Author

Topic: FIFA World Cup 2026 :Canada/Mexico/United States: Discussion Thread - page 141. (Read 57610 times)

legendary
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1873
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
I have posted this before. The decision to grant the hosting rights to Qatar for the 2022 world cup was a grave mistake from the part of FIFA. There were issues related to poor treatment being meted out to the construction workers, as well as issues regarding discrimination against certain sections of the visitors. Even in 2018, Russia hosted the tournament without any major issues. But that was not the case with Qatar in 2022. Hopefully the 2026 edition would be an occasion where the visitors and fans are treated with respect.
I hope this is the case as this was the most common complain fans had about the Qatar world cup, however there are things that could easily go wrong, the public security at Mexico is low and fans could face some dangers if going there, and while the US will host most of the games there could be some issues there as well, as visas could be difficult to get if migratory laws get harsher and the possibility of an attack against the stadiums will always be there.
I would guess that Mexico ones will not get all that much visitors, not as many as USA ones to be fair. I think it's obvious that we are going to end up seeing USA to get the most visitors out of all three nations and they are going to do fine. This is of course not guaranteed, but I bet that it's not going to be a big deal and we should be seeing trouble on the long run.

This is of course a trouble when you consider that it's going to end up with a cultural resemblance as well, there are tons of western nations going to world cup, and most of the time it's either Latin American or European teams that wins it, and that means cultures are quite close enough, for clothing, drinking, acting, everything will be pretty similar.

Well, with respect to Qatar, things can be very ambiguous, some say yes, it was a mistake, but why was it Qatar and not another country? Was there a lot of money there for them not to take away the world headquarters from this country? Why did FIFA become a blind eye, of course many say that human rights are biased in these countries, but there are countries that also violate human rights and continue walking without saying anything, the Qatari workers are unfortunate, It is something that should not have happened, but who are we to get into the rules, laws of that country and tell them what is right and what is wrong? I don't think we will have that right, as I have said before, if a country chooses to be the headquarters of the world, that country has its customs, it has its rules, and it is the one that hosts an event, the people and the fans, and players have to stick to the rules of that country, there is nothing to do there, if things are like that, you simply have to respect, there are many things that you like and others that you do not like, but after all, that country is sovereign, It has its own laws and FIFA knew that.

Now the new world cup with these 3 countries , it would be Excellent if they could include some good games from Europe from European countries, because I do not consider that Mexico will have few people, it is a common country and like all, of course there are some customs that are Different , and that are usually seen with the naked eye, but it is a different country, nothing else in its language and everything, but it must be taken into Consideration that Mexico is a very Beautiful country, that it has a lot to know and that it has a lot to do with the things that exist, it has a lot of history, compared to the USA, the USA is a developed country, it is quite obvious that the people there will cause more emotion, it has a lot to entertain themselves, and apart from the Disney parks and all those things, they are quite Striking, obviously you also have to do and grow to know Something,  your security is superior, in Mexico things have to be Better, with more Security.


I think the main reason for FIFA to choose three countries instead of one country is that we are going to have more teams in the tournament and this can put any host under more pressure, however, America had enough potential to host the 2026 World Cup by themselves and even now when we are going to have three countries hosting the world cup, still America will host most of the games and the other two teams are just co-hosting this tournament.


That is the part of the reason why they choose these three countries to host the next world cup, I mean that their move is understandable because they wanted a much bigger arena with guaranteed audience when they present their new format this coming 2026 with more games and teams added. As we all know, having the games in North America means that almost every fellow in this world can watch it and that's their goal.

Other than that, the most obvious reason why FIFA chose America-Canada-Mexico to host the 2026 World Cup is that these three countries bid and won the bid together. It's a business after all and in every business, there's always a motive behind the reason. Just like how the Qatar was rumored to won the bid because they have bought some of the people in the FIFA council to guarantee a spot to host a world cup event.

