FIFA World Cup 2026 :Canada/Mexico/United States: Discussion Thread - page 227.

Sithara007

legendary

Activity: 3164

Merit: 1344

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: davis196 on December 30, 2022, 03:33:50 AM

1.Why are you making a forum thread about an event, that is about to happen after 4 years? Isn't it too early to discuss the World Cup 2026?
Why don't we discuss Euro 2024? Grin

2.I like the idea of the next World Cup tournaments being hosted by several countries, instead of one county. This will cut the costs and there won't be any unnecessary investments in new stadiums, which won't be used that much after the World Cup ends.
However, the distances in the USA, Canada and Mexico are quite big and the teams will have to travel a lot.

Well... it is true that still we have 3.5 years to go for the next edition (next world cup will be held during mid-2026). But the qualifier matches will be starting sometime soon, and especially with confederations such as CAF and AFC, there are multiple layers of qualifying tournaments. Therefore I don't find anything wrong with this thread being created at this point. Also, the tournament format is not finalized yet. We can discuss about the qualifiers and format until the tournament starts. Also, construction hasn't been completed for all the venues.

Strongkored

legendary

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1112

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: mm2543363580 on December 27, 2022, 07:58:28 AM

Qatar has reportedly spent approx. $229 billion on World Cup infrastructure, although the World Cup Organizing Committee has not yet confirmed that figure. Many analysts and media outlets announced the total CAPEX from $220bn to $300bn for all infrastructure projects.( copied from https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.ssbm.ch/blog/is-the-fifa-world-cup-2022-in-qatar-profitable/%23:~:text%3DQatar%2520has%2520reportedly%2520spent%2520approx,bn%2520for%2520all%2520infrastructure%2520projects.&ved=2ahUKEwj1x5qc3pn8AhWIRKQEHaxxAyEQFnoECAoQBQ&usg=AOvVaw0WiGXrCLmMhAz1W3NcKf99)

So organising World cup requires alot of financial stability and developing countries who are already struggling economically can't afford this burden. I think FIFA decision is a sensible one as total burden will not go on one country plus all revenues will not go to one.

With the wealth that Qatar has, it's not a number that will be problematic for their economy.
And in my opinion, one of the reasons why the next World Cup will be held by 3 countries is because considering that there will be more teams that will play than the previous World Cup, which was only 32 and increased by 16 to 48, this addition is a significant number for one country to organize it will be very crowded, plus the number of spectators will increase because there are 16 additional countries that will also try to watch the match live

Naficopa

hero member

Activity: 2002

Merit: 516

Quote from: davis196 on December 30, 2022, 03:33:50 AM

1.Why are you making a forum thread about an event, that is about to happen after 4 years? Isn't it too early to discuss the World Cup 2026?
Why don't we discuss Euro 2024? Grin

2.I like the idea of the next World Cup tournaments being hosted by several countries, instead of one county. This will cut the costs and there won't be any unnecessary investments in new stadiums, which won't be used that much after the World Cup ends.
However, the distances in the USA, Canada and Mexico are quite big and the teams will have to travel a lot.

Not sure about the planning and management but group stages will be held in different countries and super sixteen but after that quarter finals and semi finals will be in one country . This will definitely control alot of cost and burden on one country and different countries will get the credit of hosting world cup . A very good initiative by fifa.

davis196

hero member

Activity: 2954

Merit: 906

1.Why are you making a forum thread about an event, that is about to happen after 4 years? Isn't it too early to discuss the World Cup 2026?
Why don't we discuss Euro 2024? Grin

2.I like the idea of the next World Cup tournaments being hosted by several countries, instead of one county. This will cut the costs and there won't be any unnecessary investments in new stadiums, which won't be used that much after the World Cup ends.
However, the distances in the USA, Canada and Mexico are quite big and the teams will have to travel a lot.

Naficopa

hero member

Activity: 2002

Merit: 516

Quote from: Sithara007 on December 27, 2022, 11:58:47 PM

Quote from: mm2543363580 on December 27, 2022, 07:58:28 AM

Qatar has reportedly spent approx. $229 billion on World Cup infrastructure, although the World Cup Organizing Committee has not yet confirmed that figure. Many analysts and media outlets announced the total CAPEX from $220bn to $300bn for all infrastructure projects.

I am really sad. Tens of thousands of workers from Nepal, India and Bangladesh died in Qatar during the construction of the stadiums and the Qataris could have used 0.01% of the above mentioned amount to compensate the families of the dead workers. Despite a lot of outcry from all around the globe, they refused to do that. And was all this spending really necessary? When Russia hosted the tournament in 2018, the total spending was estimated at $14 billion. Even then, they faced a lot of criticism from within the country and outside.

