Well over the last few days it has come to my attention that the World Cup in 2018 could go to any number of countries. With the 2010 World Cup going to South Africa and the 2014 World Cup going to Brazil, Sepp Blatter has publicly announced that the rotation policy for the World Cup is to be scrapped so who will get it?
England
One of the strongest bids for the 2018 World Cup has come from England. With England having hosted the 1966 World Cup and Euro 96 there will have been 22 years since they held a last major tournament and 62 years since they held the World Cup. They also have a lot of stadiums that could cope with a World Cup.
England’s bid has receieved backing from Prime Minister Gordon Brown as well as Franz Beckenbauer and Richard Caborn. Caborn is in charge of the English bid for the 2018 World Cup.
England are lucky as they have main stadiums that can be used. Fifa have a rule that you can only have one city has has 2 host stadia. The rest are only allowed one. This would mean that London would use Wembley (90,000) and the Emirates (60,000). However stadiums such as Old Trafford are outside Manchester city limits so could be used as well as the City of Manchester Stadium while Everton’s new ground is also outside city limits so could be used with Anfield.
There are also a lot of English stadiums were the capacity could be upgraded this includes, St James Park (Planned to go to 60,000), The Stadium of Light (Planned 55,000). England has the stadium and the fan base to make a very good World Cup.
Australlia
Australlia did really well at the 2006 World Cup reaching the last 16 only to be knocked out by a unfair penalty decision. However Football is growing in the continent of Oceania. The Victorian Sports Minister has said “If FIFA is serious about growing the game in the Asia-Pacific region, then the time can’t be too far away where they need to move into the region”, and “Where else would they put it but Australia?”
Australlia has 9 stadiums at the moment capable of hosting the World Cup, While the Australlian Football Federation has said that it will bid for the 2018 World Cup. The only problem is some of the 9 stadiums are not Football Stadiums. They are oval shaped and the Australlian Sports federation would likely have to expand some current stadiums.
However Australlia could easily do this, They have the money, They have the Stadia and they have enough fans. If You are determined to make Football overtake Rugby and Cricket as Australlia’s major sport then the 2018 World Cup should go to Australlia.
USA
In 1994, The U.S.A hosted the biggest attended ever World Cup. They have followed this up by hosting the 1999 and 2003 Women’s World Cup and every Gold Cup event since. They have 96 stadiums that seat over 50,000 although it must be remembered not all of these are for Football (Soccer) use.
However they did host it as recently as 1994 while other countries such as England and Australlia have only hosted it once between them. The U.S would seem to get it should the rotation policy continue and they do have the support of Jack Warner who criticized the English bid.
However the tournament in 1994 helped make Soccer appear on the U.S sports fans radar and with the U.S.A women team finishing 3rd in the Women’s world cup and the MLS enjoying new high attendances is this the time to push on and make Soccer in the United States the biggest sport in the U.S?
Canada
Canada have never ever hosted a World Cup. However they have one team in the MLS which is Toronto and in my view Toronto are the best fans in the MLS, They sing all game and get full attendances for every home game and they fill up the away end too! Most of their soccer specific stadiums are too small however they would have time to build+expand.
It would help Soccer grow in North America and with Canada likely to host the 2011 Women’s World Cup, Canada like America could start to see higher attendances at Soccer matches should the World Cup go to them. However should Canada be made to wait till 2022? Or should they get it in 2018?
Other Possible Bids
There have been rumuors of a bid from the Netherlands (with Belguim or Luxembourg). China is said to have an interest in hosting the 2018 World Cup while another source I have spoken to says India are also considering it. It is also suspected that Mexico and Nigeria may make bids for the World Cup.
However I want to hear who you think should get it?
Should Football come back home to England?
Will the World Cup help Soccer grow in Australlia, Canada or the U.S?
Or should another country (not mentioned) get it?
Let us know in the Comment box.
Related posts:
- Alternatives for World Cup 2010 FIFA’s president Sepp Blatter has just admitted in an interview...
- An Alternate view on Beckham’s debut Well it’s finally happened, Despite his ankle injury preventing him...
- Why FIFA is Out of Touch With Reality: Jack Warner It has come to the attention of Roberto that FIFA...
- LA Galaxy worried about Beckham LA Galaxy is expressing concern over Beckham’s Recall to the...
- Canadian Surprise in Miami Florida Canada and Haiti faced each other in the Gold Cup...
I think the USA would great for 2018. Football would have taken hold at that time and we have the stadiums. In fact, Tropical Park Stadium in Miami Florida which is the home of the Miami FC could be one of the venues as well as Dolphin Stadium.
Bugger off, it shouldn’t go to the States – it was there in ’94 FFS.
Surely England are going to get this one. Surely?
Being from Canada I would love for it to be here, however, I just don’t see enough support for the sport over here. If it’s not hockey or american football people won’t care that much. However they would love to go to a world cup game but I think it would be a lousy atmosphere. Also 80% of Canadian football fans would cheer for the country of their ancestry over Canada itself if they met in a game.
I THINK THAT ENGLAND SHOULD GET THE 2018 WC BECAUSE FOOTBALL IN ENGLAND AND BRITIAN HAS FALLEN TO A LOW AND THIS WOULD TURN THAT AROUND AND MAKE FOOTBALL FANS IN BRITIAN PROUD OF THEIR COUNTRY WAS AGAIN. ALSO YOUNG FOOTBALLERS WOULD BE PUSHED TO BECOME BETTER AND AIM FOR A PLACE IN THE WORLD CUP IN ENGLANG, BUT IF ENGLAND NEVER GOT IT THEN I THINK IT SHOULD GO TO CANADA OR AUSTRALIA BECAUSE THEY NEED MAJOR IMPROVEMENT TO MAKE YOUNGESTERS BETTER IN THEIR COUNTRY. IT SHOULDN’T GO TO USA BECAUSE WHEN THEY HOSTED IT IN 94 AMERICANS HAVEN’T TOOK ANY INTREST IN FOOTBALL (SOCCER) AND IT WOULD BE A POINTLESS COMPITION THAT YEAR AND A COMPLETE FAILIER.
That’s rubbish, the whole bit re: if it’s not hockey or Amer. football in Canada its not anything. Obviously you have no idea that football (soccer) is the most played sport in the country…caught you off guard. no? Toronto FC, like the article said, sells out every game and has over 5000 people on the waiting list for season tickets. Football is at an all-time high in North America and especially Canada. We are making a hard push to win the CONCACAF and qualify for the WC’10. Our time is NOW!
South Africa will host a bloody excellent world cup and let those who have doubts about that eat humble pie(like England for example,they have what they call a “back up stadiums ” just in case South Africa can’t host it,and you know what the funny thing is they defend that by sayin’ they support RSA in the world cup 2010,pleas man! as if takin’ Africa’s wealth wasn’t enough )
I think that Australia should take the 2018
World Cup because thw U.S and England has already had their turn at hosting the World Cup. The World Cup is For everyone not only for only for like England or the U.S that already had their turn at hosting the World Cup. Australia gas never hosted the World Cup before and it’s a young country that has many to learn. It also has many anazing tourist attrations like the Blue Mountains in Sydeny, the Ayers Rock, the Sydney Harbour Bridge and more.
Of course being American i would love to see the World Cup come back to the States. Football in America has been really growing among popularity and in my opinion skill level(forget the 06 world cup). We do have enough stadiums and it would be nice having the games in group play being held all over our country like in NYC, LA, Chicago, Miami, and other large cities. I understand that we had it in 94 and other countries do deserve a chance for it as well. If it cant be the USA than i think Australia should get it.
Australia- must get it because it is a country that is producing great soccer players and will get more interest if it gets to host a major event. The 2014, 2010, 2006, 1998, 1994 world cups have/will cause sleepless nights in australia because of the huge time difference australians hav had to face. the 2006 world cup in germany for instance. The opening game begins at midnight, the second 2am and the last 4am, so basically australians will not get any sleep at all if they wish to watch games from the world cup. I believe we should get a chance to host the games because we really need to and get some sleep with the games during our daylight hours.
USA- probably will not get the world cup because the hosted the world cup in 1994 alredy which is only 22 years ago.
England- Are also unlikely to get the world cup because it is unfair as england are out of form and are only using it as a way to get access to the world cup. England didnt make the euro 2008 wich 16 teams get into. Only 13 teams get into the world cup from europe and the chances of them doing so is unlikely after the performance they showed the world in the qualifiers
China- Are unlikely to host the world cup as the chief of asia has put his support behind Australia and not behind China but a suprise may be looming. Also they were neighbours of the 2002 world cup previously wich is not going to help their case