Well these things are very true, in fact I still remember when I was little and I saw the World Cup in USA94, which was a great event, I remember that back then I started to fill my panini album, it was quite an emotion, for me the main thing was to be able to fill that album before the World Cup started, in fact when that World Cup started everything was very nice, I remember the opening ceremony, everything was something great, I remember that earlier that year the final was very exciting, I really didn't like soccer in the USA not at all, but I remember very good players who did well, among those Lalas, and at that time the design of the USA fields seemed strange to me, especially the soccer goals, they had a design that was too right, in itself it was different, because I was used to seeing coaches of a different style, their different goals, at that time I really liked what some teams like Romania and Sweden were doing, they showed very elegant football, at that time they still played football and there was the Brazilian stars of the moment like Romario and Bebeto who shattered any defense, I liked how they understood each other, it was an impressive duo.

Those memories of that World Cup are very vague but at the same time very strong, Italy's performance was impressive, Baggio was a great player who did very well for me but was not lucky enough to score that decisive goal, all these things are The ones that I remember from that World Cup, currently I really like that the USA, Canada, and Mexico have been made, I like it and I'm curious about how the Canadians are going to do it since I haven't seen very striking football there, but I know that I'm sure they will show a very good football, and it's that Canada has a somewhat cold climate, I'll be happy to see some games that fall snow, to see how some players will perform, especially those who are used to hot climates and who have no interaction With the snow, I really expect a lot from this tournament, that it be much better than all the others that have happened.
hero member
Activity: 1008
Merit: 960
~snip~
I personally am not a big supporter of the players to travel around during the World Cup. The players should be concentrating on how to play well instead of traveling from one country to another. And we all know that there can be a lot of problems with having multiple hosts of the World Cup. So why even go through that trouble?

Less traveling is going to make sure that the players are not tired and actually are concentrating on playing well in the World Cup matches. And something very famous right now going on in the West is rape allegations against the players. That is definitely going to happen less in my opinion if the players are not travelling from one country to another every other day.

Yeah, I also think it's simpler and better to have a single country hosting the world cup.

But based on the next world cup, and the following bids, we will be looking at multi-country world cups for at least a decade or so.

It's just the new normal. Also, there will be more countries in the competition, whether we like it or not.
legendary
Activity: 3332
Merit: 1352
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
I personally am not a big supporter of the players to travel around during the World Cup. The players should be concentrating on how to play well instead of traveling from one country to another. And we all know that there can be a lot of problems with having multiple hosts of the World Cup. So why even go through that trouble?

Less traveling is going to make sure that the players are not tired and actually are concentrating on playing well in the World Cup matches. And something very famous right now going on in the West is rape allegations against the players. That is definitely going to happen less in my opinion if the players are not travelling from one country to another every other day.

Also, you need to take into account that USA and Canada are two of the largest countries in terms of surface area. And in many cases, the teams would be travelling from one extreme of the continent to other. And given the tight schedule of world cup, there will be hardly 3-4 days gap between the matches and this can leave the players as well as the fans exhausted. For 2030 FIFA World Cup, four of the South American countries are also planning to host the event jointly. But in their case, the area is not as large as that in case of USA/Canada.
hero member
Activity: 1918
Merit: 535
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
This is also an experiment for FIFA, for many years the top directives of FIFA thought that the world cup awarded to South Korea and Japan was a mistake and there were claims there will never be another world cup with multiple hosts, however they seem to have changed their mind due to the increase on the number of teams and matches, as this increase made way harder for a single country to have all the stadiums necessary to host the world cup, and while this would not have a problem for the US, they are using this world cup to see if this model can work and from now on multiple hosts could become the norm.

I am not in favor of having multiple hosts. One of the few positives from the 2022 FIFA World Cup was that it was hosted by a single country and therefore the fans didn't faced much difficulty in traveling and arranging accommodation. It is going to be a nightmare for the fans in 2026, as they need to travel thousands of miles to watch their favorite teams playing. Some of the matches are being scheduled in one extreme of the continent, and others are being scheduled in the other extreme. I am not sure how this is going to work out.

This doesn't make sense because there is no difference at all in terms of distances when the USA hosts the World Cup 2026 alone. Do you really think it matters whether you have to go from Houston to Washington or whether Canada and Mexico are involved? Visa and stuff could be an issue, but that is probably no different when a Mexican wants to go to Qatar or Canada.

Having several hosts can be beneficial for so many reasons as well and I think it is rather a decision that emphasizes inclusion than exclusion. Having the support of a nation like the USA to host the World Cup is good for Mexico as I am sure there will also be a lot of cooperation on the security concepts as well, which is something that can't be neglected at all these days (sadly).

I personally am not a big supporter of the players to travel around during the World Cup. The players should be concentrating on how to play well instead of traveling from one country to another. And we all know that there can be a lot of problems with having multiple hosts of the World Cup. So why even go through that trouble?

Less traveling is going to make sure that the players are not tired and actually are concentrating on playing well in the World Cup matches. And something very famous right now going on in the West is rape allegations against the players. That is definitely going to happen less in my opinion if the players are not travelling from one country to another every other day.
hero member
Activity: 1694
Merit: 722
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
Yes and I know that there are some arguments for enlarging the World Cup and some are against it, but for the sake of equality between nations, enlarging it was a necessity.

The biggest fear so far is that the overall quality of the games might be significantly diluted when there are more starting spots, which also means that more of the weaker teams will get a chance to participate. But I think for the sake of fairness smaller or weaker nations in this sport should also get a fair chance to take part and to grow through those competitions.
I really agree with what you say, the more countries that participate, the more benefits there will automatically be. I also think that by providing opportunities for small and weak countries in the context of football, it will not reduce their competitive tension. Apart from that, the World Cup will be the best forum to accommodate all forms of aspirations in football.

We can see that there are not many players from Asian countries who played in the top five European leagues in the past. After the World Cup performances in the Asian region to be precise in Korea and Japan, now many players from these two countries are playing for elite European clubs.

It depends on how you think, Many people don't see the World Cup as a tournament for the teams to show their performance and they think the important thing in the world is to get some of the teams from all over the world in one place and this way we can help people to have better relation even with other countries and this can have more priority than seeing better performance in this tournament.
But I think there are many other ways to make people have better relations with eachothers, other than football
hero member
Activity: 1344
Merit: 852
Yes and I know that there are some arguments for enlarging the World Cup and some are against it, but for the sake of equality between nations, enlarging it was a necessity.

The biggest fear so far is that the overall quality of the games might be significantly diluted when there are more starting spots, which also means that more of the weaker teams will get a chance to participate. But I think for the sake of fairness smaller or weaker nations in this sport should also get a fair chance to take part and to grow through those competitions.
I really agree with what you say, the more countries that participate, the more benefits there will automatically be. I also think that by providing opportunities for small and weak countries in the context of football, it will not reduce their competitive tension. Apart from that, the World Cup will be the best forum to accommodate all forms of aspirations in football.

We can see that there are not many players from Asian countries who played in the top five European leagues in the past. After the World Cup performances in the Asian region to be precise in Korea and Japan, now many players from these two countries are playing for elite European clubs.
hero member
Activity: 1708
Merit: 553
Play Bitcoin PVP Prediction Game
Having several hosts can be beneficial for so many reasons as well and I think it is rather a decision that emphasizes inclusion than exclusion. Having the support of a nation like the USA to host the World Cup is good for Mexico as I am sure there will also be a lot of cooperation on the security concepts as well, which is something that can't be neglected at all these days (sadly).
I can remember when the three joint hosts: USA, Canada, and Mexico for the 2026 world cup was announced. It is the first time we are going to have this coupled with the tournament format is changing from 32 to 48 countries, with 12 groups of four teams. The other rule being the top two teams from each group and the eight best third-place finishers will advance to the Knockout stage and then with the total number of games will increase to 104 over 39 days. In my own opinion, the multiple hosts it good but comes with its own set of unique challenges. I see no harm in it though, we would learn from this one and then the world would know if it was a good idea or if it is something that should be discontinued after the tournament ends.

1. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_FIFA_World_Cup
2. frontofficesports.com/fifa-expands-2026-world-cup-104-game-format/

Yes and I know that there are some arguments for enlarging the World Cup and some are against it, but for the sake of equality between nations, enlarging it was a necessity.

The biggest fear so far is that the overall quality of the games might be significantly diluted when there are more starting spots, which also means that more of the weaker teams will get a chance to participate. But I think for the sake of fairness smaller or weaker nations in this sport should also get a fair chance to take part and to grow through those competitions.
hero member
Activity: 1120
Merit: 887
Livecasino.io
Having several hosts can be beneficial for so many reasons as well and I think it is rather a decision that emphasizes inclusion than exclusion. Having the support of a nation like the USA to host the World Cup is good for Mexico as I am sure there will also be a lot of cooperation on the security concepts as well, which is something that can't be neglected at all these days (sadly).
I can remember when the three joint hosts: USA, Canada, and Mexico for the 2026 world cup was announced. It is the first time we are going to have this coupled with the tournament format is changing from 32 to 48 countries, with 12 groups of four teams. The other rule being the top two teams from each group and the eight best third-place finishers will advance to the Knockout stage and then with the total number of games will increase to 104 over 39 days. In my own opinion, the multiple hosts it good but comes with its own set of unique challenges. I see no harm in it though, we would learn from this one and then the world would know if it was a good idea or if it is something that should be discontinued after the tournament ends.

1. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_FIFA_World_Cup
2. frontofficesports.com/fifa-expands-2026-world-cup-104-game-format/
legendary
Activity: 896
Merit: 1020
Winger Anthony has been dropped from Brazil's World Cup qualifying team due to allegations of torture by his girlfriend. On Monday (September 4), the Brazilian media UOL published a news report based on the complaint of Anthony's ex-girlfriend. It was there that the Seleção striker was charged. The police in Sao Paulo and Greater Manchester then took it into account and started an investigation.  However, the 23-year-old winger has denied the allegations. Anthony's comments, I want to say calmly, the allegations are false. The evidence has already been prepared and some more evidence is being produced, which will show that I am innocent. I believe that the ongoing police investigation will bring to light the fact that I am innocent. The allegations that surfaced on Monday need to be investigated. That is why the Manchester United star has been dropped from the national team. Arsenal striker Gabriel Jesus has been called up instead for the 2026 World Cup qualifiers against Bolivia and Peru.

There have been a high rate of allegation of rape, molestation, and violence against some young player recently. From Mendy to Greenwood and now Anthony. Some people claim that some of these accusations are set up to exploit these players financially or frustrate their careers. But we have to leave the police and other law enforcement agencies to investigate the matter and come up with their finding. But I am not comfortable with suspending a player before an investigation. The player should be allowed to play games until they are found guilty.

Honestly whatever gets more views, is the one getting the most attention. Woman world cup is not something that gets a lot of attention unfortunately, it is not as fun to watch it as men one neither. So that means netball may get more than the women world cup. However, there are only a few things in the world that can pass men world cup in football, like Cricket maybe pass it, NFL maybe pass it, but that's about it and we are not usually going to see it change.

So men world cup finals will always be one of the most watched things, top 5 easily, whereas women one is not even in the top 10 or so. This is why it should be important to know what is viewership and how you could do differently in that kind of regard.

The attention a sport gets will depend on how popular the game is in the country. Cricket and Netball are unknown in my country, soccer is the most popular and acceptable sport. The female world cup in Australia got all the attention of citizens that there was always celebration on the streets when the girls win games. It might not get the same support as the male world but it dwarfed support for basketball which is another popular sport. I don't know about others, but I find the Female World Cup very entertaining
sr. member
Activity: 1344
Merit: 379
Yeah, fair enough, but what I'm saying is that in South America and Europe you have fans talking about footaball 365 days a year, every year.

It's like religion. Everyone loves it and lives it.

Whereas in America is just popular when there's something big going on.

Well.. the last line summarizes it. It's a good thing, right? In Europe and Latin America, too much importance is being given to one sport and everything else suffers as a result. But in the United States, no one sport is having a monopoly and there is enough attention being given to most of the Olympic disciplines. One disadvantage with the United States is that despite being the no.1 economy in the world, they don't have a good football league. The Major League Soccer is nowhere in comparison to European leagues such as Serie A or EPL.
The United States is the most financially powerful country, so their country does not have any major leagues like the English Premier League, La Liga or Serie A, which is why they have not made much progress in football so far. USA is lagging behind in all sports not only football but cricket volleyball or any other sport except football. The better the economic condition of the United States, the better they can surely produce a league of good quality. If the US invests money in different sports, they will surely succeed and until they give too much importance to one sport, they will never do well in all of them. The United States is very focused on the Olympics, which is why they achieve significant success in the Olympics every year. The US should give equal importance to the Olympics as well as other sports.
Right on the money when it comes to the American sports environment! Surprisingly, the US. has made progress in some games but has "overlooked" football (also called soccer). The 2026 World Cup, which will be held in the US., Canada, and Mexico, could be a turning point for soccer in the US. The top objectives should be a profitable league system and programs to help kids grow up. But lets not forget that basketball, baseball, and American football are also very good in the US. Diversifying spending in sports would be good for the country, and not just in soccer. It would also be good for cricket and volleyball
In case of many countries who have bad economic condition they remove themselves from participating in different sports despite having talent but America has money manpower and talent so why not spend time behind sports. Like all kinds of sports are catered in India, if all kinds of sports are catered in America then America will be the best country in the world in terms of sports because America has all kinds of people and if sports are given more importance then young generation will be more focused on sports.

