Pro-US Infantino (FIFA's President) Accused of Corruption

[Valrifell]

It's soccer.

People have gone to war over it

This is true. It's too dangerous and must be banned under international law.

[Shofercia]

I didn't say it doesn't matter. I'm just say it pales in comparison to other sports here.

Again it depends on your region. American Football is popular all over the US while hockey is only popular in the northern half of the US, NASCAR is only popular in the south, baseball is popular on the coasts, basketball is very popular in the southern half of the US and in the northeast, and soccer is very popular in the sun belt states.

To say it doesn’t matter because it’s not American football is downright silly

Hockey's popular all over California. It's just not popular in Arizona and New Mexico. Poor Coyotes

"Hey, I'm going to manage the team in the hottest city in America" - Wayne Gretzky

[Shofercia]

A lot of people want the US to host it. The OP's question was "should the US use a technicality to win hosting rights and risk a potential boycott?"

If the question was just "do you want to host it?" I think it'd just be the entire thread vs Kramanica

Yes, but then again I’m the type of person who doesn’t care how we do it just that we win.

So then you'd be ok with the US hosting, despite boycotts from Africa, Asia, South America, and possibly Europe?

[Valrifell]

Yes, but then again I’m the type of person who doesn’t care how we do it just that we win.

So then you'd be ok with the US hosting, despite boycotts from Africa, Asia, South America, and possibly Europe?

How else would we win?

[Thermodolia]

So then you'd be ok with the US hosting, despite boycotts from Africa, Asia, South America, and possibly Europe?

How else would we win?

^this

[Shofercia]

How else would we win?

^this

At least you guys are being honest about it.

[Thermodolia]

Yes, but then again I’m the type of person who doesn’t care how we do it just that we win.

So then you'd be ok with the US hosting, despite boycotts from Africa, Asia, South America, and possibly Europe?

Yes. They aren’t going to boycott anyway. It’s all a bunch of hot air.

Besides it’s not just the US as it’s a joint hosting between the US, Canada, and Mexico. Should probably be named the NAFTA host.

[Shofercia]

So then you'd be ok with the US hosting, despite boycotts from Africa, Asia, South America, and possibly Europe?

Yes. They aren’t going to boycott anyway. It’s all a bunch of hot air.

Besides it’s not just the US as it’s a joint hosting between the US, Canada, and Mexico. Should probably be named the NAFTA host.

Eh, most of the games will be in the US. Mexico and Canada just get a few games to attract Mexican and Canadian fans to the MLS. It's similar to the "joint" Olympic Bid between Sweden and Latvia - where Latvia only gets to host events that Sweden can't.

Also, I'm certain the Africans will boycott. They're extremely angry with Infantino. He might not last until the end of the year.

[Thermodolia]

Yes. They aren’t going to boycott anyway. It’s all a bunch of hot air.

Besides it’s not just the US as it’s a joint hosting between the US, Canada, and Mexico. Should probably be named the NAFTA host.

Eh, most of the games will be in the US. Mexico and Canada just get a few games to attract Mexican and Canadian fans to the MLS. It's similar to the "joint" Olympic Bid between Sweden and Latvia - where Latvia only gets to host events that Sweden can't.

It’s still a joint bid, and I think it’s pretty cool.

[Shofercia]

Eh, most of the games will be in the US. Mexico and Canada just get a few games to attract Mexican and Canadian fans to the MLS. It's similar to the "joint" Olympic Bid between Sweden and Latvia - where Latvia only gets to host events that Sweden can't.

It’s still a joint bid, and I think it’s pretty cool.

Most quality bids are cool, but when you have 6 stadiums from Mexico and Canada, combined, and 17 stadiums from the US, I doubt that referring to it as primarily and American Bid is misleading.

[Risottia]

Erm, really? No one?

CBS: https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/u ... -responds/

ESPN: http://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-world-c ... co-sources

SI: https://www.si.com/soccer/2018/03/07/20 ... -fifa-vote

NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/29/spor ... rning.html

Forbes: https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveprice ... id-details

Business Insider: http://www.businessinsider.com/us-2026- ... ger-2018-2

Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/soc ... opularity/

USA Today: https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/s ... 109290258/

Over 26 million Americans watched the World Cup Final when America didn't even make it: https://thebiglead.com/2014/07/14/2014- ... hed-on-tv/

Yeah, and 103 million watched the super bowl. Most Americans literally dont give a shit about soccer.

That's a bit of a change from your initial claim, Mr."Literally no one", right?

Also, the World Cup is an international event. It means selling it all over the world. Its final is the second most watched sports event in the world, right after the UEFA CL final, iirc.

