World Cup 2014

[Shaggy]

The same thing happened here in South Africa where every team played their group matches in different cities - ok SA is not as big as Brazil but this is not a new thing with regards to World Cups...

Yep and it was an absolutely ****e tournament. So Brazil is likely to be even worse.

[Alex]

So whats the answer. Only ever hold it in a country thats under a certain size? There is always going to be travelling. As long as the games are spaced properly, I dont see it being a problem. The reason WC2010 was **** is because Spain were the only team worth a wank in the tournament.

[PTP]

i will still watch as many games as possible though - probably getting pissed and having pub lock ins for the 2am games

Thats just how i roll

[Kenneth]

Could hold all games in each group in the same region.

[Shaggy]

So whats the answer. Only ever hold it in a country thats under a certain size? There is always going to be travelling. As long as the games are spaced properly, I dont see it being a problem. The reason WC2010 was **** is because Spain were the only team worth a wank in the tournament.

Lots of players/squads complained about their schedules and the travelling, it almost certainly contributed to the poor standard of football on show. And it doesn't help when the fans are having a **** time too.

[Kenneth]

And hopefully there won't be a repeat of the ball fiasco.

[dom9]

My theory is that Brazil is developing at a huge rate and playing these games in some of the less known cities will stimulate economic growth and awareness of these places. The main metropolises (Rio, Sao Paulo) are concentrated around the coast. This tournament is opening the rest of Brazil up a bit more. I have no idead what the stadium capacities is thoe parts of the country though.

Argentina just did something similar with the Copa America. The majority of games were played in the provinces.

[dom9]

And hopefully there won't be a repeat of the ball fiasco.

It wouldn't be a World Cup without a ball fiasco.

[Alex]

Lots of players/squads complained about their schedules and the travelling, it almost certainly contributed to the poor standard of football on show. And it doesn't help when the fans are having a **** time too.

I bet Spain didnt complain

The fans having a **** time is a fair point. But thats because of the ****in din at every match.

BBBBBBZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

[Shaggy]

I bet Spain didnt complain

The fans having a **** time is a fair point. But thats because of the ****in din at every match.

BBBBBBZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

And also the fact they had to travel all over the ****ing place, leaving them tired and skint.

[Craig_H]

Disagree on that now. For the world cup Id wager that there will be more watching in Asia, Oceania, South America and North America for Europe to not matter as much.

That's why I said 'traditionally'.

I think, in terms of tv broadcasting revenues, the US is now the biggest paying nation.

[Alex]

That's why I said 'traditionally'.

I think, in terms of tv broadcasting revenues, the US is now the biggest paying nation.

Yeah, thats why I wrote my reply..

[Fernandinho]

Nothing wrong with "opening up" brazil but at least centre the groups so the fans dont have to waste a **** load of time and money travelling.

Picture fans on 20 hour bus rides to watch an hour and a half of football after travelling half way around the world to get there. Not to mention the fact that from what I have been told international flights within south america are very expensive.

Part of me thinks they are doing it because it is a good way to make fans pay more money while there (travel costs)

[dom9]

Some explanation here, and I stand corrected:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/timvickery/2011/10/tim_vickery_1.html

World Cup 2014 - a scheduling headache


Tim Vickery | 19:26 UK time, Sunday, 23 October 2011

"It's been a big task and long work," said Fifa secretary-general Jerome Valcke last week when the calendar of the 2014 World Cup was presented. "We had 57 versions of this match schedule and finally nine on which we have been working. We took into account the medical aspects, logistics, travel and accommodation."

Staging a World Cup in a country the size of a continent is not easy, and Brazil in June/July offers a specific challenge - winter bites hard in the south and barely touches the north.

One of the big headaches in drawing up the match schedule must have been the question of how to deal with the southern host cities of Porto Alegre and Curitiba, where temperatures can drop to freezing.

It had been assumed that for practical purposes this World Cup would have to revert to the previous format, where teams would play all their group games in a certain region. This would have the advantage of reducing travel time in such a vast country - especially interesting since airport capacity has always been seen as the Achilles heel of Brazil 2014.
The World Cup 2014 takes in host cities speard far apart.

The 2014 World Cup in Brazil is spread all round the huge South American country. Photo: Getty images

But this regionalisation created a problem. Those teams based in the south would have been at a clear disadvantage. After spending weeks in the cold for their group games, a move further north in the knock-out stages could subject them to a temperature difference of 30 degrees.

This was clearly unfair - and possibly dangerous. So the idea of regionalisation was dropped, and instead all the teams will be travelling round the country - only some will be travelling a lot more than others. There are huge discrepancies in teams' itineraries.

The hosts' group is a good example. Brazil will have to clock up the air miles - indeed, one of the arguments against regionalisation was clearly the perceived need to have the national team in action in different parts of the country. So they open the tournament in Sao Paulo in the south-east, move up to Fortaleza in the north east for the second game and conclude their group programme in the middle of the country in Brasilia - a combined distance of 3,920km (2,435.8 miles) between the three cities.

Brazil's second opponents have things much easier - they stay in the north east, with games in Natal and Recife as well as Fortaleza, a combined distance of 1,160km (720.8 miles). But the other two teams in the group have to fly up to Manaus in the Amazon. Brazil's opening day opponents are especially penalized - Sao Paulo to Manaus to Recife is a combined distance of 6,000km (3,728.2 miles).

The team drawn as G1 has three group matches in cities of the north east. H1 has done even better, with fixtures in Belo Horizonte, Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro and a combined distance of just 700km (435 miles). While poor old E4 has two games in the cold south, and then from Curitiba faces the marathon flight north to Manaus.

They have clearly drawn the short straw. There are other long journeys but no others quite as absurd as this. It is here that the temperature differences will really bite - a problem minimized elsewhere in the schedule by downplaying the role of the south. Curitiba has the minimum host city ration of four games, all in the group phase, while Porto Alegre only has one more.

This looks like an anomaly. Porto Alegre can claim to be Brazil's third footballing city, behind Rio and Sao Paulo. At worst it is fourth, behind Belo Horizonte. And yet six cities will receive more World Cup games, including the likes of Brasilia and Fortlazea whose contribution to the Brazilian game is clearly inferior.

In Brazil this is widely being interpreted as the latest act in the cold war between Brazil's president Dilma Rousseff and controversial local football boss Ricardo Teixeira. Porto Alegre is Rousseff's political base. Cutting down its 2014 role, it is said, is Teixeira's act of revenge.

Maybe - and it is certainly worth speculating how much better the tournament planning and organisation might have been had Rousseff come to power earlier. But in this case it seems more likely that Fifa have cut back the participation of the south in order to reduce the number of games in cold temperatures - not just for the players, but also for the tourists.

Considerable thought seems to have been given to the tourist experience. There is no footballing justification whatsoever for building stadiums in Manaus and Cuiaba. But staging World Cup games there will take people close to two of Brazil's major natural attractions, respectively the Amazon rain forest and the Pantanal wetlands. Visiting those might seem a more attractive tourist package than putting on an extra two layers of clothing to cope with the cold of Porto Alegre or Curitiba .

Whatever the reasons, it is hard to look at the match schedule and not come to the conclusion that the 2014 World Cup is overblown, and that Fifa original idea of eight to 10 host cities might have been better. As it stands, with the discrepancies in distances to be travelled, the draw in December 2013 will take on extra importance. Everyone will want to be H1 or G1. No one will want to be E4.

[IN_RAFA_WE_TRUST]

I would love to goto this world cup, I reckon it will be the best world cup experience.
Beautiful womens everywhere. crazy fans , nutters everywhere. Probably more crime than sowt afreeka.
The football will be good too.