This is a thing with Qataris and other Arab countries they spend millions billions on infrastructure construction and than they dismantle them and make them new , seems that they have excessive amount of money and they don't value human lives this is a sad reality in many countries.

BobK71

hero member

Activity: 2128

Merit: 655

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

The upcoming 2026 World Cup is going to undergo major format changes. 48 teams will be reduced to 32 after the group stage and then the tournament will be knocked out. Since FIFA is thinking about the inclusion of 48 teams, if they arrange the fixtures through 12 groups with 4 teams that can be effective but the changes will be fixed next year. No doubt that next World Cup will be more competitive. That will boost the confidence of the World Cup immensely.

Sithara007

legendary

Activity: 3164

Merit: 1344

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: rdluffy on December 28, 2022, 07:59:34 AM

Fifa is thinking about 12 groups of 4 teams each one, the group will probably stay the same as now, 4 teams.
After group stage, the difference will be the round of 32 instead of round of 16, so there's one more round after all

And the classification will be 2 best teams of each group + 8 teams with better 3rd place.

I bet Fifa will chose this rules next year, it makes more sense.

Groups of 5 teams is very unlikely because there will be 48 teams

FIFA was earlier thinking about having 48 teams divided in to 16 groups. There will be three teams in each group and the top two will progress to the round of 32. But then, Qatar 2022 worked well with 4-team groups. Most of the matches were fiercely competitive. So they may go with 12 groups of 4 teams each. The top 2 teams from each group will progress to the next stage, and in addition, 8 among the 3rd placed teams will also qualify to the round of 32. In my opinion, I find the modified format (12 groups) much better than what they had earlier.

Silberman

legendary

Activity: 2492

Merit: 1332

Quote from: bitgolden on December 27, 2022, 05:05:24 PM

It's not about having high quality at the world cup itself and low quality in the beforehand, it's just brining that to world cup itself as well. I think instead of picking a small number of teams for the world cup, I feel like all the members of fifa should be participating, no beforehand, no qualifiers or anything, just pure world cup where 100+ teams or I don't know how many there are all play.

Even if a team is too poor to come, whoever has the tournament should pay it and bring them. All in all it should be like 128 to 64 to 32 to 16 to 8 to 4 to 2 and the champion. That type of thing would be a lot better, and you could still have group stages in that type of situation as well. It would make everyone in the world feel included every time.

That would be a nice format but once again when it comes to FIFA we need to always think about the money, such a format will require a long world cup and more matches so it may seem as if it could produce more profits for FIFA, however if they did such a thing the tournaments to qualify to the world cup will have to be eliminated, and the qualifiers last years and there are hundreds of matches, so FIFA will most likely lose money with such a tournament format, which basically guarantees that it is never going to be implemented.

And while a little bit off-topic Pele the one that is regarded by the majority of the fans as the best player ever died today, a very sad day for soccer fans all over the world.

rdluffy

legendary

Activity: 2226

Merit: 1304

Quote from: Pierre 2 on December 27, 2022, 03:58:54 AM

I think having more teams in World Cup sounds like good idea. But in my opinion it will drastically decrease quality of matches played in group stage. I heard that FIFA is still not sure with amount of teams to be part of groups. More teams mean lot more unnecessary matches. Imagine you are France, after 3 wins you would use your bench in last match (if groups will be 5 teams). We can't avoid this even in 4-team groups. FIFA should find a way to avoid match fixing. Gambling odds can become crazy at last matches.

Fifa is thinking about 12 groups of 4 teams each one, the group will probably stay the same as now, 4 teams.
After group stage, the difference will be the round of 32 instead of round of 16, so there's one more round after all

And the classification will be 2 best teams of each group + 8 teams with better 3rd place.

I bet Fifa will chose this rules next year, it makes more sense.

Groups of 5 teams is very unlikely because there will be 48 teams

Sithara007

legendary

Activity: 3164

Merit: 1344

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: mm2543363580 on December 27, 2022, 07:58:28 AM

Qatar has reportedly spent approx. $229 billion on World Cup infrastructure, although the World Cup Organizing Committee has not yet confirmed that figure. Many analysts and media outlets announced the total CAPEX from $220bn to $300bn for all infrastructure projects.

