The bidding for the 2018/2022 FIFA World Cup is underway, and the nine candidates that have submitted bids will be working feverishly until December 2 to try and convince the 24 members of the FIFA Executive Committee that their bid is the best one for either 2018/2022.
I’m beginning to think, though, that the bids that have to spend billions on upgrades might miss out after recent events.
FIFA’s quest to give Africa its first World Cup has to be admired, but the reality has been a sense of frustration and concern about how the preparations have been undertaken. Ticket sales were initially slow and prices have been cut to entice the locals to purchase more tickets.
Stadia construction was behind schedule and took a firm push by FIFA to get construction back on schedule and completed.
Just recently, however, FIFA admitted that they signed off on an extra $100 million to ensure that training camps and practice facilities were up to exacting standards, sums up the dramas involved with this World Cup.
News then that the 2014 FIFA World Cup preparations in Brazil are also behind schedule, coupled with the Ukraine’s problems in getting ready for UEFA Euro 2012, surely must be giving FIFA nightmares about giving future World Cups to countries that need to spend billions on stadia and infrastructure, regardless of how many years each country will have to get themselves ready.
However, FIFA do like the PR in saying how they help countries transform and highlight how $6 billion has been spent in South Africa upgrading stadia and essential infrastructure and leaving a lasting legacy for the country and the African continent.
Sepp Blatter has also heaped praised on both the Qatari and Russian bids, both of which will need to spend billions to make it happen. But with FIFA relying on the World Cup for 95 percent of their revenue, it’s crucial that the tournament is hassle free.
Out of all the current bids, I believe the Russian bid will leave the biggest legacy in terms of stadia and infrastructure improvements for a country.
The USA bid provides the highest possible financial windfall for FIFA from the tournament itself, with over five million tickets available with projected revenue of $1 billion. It also provides the least hassle, as they could theoretically host the tournament tomorrow.
It will be interesting to see which way FIFA will go. FIFA might hedge their bets and go both ways: one for the legacy, one for the windfall.
In light of England’s self-inflicted own goal, I could see the bids going to Russia for 2018 and USA for 2022.
Are you the ultimate team manager? Pick your own superstar team and go head to head with other football fans for glory and cash prizes on Draftstars. Imagine what you could be buying instead. Set a deposit limit.
The Reds defeated Wolves 2-nil and gave the manager a fitting send-off after nine Premier League seasons at the club - and he even…
Pep Guardiola has cast doubt over his long-term Manchester City future after admitting he is running out of things to achieve following an historic…
Bournemouth's Neto was out of position after racing to save an earlier chance from Chelsea, only to kick it straight to Moises Caicedo, who…
Needing to win against Everton and hoping Manchester City lost to West Ham, the biggest cheer of the afternoon from Gunners' fans came when…
With Arsenal a possibility of stealing the Premier League title on the final day, the striker wasted no time giving Manchester City the perfect…
After taking the lead in the second minute, Manchester City recorded a 3-1 win to become the first team to win the Premier League…
