2018 FIFA World Cup

[RUPERTKBD]

3 hours ago, Scottish⑦Canuck said:

I'm pleased for Canada but the geographical distances between host cities is ridiculous.

 

The alternative in Morocco wasn't exactly all that enticing either though.

It's a bit weird, but it will allow for easier staggering of start times for matches. Plus, groups will likely play all of their matches in a common area. It's not like they'll play in Edmonton and then pack up and head to Houston, or Guadalajara...

[NewbieCanuckFan]

3 hours ago, Lateralus91 said:

FIFA just announced that the 2026 World Cup will be hosted by Canada, the USA and Mexico. It will be the first WC which will see 48 teams compete in the main tournament. Congrats, guys!

I'm guessing we'll have to travel out of the province to see any games (not that I blame the BC NDP for that - as I can't say I disagree with their position).

[goalie13]

3 hours ago, Lateralus91 said:

FIFA just announced that the 2026 World Cup will be hosted by Canada, the USA and Mexico. It will be the first WC which will see 48 teams compete in the main tournament. Congrats, guys!

While I think it's exciting that the tournament will be played here, it feels like a cheap way to get Canada into the game.

[Shift-4]

Dear soccer fanatics

I need help   

 

I know nothing about soccer

I am entering a pool at work (boss is big on soccer, damn brits  lol)

First round of pool is picking those to advance from group stage.

I was just going to go with FIFA rankings with the exception of picking Russia over Egypt (Putin will make it happen).

Any flaws in this logic?

 

(and yes I know this logic was not flawless last WC)

[Brad Marchand]

12 minutes ago, Shift-4 said:

Dear soccer fanatics

I need help   

 

I know nothing about soccer

I am entering a pool at work (boss is big on soccer, damn brits  lol)

First round of pool is picking those to advance from group stage.

I was just going to go with FIFA rankings with the exception of picking Russia over Egypt (Putin will make it happen).

Any flaws in this logic?

 

(and yes I know this logic was not flawless last WC)

If you want to just use rankings to pick between teams, use the World Football Elo Ratings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Football_Elo_Ratings

 

43 minutes ago, Scottish⑦Canuck said:

Spain are nuts sacking their manager 2 days before the start of the tournament. My brackets will be ruined.

Lmao.

[Shift-4]

24 minutes ago, Brad Marchand said:

If you want to just use rankings to pick between teams, use the World Football Elo Ratings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Football_Elo_Ratings

 

Thanks.

This changed one of my picks.

And confirmed the Russia pick.

[Scottish⑦Canuck]

1 hour ago, Brad Marchand said:

If you want to just use rankings to pick between teams, use the World Football Elo Ratings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Football_Elo_Ratings

 

Lmao.

[ReggieBush]

4 hours ago, Scottish⑦Canuck said:

I'm pleased for Canada but the geographical distances between host cities is ridiculous.

 

The alternative in Morocco wasn't exactly all that enticing either though.

I think that they will split up the tournament across the 4 major time zones to limit travel. For example Argentina will play their group stage matches in LA, Seattle and San Fran. Mexico will play all their group stage matches at home, the US will likely play all their in the Northeast.

 

Im still cheesed that Vancouver didn't put in a bid to be one of the host cities

[Scottish⑦Canuck]

1 minute ago, ReggieBush said:

I think that they will split up the tournament across the 4 major time zones to limit travel. For example Argentina will play their group stage matches in LA, Seattle and San Fran. Mexico will play all their group stage matches at home, the US will likely play all their in the Northeast.

 

Im still cheesed that Vancouver didn't put in a bid to be one of the host cities

Yeah, it kind of sucks. At least you have Seattle within driving distance though.

[Ghostsof1915]

1 hour ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

I'm guessing we'll have to travel out of the province to see any games (not that I blame the BC NDP for that - as I can't say I disagree with their position).

Maybe we should be blaming the residents of Gastown. If the Whitecaps had their way, they'd have built the Whitecaps Waterfront Stadium, with a real grass pitch. 

We'd have a new stadium for footy. Instead of the Liberals blowing hundreds of millions of dollars on a stadium that is not even being used above 50% of capacity. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

2 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Maybe we should be blaming the residents of Gastown. If the Whitecaps had their way, they'd have built the Whitecaps Waterfront Stadium, with a real grass pitch. 

We'd have a new stadium for footy. Instead of the Liberals blowing hundreds of millions of dollars on a stadium that is not even being used above 50% of capacity. 

There is too much anger in your post Ghostof1915......life is too short.....be happy and move on....or...

 

 

[Tre Mac]

I don't blame the gov't for not writing a blank cheque to FIFA.

 

Quote

Columnist Mike Smyth writes about Vancouver's collapsed World Cup bid, including a look at a proposed "Host City Agreement" with FIFA.

Reading through the 61 pages of FIFA’s “Host City Agreement” for the World Cup is a jaw-dropping experience that left me with just one question: Why would any city even consider signing a contract this outrageous, grotesquely unfair and completely unreasonable?

I obtained a copy of the current deal. Read it for yourself at the bottom of this column. Prepare to be stunned. And then thank your lucky stars that the B.C. government took one look at it and walked away.

Last week, the United Bid Committee hoping to bring the 2026 Cup to Canada, the U.S. and Mexico dropped Vancouver as a potential host city after the provincial government objected to the contract terms.

Here are some of the mind-boggling highlights (or lowlights) of FIFA’s current Host City Agreement, in place for this summer’s Cup in Russia. Vancouver would have been required to accept similar terms:

FIFA GETS THE PROFITS, TAXPAYERS GET THE BILLS: A theme constantly repeated throughout the agreement is that the host city has to pay for pretty much everything in it. “The host city shall be responsible to bear all costs for the fulfilment of its obligations,” it says.

And those obligations are incredible:

SECURITY: Notorious for going overbudget, security costs for the Cup would be huge, especially since the deal requires “the highest quality and standard” for the event.

Safety, security and fire protection must be provided at stadiums and their surroundings, training sites, official hotels, the FIFA Fan Fest, airports, train stations, bus routes and elsewhere, the agreement states.

The deal also demands “dedicated police protection for the participating teams, key representatives of FIFA, VIP guests and competition officials” with “further details” of the security plan to be worked out later.

B.C. PLACE STADIUM: The agreement demands a “controlled area determined by FIFA” around the stadium, where the host city would be required to enforce FIFA’s commercial rights. That means a ban on unauthorized advertising and commercial activity within the protection zone. In Russia, the controlled area is a two-kilometre radius around stadiums.

The deal also requires “sufficient redundant backup power grids to deal with any power failure at the stadium,” which would force the government to install a second, independent power supply at B.C. Place.

FIFA would also be allowed to change the name of the stadium during the Cup.

TRANSPORTATION: The agreement requires 800 free parking spaces around the stadium for FIFA officials, free public-transit service for holders of game tickets and FIFA accreditation, and the right for FIFA to “restrict public access at any time” on any road and to demand “police escorts” for FIFA vehicles.

FIFA FAN FEST: This festival would be fully paid for by taxpayers and must include “power and water supply, cleaning, waste management, toilets, lighting, signage, first-aid and emergency services.”

CITY MAKEOVER: “The host city shall use best efforts to render the public facilities and public spaces within the host city as attractive as possible during the competition period and shall, at its own expense, carry out the respective beautification measures,” including “temporarily covering and decorating construction sites.”

NO TAXES FOR FIFA: The deal states that “all taxes, duties and levies imposed directly or indirectly” on FIFA will be paid by the host city, and the host city “waives any and all claims of liability” against FIFA for loss or damages caused by FIFA.

ONE LAST THING: As if that’s not enough, FIFA reserves the right to change the agreement later by adding “multiple modifications and/or enhancements and/or additional requirements” to the deal.

Do you understand now why the government told FIFA to take a hike? Taxpayers should be grateful.

http://theprovince.com/news/bc-politics/fifas-shocking-host-city-agreement-for-the-world-cup

 

 

[thejazz97]

2 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said:

That's harsh Tre....

 

...I was thinking of Saskatchewan....(it works for the RCMP...)

[ReggieBush]

54 minutes ago, Scottish⑦Canuck said:

Yeah, it kind of sucks. At least you have Seattle within driving distance though.

Yea thats true. I am going to travelling to the Italy matches though. Better start saving up

[AV.]

Between Pep Guardiola basically confirming himself as a separatist (although I'm not sure that surprised anybody), Julen Lopetegui not even establishing his intentions to the RFEF nor Florentino Perez until the very last minute, not to mention Spain having already made headlines for players they dropped/didn't bring, this looks like it could be disastrous for them this tournament.

 

But then again, calciopoli proved that sometimes distractions can be a good thing for a team.

[Ronaldoescobar]

4 hours ago, goalie13 said:

While I think it's exciting that the tournament will be played here, it feels like a cheap way to get Canada into the game.

Agree with this... Unless there is drastic improvement I am of the opinion that Canada should not be a guaranteed entry. As its a 3 country bid they should allow only the top country to be guaranteed in (Mexico at this point) with the other two playing through the qualifiers as normal. 

[Brad Marchand]

19 minutes ago, Ronaldoescobar said:

Agree with this... Unless there is drastic improvement I am of the opinion that Canada should not be a guaranteed entry. As its a 3 country bid they should allow only the top country to be guaranteed in (Mexico at this point) with the other two playing through the qualifiers as normal. 

All Canada needs to do is clone Alphonso Davies ten times and teach one of them how to play goalkeeper. He can already play forward, midfield, and fullback, so ten Davies clones should fill out the roster nicely.

[Ronaldoescobar]

Just now, Brad Marchand said:

All Canada needs to do is clone Alphonso Davies ten times and teach one of them how to play goalkeeper. He can already play forward, midfield, and fullback, so ten Davies clones should fill out the roster nicely.

We can sure hope that technology exists in a few years hehe.

[goalie13]

18 minutes ago, Ronaldoescobar said:

Agree with this... Unless there is drastic improvement I am of the opinion that Canada should not be a guaranteed entry. As its a 3 country bid they should allow only the top country to be guaranteed in (Mexico at this point) with the other two playing through the qualifiers as normal. 

Maybe there's a middle ground.

 

My idea - Top team is guaranteed in, like you said.  But if either of the two teams can qualify for 2022, then that would also qualify them for 2026.  If they don't qualify for 2022, then they have to qualify for one of the usual CONCACAF spots.

 

I read in one of the articles that FIFA has yet to decide whether all three hosts nations will automatically qualify.  It will be interesting to see how the qualifying plays out for the expanded tournament.

[Ronaldoescobar]

2 minutes ago, goalie13 said:

Maybe there's a middle ground.

 

My idea - Top team is guaranteed in, like you said.  But if either of the two teams can qualify for 2022, then that would also qualify them for 2026.  If they don't qualify for 2022, then they have to qualify for one of the usual CONCACAF spots.

 

I read in one of the articles that FIFA has yet to decide whether all three hosts nations will automatically qualify.  It will be interesting to see how the qualifying plays out for the expanded tournament.

Not a bad idea at all with the 2022 WC qualifying suggestion.