The Case Against The US World Cup Bid, The Case For...Part II

....Qatar!

Hello to all,

(Quick note, this was written prior to the Arab Spring and the widespread unrest in the region. You can read Part I here, if you missed it.)

I would love to see the 2018 World Cup go to England. They have everything needed to make it an enjoyable and memorable World Cup. All of the stadiums are located near rail service and close to city centers. And, no two bidding cities are more than 250 miles apart. They also boast a great football culture and passionate fans. You're probably thinking that the choice of England is nothing to get worked up about. My choice for 2022 may surprise you though. I'm hoping it goes to Qatar. You're probably thinking, "Where the hell is Qatar?" and "Why would I want to go there?"
I admit that it may be a long odds for the Qatari bid. But, if the votes go their way, it promises to be a totally re-imagined World Cup, unlike one we have seen before. First the stadiums, they possess state-of-the-art technology simply not yet available in the U.S.. Please take a look at the first video, and you truly will be blown away. You probably noticed a few terms that were not fully explained. The "modular upper-tier seating" is truly revolutionary. Since, the stadiums will not need to host large World Cup-like crowds after the tourney, this modular seating allows for the upper tier to be taken apart. The parts will then be donated to developing nations.

The weather is also a big issue in Qatar, with temps getting well into the triple digits in the summer months. These stadiums also employ cooling technology that will allow that temperature in the stadium to drop by up to 70 degrees (Fahrenheit), all with creative uses of natural air flows. This technology will be given to other nations with hot climates, so they will be able to host large events like this. For those of us worried about the environment, these stadiums are carbon neutral as well. They use solar panels for power during the games. When the games are not going on, the energy captured is then moved to the local power grid.

Transportation should not be a problem either. The bid committee has contracted Deutsche Bahn, to handle their rail system. These are the same folks that run Germany's system, so it should not be a problem. If you wanted to take a different method of transport to the game, you have the option to take a water taxi, along the Arabian Gulf to the game (shown in the stadium video). Kinda beats that bus ride to the outskirts of Washington D.C., Boston, Phoenix, or to the swamps of New Jersey. Yup, U.S. soccer calls the bid city "New York/ New Jersey", but you'll be going out to the swamps of North Jersey for the game.

The biggest obstacle for the Qatari bid is the stadium capacity and how much of a hit FIFA is willing to take on tickets sold. Out of the 5 stadiums completed, 1 holds about 70,000 people, the other 4 are in the 40-45,000 range. The U.S. is light years ahead in this regard. All of the stadiums in the U.S. bid fall between in 80-95,000 in maximum capacity. The World Cup hosted by the U.S remains the highest in overall attendance, because of the sheer size of the arenas. The wildcard is Sepp Blatter (FIFA president), he pushed to get a World Cup to the African continent and has backed the idea of a one in the Middle East. The decision day is 176 days away, we shall see.

I looked again at the travel a Brazil fan have had to do for the 1994 World Cup. Remember, Brazil hopped from Stanford, to Detroit, back to Stanford, onto Dallas, and back to Pasadena for the final. I nerdedout last night and checked just how many miles (approximately) a Brazil fan and the team would have traveled. A few assumptions: I assumed the fan would have traveled to the States from SaoPaulo (Brazil's largest city). The closest airports to two of the game sites are Los Angeles (for the Pasadena game) and San Francisco (for the games at Stanford). And, I had to assume direct flights.
I hope you're sitting down, the miles traveled kinda shocked me:

Sao Paulo to San Francisco: 6500 miles
San Francisco to Detroit: 2050 miles
Detroit to San Francisco: 2050 miles
San Francisco to Dallas: 1750 miles
Dallas to Los Angeles: 1250 miles
Los Angeles back home to SaoPaulo: 6150 miles

Miles traveled: 19750 in a month, yikes! If you traveled 24,901 miles, you could have gone completely around the equator of the Earth. So, you can follow Brazil at a U.S. hosted World Cup or travel literally around the world, your choice.
And, a couple of other notes on Qatar:

- In regards to Qatar size, all of the stadiums will be less than an hour from each other. Allowing fans to see more than one game in a day. And, the country of Qatar is only 4400 sq miles in size. If you remember my mini-rant on Houston, you know that Houston covers 600 sq miles by itself. So, the country is just 7 times as large as the city of Houston.

- The time difference between Eastern Standard Time and Qatar is only 7 hours. I initially thought it was much more than that, figuring it was much further to the East. To put that into some kind of context, there is a 6 hour time difference between us and most points in Western Europe and the S. African towns hosting this year's matches. So, the kickoff times will be just one hour earlier than past tournaments: Euro 2008 (hosted by Austria/Switzerland), World Cup '06 (Germany) as well as this year's Cup. Isn't it better to skip out of work for these games, than to watch them after a long day?
So, there's the case for Qatar. A World Cup would certainly go off without a hitch here in the States and it would be fine, but what else would it be? A World Cup in Qatar would give us new technology to emulate, help grow football in developing nations through their donations, and shine a light on a country/culture that most know little about.

My brother did remind me of one thing, that Qatar is an Islamic nation (can't believe I forgot that angle). After doing some research, I found a number of different countries and schools with travel advisories. All of these mentioned the same thing, visitors should be sensitive to Islamic culture and customs. This includes, of course, how you dress. So, a tournament in Qatar will not give us scenes like this or this. But, I say its a small price to pay, for a game changing World Cup. These women will be back in 2026. Hope you enjoyed the post, had some laughs, and learned some stuff along the way.

See you next time,

James

The Case Against The US World Cup Bid, The Case For...

Hello again,

Thanks so much for coming back for this 2nd post. I'm glad I didn't scare anyone away with the thought of Anti-American rhetoric. That being said, I do want to explain one thing I said at the end of the inaugural post. I said that I would "de-sell" you on the idea of the United States landing the World Cup. We all know that the U.S. would do a wonderful job hosting and most of the infrastructure needed to effectively host a World Cup already exists (I'll explain in a bit).

For me, there are a few ingredients essential to properly hosting a World Cup. And, I mean for all parties (fans, media and players). First off, it should be hosted in a smaller country, in relation to the U.S. but with many large cities. Also, I think the hosting cities should all be accessible from each another, via train. It is also ideal to have the stadiums pretty close to the city centers. Germany 2006 was a great success in this regard. If you were a fan, you did not have to board a plane to follow your country. If you did happen to board a plane, your flight would not have been more than 1-1.5 hours. The stadiums were also walking distance from rail lines. The USA bid cities leave much to be desired. You'll notice that Houston is on the list. And, if you have visited there (sadly I have), you know its equal to the 5th level of hell . Its a sprawling city, impossible to navigate and is spread across a whopping 600 square miles. To top it off, there is only a light rail service to get you to the proposed stadium. Many of the other cities don't have an underground rail network and some of the stadiums are far from the center of town. They include Boston/ Foxborough (stadium is 28 miles from town) and Washington, DC. (stadium is in Landover, Md, 12 miles away in a different state!!). Fed Ex Field has only been around since 1997, and it sucks so bad they already want a new one. I've actually been there for an NFL Throwball game, and it is pretty horrible. My experience here could be a separate post in and of itself. Some cities are places you want to be: New York/ NJ, Miami, San Diego, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia. There are some others you can do without: Baltimore, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Tampa Bay. If you're lucky, you'll make it to one World Cup in your life. Could you imagine if your country played their games in Indianapolis or Kansas City? Not much fun. Phoenix is also on the list, and the US Soccer folks have no problem telling you that the stadium will be serviced by just one bus line. So, I think you get my point. The U.S. is almost too big to host a World Cup AND make it truly enjoyable for the fans. You have bid cities on each coast to complicate things as well.

