stadiums and hotels were already in place, it was almost idiot proof, which when dealing with FIFA is important.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Back in Tyrone, , Ireland.
    Posts
    1,651

    Default

    quote:Originally posted by devioustrevor

    I always thought the Egyptian bid was better anyways. All the Stadiums and hotels were already in place, it was almost idiot proof, which when dealing with FIFA is important.
    Provided Al-Qaida don't ruin it.

  10. #10
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Pretoria, , South Africa.
    Posts
    1

    Default

    quote:Originally posted by devioustrevor

    I always thought the Egyptian bid was better anyways. All the Stadiums and hotels were already in place, it was almost idiot proof, which when dealing with FIFA is important.
    Hi everyone, you have a South African on board. Kinda accidentally discovered this discussion but got really interested. Hope people will get over this idea of having the world cup moved from South Africa and start worrying about whether their teams will qualify or not. South Africans are excited and will be behind the African and South American teams in 2010. Here we always rally behind the Nigerians, Camerooneans, Egyptians, Tunisians, Morrocans, Senegalise, Brazilians, French and Argentines almost like our own national team. We are currently focusing on making sure that we address all potential problems at least one year before the tournament. Hope you guys will make it here. I'm sure we will deliver a memorable global tournament on behalf of the rest of Africa.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •