Cybereagles

The Undisputed Number One Home for All Super Eagles Fans
It is currently Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:59 am

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 915
Enugu II wrote:
Analyzer,

I actually do not think they are crappy. Congo DR and USA are not crappy, for instance.

BTW, we heard the watering down when the WC moved from 16 to 24, we heard it when it moved from 24 to 32, we are hearing it again. Guess what, each time it was even better. Let me tell you something, Analyzer, football is far more balanced than when the WC was 16 and we had the likes of Zaire and Haiti. The World Cup is 32, do you think we still have the depth of difference we saw in 1974 with 16 teams? What you forget is that the game has improved and the gap between the nations have narrowed a lot. Factor that in when you think of 48 teams.


analyzer wrote:
F360 wrote:
Enugu II wrote:
Cito wrote:
Synopsis wrote:
A 48 team world cup will be terrible.

For the DNQers maybe but to the countries in it , nah!

On a serious note, it is just the same with about 8 plus crappy games added to the current number.



Cito,

There will not be crappy games. Think about this -- if we had 48 team WC this year you may have the following participating:

Italy
Ghana
Chile
USA
Holland
I/Coast
Paraguay
Wales
Austria
N/Ireland
Ukraine
Congo DR
Greece
Cameroon
Jamaica
Burkina Faso

*Note, I have not used actual berths designed for qualification from Confederations. This is just to note countries capable of playing now in the World Cup and there are more.


Capability doesn't mean "Uncrappy" games.

What actual fan of Greece, Jamaica, N.Ireland, Holland or Italy seriously think their team "deserved" to be at the World Cup? From their national team manager to the play of their team during qualifying, I think the fans of those teams wouldn't expect decent play from their teams. Now maybe if the managers of those teams were sacked after qualifying (not very likely) then they'd expect that.


I think EII has not factored in how crappy most of those teams he listed currently are at present time.

Most of those teams listed by EII are currently crap hence why they could not make it to Russia. If Russia WC had 48 teams, most of those teams listed will be there "undeservedly" .. USA could not beat T&T to qualify. Italy lost out to Sweeden. Holland did not even finish 2nd in their group (I stand corrected). Greece, Ukraine, Austria, Wales, NI, Congo DR - average teams at best. Jamaica? that is having a laugh.

Anything can happen by 2026 but I strongly doubt you will even have > 25 of the 48 teams as credible competitions.
32 is the perfect number. Very symmetrical. Now there will be 16 groups of 3. Penalties to decide tied group matches. Don’t you understand how insane that will be?
.


Last edited by Synopsis on Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 4:56 am
Posts: 6848
Location: TX
Enugu II wrote:
Odas wrote:
Enugu II wrote:
How each country voted on Fifa.com website.

Chief Enugu II, can you please post the link of how the countries voted? Using my handset, I am not able to get the information. I - mainly - want to see how African nations voted. To be honest, I hope the East, Central and West African nations voted against Morocco



I am yet to locate the link announced for FIFA.com but a summary story is below ant this link https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/06/08/sports/worldcup/fifa-vote-world-cup-2026-host.html?recp=3 points to how each country actually voted. ZIMBABWE voted for United Bid in a big surprise.

Quote:
How geopolitics influenced the 2026 World Cup vote
Martin Rogers, USA TODAY Published 9:43 a.m. ET June 13, 2018 | Updated 9:59 a.m. ET June 13, 2018
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/soccer/2018/06/13/2026-world-cup-politics-usa-russia/697365002/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=usatoday-newstopstories

MOSCOW — FIFA’s new electronic voting system meant that the decision to award the United States, Mexico and Canada the right to host the 2026 World Cup was swift and speedy.

Within seconds the result was conveyed and, given that present-day FIFA is keen to show how transparent it is, the decisions of each member nation was made public minutes later.

While the United Bid easily carried the day, seeing off Morocco 134-65 with one vote for neither bid, the minutiae of which countries voted for whom provided a fascinating look at how geopolitics can infiltrate soccer – or not.

Here are some of the highlights:

– Iran: The only country that took the “none of the bids” option, presumably on the basis that it does not have diplomatic ties with either the U.S. or Morocco and wouldn’t been keen to see either host.

– North Korea: Rather disappointingly for those seeking a mischievous storyline in the wake of Trump and Kim Jong-Un's meeting, voted for Morocco. Did Trump forget to ask for that in negotiations at the Singapore summit?

– Cuba: Abstained from voting altogether

– Iraq, Afghanistan: Backed the United Bid.

– Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain: The United States' major Persian Gulf allies voted for the United bid.