Since the U.S. hosted World Cup 1994, I took a look back and pretended I was a Brazil fan (winners that year) and attended every game. In 1994, a Brazil fan would have watched the first 2 games in Stanford, CA, flown to Detroit for the final group stage game, flown back to Stanford for the next round, then to Dallas, and back to Pasadena for the final. It was a little better, if you followed the second place team that year, Italy. An Italy supporter would have started in New Jersey, gone to Washington D.C., then to Boston (for 2 games in a row), back to New Jersey, then to Pasadena. This also takes it toll on the players who are doing all this traveling, hopping time zones, and could ultimately affect the quality of the games. The same could happen with the cities chosen for 2018.
A smaller issue is the culture factor. In other countries, football in general, and especially a World Cup is simply ubiquitous. Its just everywhere. Everyone is talking about it, goofy songs are made just for the event, World Cup signs and billboards are literally everywhere. The billboard in that last link is not a fake. In our lifetimes, football may top out and become the fourth most popular sport in the States.

Which brings me to last Saturday, I have World Cup fever just like anyone else that may be reading this. So, I decided to pick up a jersey to wear out to bars for the month. My wife asked a older gentleman, working at an unnamed sporting goods store (I won't even plug them to my 3 followers!) if they had "jerseys for the World Cup nations?" He looks at her quizzically and says, "World Cup?". After some uncomfortable silence, my wife translates it to Yankee talk and says, "soccer jerseys?" The guy points to a section of the store and says, "anything we have is over there." Hey, it was only 6 days away from the biggest sporting event in the world, about 1 billion people will watch the final and the guy works in a sporting goods store. Why should he know what the World Cup is?

Anyway, that is my case against the U.S. I had more I could have written, but I want you all to come back. That being said, the title of this blog post is, "The Case Against the U.S bid, The Case For....". If you're still reading, you're probably wondering who I want to land the next 2 World Cups (both will be awarded at the end of the year). Check back for my next posting for my choices for 2018 and 2022.

Back soon with Part II,

James

Week In Review, Topics Include: NDAA, Gingrich Tax Plan, West Port Shutdown On & The Icelandic Recovery

Hello to all and thanks for checking in.

We had another big week and there is so much to get to. We had yet another GOP Debate. Unbelievable right? When I saw it on, I thought it was a re-run. I think there are more GOP Debates this year than total episodes of "Seinfeld." It ended at 11pm last night (Thursday). So, if anything crazy happened, I may post some of my tweets from the night, by midday Friday. We also had what may be the end of one of our base Constitutional rights, multiple port shutdowns and slowdowns on the West Coast, my point on the climate change debate was illustrated, the Year in Review from Google, and how Newt Gingrich wants to give all the money in the country (maybe even the world), to the top 0.1% of the population. Let's get to it.

National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) : 

I mentioned the NDAA in last week's post. In short, it gives the government the right to indefinitely detain Americans without trial or due process, if they are suspected of terrorist activities. So, Guantanamo Bay is now open to Americans. I mentioned in last week's "Week In Review" that the White House was threatening to veto the bill. However, like everything else with Obama, he backed off that original stance. As I mentioned in that last post, the veto threat was in place if there was a special carve-out or distinction for U.S Citizens. The wording of the bill was changed to remove that stipulation, so now US citizens can be treated the same as anyone else who is deemed a terrorist. The Guardian (from the UK) did a great job with this. Check out their piece on the NDAA here. And, if you have not heard of this until now, don't blame yourself. There has been what amounts to a media blackout on this topic. It seems that you have to leave the US, to find out what is happening here. I've been using independent/overseas sources to keep up with this story. At the time of posting, the bill awaits Obama's signature. Here's hoping that there will be enough pressure from the outside to force a veto. There are marches planned for the next couple of days to the White House. Many petitions have been circulated online as well. Fingers crossed on this one, but I'm not hopeful.

Don't Forget To Pack Your Earplugs:

The manufacturer of the Long Range Acoustic Device or LRAD has record sales this past fiscal year, it was up 57% from last year. Seems like police departments are loading up. So, if you make your way to a large protest bring earmuffs, ear plugs, cotton balls, BOSE noise canceling headphones and be on the lookout. Silver linings on the US becoming a police state? This company is based in San Diego. So, purchasing LRADs create American jobs!! Hopefully, we can keep protesting our way out of this recession. As an aside, did you know that tear gas is made in Jamestown, Pennsylvania? As I find more of these, I'll pass them on. But, it seems like, you can get any item needed to brutally crush protesters within our borders. USA! USA! USA!

