[Gaz]

Was having this conversation with a couple of my mates the other night.

In 2000, Belgium and the Netherlands were joint hosts of Euro 2000. In 2008 we had Austria and Switzerland as joint hosts, and in 2012 we have Poland and Ukraine as joint hosts.

And in 2002, we had Japan and South Korea as joint hosts of the World Cup.

Now, in each case both countries were allowed to qualify automatically, which to me seems pretty unfair, as it takes away one other qualifying space and, in particular, the holders of the World Cup do not qualify automatically anymore (do the holders of the European Championships? I don't think so).

Any thoughts?

[Fudge]

Given the stadium/venue criteria, there are a limited number of European countries that could host the European Championships on their own (Probabaly only England, France, Germany, Italy, Spain) so having co hosts is probably a necessary evil.

EDIT - and Portugal (possibly more)

I'd definitely agree the WC should be hosted by a single country, so that there are more qualification spaces available though.

This post has been edited by Fudge: 15 March 2010 - 23:34

[chris123]

Gaz, on 15 March 2010 - 23:03, said:

Was having this conversation with a couple of my mates the other night.

In 2000, Belgium and the Netherlands were joint hosts of Euro 2000. In 2008 we had Austria and Switzerland as joint hosts, and in 2012 we have Poland and Ukraine as joint hosts.

And in 2002, we had Japan and South Korea as joint hosts of the World Cup.

Now, in each case both countries were allowed to qualify automatically, which to me seems pretty unfair, as it takes away one other qualifying space and, in particular, the holders of the World Cup do not qualify automatically anymore (do the holders of the European Championships? I don't think so).

Any thoughts?

While I agree that the dilution of quality at the world cup is unfortunate, having the host nation(s) team at the tournament is a must, watching a whole nation come to a stand still and go mad for their team helps to keep the host countries fans and media interested.

Its part of the reason I love the world cup, the quality players are still on show regardless, but the whole atmosphere is second to none.

[HibeeJibee]

FIFA's hosting policy for the World Cup has, until now, been that they'll only choose a joint host if no individual host is available. During the era of the rotation policy, Asia's turn came about. After a prolonged campaign of bidding against each other, a solution was found by making Japan and Korea host together (see http://en.wikipedia....ing_controversy ). No other World Cup has been hosted jointly, and I suspect we won't see one like it for a long time. Spain-Portugal and Belgium-Netherlands very unlikely to win 2018 or 2022, IMO...

Euros are different matter: not such pressure on qualifying slots, even less so once expanded to 24. But that expansion makes it impossible for anyone bar perhaps England, Germany, France, Russia, Italy, Spain or Turkey to host it. So co-hosting is vital to letting new areas/nations get it.

If you think co-hosting is bad, the 2007 Asian Cup was (like the Euros) a tournament involving 16 teams. Of which FOUR qualified automatically - Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam - for the finals. I support title holders having to qualify btw: as if anything, keeps them in better form.

[chico]

Zombie! Please hit whatever number it was and go.. Geez. I almost was interested in this subject, then Asia... Zzzz!

[grazza]

IMO countries that can solely host world cups should not be allowed to host European championships.

With a 24 team European championship it is fair to say that it would take a huge shock for England, Germany, Italy, Spain and France to not qualify anyway. These nations are capable of hosting a world cup on their own I think the Spanish could have gone alone without the Portugese in their world cup bid.

Arguably with a 50% increase in teams in Euros there could be 3 hosts in a tournament. Personally I am not in favour of that though perhaps have a play off to decide 2nd qualifiers.


World Cup
2018 - England (Infrastructure in place, good stadiums and due another turn)
2022 - Australia (A lot of work to do but FIFA will want to go to a new place after a safe European choice)
2026 - USA (North America well overdue a turn can see them beating Mexico and Canada are still short when it comes to football
2030 - Spain (If they miss out in 2018 think they will work on their bid and go solo)
2034 - China (World superpower inevitably the next real Asian host)
2038 - Argentina ( Due to go back to South America and Brazil got last shot unless some other nations can put a strong joint bid together.

Nigeria will probably be next African nation to get it, After China get it may go back to Japan again but could see a big push towards India getting to host.

Euros
2016 - Italy (think they will get it after missing out last time and need a boost after demise of Serie A and scandals)
2020 - Romania and Bulgaria (combined population of 30 million and improving infrastructure
2024 - Turkey (look to grow closer to Europe like Poland and Ukraine did)
2028 - Czech Republic and Slovakia
2032 - Russia (need to do a euros before looking to host a world cup)

That is how I can see things going and hopeful not too many big countries get the Euros. I think after the fiasco with Poland and Ukraine UEFA may want to go with Italy as while work needs to be done on Stadia there are plenty there and the tournament should be ok. I think we may see a patern where every 2nd Euros are a joint bid and perhaps like the world cup they may announce two at the same time in future and give the later tournament where the hosts have more work to do more time to get things in place. World Cups similarly I think Fifa want a fairly safe bet every 2nd tournament e.g. France, Germany, Brazil in comparison to complete news in USA, Japan/South Korea, South Africa. Intrestingly though I think 2018 will be a safe host for them and it will give more time for the 2022 host who will be a new and I think maybe Australia and thus give them plenty of time to get things in place (nearly 12 years).

[kiwififer]

OZ should get a WC, no question about that. They have the stadia, the infrastructure and the experience to have it especially Melbourne and Sydney.

The AFL won't like it, any tournament will take place during the season and they have said they would fight being chucked out of their grounds, but as Swarley posted a while ago, a couple of suitcases of money will change hands and problem solved.

Imagine Scotland qualifying, it would be a home game every time they set foot on the pitch.

There's talk of NZ joining up for a joint bid, but quite frankly, OZ doesn't need us. Only Auckland could have a group as Eden Park will hold 80k, the cake tin in Welly only has 30k.

[Borys]

Ahoj!
I'm half surprised the 2012 affair hasn't been taken away from Poland and Ukraina yet. I've only read about the problems in Ukrainia, but can see the Polish mess with my own eyes. The EURO preparations are in shambles (not unexpectedly).
No places were "lost" by awarding the event to co-hosts, as the EURO was (needlessly) expanded to 24 teams.
Borys

This post has been edited by Borys: 16 March 2010 - 05:23

[greenockraver]

Borys, on 16 March 2010 - 05:22, said:

Ahoj!
I'm half surprised the 2012 affair hasn't been taken away from Poland and Ukraina yet. I've only read about the problems in Ukrainia, but can see the Polish mess with my own eyes. The EURO preparations are in shambles (not unexpectedly).
No places were "lost" by awarding the event to co-hosts, as the EURO was (needlessly) expanded to 24 teams.
Borys

Not until 2016 it hasnt

[Borys]

Ahoj!
Me Tarzan, Me wrong.
Borys

This post has been edited by Borys: 16 March 2010 - 13:04