The Red Report: New faces welcomed, the Evans conundrum & the World Cup

As per usual we decided to look at a non-United topic. Quite simply, the World Cup bids for 2018 and 2022 – good, bad, fixed, corrupt…?

Chudi | The Busby Way: As United fans it’s common to see the stance United >>> England but I implore you to find a person that isn’t disappointed that we didn’t get the World Cup. I was looking forward to getting to a couple games but Russia is a def no no for me.

Qatar is a strange choice as it was named as a high-risk venue but still won but I wonder how the weather etc will affect the tournament. Air-conditioned stadiums are being touted and whilst that is the obvious answer how will it affect player performance?

In terms of the actual decision, it is a disgrace. England were clearly the best option but factors that were beyond the power of the campaign caused England to lose. David Beckham is a football superstar, add to that the Prime Minister and the future king of England and that should have pushed our bid clear so to get just 2 vote is a shambles!

Doron | Stretford-End: I personally was surprised that England lost the 2018 bid – I was even more surprised by the fact England managed only two votes. I remember Euro 1996 very well and whilst the passion for the national team seems to have waned, staging a major tournament was great fun.

Maybe England’s bid had too much of a celebrity sprinkling of stardust over it. We as a country are obsessed by ‘big names’ and celeb culture – not something FIFA were necessarily looking for. We probably just over-estimated how good the bid actually was. I’ve no doubt the media and the Panorama programme didn’t help. At times we’re our own worst enemy. Why the English media would ever publish anything that would put the bid in jeopardy is crazy – of course the reality is, like celeb culture, shocks and scandals sell.

England’s bid itself was good. The passion for football in this country is without a doubt huge. The stadiums are great and many are set to be redeveloped. It’s a shame that the heroes of 1966 will be unlikely to ever see a World Cup back in this country.

As for the winners – well the common theme is money. Both Russia and Qatar have plenty of time to make sure they put on a good tournament. Blatter has always tried to take the World Cup to new frontiers which is admirable but there is always a risk associated with that. Certainly no one wants a repeat of the dull football witnessed in South Africa this summer just gone by – even if the tournament was coordinated very well. The main concern with Qatar in 2022 is of course the heat – football in 100 degree temperatures will not be good to watch. FIFA will have a lot to answer to should these tournaments fail to live up to expectations.

Yolkie | Stretford-End: Despite the obvious hints of untowards behaviour and corruption, I kind of agree with Alex Thomas at CNN who suggested the over the top reaction to not getting it might be a bitter reaction down to xenophobia.

Do I think Russia and Qatar are the right countries to get the tournaments? No; both are ridiculously overpriced destinations for the average fan and they have climates that take in both extremes; it won’t be conducive to good football, I’m sure. Lessons should have been learned from South Africa; not that the country or continent for that matter did a bad job but the tournament was pretty poor, smacked of making a political point.

So I agree with the notion that Blatter is trying to leave behind a legacy of breaking down barriers; not in itself a bad thing but that has overtaken the desire to see a good tournament on the pitch instead of a political breakthrough off it. I’m not saying this as a disgruntled England supporter as, being honest, it didn’t really bother me that we didn’t get it. But in terms of the best infrastructure and set up, logically, I felt the England bid was the best.

Siddarth |Bangalore to Old Trafford: A very funny decision for me, I don’t know what the people at FIFA were thinking but this is a disgraceful result. The three best bids for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups, England, Australia and U.S.A got a total of only 6 votes between them?!

Especially hard on England considering they had possibly the best bid possible, it’s sad that 22 people have the power to decide where the biggest sporting event of the world gets held, and they expect it to remain corruption free?! How could Russia win it if there was no politics involved? Only solution I think is to change the voting system, otherwise corruption will just be on the rise!

Kyle | Stretford-End: Being an American, I too was left disappointed by the chosen World Cup hosts. Last week I made it clear that I was club > country, and that is still very much the case, but I didn’t want the tournament here just for the sake of it. Another World Cup in the United States could have done incredible things for the sport. The 1994 World Cup served as a platform for soccer to grow in this country. As part of the bid the MLS was born and since then the game has steadily grown in popularity. With a good, strong fanbase already established in this country, having the 2022 World Cup would’ve been massive for the game. It would’ve escalated the popularity in this country to a whole new level, just as it did in 1994. I still questions FIFA’s decisions. From a technical standpoint England and the United States seemed the best choices, and instead Russia and Qatar were selected. It’s certainly disappointing, it’s a blow for the growth of the game in my country, but it’s time to move on. Maybe United will do their summer tour in the US for 2022…

TG | ManUtd24: Obviously I’m gutted – but I’m quite looking forward to watching Russia and Qatar host the competition. It’s always a good thing when a ‘new’ country does it, although England are long overdue holding one simply on the basis that, as Sepp Blatter says, they are the ‘motherland of football’. Franz Beckenbauer said that England can host the Cup ‘tomorrow’ if they like because they have everything; the fans, the stadia and anything else that falls in with infrastructure. Anyway, although Qatar and Russia have problems to address, I’m sure both will do a great job. Best of luck to both of them.

Alan | RedForceRising: Anybody interested in knowing more about FIFA should read the book, Foul!, by Andrew Jennings and then you won’t be surprised when the country with the best technical bid, as well as best commercial bid – England – doesn’t make it past the first round.

I’m sure Qatar will do an excellent job in terms of facilities and infrastructure, but hosting such a large event with a global audience in that region is just begging for trouble and security risks.

I’m less enthusiastic about Russia hosting the World Cup and find it difficult to accept that FIFA have awarded the World Cup to a country with notoriously racist football fans. Then again, FIFA “don’t do” racism.

Nick | United Youth: It was almost as if Blatter and co. woke up on Thursday, finally realised how untouchable they are and gave up any pretence of fair play or ethics. We all knew FIFA was corrupt as hell, but in picking Russia and Qatar, it’s almost as if they were saying ‘yep, we are corrupt as hell, what are you going to do about it?’ whilst laughing manically and racing to the nearest bank with briefcases and brown envelopes in tow.

I’m very much a club > country guy but loved the idea of having a World Cup on our doorstep. No disgrace that England didn’t win 2018 with some strong alternatives, but to only get two votes (one from our own guy, one from one of the Panorama 3 presumably trying to show it had no effect) given the obvious strength of all aspects of the bid is a farce and shows that applying in the first place was a complete waste of time, and that we’ll never host the event unless there’s massive change at the top of FIFA. The decision to award 2022 to Qatar meanwhile is breathtakingly obscene and has seriously damaged the credibility of the tournament. Might not be a popular view but I just hope the 2022 event goes tits up in a big way – it might be the only way things get changed.

What’s done is done, but even so…it’s still baffling to try and explain just why the English bid did so poorly.

————

Best of the blogs:

The Busby Way | Could Barcelona have done that to United? I doubt it…

Stretford-End | United Poised For Huge Player Investment

ManUtd24 | In Defence of Jonny Evans

RedForceRising | Video: Goals From Welbeck and Cleverley in Loan Watch Summary

Bangalore To Old Trafford | Silver Lining To Defeat

United Youth | Loan Round-up, November 27-30

————

That concludes another Red Report for the week. Hopefully this edition keeps you entertained until next Monday. We’re always open to hear from you so you can catch us on Twitter:

Follow The Busby Way

Follow Stretford-End

Follow Doron

Follow Kyle

Follow Yolkie

Follow Bangalore To Old Trafford

Follow ManUtd24

Follow RedForceRising

Follow United Youth

————

But don’t forget to check out our individual sites if you think we have missed something, as it is likely at least one of us will have covered it there:

The Busby Way

Stretford-End

Bangalore To Old Trafford

ManUtd24

RedForceRising

United Youth

One response to “The Red Report: New faces welcomed, the Evans conundrum & the World Cup”

  1. jonathan says:

    A friend of mine on Facebook said:
    “One World Cup will have too much drinking, and the other won’t have any at all”

    Overall, this is pretty laughable and don’t doubt for a second money and corruption has everything to do with this. Russia hosts the Winter Olympics in 2014 and will have to spend billions upon billions to stage it as there was literally ZERO infastructure when they were awarded it. Just look up “Sochi 2014 controveries” on google and have ample and amusing reading. Don’t Ukraine have the next Euro? I know it’s another country, but that’s kind’ve like awarding a Euro to Scotland and the next World Cup to England.

    Of course Qatar’s win makes Russia’s look perfectly normal. Could anyone please name one player from this country (at any level – hell, even a beer league)? How exactly is that legacy building for the game when the country is virtually a city-state? They will barely be able fill every stadium they build with the country’s entire population. It will just be an ostentatious display of wealth and complete waste of money, not to mention a slap in the face to mother nature by building grass fields and air-conditioned stadiums in the middle of the desert.

    Take note that every World Cup awarded after Germany requires significant infastructure building and cost (including Brazil). There’s obviously money to be made and government and Fifa officials alike have their hands in the pot. Probably the worst way to bid for the World Cup is stating that you’re ready to do it.