With most of the matches in the 2026 World Cup being played in America, America will definitely plan their football differently and hopefully they will take the steps they need to take to improve their football.
legendary
Activity: 3304
Merit: 1128
I'm not sure about that, at around the same time that the Women's World Cup was happening in Australia there was also the Netball World Cup, which Australia actually won.

The amount of engagement of the Netball World Cup was nothing compared to the one from The Women's World Cup.

So, it's not really just that there's a world cup event going on, there is also the fact that some sports are more popular than others in general.
Honestly whatever gets more views, is the one getting the most attention. Woman world cup is not something that gets a lot of attention unfortunately, it is not as fun to watch it as men one neither. So that means netball may get more than the women world cup. However, there are only a few things in the world that can pass men world cup in football, like Cricket maybe pass it, NFL maybe pass it, but that's about it and we are not usually going to see it change.

So men world cup finals will always be one of the most watched things, top 5 easily, whereas women one is not even in the top 10 or so. This is why it should be important to know what is viewership and how you could do differently in that kind of regard.
hero member
Activity: 3052
Merit: 685
I think that's one of the few reasons why both Canada and Mexico are only offered 10 games each, their resources alone are not enough to take point for the event's security because if they focus on that area, some areas would be at risk as well. We know that there will be some threats (it may be an empty threat or not) but it will be the security's responsibility to settle it without making the people panic so that the games will happen as smoothly as possible.

While for the games that will happen in US soil, it will be safe to assume that all games will happen as planned without any hurdles because they have enough resources and manpower to do the job while the people spectating the event are enjoying. Regarding that, it's expected that their securities will be heightened during the whole duration.

The 1986 FIFA World Cup was hosted by Mexico. There were a total of 24 participants, and the matches were held across 12 venues. In total, 52 matches were played. So it is clear that Mexico has the capability to host a large number of matches. Now the question is why so little matches have been allotted to Mexico and Canada this time. Answer is that they are co-hosts in name only. USA is the proper host and they have given a few matches to the other two countries, just because of their generosity. FIFA is also primarily interested in expanding the game within the US, and they are least bothered about the other two nations.
This is also an experiment for FIFA, for many years the top directives of FIFA thought that the world cup awarded to South Korea and Japan was a mistake and there were claims there will never be another world cup with multiple hosts, however they seem to have changed their mind due to the increase on the number of teams and matches, as this increase made way harder for a single country to have all the stadiums necessary to host the world cup, and while this would not have a problem for the US, they are using this world cup to see if this model can work and from now on multiple hosts could become the norm.

If they are against it, then they should've forbid these countries from submitting their bid together as one and will only allow one country as a host. But since nothing like that has happened and only claims were made that Japan and South Korea are the last ones to host World Cup together, then it's safe to assume that FIFA are now welcome about the fact because while they are changing the format and adding some games, that means they are looking for a host that got most resources and venue to host such big event. I'm sure that the arrangements were made already hence why Canada and Mexico will only have 10 games each because of the said reason.
full member
Activity: 476
Merit: 158
Winger Anthony has been dropped from Brazil's World Cup qualifying team due to allegations of torture by his girlfriend. On Monday (September 4), the Brazilian media UOL published a news report based on the complaint of Anthony's ex-girlfriend. It was there that the Seleção striker was charged. The police in Sao Paulo and Greater Manchester then took it into account and started an investigation.  However, the 23-year-old winger has denied the allegations. Anthony's comments, I want to say calmly, the allegations are false. The evidence has already been prepared and some more evidence is being produced, which will show that I am innocent. I believe that the ongoing police investigation will bring to light the fact that I am innocent. The allegations that surfaced on Monday need to be investigated. That is why the Manchester United star has been dropped from the national team. Arsenal striker Gabriel Jesus has been called up instead for the 2026 World Cup qualifiers against Bolivia and Peru.
hero member
Activity: 1708
Merit: 553
Play Bitcoin PVP Prediction Game
This is also an experiment for FIFA, for many years the top directives of FIFA thought that the world cup awarded to South Korea and Japan was a mistake and there were claims there will never be another world cup with multiple hosts, however they seem to have changed their mind due to the increase on the number of teams and matches, as this increase made way harder for a single country to have all the stadiums necessary to host the world cup, and while this would not have a problem for the US, they are using this world cup to see if this model can work and from now on multiple hosts could become the norm.