[MERIZoC]

Surely the World Cup final is more watched than the Champion's League?

e: yes, looked it up. 2014 WC final had over one billion, CL "just" 350 million

[Risottia]

Surely the World Cup final is more watched than the Champion's League?

e: yes, looked it up. 2014 WC final had over one billion, CL "just" 350 million

Oh, silly me.

Anyway, both still score a bit more than the US Super Bowl thingy. Which means some US advertisement companies and broadcasters might be slightly interested.

[Ethel mermania]

I am shocked, shocked I say to hear there is corruption at FIFA.

[Risottia]

Eh, most of the games will be in the US. Mexico and Canada just get a few games to attract Mexican and Canadian fans to the MLS. It's similar to the "joint" Olympic Bid between Sweden and Latvia - where Latvia only gets to host events that Sweden can't.

It’s still a joint bid, and I think it’s pretty cool.

A joint North American bid would be nice, as long as they don't give us another shit revenue-time combination as the US did in '94 - a final in Pasadena, in July, in the early afternoon. That was totally crazy. Move the final to a place and a time with a decent temperature ffs.

[Ethel mermania]

It’s still a joint bid, and I think it’s pretty cool.

A joint North American bid would be nice, as long as they don't give us another shit revenue-time combination as the US did in '94 - a final in Pasadena, in July, in the early afternoon. That was totally crazy. Move the final to a place and a time with a decent temperature ffs.

Time zones are a bitch eh? If they played it at 7 pm, it would be 2 am or so for europe.

[Thermodolia]

It’s still a joint bid, and I think it’s pretty cool.

A joint North American bid would be nice, as long as they don't give us another shit revenue-time combination as the US did in '94 - a final in Pasadena, in July, in the early afternoon. That was totally crazy. Move the final to a place and a time with a decent temperature ffs.

Atlanta is a nice temperature.

[Shofercia]

It’s still a joint bid, and I think it’s pretty cool.

A joint North American bid would be nice, as long as they don't give us another shit revenue-time combination as the US did in '94 - a final in Pasadena, in July, in the early afternoon. That was totally crazy. Move the final to a place and a time with a decent temperature ffs.

Final's going to be in America's Best Stadium, if the US wins the bid, in New Jersey. Hey, Jersey's gotta have something nice. There are now rumors that if Infantino expels Morocco, the US could lose on a vote of no confidence, and get the bid thrown out. Then we start the process all over again, possibly with US excluded from bidding.

Anyways, here's the stadium:

[Fartsniffage]

A joint North American bid would be nice, as long as they don't give us another shit revenue-time combination as the US did in '94 - a final in Pasadena, in July, in the early afternoon. That was totally crazy. Move the final to a place and a time with a decent temperature ffs.

Final's going to be in America's Best Stadium, if the US wins the bid, in New Jersey. Hey, Jersey's gotta have something nice. There are now rumors that if Infantino expels Morocco, the US could lose on a vote of no confidence, and get the bid thrown out. Then we start the process all over again, possibly with US excluded from bidding.

Anyways, here's the stadium:

So they're expecting the final to be between Plapatine and Yoda?

[Stellonia]

Morocco deserve the opportunity to host the World Cup more than the U.S. when you consider the fact that they have a stronger national team and are considerably more interested in soccer than America.

iirc Morocco was promised the cup a bit ago but it went to Russia instead? Or one of the other countries, can't remember what year it was for. I would be perfectly happy with it in the US, since, you know, that's close to home.

the US has Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa

Why do these get votes?

All of those jurisdictions have their own football federations, which exist separately from the USSF. They each field their own national teams and organize their own domestic competitions.

[Thermodolia]

Well OP your idea that all of South America, all of Europe, and all of Asia would vote against the US didn’t happen.
Russia and Co. voted for us, all of Eastern Europe voted for us, almost all of South America voted for the joint bid, and most of the Middle East did the same.

You where wrong. Dead wrong. 134 to 65 in the Joint bid favor.

[The Two Jerseys]

Well OP your idea that all of South America, all of Europe, and all of Asia would vote against the US didn’t happen.
Russia and Co. voted for us, all of Eastern Europe voted for us, almost all of South America voted for the joint bid, and most of the Middle East did the same.

You where wrong. Dead wrong. 134 to 65 in the Joint bid favor.

(Image)

I was gonna say, OP is claiming that Puerto Rico and the other American territories voted for the US when I could've sworn that the BBC article said that they didn't vote...

---

Also, according to the BBC article most of the Moroccan stadiums that would be hosting matches aren't even built yet, while the existing ones need major renovations.

