Original Dub wrote:CityGer wrote:Original Dub wrote:I would have liked to have had a World Cup on so close to home, but looking at the coverage today and Andy Anson whinging that the voting process should be changed because those voting have too much power.
Had England's bid been successful, he wouldn't have opened his gob about the "process". Which does echo one or two things mentioned in this thread...
So you agree that a voting process that sees the nation with the best infrastructure, best commercial bid, best technical bid and the bid with the lowest risk rating get just two votes?
I'm not particulrly fussed that we didn't get it but what Anson said was bang on the money.
Not sure mate.
What I am sure about is that he wouldn't have said a fucking word about it if the decision had gone his way.
Oh come on Dub, that goes without saying. What I'm pointing out is that you can't question what he actually said. Look at the Auzzies, theirs was a far superior bid to that of Qatar but yet again, it was fore gone conlusion.
He was questioning the process and did so in a calm and articulate manner. I can't see any sort of logic that could disagree with what he said. The process is completely flawed.
I've not got an issue with FIFA sending the world cup around the world to new countries, none what so ever. When SA scored the first goal against Mexico it was one of the special moments in football for me. But please, don't let people spend millions of pounds compiling a bid only to laugh at it and award the event to nations who submitted bids that were way inferior.