I am not in favor of having multiple hosts. One of the few positives from the 2022 FIFA World Cup was that it was hosted by a single country and therefore the fans didn't faced much difficulty in traveling and arranging accommodation. It is going to be a nightmare for the fans in 2026, as they need to travel thousands of miles to watch their favorite teams playing. Some of the matches are being scheduled in one extreme of the continent, and others are being scheduled in the other extreme. I am not sure how this is going to work out.

This doesn't make sense because there is no difference at all in terms of distances when the USA hosts the World Cup 2026 alone. Do you really think it matters whether you have to go from Houston to Washington or whether Canada and Mexico are involved? Visa and stuff could be an issue, but that is probably no different when a Mexican wants to go to Qatar or Canada.

Having several hosts can be beneficial for so many reasons as well and I think it is rather a decision that emphasizes inclusion than exclusion. Having the support of a nation like the USA to host the World Cup is good for Mexico as I am sure there will also be a lot of cooperation on the security concepts as well, which is something that can't be neglected at all these days (sadly).
legendary
Activity: 3332
Merit: 1352
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
This is also an experiment for FIFA, for many years the top directives of FIFA thought that the world cup awarded to South Korea and Japan was a mistake and there were claims there will never be another world cup with multiple hosts, however they seem to have changed their mind due to the increase on the number of teams and matches, as this increase made way harder for a single country to have all the stadiums necessary to host the world cup, and while this would not have a problem for the US, they are using this world cup to see if this model can work and from now on multiple hosts could become the norm.

I am not in favor of having multiple hosts. One of the few positives from the 2022 FIFA World Cup was that it was hosted by a single country and therefore the fans didn't faced much difficulty in traveling and arranging accommodation. It is going to be a nightmare for the fans in 2026, as they need to travel thousands of miles to watch their favorite teams playing. Some of the matches are being scheduled in one extreme of the continent, and others are being scheduled in the other extreme. I am not sure how this is going to work out.
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1338
I think that's one of the few reasons why both Canada and Mexico are only offered 10 games each, their resources alone are not enough to take point for the event's security because if they focus on that area, some areas would be at risk as well. We know that there will be some threats (it may be an empty threat or not) but it will be the security's responsibility to settle it without making the people panic so that the games will happen as smoothly as possible.

While for the games that will happen in US soil, it will be safe to assume that all games will happen as planned without any hurdles because they have enough resources and manpower to do the job while the people spectating the event are enjoying. Regarding that, it's expected that their securities will be heightened during the whole duration.

The 1986 FIFA World Cup was hosted by Mexico. There were a total of 24 participants, and the matches were held across 12 venues. In total, 52 matches were played. So it is clear that Mexico has the capability to host a large number of matches. Now the question is why so little matches have been allotted to Mexico and Canada this time. Answer is that they are co-hosts in name only. USA is the proper host and they have given a few matches to the other two countries, just because of their generosity. FIFA is also primarily interested in expanding the game within the US, and they are least bothered about the other two nations.
This is also an experiment for FIFA, for many years the top directives of FIFA thought that the world cup awarded to South Korea and Japan was a mistake and there were claims there will never be another world cup with multiple hosts, however they seem to have changed their mind due to the increase on the number of teams and matches, as this increase made way harder for a single country to have all the stadiums necessary to host the world cup, and while this would not have a problem for the US, they are using this world cup to see if this model can work and from now on multiple hosts could become the norm.
hero member
Activity: 2646
Merit: 686
Security is the one thing I am worried about, the rest can be handled well. The organizations, the events, the products that is needed, everything will be there and will be fine and I do not think any problems will arise at all in any of the nations.