While in comparison, North America already has dozens of stadiums that can seat 70,000+, and due to scheduling they have several months of downtime to get the stadiums ready for the matches.

So it's really a no-brainer.

[Shofercia]

Well OP your idea that all of South America, all of Europe, and all of Asia would vote against the US didn’t happen.
Russia and Co. voted for us, all of Eastern Europe voted for us, almost all of South America voted for the joint bid, and most of the Middle East did the same.

You where wrong. Dead wrong. 134 to 65 in the Joint bid favor.

(Image)

My first thoughts after hearing about America's well deserved Victory were: "damn, Cordeiro knows his shit, yay, less American kids will do drugs, nice, my option on land in Pasadena just increased in value!" Your first thought was "teeeheee, someone on the Internet is wrong, I need to grave dig an irrelevant thread!" Sometimes the difference between rich and poor is due to societal factors, but in this case, it's clearly not. If A assesses land value, and B gravedigs old posts, it's really not the illegal immigrants' fault that A's wealthier than B. That's just common sense.

The OP was wrong, and honestly, the OP became wrong when FIFA announced that Morocco wouldn't be disqualified, since the OP's claim was, and I quote:

Sometimes it's better to lose fairly, than to win on a technicality.

The US won fair and square. The election was held, and any intelligent person can grasp that winning fairly is better than losing fairly. But for someone who claims to be a Patriot, to go "teehee, someone on the Internet, is wrong!" on what should be a day of celebration, for me that means two things: either that person is living, rent-free, inside his head, or he's not a real Patriot. You are welcome to disagree, we have free speech in America. But you've just demonstrated an "Adam Burrish" level of incompetence.

Who's Adam Burrish? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46zzFxkh8Ic (at 3:01)

Basically, after winning the Stanley Cup, (due to no efforts of his own,) Adam Burrish decided to troll Hall of Famer Chris Pronger; Pronger's response: "If you're going to make a comment like that five minutes after you win the Stanley Cup, you probably got bigger things to worry about." To paraphrase: "if you're going to grave dig a thread to gloat, on the day that the US pulls off a remarkable Victory with good news all around, (for the US,) you probably got bigger things to worry about."

And in true Burrish fashion, even in your gloat, you're wrong; dead wrong, with this claim: all of Eastern Europe voted for us

from an actual sports source: https://www.si.com/soccer/2018/06/13/wo ... ng-results

Belarus, Estonia, Serbia

are Eastern European countries that voted for Morocco. Even in your gloat, you heroically fumble, like Burrish. He ended up playing in the minors, becoming one of the few, (perhaps the only,) Stanley Cup winner to be relegated to the Minors. Ouch. Anyways, I gotta go to Pasadena this weekend, check on that land option, and you can continue to gravedig old threads and blame illegal immigrants for your financial status.

[Shofercia]

Well OP your idea that all of South America, all of Europe, and all of Asia would vote against the US didn’t happen.
Russia and Co. voted for us, all of Eastern Europe voted for us, almost all of South America voted for the joint bid, and most of the Middle East did the same.

You where wrong. Dead wrong. 134 to 65 in the Joint bid favor.

(Image)

I was gonna say, OP is claiming that Puerto Rico and the other American territories voted for the US when I could've sworn that the BBC article said that they didn't vote...

---

Also, according to the BBC article most of the Moroccan stadiums that would be hosting matches aren't even built yet, while the existing ones need major renovations.

While in comparison, North America already has dozens of stadiums that can seat 70,000+, and due to scheduling they have several months of downtime to get the stadiums ready for the matches.

So it's really a no-brainer.

First, it's FIFA we're talking about. FIFA. The organization that's holding the World Cup during Winter. Common sense doesn't always apply, unless you think that it's common sense to hold the WC during Winter. I don't. For me, holding the WC in the Summer is a no brainer.

Second, it's true that PR didn't vote, but the thread was gravedug. Look at the dates. Back then it was very much up in the air. Morocco even requested that they remove themselves from the vote, and PR initially refused. Way after the OP was written. I can gravedig any election thread, and fine inconsistencies there that are obvious with the benefit of hindsight. The US won, cleanly. We know that, with the benefit of hindsight. If it was so obvious in April, why did Cordeiro bend over backwards for just 8 votes? (Yes, I know CONMEBOL has 10, but only 8 were swayable, one was pro-US, one was anti-US, no matter what.)

https://www.socceramerica.com/publicati ... -up-s.html

This was after the last post of the thread, and before the gravedig.

[Pope Joan]

Hearing anyone in FIFA accused of corruption is about as shocking as reading "dog bites man."

Hearing that one of them was NOT corrupt would be more like reading "man bites dog"