Climate News:

Just on Tuesday, I posted something I written on what I felt was missing from the climate discussion. Check it out here, if you haven't seen it. I'm really proud of it. My main point was that spreading the message to somewhat curtail meat-eating (I know the whole world won't go vegetarian) is seldom mentioned. Just yesterday, an article was published that talked about the dangers of Arctic methane being released in our atmosphere. The article states that thanks to permafrost melting in the Arctic, forecasts of climate change could be 2.5 times worse than the already released estimates. Going back to the meat-eating point, worldwide livestock population causes the emission of 80 million metric tons per year. With that said, it remains absent, as one of the potential solutions, from nearly all the climate change articles I see. I mentioned in Tuesday's post, that methane is 70 times worse than CO2 over a 25 year period. Excluding this fact from the discussion simply makes no sense to me.

How To Come Out Of A Crisis, Nordic Style:

Kudos to Iceland. They are coming out of their banking crisis the way you should. A couple of weeks ago (I just found this out), they arrested the CEO of one of their banks. Imagine that? In the US, about 5,000 people have been arrested for protesting said banks. And, 2 more quick things on Iceland. They deserve a book written about them, not just a post. After their banking collapse, they let the banks fail and expanded their social safety net. The Icelandic economy is showing growth that outpaces the rest of the world. They also have re-written their own constitution. The people of Iceland were able to make massive demands of their government, force resignations, new elections, etc. Since Iceland doesn't have an army, the citizens couldn't be brutalized like here or in Middle Eastern nations. That is the VERY short version of the Iceland story. Give them a look when you have a chance. They even used social media to crowd-source their new constitution, during the drafting process. Amazing stuff.

Port Shutdown Round-Up: 

December 12th saw an attempted shutdown of West Coast shipping ports. The aim was to shine a light on the plight of truck drivers connected with the shipping companies and dock workers working on these ports. Apparently, Goldman Sachs has gotten their hands into the import market as well. The ports are called "Wall Street On The Water." Through deregulation and union bashing, these workers lead a very tough existence. I did not know this, prior to the protest. But, many don't have health insurance. The truck drivers are not employees of the shipping companies. They are technically "independent contractors." Because of that, they pay for their own fuel for the trucks, there is no workman's compensation, very little time off, and other cruel working conditions. The success of the protest was hit and miss up and down the coast. I can tell you they did succeed in raising awareness. I had no idea of any of this prior to the shutdown attempt. Most posts did experience slowdowns. Oakland's port was shutdown for the better part of 24 hours. Seattle's port had long delays and clashes with the cops. Here's a video from the local Seattle news and they look in on a couple of other ports, in this clip.

Republicans Are Coming For It All: 

During the week, Newt Gingrich released his tax plan and, spoiler alert, it proportionately benefits wealthy citizens. I'm still at a loss why anyone votes Republican. Maybe it's an aspirational vote. Maybe they inwardly say, "If I win the lottery tomorrow, this is how I want to be treated." Other than that, I'm stumped. His plan was a complete joke. There are approximately 130,000 people in the top 0.1 percent of taxpayers in the US. With the Gingrich plan, they would have a tax cut of 1.9 million dollars per year. If you assume the Bush tax cuts continue, and add the Gingrich cut, their taxes are lowered by 2.3 million per year. Anyone making $40,000-1,000,000 would pay a higher tax rate than someone with an INCOME (not wealth) of over 1 million dollars per year.

Google's Year In Review:

A fitting way to finish, the Year In Review, just released yesterday from Google. I'm not ashamed to say there were a few tears here at Hub Headquarters. Year in Reviews are my Kryptonite, they always get me. Enjoy and keep the Kleenex nearby.

 See you next time,

James