If you have spent any time reading what many soccer writers in the United States have been writing in the last couple of days, you would be led to believe that the U.S. is the clear choice to host the 2022 World Cup. Some have even suggested that if anyone other than the U.S. wins the right to host that it will be in large part due to corruption. Of course, it is very easy to make a corruption argument against FIFA right now considering that two members of the executive committee have been suspended for taking bribes, three others accused of doing so and countless others involved in less than honorable dealings, but to pin any U.S. loss on corruption would be a mistake.
USA Not Obvious World Cup 2022 Host Some Make It Out To Be
With the vote on the host of the 2022 World Cup just hours away, some have pegged the United States as the obvious choice to host, but they are far from it
Getty Images
Had someone not paid much attention to the two-year bidding process for the 2022 World Cup outside of press releases until the last few days, which appears to be the case with some, assuming that the U.S. is going to win is natural. From a pure numbers standpoint, there is no competitor to what the U.S. can offer.
Of the four other countries bidding to host the event, Australia, Japan, Qatar and South Korea, only Australia is offering more than one stadium that holds 76,000 people or more. That is the average stadium capacity of the 18 stadiums that the U.S. bid has put forward and after setting World Cup attendance records that still stand today, the bid promises to beat that record with 5,000,000 people attending the 2022 World Cup in the U.S. Television rights fees would skyrocket, as would sponsorship revenues and the infrastructure, hotels and training sites that the U.S. offers is far and beyond what the other bidders are offering, but that is only part of what goes into choosing a World Cup host.
Putting aside allegations of corruption and politicking that cannot be accounted for and tied to specific bids beyond rumors, stadiums and infrastructure are not the sole reason a World Cup host is picked and many would do well to remember that.
When the United States was awarded the 1994 World Cup the national team hadn’t qualified for a World Cup since 1950. In fact, there were rumblings that had the U.S. not qualified for the 1990 World Cup FIFA would have taken the 1994 hosting rights away and given them to another country. There was no professional outdoor soccer league in 1994 and even now some lament the lack of atmosphere at the stadiums during the tournament, despite the seats at all the large stadiums being packed.
FIFA took a chance when they awarded the U.S. the 1994 World Cup and it spurred a growth of the game in the U.S. that led to the creation of Major League Soccer and can be attributed for much of the sports’ success now. One thing that the U.S. bid committee has made clear is how successful the 1994 World Cup was in building up the sport in the U.S. and how hosting the 2022 World Cup would take the sport to whole new levels in the country, which is a fair argument. Isn’t it just as fair of an argument that other countries should have the opportunity to take the step that the U.S. took in 1994 before the U.S. gets another turn though?
Japan and South Korea’s bids have been dismissed by many because the two countries joint-hosted the 2002 World Cup, but how about Qatar? Well they have several problems facing there bid and many have attributed their continued competition in the bidding a farce, but that still leaves Australia.
Like the U.S., Australia has a burgeoning national soccer league. The A-League was created in 2005 and just months later the Australian national team defeated Uruguay in a penalty shootout in front of 82,000+ Aussies to secure their first spot in a World Cup since 1974. With the growth of the game in a country that some have called the most sports mad per capita in the world, taking the World Cup to Australia for the first time ever is an intriguing possibility.
Unlike some other bidders, there is no chance of the World Cup stadiums becoming white elephants following the event thanks to the growth of the sport in Australia and the prominence of rugby and Australian Rules Football that will keep stadiums in use for decades. Australia has also proven to be a fantastic host of mega-events after a stunning 2000 Olympics in Sydney and 2003 Rugby World Cup among other events. Cities like Melbourne and Sydney are recognized around the world and as a modern, first world country, there are few infrastructure or transportation problems.
With a strong bid, from stadiums to infrastructure, and the ability to spread the game to a new country, why shouldn’t Australia host the World Cup in 2022? Not only would Australia host the even for the first time, but it would be the first time that the Oceanic region got to host a World Cup, even if for football reasons Australia is considered part of Asia by FIFA. Fresh off of taking the event to Africa in 2010 and returning the event to South America for the first time in decades, the World Cup can go to Australia and Oceania for the first time in 2022, the same way that the U.S. got their first go around in 1994.
Furthermore, FIFA’s policy makes it so if a continent hosts a World Cup, that continent cannot host either of the next two tournaments. Some have questioned whether FIFA would award Australia, Qatar, Japan or South Korea the 2022 tournament and eliminate China, a potential big money earner, from contention to host in 2026 and 2030. However, despite being considered a member of Asia by FIFA, it would not be hard to justify that Australia should be considered an Oceanic host in the event that they win the right to host the 2022 World Cup, keeping the door open for China in 2026 and 2030.
The United States has a very strong bid for the 2022 World Cup. The final presentation emphasized the numbers that no other bid can match and with the star power of Morgan Freeman and former President Bill Clinton, it was hard not to be impressed by what the U.S. can offer. If the U.S. does win the right to host the event, those who supported other bids will be upset that their preferred choice did not win, but few will argue that the U.S. is an undeserving host. That said, are they the most deserving?
Those who have claimed that U.S. is the clear-cut best host for the 2022 World Cup are proving to be rather ignorant to the two-year bidding process and the bids of all the countries that co well beyond simple numbers. South Korea, Japan Qatar, Australia and the U.S. have all put together their bids and even if you look at the bid from a technical standpoint, Australia is still hanging around with the U.S. as a competent host without the recent hosting fatigue that could plague the U.S. While the U.S. does have a strong bid, they are hardly the only bid and when the 22 FIFA executive committee members sequester themselves inside FIFA House to vote on who will in fact host the 2022 World Cup, people would do well to take into account the other bids, specifically Australia’s, that make the U.S. anything but an obvious choice.
See More:
