Non-Road Boards > Sports

2022 FIFA World Cup

<< < (2/58) > >>


--- Quote from: cabiness42 on March 29, 2022, 06:30:16 PM ---CONMEBOL: With the final matchday tomorrow; Peru, Columbia and Chile are all alive for a spot in a June playoff with an AFC team.

--- End quote ---

Those games were yesterday. Peru beat Paraguay 2-0 to advance by 1 point over Colombia. Peru now has the intercontinental playoff for the second year in a row and will play either UAE or Australia.
Side note, I kind of hope we lose 5-0 tonight to Costa Rica by us kicking it into our own goal 5 times in injury time. That way we still qualify, and, if Mexico loses, they're in the playoff against (likely) New Zealand.

english si:
One of the things that bugs me about Qatar that isn't the slave labour and appalling worker safety, or the bribery and corruption, is that they do not have enough cities to host a 32-team World Cup.

I believe there is normally a rule banning a city from having more than 2 stadiums in a city. Even if you ignore that 3 of the 5 cities are basically suburbs of a 4th, one of those 5 cities has 3 of the 8 stadiums. Really though we're looking at a city with 7 stadiums and one not far away with 1.

Russia had 12 stadiums in 11 cities. Brazil and Germany both had 12 stadiums in 12 cities. South Africa had 10 stadiums in 9 cities. Japan and South Korea had 20 stadiums in 20 venues.

Multiple games happening on the same day in a (not huge) Metropolitan area is not good for logistics, security. When they do stuff like the EPL schedule, they will make sure the only place with two games on the same day is London (because there's too many teams to be able to block that) and even then they try hard to make sure that geographically close games are not chronologically close. And UEFA try and make sure there's not two Champions League games in the same city on the same night. All that's out the window here.

On the other hand, why should they categorically ban smaller countries from hosting the World Cup just because of a preference for spreading it out more?


--- Quote from: 1995hoo on March 30, 2022, 04:41:50 PM ---On the other hand, why should they categorically ban smaller countries from hosting the World Cup just because of a preference for spreading it out more?

--- End quote ---

Small countries can always jointly host with another country. Qatar could have done a joint bid with Saudi Arabia.

There has rightfully been a ton of controversy surrounding this tournament. However, what annoys me with people who loudly and proudly claim they're not going to watch is that if your basis for not watching this WC is humanitarian/racial/discrimination/safety/corruption issues in Qatar, you should be thinking about whether watching certain other sports/competitions meets those standards. European club soccer for example is chock-full of corruption, and many of the big teams are owned by the same Middle Eastern oil giants that essentially bought the tournament to Qatar.

While it's much more logical for the tournament to be in the summer, it's going to be fun to be able to watch the World Cup and the NFL, the pinnacles of my two favorite sports to watch, on the same day.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version