– Qatar: The 2022 World Cup host (beating out the United States in 2010) and current diplomatic adversary of its Gulf neighbors, voted for Morocco.

– Russia: Backed the United Bid. Who knows if Vladimir Putin gave the order, but few countries have closer ties between government and soccer federation than Russia.

– China and Chinese Taipei: Both went for Morocco.

– France: One of a handful of European countries to pick Morocco, though that likely had more to do with close historic ties than Emmanuel Macron’s frustration with Trump. The Netherlands, Italy and Belgium also voted for Morocco.

– Seven African nations: Turned the vote into a total blowout by siding with the USA, Canada and Mexico. Any viable path to a Morocco win needed to be centered around sweeping the African bloc.

– Venezuela: Regional voting is common and CONMEBOL, the South American federation, was mostly behind the United campaign. Thus, Venezuela, one of the countries on Trump's travel ban list, voted for the American-backed campaign.


I believe the word is that Russia originally backed Morocco's bid but changed their mind recently. I wonder what changed...or who encouraged the change. :???: :idea:

_________________
....................................................

--------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 6:16 pm
Posts: 13421
Bigpokey24 wrote:
Benedict Iroha wrote:
It's an American World Cup. Dallas will definitely get some games.

i was in Dallas last weekend, yall have the worst drivers in the entire US

You obviously haven’t seen Nevada drivers...

_________________
"Learn from others whom have walked the path before you, but be smart enough to know when to cut your own trail."

You either die as a good poster, or live long enough to become the troll.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 2:39 am
Posts: 16675
Location: Super Eagles Homeland
Synopsis,

In terms of symmetry 32 is better than 48 but that would not rank high on a rationale to keep the WC at 32 if you ask me. We did not have symmetry either when it was 24. For me, the biggest argument that I think you can have for 32 is that at 48 the chances of some nations hosting the stuff becomes impaired. The other big argument of time and health of players was alreadu solved by re-working the schedule where the 48-team tournament only adds two games for the final 4 teams and a week for the tournament. But symmetry and watering down just do not seem compelling arguments for me based on past evidence on those two issues.

Synopsis wrote:
Enugu II wrote:
Analyzer,

I actually do not think they are crappy. Congo DR and USA are not crappy, for instance.

BTW, we heard the watering down when the WC moved from 16 to 24, we heard it when it moved from 24 to 32, we are hearing it again. Guess what, each time it was even better. Let me tell you something, Analyzer, football is far more balanced than when the WC was 16 and we had the likes of Zaire and Haiti. The World Cup is 32, do you think we still have the depth of difference we saw in 1974 with 16 teams? What you forget is that the game has improved and the gap between the nations have narrowed a lot. Factor that in when you think of 48 teams.


analyzer wrote:
F360 wrote:
Enugu II wrote:
Cito wrote:
Synopsis wrote:
A 48 team world cup will be terrible.

For the DNQers maybe but to the countries in it , nah!

On a serious note, it is just the same with about 8 plus crappy games added to the current number.



Cito,

There will not be crappy games. Think about this -- if we had 48 team WC this year you may have the following participating:

Italy
Ghana
Chile
USA
Holland
I/Coast
Paraguay
Wales
Austria
N/Ireland
Ukraine
Congo DR
Greece
Cameroon
Jamaica
Burkina Faso

*Note, I have not used actual berths designed for qualification from Confederations. This is just to note countries capable of playing now in the World Cup and there are more.


Capability doesn't mean "Uncrappy" games.

What actual fan of Greece, Jamaica, N.Ireland, Holland or Italy seriously think their team "deserved" to be at the World Cup? From their national team manager to the play of their team during qualifying, I think the fans of those teams wouldn't expect decent play from their teams. Now maybe if the managers of those teams were sacked after qualifying (not very likely) then they'd expect that.


I think EII has not factored in how crappy most of those teams he listed currently are at present time.

Most of those teams listed by EII are currently crap hence why they could not make it to Russia. If Russia WC had 48 teams, most of those teams listed will be there "undeservedly" .. USA could not beat T&T to qualify. Italy lost out to Sweeden. Holland did not even finish 2nd in their group (I stand corrected). Greece, Ukraine, Austria, Wales, NI, Congo DR - average teams at best. Jamaica? that is having a laugh.

Anything can happen by 2026 but I strongly doubt you will even have > 25 of the 48 teams as credible competitions.
32 is the perfect number. Very symmetrical. Now there will be 16 groups of 3. Don’t you understand how insane that will be.

_________________
The difficulties of statistical thinking describes a puzzling limitation of our mind: our excessive confidence in what we believe we know, and our apparent inability to acknowledge the full extent of our ignorance and the uncertainty of the world we live in. We are prone to overestimate how much we understand about the world and to underestimate the role of chance in events -- Daniel Kahneman (2011), Winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics
Winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics


Last edited by Enugu II on Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:19 am
Posts: 24464
Benedict Iroha wrote:
Minneapolis, Atlanta, Seattle, Dallas, Los Angeles and their new stadium...maybe Las Vegas..New York will host the final. Azteca stadium will host a semi final.


Who said New York will host the final? Many cities are biding for the finals as I type.

This morning, Dallas has started preparation for 2026 and are biding to host multiple games which will include Semis or Final. But New York and San Francisco have a very good chance of hosting the finals but I tell ya...Jerry World is the best stadium in the world, so, Dallas should get it.

_________________
DAK TO THE FUTURE...HOT BOYZ...DEM BOYZ...COWBOYZ!!

To be scientifically literate is to empower yourself to know when someone else is full of boolsheet!

Scientifically speaking: ANC Trophies = 3/4 when Br^33 = 0.
***Breda = Br****


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:19 am
Posts: 24464
joao wrote:
ohenhen1 wrote:
Morocco messed up with their presentation.

Morocco's presentation was not the problem.
They were contesting against three nations bidding from a powerful football federation - CONCACAF.
Case closed!!!


But opaks yarners on this board will not agree with you on this one. CONCACAF is just one tough region mehn.

_________________
DAK TO THE FUTURE...HOT BOYZ...DEM BOYZ...COWBOYZ!!

To be scientifically literate is to empower yourself to know when someone else is full of boolsheet!

Scientifically speaking: ANC Trophies = 3/4 when Br^33 = 0.
***Breda = Br****


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 4:56 am
Posts: 6848
Location: TX
Image

The United Bid’s final Candidate Host Cities are:

Canada:

Edmonton
Montréal
Toronto

Mexico:

Guadalajara
Mexico City
Monterrey

United States:

Atlanta
Baltimore
Boston
Cincinnati
Dallas
Denver
Houston
Kansas City
Los Angeles




Miami
Nashville
New York/New Jersey
Orlando
Philadelphia
San Francisco Bay Area
Seattle

_________________
....................................................

--------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 915
Since draws might be decided by penalties

There could be a scenario where the winner of a group gets Brazil in the next round while 2nd place gets Iran. The top two teams in the group would purposely miss penalty kicks to avoid Brazil. Terrible decision by FIFA.


Last edited by Synopsis on Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 4:53 am
Posts: 3916
^^ Would have replaced Nashville with Minneapolis...U.S bank is a really dope stadia.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 4:56 am
Posts: 6848
Location: TX
joao wrote:
ohenhen1 wrote:
Morocco messed up with their presentation.

Morocco's presentation was not the problem.
They were contesting against three nations bidding from a powerful football federation - CONCACAF.
Case closed!!!



Add in the fact that they played two nations against each other.

Argentina/Uruguay want to bid for 2030. USA got their support and CONMEBOL overall on this so they expect US support for their 2030 bid.

England want to bid for 2030. USA got their support and they expect the USA to support their 2030 bid.


Then factor in what the new USSF prez has done and focused on since he won the job. He focused on the WC bid over anything else. New coach for the national team was put on the backburner until after the WC. All Cordeiro did was travel, travel, travel. He has been out of office almost every day since he won the job. He and the Canada FA prez and Mexico FA prez traveled a lot. They went to visit FA presidents in almost every country in South America, Europe and Asia. They put in a lot of work to secure votes and I'm not sure if the Moroccan FA prez was putting in similar work...even in Africa where we know the sub-saharan countries weren't all happy with Morocco for football and non football reasons.

_________________
....................................................

--------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 4:56 am
Posts: 6848
Location: TX
Cito wrote:
Bigpokey24 wrote:
Benedict Iroha wrote:
It's an American World Cup. Dallas will definitely get some games.

i was in Dallas last weekend, yall have the worst drivers in the entire US

You obviously haven’t seen Nevada drivers...



He sounds like someone that hasn't been around the USA if he thinks Dallas drivers are the worst.

Miami residents and drivers would laugh like crazy at the thought that Dallas drivers are the worst. Not even close and I've lived in both to experience the drivers.

_________________
....................................................

--------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 4:53 am
Posts: 3916
kolinzo wrote:
Benedict Iroha wrote:
Minneapolis, Atlanta, Seattle, Dallas, Los Angeles and their new stadium...maybe Las Vegas..New York will host the final. Azteca stadium will host a semi final.


Who said New York will host the final? Many cities are biding for the finals as I type.

This morning, Dallas has started preparation for 2026 and are biding to host multiple games which will include Semis or Final. But New York and San Francisco have a very good chance of hosting the finals but I tell ya...Jerry World is the best stadium in the world, so, Dallas should get it.


It has been concluded that Giants stadium in New York will host the final.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 4:56 am
Posts: 6848
Location: TX
kolinzo wrote:
Benedict Iroha wrote:
Minneapolis, Atlanta, Seattle, Dallas, Los Angeles and their new stadium...maybe Las Vegas..New York will host the final. Azteca stadium will host a semi final.


Who said New York will host the final? Many cities are biding for the finals as I type.

This morning, Dallas has started preparation for 2026 and are biding to host multiple games which will include Semis or Final. But New York and San Francisco have a very good chance of hosting the finals but I tell ya...Jerry World is the best stadium in the world, so, Dallas should get it.


I have no idea where you got whatever you wrote but it's absolutely incorrect information.
Dallas isn't preparing to host the Final.
It's been known for a while that Metlife in New York will get the final. It's pretty much a formality.

It's not about who should get it but rather who will get it. It was agreed on during the bidding process as the USSF evaluated city and stadium hosting bids.

_________________
....................................................

--------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 4:53 am
Posts: 3916
Bigpokey24 wrote:
Benedict Iroha wrote:
It's an American World Cup. Dallas will definitely get some games.

i was in Dallas last weekend, yall have the worst drivers in the entire US

:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:30 am
Posts: 4350
analyzer wrote:
osita wrote:
Enugu II wrote:
USA/Canada/Mexico just won the BID!!!! Congratulations



UNITED BID = 134 votes
MOROCCO BID = 65 votes
NONE BID = 1
INELIGIBLE = 7


Shame and African countries voted for the US.

Sentiments aside, I think a 48 team world cup with 80 games would have been too much for Morocco. I don't think they have or would have the infrastructures to meet the demands of such a large world cup. They also missed their opportunity when it decided to pull out of hosting ANC. That would have been a good platform to showcase its hosting capabilities.

Morocco actually hosted 2018 CHAN.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 12:25 am
Posts: 33064
Location: ßos✞on ✈️ Mo✞own ✈️ Lægos
Odas wrote:
Cito wrote:
Otitokoro wrote:
Yuck!
Can’t believe the world katowed to Trump’s threats...
Enugu II wrote:
USA/Canada/Mexico just won the BID!!!! Congratulations

I believe they have a way better package. A vote for Morocco over the United bid would have been a bit sentimental. In the end this was the right choice.

Sometimes you just ignore a baby’s tantrum and do the right thing.

:agree: :agree: :agree:

Trump will claim credit though.

_________________
O-Qua Tangin Wann! "It's all laughs till he walks into an empty room with plastic on the floor." - Goodfellas

© ɹ ǝ ʇ s ɯ é ʎ ǝ ɥ ʇ
" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 2:39 am
Posts: 16675
Location: Super Eagles Homeland
theYemster wrote:
Odas wrote:
Cito wrote:
Otitokoro wrote:
Yuck!
Can’t believe the world katowed to Trump’s threats...
Enugu II wrote:
USA/Canada/Mexico just won the BID!!!! Congratulations

I believe they have a way better package. A vote for Morocco over the United bid would have been a bit sentimental. In the end this was the right choice.

Sometimes you just ignore a baby’s tantrum and do the right thing.

:agree: :agree: :agree:

Trump will claim credit though.



Correct. :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:

_________________
The difficulties of statistical thinking describes a puzzling limitation of our mind: our excessive confidence in what we believe we know, and our apparent inability to acknowledge the full extent of our ignorance and the uncertainty of the world we live in. We are prone to overestimate how much we understand about the world and to underestimate the role of chance in events -- Daniel Kahneman (2011), Winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics
Winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 9:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 6:16 pm
Posts: 13421
Enugu II wrote:
theYemster wrote:
Odas wrote:
Cito wrote:
Otitokoro wrote:
Yuck!
Can’t believe the world katowed to Trump’s threats...
Enugu II wrote:
USA/Canada/Mexico just won the BID!!!! Congratulations

I believe they have a way better package. A vote for Morocco over the United bid would have been a bit sentimental. In the end this was the right choice.

Sometimes you just ignore a baby’s tantrum and do the right thing.

:agree: :agree: :agree:

Trump will claim credit though.



Correct. :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:

Wait until a team takes a knee and he will ask FIFA to take it back. We don’t want anymore.

_________________
"Learn from others whom have walked the path before you, but be smart enough to know when to cut your own trail."

You either die as a good poster, or live long enough to become the troll.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], lacidi and 30 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group