The one and only thing I am not certain about is security,  because there will be a lot of people riled up at the games and they will need a lot of extra security for it, Mexico is already known as a dangerous nation, true or not there is a rumor about it at least, and Canada doesn't have any which means they also do not have enough law enforcement to spare for hundreds of thousands of new people as well, and USA already has troubles as we know. It is going to be tough without a doubt.

@FanEagle I highly doubt that anything can go wrong with the security at the World Cup as all 3 countries will be deploying huge man power to ensure everything goes well and I also believe that many mock-up scenarios are also run hence the World Cup should go smoothly. Furthermore the fan’s too should act responsibly and follow all the instructions given to them because if they ignore the safety guidelines then they could end up in trouble and then one can’t blame the host country for it.
legendary
Activity: 3332
Merit: 1352
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
I think that's one of the few reasons why both Canada and Mexico are only offered 10 games each, their resources alone are not enough to take point for the event's security because if they focus on that area, some areas would be at risk as well. We know that there will be some threats (it may be an empty threat or not) but it will be the security's responsibility to settle it without making the people panic so that the games will happen as smoothly as possible.

While for the games that will happen in US soil, it will be safe to assume that all games will happen as planned without any hurdles because they have enough resources and manpower to do the job while the people spectating the event are enjoying. Regarding that, it's expected that their securities will be heightened during the whole duration.

The 1986 FIFA World Cup was hosted by Mexico. There were a total of 24 participants, and the matches were held across 12 venues. In total, 52 matches were played. So it is clear that Mexico has the capability to host a large number of matches. Now the question is why so little matches have been allotted to Mexico and Canada this time. Answer is that they are co-hosts in name only. USA is the proper host and they have given a few matches to the other two countries, just because of their generosity. FIFA is also primarily interested in expanding the game within the US, and they are least bothered about the other two nations.
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 2025
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
Security is the one thing I am worried about, the rest can be handled well. The organizations, the events, the products that is needed, everything will be there and will be fine and I do not think any problems will arise at all in any of the nations.

The one and only thing I am not certain about is security,  because there will be a lot of people riled up at the games and they will need a lot of extra security for it, Mexico is already known as a dangerous nation, true or not there is a rumor about it at least, and Canada doesn't have any which means they also do not have enough law enforcement to spare for hundreds of thousands of new people as well, and USA already has troubles as we know. It is going to be tough without a doubt.

I would not sweat too much about it, to be honest.
Even before the World Cup takes place there will be people from all three administrations designing plans to prevent any incident to happen, though I have got the impression those threats you are talking about have something to do with illegal immigration and other similar policies.

However, the hosts are better to show more attention to possible extremist islamic cells which could take advantage of this world even to spread their message through violence, the Islamic state and other groups from the middle east are still active and operating from the shadows.
Cartels are mostly into violence for money, not politics.
hero member
Activity: 2716
Merit: 904
Security is the one thing I am worried about, the rest can be handled well. The organizations, the events, the products that is needed, everything will be there and will be fine and I do not think any problems will arise at all in any of the nations.

The one and only thing I am not certain about is security,  because there will be a lot of people riled up at the games and they will need a lot of extra security for it, Mexico is already known as a dangerous nation, true or not there is a rumor about it at least, and Canada doesn't have any which means they also do not have enough law enforcement to spare for hundreds of thousands of new people as well, and USA already has troubles as we know. It is going to be tough without a doubt.

I think that's one of the few reasons why both Canada and Mexico are only offered 10 games each, their resources alone are not enough to take point for the event's security because if they focus on that area, some areas would be at risk as well. We know that there will be some threats (it may be an empty threat or not) but it will be the security's responsibility to settle it without making the people panic so that the games will happen as smoothly as possible.

While for the games that will happen in US soil, it will be safe to assume that all games will happen as planned without any hurdles because they have enough resources and manpower to do the job while the people spectating the event are enjoying. Regarding that, it's expected that their securities will be heightened during the whole duration.
Jump to: