Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Only two votes!!



Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
31,274
HKFC, I think you've got it. In which case what a cunning plan - a plan more cunning than a fox that used to be Professor Of Cunning at Oxford University.
 






Albion Rob

New member
£15 million



Tactical voting. It means that two who actually wanted Russia or Spain, voted instead for Holland in round 1, to see a potential threat in England eliminated early. Then, once we were out of the running, they switched their vote. That's how it works.

On that point, though, Russia picked up four more votes after the first round - presumably two of those who had voted for Holland/Belgium and the two who had voted for England. I know that there may be a number of nuances and actually the seven who voted for Spain/Portugal the first time around may not be the same as those who voted for them the second time around but if it is the case that England's vote went to Russia then that's bitterly disappointing and suggests Geoff Thompson is a long way out of touch - Spain and Portugal (financial concerns aside) would have provided and infinitely better World Cup than Russia IMHO.
 


Freddo

Well-known member
May 14, 2006
736
Clapham
England's vote went to Russia then that's bitterly disappointing and suggests Geoff Thompson is a long way out of touch - Spain and Portugal (financial concerns aside) would have provided and infinitely better World Cup than Russia IMHO.


I disagree. Firstly England and Spain/Portugal's bids were relatively similar in that both had all the infrastructure in place. I'm happier to lose to Russia who made a big thing about how it will be a catalyst for improvements in their infrastructure.

Also Spain hosted it in 1982, 16 years more recently than us. Russia have never had it, and if FIFA wanted to take football to all areas of the world then Russia was a better choice than Spain.
 


Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
31,274
If Belgium/Netherlands had 2 votes in Round 2 then that implies there were actually 2 voters all along that wanted them to host. If the other 2 who voted tactically in Round 1 to get England eliminated had voted Russia in the first place that would have put us and Belgium/Netherlands both on 2 votes. So, 2 questions:

1. What would have happened in the event of a tie for last place in Eound 1?
2. Is tactical voting against the rules?

In the case of Question 2 it's supposed to be a secret ballot, except that it can't be secret if it's tactical.
 




Questions

Habitual User
Oct 18, 2006
25,515
Worthing
One point which has been overlooked is that the Russian whores which will be made available to FIFA officials are some of the best around.
The availability of cocaine is quite good as well.

Its our fault if we failed to mention any of these perks in our bid.
 




SurreySeagulls

Well-known member
Jul 9, 2003
2,465
Guildford
Quite simply FIFA is not transparant and depending on whos hand you shake a brown paper bag at gets your vote. FIFA dislike England with passion and Mr Warner is by all accounts not quite an honest man. Although I have no proof of that of course. Just let the hacks at them now. For what it is worth I am pleased if we didn't get it then Russia would get it as it is a fabulous country and it will be an excellent World Cup. Just a pity members of FIFA can't vote for the best bid.
 




Albion Rob

New member
I disagree. Firstly England and Spain/Portugal's bids were relatively similar in that both had all the infrastructure in place. I'm happier to lose to Russia who made a big thing about how it will be a catalyst for improvements in their infrastructure.

Also Spain hosted it in 1982, 16 years more recently than us. Russia have never had it, and if FIFA wanted to take football to all areas of the world then Russia was a better choice than Spain.

I guess it's how you see things.

I would have preferred Spain/Portugal because of the relatively minor time difference, the great stadia (Bernabau, Camp Nou, Velencia's ground, the two in Lisbon) and the fact most cities in the two countries are relatively easy to access.

I realise that is quite a narrow, pretty selfish, view, I don't think that having good stadiums and good infrastructure should necessarily preclude a country from holding the World Cup, as it seems to be doing here.

I'm also not convinced about 'taking football into all areas'. What does that really mean? I think the Russians are pretty engaged on the international football circuit and they hosted the CL final a couple of years ago. It's not as if the Russians don't have a sound footballing history themselves. They seem to be comfortable with their 'level' of football enjoyment - not as big as ice hockey, basketball and ballet/gymnastics (seriously) - and that's fine, in the same way as the Americans were happy with their level of engagement in 1994.

Oh well, what's done is done - as a country we seriously need to start turning our attention towards nurturing kids so that we actually have a chance of winning the bloody thing, wherever it's held.
 








Brovion

In my defence, I was left unsupervised.
NSC Patron
Jul 6, 2003
19,879
We've actually gone BACKWARDS. When we were bidding for the 2006 World Cup (the one where Man U pulled out of the FA Cup to play in that World thingy and everybody said the FA were going back on a Gentlemen's agreement with Germany) we actually got FIVE votes in the first round and survived to round 2.
 


armchairclubber

Well-known member
Aug 8, 2010
1,658
Bexhill
And I guess one was our own!

Lord Seb Coe was being quoted all day as saying of our chances it "smells good". What was he smelling, Gruyere and Rosti ?!

Think our reps may have been a little too honest for the likes of FIFA. It doesn't taste so good now.
 


Barry Izbak

U.T.A.
Dec 7, 2005
7,423
Lancing By Sea




ROSM

Well-known member
Dec 26, 2005
6,777
Just far enough away from LDC
Well the two votes were us and likely turkey. The talk is that warner offered the 3 concacaf votes if we could get to 6 in the first round. That needed huyatu to vote for us and following panorama he changed his mind. Apparently he was in tears at the fifa exec meeting on tuesday and has instructed solicitors against the bbc. If he wins then that shows the margin between first round removal and progressing and trying to get second option votes.

A number of other votes I'm sure were tactical to ensure we went out early so dutch/belgians got more votes than were needed.
 


16bha

New member
Sep 6, 2010
2,806
East Stand Upper & Worthing
And apparently Septic Bladder also reminded the exec about the corruption claims just before the vote. If that's not a clear steer then I don't know what is. I don't mind Russia an Qatar winning, as long as someone drives the little shit out of Zurich on his arse!
 


seggers

New member
Nov 10, 2009
472
Worthing
Russia's whole bid about improving them as a country is a joke, there basically saying once your developed to actually be capable to hold a world cup you should not be allowed to. Plus why is some French **** in charge of football?
 






drew

Drew
NSC Patron
Oct 3, 2006
23,631
Burgess Hill
Only 2 votes leads me to believe our bid wasn't as great as we were told and that the bid team were completely out of touch with reality.

Your statement leads me to believe you are not in touch with reality. We all know the system is corrupt but I am sure that we finished where we did because :-

a) We didn't try to bribe anyone.
b) Our media sucks.
c) Members of the committee who had indicated their intention to vote for us were persuaded otherwise by fair means or (probably) foul.

There is no way in an honest vote that we would have picked up only one vote! It would be interesting to see who that was and who the likes of Beckenbaur and Platini voted for (although you would put your mortgage on the fact that in a straight race between England and the Gaza Strip Platini would vote for the later).
 


Oct 25, 2003
23,964
Russia's whole bid about improving them as a country is a joke, there basically saying once your developed to actually be capable to hold a world cup you should not be allowed to. Plus why is some French **** in charge of football?

exactly....why not just give it to f***ing burkina faso?
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here