Against:
1. They've got shit grounds
2. We are in 2 different confederation and FIFA might not like it
For:
Oceania has never host a WC
Printable View
Against:
1. They've got shit grounds
2. We are in 2 different confederation and FIFA might not like it
For:
Oceania has never host a WC
Would the Kiwi's want to cough up the money to build 2-3 new stadiums though??
Even if we had 3/4 of it and they had 1/4 would their government be keen to spend the money to build 2 decent stadiums??
Considering they can't even be arsed to build a decent stadium for their Rugby Union I can't see them being keen to do it for football.
Other thing is we are more than capable of hosting the thing on our own. Issue is we do not have the political clout to get it when after Qatar is done China India with their massive population bases and potentially mammoth economies offer more than we do to FIFA.
We ain't getting it anytime soon as FIFA use the WC to line their pockets and they ain't taking it to Western Countries with laws that don't tolerate their corruption anytime soon. They lost too much on Germany in 2006 to let it happen again
yes. more material santo sam ed
I don't think the World Cup will go to democratic countries while FIFA is in it's current form
the Cup goes to nations who will make FIFA the most money through hosting it - free, democratic nations simply won't put up with the changing laws, the 'FIFA courts' and the wholesale export of cash that goes with hosting
New Zealand would have a better chance of hosting the Winter Olympics, they should go for that instead
Can see China being the next Asian country to host (not sure about India though). However, New Zealand would be in with a reasonable shot if they had the stadiums/infrastructure as Oceania would be the only confederation not to host a World Cup. Teaming up with Australia makes sense, to utilise our stadiums. Not sure how FIFA would feel about 2 different confederations holding the World Cup.