<p>“I can see Qatar as being a good choice only if they play the game inside an air conditioned stadium. If the game is played in the extreme heat, it will affect the game but more importantly it will create excuses as to why one team lost and another won.”</p>
<p>These are professionals. Most have played in warm weather in the past. South Africa is not particularly cold relative to Qatar so there should be no excuses. Australia is hot as well and the white Australians do not complain whatsoever. </p>
<p>African teams also routinely play in warm and cold weather year round and there are no complaints.</p>
<p>The dullards who are complaining about this either are ignorant about football or trying to come up with a reason for why England or the United States should have gotten the Cup. Although I think England has some merit, the US has none.</p>
<p>Keile, everyone is entitled to his or her own opinions, but not a set of facts. Since you seem quick to call people ignorant about the game of football, perhaps you ought to watch a few reruns of the WC in South Africa AND read about the Southern Hemisphere. The reruns will show you that coaches were discussing the impact of the cold because the games were played in the … winter? Does this ring a bell?</p>
<p>“Many areas of South Africa have shivered as the mercury has plummeted since the tournament started, with temperatures in high-altitude Bloemfontein due to dip well below freezing in the coming days.”</p>
<p>Do you expect freezing temperatures in Qatar? Well, some still expect hell to freeze over too! :)</p>
<p>Of course the players are professionals, and have played in all sorts of weather. Duh.
I’m thinking of the fans.</p>
<p>Keile, you really could have picked a better pro than Wayne Rooney, who is in the news more for his off the pitch antics than play on the field.</p>
<p>I’ll name some pros- CR, Xavi, Villa, Puyol, Iniesta, the list goes on. Portuguese and Spanish. I was pulling for that bid in 2018. Spain hosted in the early '80s, Portugal never.</p>
<p>The weather will not be a factor in Qatar as the stadia will be partially covered and well ventilated. Of course, making it cool will not be possible, but it will not feel like 100+ degrees.</p>
<p>gloworm, have you even been to Qatar? How do you know it will not be “fan friendly”? The country is building excellent tourist infrastucture (airport, highways, hotels, restaurants etc…) and should be able to host major events with ease. Is Qatar a place I would recommend for a cultural experience or a fun and exotic tropical escape? Definitely not. But for a sporting event, I do not see why Qatar is so objectionable. One thing is certain, there will not be too much Hooligan activity! ;)</p>
<p>Keile - the WC in the US set huge attendance records.</p>
<p>we saw how well Rooney, Lampard, and Gerrard did at the last WC. They were very impressive, with their ability to tie the US, a team of significantly inferior players.</p>
<p>ps US keeprs have been voted best keeper in the Premier League.</p>
<p>fwiw, the stadiums in Qatar will be air conditioned (but they will also be outside)</p>
<p>Soccerguy, an industrialized country of 300 million should break attendence records. Prior to the US, no country with a population greater than 150 million had hosted the World Cup. But that does not make the US a soccer nation. I was in the US the summer you hosted the World Cup. I saw dozens of matches in sports bars in Chicago and NYC. We are talking ESPN Zone and other very popular venues. Half the time, there were no lines to get in and a large percentage of spectators were foreigners like myself. Countries like Argentina, Brazil, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK are way more rabid when it comes to soccer. Hell, even France and Holland, which don’t care too much about soccer, are more passionate about the sport than the US.</p>
<p>At any rate, Germany and Mexico were an oddity and it will never happen again. No country will (or should) host the Word Cup twice within 50 years. Think of all the worthy countries and regions that have never hosted a World Cup. Australia, China, Egypt, Holland, India and Sweden, to say nothing of Eastern Europe. In a few years, once they have sorted out their security issues, countries like Nigeria and Algeria would also make a strong case.</p>
<p>Alexandre, I really value your opinions, but you keep mentioning facts that quite incorrect. For starters, Sweden hosted the 1958 WC. Then how do you come up with the fact that Holland does not care for soccer? The country that brought us Cruijff, Ajax, and should have won a couple of WC without blatant corruption. I know Holland has ice skating, but voetbal is king in the low countries. </p>
<p>As far as the US goes, again how do you measure participation? Ever walked around
Us cities on a Saturday and see hundreds of games, including 4 year old girls? I am afraid you are confusing the difficulty of sustaining leagues comparables to the NFL with overall success. Do you know how many soccer players there are in Dallas alone…registered players that is? Do you remember the women soccer WC in the US?</p>
<p>xiggi, I may have been incorrect about Sweden hosting the World Cup, but I was not incorrect about the other 5 countries or about Eastern Europe. </p>
<p>And I never said Holland was not a good soccer nation, I said that in Holland, soccer is not a religion as it is in Brazil, Germany, Italy or the UK. </p>
<p>Finally, soccer in the US is not an important sport xiggi. Sure, there are 20-30 million Americans who care about it, but there are 280-290 million who couldn’t care less about it. Baseball, Basketball, Football, Hockey, Golf and Tennis are all more significant sports than Soccer in the US.</p>
This is currently true with respect to money sports. But soccer has become a huge youth sport in the U.S. I think forward-looking people think that this will eventually translate into a lot of people who will be interested in pro soccer.</p>
<p>Hunt, it is perfectly legal to consume alcohol in Hotels in Qatar. I am not sure if the government will allow drinking in the stadiums though. I am fairly certain they will relax their rules and make it perfectly ok to drink in the stadiums during the World Cup.</p>
<p>This said, it is sad if one defines fan-friendliness by how easy it is to drink. I should hope people can have fun without the consumption of liquor.</p>
<p>And as long as I can remember, certainly since the mid 80s, Soccer has been a popular youth sport. That has not yet translated into becoming a major sport. Soccer is not culturally consistant with the US way of life. I honestly do not see it taking its place among America’s great sports.</p>
<p>Alexandre, you make an interesting comment about soccer in America, but what do you mean that soccer is not culturally consistent with the US way of life?</p>
Well, I was kidding, sort of. But honestly, most sports fans the world over drink. Maybe Qatar will relax its requirements–did it promise to do so to get the bid?
<p>Hunt, I am not aware of Qatar making any promises. As it stands, fans will be able to drink to their heart’s content in hotels, but not at the stadium. Whether or not Qatar makes an exception during the World Cup remains to be seen.</p>
<p>Razorsharp, Americans like a lot of offensive action. Soccer games averages 2 goals per game. Can you imagine if the average NFL game ended in a 7-7 draw or a 10-3 win? And television networks will not broadcast games that do not allow multiple pauses for advertisements. That is what I mean by culturally inconsistant. Maybe I worded it too harshly. Let us just say that I don’t think Soccer is ideal for the US market. I always found Soccer to be too “socialistic” for a country like the US.</p>