I am really sad. Tens of thousands of workers from Nepal, India and Bangladesh died in Qatar during the construction of the stadiums and the Qataris could have used 0.01% of the above mentioned amount to compensate the families of the dead workers. Despite a lot of outcry from all around the globe, they refused to do that. And was all this spending really necessary? When Russia hosted the tournament in 2018, the total spending was estimated at $14 billion. Even then, they faced a lot of criticism from within the country and outside.

bitgolden

legendary

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1128

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: Pierre 2 on December 27, 2022, 03:58:54 AM

I think having more teams in World Cup sounds like good idea. But in my opinion it will drastically decrease quality of matches played in group stage. I heard that FIFA is still not sure with amount of teams to be part of groups. More teams mean lot more unnecessary matches. Imagine you are France, after 3 wins you would use your bench in last match (if groups will be 5 teams). We can't avoid this even in 4-team groups. FIFA should find a way to avoid match fixing. Gambling odds can become crazy at last matches.

It's not about having high quality at the world cup itself and low quality in the beforehand, it's just brining that to world cup itself as well. I think instead of picking a small number of teams for the world cup, I feel like all the members of fifa should be participating, no beforehand, no qualifiers or anything, just pure world cup where 100+ teams or I don't know how many there are all play.

Even if a team is too poor to come, whoever has the tournament should pay it and bring them. All in all it should be like 128 to 64 to 32 to 16 to 8 to 4 to 2 and the champion. That type of thing would be a lot better, and you could still have group stages in that type of situation as well. It would make everyone in the world feel included every time.

Naficopa

hero member

Activity: 2002

Merit: 516

Quote from: rdluffy on December 27, 2022, 08:35:58 AM

Quote from: Pierre 2 on December 27, 2022, 06:45:50 AM

I agree with this idea. This type of tournaments should be partially done by developing countries. Actually this one is great example, Mexico is developing country partner to developed countries like USA and Canada. Giving a tournament directly to developing country may create issues. They tend to have worse finances and completing stadiums can be great hassle. I heard that even Mexico may have issues through this 2026 tournament.

Mexico already hosted 2 World Cups, 1970 and 1986.
Mexico is, of course a developing country, way different than USA and Canada in infrastructure, but Mexico already have good football stadiums, people in Mexico loves football and in my opinion they will not have problems to host the World Cup, it's only 10 matches too.
I think it's importat to have the stadiums because it's probably the most expensive thing to build, and a waste of resources in some cases, like Qatar, they built for nothing, and even in Brazil with plenty os stadiums available, they built some stadiums in places where's no matches are being played right now.

Mexico cities that will host the matches: Guadalajara, Monterrey and Mexico City.
Interesting fact, the biggest stadium will probably be Metlife Stadium in New York, supporting 82,500 people, and the second is Azteca Stadium in Mexico City, supporting 81,070 people
But there are some media that says Azteca can host almost 90,000 people, being the biggest one of all

The stadiums Qatar build from recycled shipping containers will be dismantled after World cup.
Lusail Stadium will incorporate “a community space of schools, shops, cafés, sporting facilities and health clinics. Al Bayt will have a five-star hotel, shopping mall and sports medicine clinic. Two of the stadiums will be used by local soccer clubs.
USA ,Canada will also make stadiums like this for later use as sports centers. And Mexico as you said has already huge football stadiums.

rdluffy

legendary

Activity: 2226

Merit: 1304

Quote from: Pierre 2 on December 27, 2022, 06:45:50 AM

I agree with this idea. This type of tournaments should be partially done by developing countries. Actually this one is great example, Mexico is developing country partner to developed countries like USA and Canada. Giving a tournament directly to developing country may create issues. They tend to have worse finances and completing stadiums can be great hassle. I heard that even Mexico may have issues through this 2026 tournament.

Mexico already hosted 2 World Cups, 1970 and 1986.
Mexico is, of course a developing country, way different than USA and Canada in infrastructure, but Mexico already have good football stadiums, people in Mexico loves football and in my opinion they will not have problems to host the World Cup, it's only 10 matches too.
I think it's importat to have the stadiums because it's probably the most expensive thing to build, and a waste of resources in some cases, like Qatar, they built for nothing, and even in Brazil with plenty os stadiums available, they built some stadiums in places where's no matches are being played right now.

Mexico cities that will host the matches: Guadalajara, Monterrey and Mexico City.
Interesting fact, the biggest stadium will probably be Metlife Stadium in New York, supporting 82,500 people, and the second is Azteca Stadium in Mexico City, supporting 81,070 people
But there are some media that says Azteca can host almost 90,000 people, being the biggest one of all

mm2543363580

full member

Activity: 952

Merit: 105

Qatar has reportedly spent approx. $229 billion on World Cup infrastructure, although the World Cup Organizing Committee has not yet confirmed that figure. Many analysts and media outlets announced the total CAPEX from $220bn to $300bn for all infrastructure projects.( copied from https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.ssbm.ch/blog/is-the-fifa-world-cup-2022-in-qatar-profitable/%23:~:text%3DQatar%2520has%2520reportedly%2520spent%2520approx,bn%2520for%2520all%2520infrastructure%2520projects.&ved=2ahUKEwj1x5qc3pn8AhWIRKQEHaxxAyEQFnoECAoQBQ&usg=AOvVaw0WiGXrCLmMhAz1W3NcKf99)

So organising World cup requires alot of financial stability and developing countries who are already struggling economically can't afford this burden. I think FIFA decision is a sensible one as total burden will not go on one country plus all revenues will not go to one.
The Qatar World Cup 2022 has generated approximately $7.5 billion for FIFA through commercial deals, an increase of $1 billion from the previous World Cup in Russia in 2018(https://www.businesstoday.in)

Pierre 2

legendary

Activity: 2394

Merit: 1358

Quote from: Blawpaw on December 27, 2022, 04:52:06 AM

I guess that the world cup should be done in countries that are in need of developing. This could help the countries apply the money in building structures that would benefit the country. This could be used to help developing countries.

I agree with this idea. This type of tournaments should be partially done by developing countries. Actually this one is great example, Mexico is developing country partner to developed countries like USA and Canada. Giving a tournament directly to developing country may create issues. They tend to have worse finances and completing stadiums can be great hassle. I heard that even Mexico may have issues through this 2026 tournament.

Blawpaw

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1027

I guess that the world cup should be done in countries that are in need of developing. This could help the countries apply the money in building structures that would benefit the country. This could be used to help developing countries.

Silberman

legendary

Activity: 2492

Merit: 1332

Quote from: BitcoinAccepted on December 25, 2022, 01:05:10 PM

It is a nice idea to organize the World Cup in different countries. But in terms of transport, it is not optimal for the players. You will always have to travel up and down, which is not great for your preparation. And the distances between these countries can also be considerable. Mexico and a World Cup, we've already experienced that once before in 1986. I thought everything had gone pretty well then. It surprises me a little that they organize the World Cup, since America is not really a football country at all. At least, football is not among the 3 most popular sports. Maybe not even in the top 5.

When it comes to FIFA you only need to think about the money to find out why they do things they way they do, an increase in the number of teams means more matches and more money for them, however since this is the first time they are changing the format of the tournament in such a long time they are trying to distribute the burden among several countries and see how this experiment turns out, also even if the US is not a country that has a long soccer tradition, FIFA has tried for a long time for this to change as there is a lot of money for them to make if this changes, so they are trying to improve the popularity of soccer at the US with this move.

Pierre 2

legendary

Activity: 2394

Merit: 1358

I think having more teams in World Cup sounds like good idea. But in my opinion it will drastically decrease quality of matches played in group stage. I heard that FIFA is still not sure with amount of teams to be part of groups. More teams mean lot more unnecessary matches. Imagine you are France, after 3 wins you would use your bench in last match (if groups will be 5 teams). We can't avoid this even in 4-team groups. FIFA should find a way to avoid match fixing. Gambling odds can become crazy at last matches.

Sithara007

legendary

Activity: 3164

Merit: 1344

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: romero121 on December 26, 2022, 07:37:02 PM

This isn't going to be a diverse World Cup, it is a complicated one. Maybe in real-time we'll experience variety of matches not because of the diverse cultures getting involved. Just out of the varying climatic conditions. When the hosting rights for the 2022 FIFA World Cup was given to Qatar the first thing came into discussion is the hot climate condition which makes the audience and players suffer. But they came up with the plan and kept the entire ground in a cool condition. Maybe such kind of technology will be used as variation happens between the countries.

Qatar spent close to $250 billion to host the world cup, because they wanted to showoff their wealth. That is not the case with the three North American countries, because they are not in a good economical situation. But the advantage with United States, Canada and Mexico is that they don't need to construct any new stadiums. They already have enough quality venues to host the games. But even then, hosting a tournament with 48 participants is going to be a huge challenge. And this is the first time in recorded history that such a huge tournament is being organized.

Tipeform$

member

Activity: 168

Merit: 15

#SWGT PRE-SALE IS LIVE

FIFA World Cup will be held in 2026 which country will be discussed by FIFA but there is a target. Many of the three countries discussed here are Canada, Mexico, and the United States. If the United States hosts the FIFA-controlled World Cup in 2026, soccer fans will suffer. Because all countries can go to watch FIFA World Cup games, but in this case, the audience will have to suffer a lot in getting a visa. Although earlier the United States hosted the FIFA World Cup, but this time everything is different. This has raised many questions in our minds, many football lovers may be confused about getting a visa.

Topic: FIFA World Cup 2026 :Canada/Mexico/United States: Discussion Thread - page 227. (Read 45249 times)