England World Cup bid

[red g]

ah it's the fifa committe who vote

i thought there were only 22 votes?

there is about 40 on that list?

does sepp just pick the best 22 votes ? ie the ones that don;t include england?

[Exiled_red]

they do not reveal who voted for who.

I know, I meant how many votes each bid got. I've not seen it anywhere

[fah-q]

From Russia with love is on before are game I see.

[Tee]

2 votes?!! A wasted effort by all concerned with our bid, we were never ever going to get this gig. Disgraceful.

[-V-]

This will probably offend some of you but i'll say it anyway.

The problem is that the english only look at it from their own perspective and how it will bring them enjoyment for 30 days. Whereas people at Fifa and the world in general take the view that the winning bids should be those which have a lasting impact and help to develop the host country i.e South Africa

Russia and the Middle East have never hosted a World Cup before so its good that they have it for the first time and the main thing is that they are promising to use this world cup as a reason to develop the infrastructure around their countries for the sake of their citizens. Impact that will last a long long time.

What did the england bid offer? A good 30 day festival and alot of fun but nothing beyond that

[Bender]

Am not sure why people seem upset...........England were never ever going to be awarded the world cup.......too many raised expectations

[nineteen]

Just heard a good point on the radio re BBC/Panorama program.

If they are corrupt the FIFA officials would be angry to be exposed and if they aren't corrupt they'd be just as angry to be unfairly tainted as such - lose / lose.

Why couldnt the BBC have aired Panorama next week FFS?

Not sure if that's what it came down to but it certainly wouldn't have helped.

The whole secret ballot process is ripe for corruption, and probably has been tainted on a number of occasions over the last 20/30 years. I was reading some of the build up articles on David Bonds blog:

"It could be argued that the impact of the Teixeira and Leoz allegations will be minimal as they are already committed to Spain/Portugal...

Warner, who is said to control at least two but possibly all three of the Concacaf votes, has been courted assiduously by England."

So voters align themselves with home/supportive bids rather than what is best, and Warner is complete tool with a vice-like grip over FIFA. Yeah, that makes for a really fair and open process.

At my job, when we choose a vendor or software application we go through an exhaustive selection process, where the criteria for success are weighted based on importance and defined up front. In the review and selection, everyone scores the criteria and the results are tabulated. The whole process is open to avoid conflict of interests. Why couldn't something similar be done here. Make it open and make everyone justify their choices? Oh that's right, because then the FIFA committee members will lose the payoffs and kickbacks.

[Tee]

This will probably offend some of you but i'll say it anyway.

The problem is that the english only look at it from their own perspective and how it will bring them enjoyment for 30 days. Whereas people at Fifa and the world in general take the view that the winning bids should be those which have a lasting impact and help to develop the host country i.e South Africa

Russia and the Middle East have never hosted a World Cup before so its good that they have it for the first time and the main thing is that they are promising to use this world cup as a reason to develop the infrastructure around their countries for the sake of their citizens. Impact that will last a long long time.

What did the england bid offer? A good 30 day festival and alot of fun but nothing beyond that

Do they ****.... they don't look beyond their own pesonal benefit. It is a romantic notion you put forward but it is a load of bollocks tbh.

[Shaggy]

What did the england bid offer? A good 30 day festival and alot of fun but nothing beyond that

Come on. Top class, ready-made facilities - quality stadia, training facilities etc. A core of 'home support' for many nations already living over here. There are plenty of reasons to support our bid.

[fah-q]

This will probably offend some of you but i'll say it anyway.

The problem is that the english only look at it from their own perspective and how it will bring them enjoyment for 30 days. Whereas people at Fifa and the world in general take the view that the winning bids should be those which have a lasting impact and help to develop the host country i.e South Africa

Russia and the Middle East have never hosted a World Cup before so its good that they have it for the first time and the main thing is that they are promising to use this world cup as a reason to develop the infrastructure around their countries for the sake of their citizens. Impact that will last a long long time.

What did the england bid offer? A good 30 day festival and alot of fun but nothing beyond that

How much of a development is going to happen in a country where it is 40c+ in July and has a population of 1.5m? There's more people in Birmingham ffs.

[Bender]

Come on. Top class, ready-made facilities - quality stadia, training facilities etc. A core of 'home support' for many nations already living over here. There are plenty of reasons to support our bid.

Except russia offered the biggest bribes

[Leyton388]

Russia is controlled by ex KGB agents and is a Mafia state. Look at the 2008 CL final and the stories that come out of that with regards to fan friendliness and policing?

[Tee]

Come on. Top class, ready-made facilities - quality stadia, training facilities etc. A core of 'home support' for many nations already living over here. There are plenty of reasons to support our bid.

Bottom line for me is 50 years since we last had the tournament. 50 years FFS! If we could only convince 2 members this time there is little hope of it ever returning to England in our lifetimes.

[Neil Young]

It was always a high risk strategy to feature a drunken gnome in the final presentation. It could have been a masterstroke but sadly not.

[little dave hedgehog]

It was always a high risk strategy to feature a drunken gnome in the final presentation. It could have been a masterstroke but sadly not.

i resent the insinuation that i would sell out my country like that.