DISQUS

Alex Z · 10 months ago

"England invented the game, without which the World Cup would not even be possible."

Can't you use that argument for every World Cup year? Why not give the World Cup to England in '26, '30, '34, and so forth - they invented the game, and therefore have the right to host it!

kkfla737 · 10 months ago

No offense Sam because I've liked almost all of your writing on this site, but your piece just outlined the reason so many around the globe resent English football supporters.

The fact is England has very real problems as a potential host nation which is why the 2006 bid never really got off the ground. On Major League Soccer Talk, I detail why Australia or the US would be a better host nation.

Believe it or not, English fans have a horrible reputation around the globe. Perhaps it's not deserved: I believe we probably have more hooliganism between the US and Canada than England has today. BUT, the fact is that in an informal survey I've done, many foreign fans would rather not travel to parts of England north of London.

I don't personally agree with this sentiment. The United States is a much more dangerous country than the UK particularly at football matches. A fan was shot at a game I was at last year. Keep in mind people carry guns in the US and do not in Britain.
Atlante, the Mexican Champions of the 2007 Apertura can tell you how dangerous the US is after incidents at a Superliga match in Foxboro this past summer. But the perception is different than that.

Additionally, FIFA is into generating revenue. The amount of money they can make in the US in unequaled.

Check out my post at: http://www.majorleaguesoccertalk.com/us-bid-for...

Django · 10 months ago

I'd be interested to know if this "informal survey" involved anything more than asking a couple friends what they think of England. And you make it sound like every Tom and Harry in the US is walking around with a pistol...it's not exactly the Old West. All-encompassing statements like "people carry guns in the US and do not in Britain" are mostly just foolish and irresponsible. There are certainly dangerous parts of the US and its cities, but I'd think that's true anywhere. I'm not qualified to say anything about Britain, so I won't, but maybe I'll do an informal survey to find out. Nice plug for your site though.

kkfla737 · 10 months ago

We had a shooting at a game in the US last year: the US-Mexico game. When was the last time someone was shot in an english football ground?

People in the US carry guns, ESPECIALLY in rural areas. Sadly it's part of the American ethos of individualism, freedom, etc...........

I for one would personally feel safer walking the streets of London at midnight than of Topeka, KS in the middle of the day, but maybe that's my liberal bias. :)

From a sentimental standpoint England should be the front runner but it's never that simple. Many in the football world are envious of England or simply hate England. The reputation of hooliganism continues though it is somewhat unwarranted as I have said.

But the informal survey I took was mostly of Latins, and Africans. They would much prefer the world cup to NOT be in England. They aren't being fair, but if the process were fair England would have hosted another World Cup as far back as 1982 or 1990.

Sam Dalton · 10 months ago

Thanks for the comments guys.

kkfla737, I can understand your point about alot of people around the world having a negative opinion of English football fans, but really there are hardly ever problems these days at matches here.
And I acknowledge that FIFA would make more money from a World Cup in he USA, but they hosted it only 15 years ago, wheras England hasn't had it since 1966. For the country that invented football to be aloud to host less World Cups than the likes of Mexico and USA, two nations that are more interested in other sports, would be a disgrace in my opinion.