this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
0 points (50.0% liked)
Football / Soccer / Calcio / Futebol / Fußball
142 readers
1 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It’s all so disgraceful. It was already essentially a lock, but this just confirms it a bit more. Indonesia isn’t in a position to host, but that’s not the point.
I don’t get how FIFA is going to allow this bid. FIFA had this rule to be able to host a bid: “hosts are required to have at least fourteen all-seater stadiums with a capacity of 40,000, with a minimum of seven being pre-existing.”
Saudi Arabia has 2 such pre-existing stadiums. They didn’t meet the requirement (the South American bid did). But of course FIFA suddenly decided to relax that rule for Saudi.
Imo, it would’ve been much more ethical for the South American countries to renovate a few existing stadiums that will continue to be used after the World Cup rather than allow/encourage Saudi to spend billions to build 10+ brand fucking new stadiums that will mostly sit empty after the cup.
Fuck FIFA and Saudi (and CONMEBOL for being fine with this shit).
Australia doesn't have meet those requirements either (most of the 40k+ stadiums are Ovals that don't meet the sightline requirements) so the rule relaxation benefits them too.
That is far more easy to relax on then Saudi Arabia having only 2/14 stadiums and needing to spend billions in 12 more stadiums for absolutely no fucking reason and will be used for nothing after the wc. Australia already has all the required grounds and the reason they are all ovals are because they are cricket grounds but they will be used before and long after the wc for cricket and afl so it's not wasting any money
I'm not arguing who has the better bid. The point is that loosening the requirements benefitted Australia too, not just SA.