Remove this ad

Lead

May 29 17 10:51 AM

Tags : :

So with reports that ticket sales for this summer's tournament are doing poorly, and FIFA apparently planning changes to the Club World Cup, is the Confederations Cup going to end up as a casualty? And more to the point, who here likes it and thinks it should stay?

Personally I think what they're planning for 2021 (hosting it in an Asian country other than Qatar) could end up being the way to go for the future, it might benefit from being seen as its own event rather than being 'tethered' to the next year's World Cup, could definitely do well out of hosting being taken to countries that might appreciate it more.

FIFA Confederations Cup (Result)

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Remove this ad
avatar

TheRoonBa

Posts: 5,500 Site Admin

#1 [url]

May 29 17 10:53 AM

Isn't the point of hosting it in the World Cup hosting country so that they can test stadiums and security, etc. on a smaller scale before the main event?

Quote    Reply   

#2 [url]

May 29 17 11:29 AM

It was (and of course for a while at turn of millennium alternated with a non-WC host every 2 years*), but as of the 2026 World Cup, the 'test event' is going to be the World Cup Intercontinental Play-Offs, they'll hold those matches in the World Cup host nation(s) presumably in November 2025.

Not sure what they've got for Qatar to test in 2021 though, maybe they'll end up getting a youth World Cup or something.



* = The other day I came across this piece of beautiful bizarreness, South Africa and Egypt putting forward a co-hosting bid...

Quote    Reply   

#3 [url]

May 30 17 7:23 AM

Qatar has hosted a youth world cup before (this didn't seem to generate as much "oh no it'll be hot" outcry at the time). The Confederations Cup can be good when the teams in it are taking it seriously, and the local public turn out to watch. But it doesn't seem to have captured the TV market attention (in Europe at least) and is considered far less important than the World Cup and the major continental tournaments - FIFA seem to have failed to "exploit" this tournament as much as they would have wanted.

Quote    Reply   

#4 [url]

May 30 17 11:26 AM

nfm24 wrote:
Qatar has hosted a youth world cup before (this didn't seem to generate as much "oh no it'll be hot" outcry at the time).
In fairness it was in late April so not quite the middle of summer (also a late replacement so little time to take complaints), but a very valid point (aren't some places still banging the 'too hot' drum even for December?), not to mention it was a youth tournament, which would've no doubt brought out the "think of the children [who are actually in the U20 bracket so legally adults]" brigade nowadays.

They also had the 1994 World Cup in some hot places in the USA, and as recently as 2011 had an U17 World Cup in summer in Mexico, none of them quite match Qatari heat but it'll be interesting to see if the same people complain if matches in the 2026 World Cup get played in Miami or Monterrey in the middle of summer (or Marrakesh, or Abidjan). And not a FIFA event, but this tournament looks like it would have been a pretty hot one.

Quote    Reply   

#5 [url]

May 30 17 11:44 AM

nfm24 wrote:
The Confederations Cup can be good when the teams in it are taking it seriously, and the local public turn out to watch. But it doesn't seem to have captured the TV market attention (in Europe at least) and is considered far less important than the World Cup and the major continental tournaments - FIFA seem to have failed to "exploit" this tournament as much as they would have wanted.
Yeah, not sure what's up with the Russians not snapping up tickets, a lower level of foreign tourists is a little more understandable, but they're using less stadiums and with lower capacities than Brazil and still not even half-sold at the time of writing, not to mention this is their first-ever major international tournament hosting.

It's never going to be as big as the World Cup, and I agree, FIFA have a nice thing going with the 'champion of champions' angle but for some reason it's not clicking with the masses. No-one expects it to challenge the World Cup but under this 'warm-up event' approach maybe it suffers from the comparisons.

Quote    Reply   

#6 [url]

May 30 17 12:00 PM

I'm not sure, but maybe typical Russian attendances at stadiums are lower anyway. For international matches at least.

The AFC and CAF have hosted plenty of tournaments in hot countries over the years.  Personally I've never understood the big deal about the playing conditions.  As long as they are not actually oppressive to the population in general (e.g. spectators).  Surely part of the game is to adjust your playing style to the conditions, within reason.  If it is hot, you keep the ball more and don't waste energy chasing lost causes as you would do in November in the mud.  If it is dry and hard ground, long balls will bounce through more easily. 

Of course, you could also adjust the rules e.g. water breaks every 15 mins, extra sub, or reduce the length of the game down to 70 minutes for example.


Last Edited By: nfm24 May 30 17 12:04 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#7 [url]

May 31 17 8:31 AM

mattsanger92 wrote:
nfm24 wrote:
Qatar has hosted a youth world cup before (this didn't seem to generate as much "oh no it'll be hot" outcry at the time).
In fairness it was in late April so not quite the middle of summer (also a late replacement so little time to take complaints), but a very valid point (aren't some places still banging the 'too hot' drum even for December?), not to mention it was a youth tournament, which would've no doubt brought out the "think of the children [who are actually in the U20 bracket so legally adults]" brigade nowadays.

They also had the 1994 World Cup in some hot places in the USA, and as recently as 2011 had an U17 World Cup in summer in Mexico, none of them quite match Qatari heat but it'll be interesting to see if the same people complain if matches in the 2026 World Cup get played in Miami or Monterrey in the middle of summer (or Marrakesh, or Abidjan). And not a FIFA event, but this tournament looks like it would have been a pretty hot one.

Without going too far, the Intertoto Cup matches played in July and August in the summer of 2003, especially in southern Europe, were a valid example of extreme conditions. That was a dramatic summer because of the worst heat wave since time immemorial.

Quote    Reply   

#8 [url]

May 31 17 9:16 AM

nfm24 wrote:
The AFC and CAF have hosted plenty of tournaments in hot countries over the years.  Personally I've never understood the big deal about the playing conditions.  As long as they are not actually oppressive to the population in general (e.g. spectators).  Surely part of the game is to adjust your playing style to the conditions, within reason.  If it is hot, you keep the ball more and don't waste energy chasing lost causes as you would do in November in the mud.  If it is dry and hard ground, long balls will bounce through more easily. 

Of course, you could also adjust the rules e.g. water breaks every 15 mins, extra sub, or reduce the length of the game down to 70 minutes for example.
Yep, although critics will say that those countries in Asia and Africa are 'used to it', and it's not the same as inviting countries from Northern Europe, kind of like a reverse Super Bowl argument. And completely agree with the 'adapting your game' part, of course most World Cups are usually held in optimum conditions (or close to it), but there will always be surprises and part of football is to adapt, like that Switzerland v Turkey match at Euro 2008.

Unfortunately the 'spectators' part will probably be a lightning rod for controversy even with the air-conditioned stadiums, you just know that there's going to be a fan or few who suffers from heatstroke and it'll be Qatar's fault despite the fan receiving numerous warnings about what to do for their own safety. I'm basically picturing this on steroids.

In fairness I played in 25-degree heat the other week and felt a little uncomfortable by the end, although that might have just been the cheap artificial turf trapping more heat close to the pitch, plus playing for something like half-hour to an hour with no water break, and not particularly wanting to put myself under too much strain for the sake of a pick-up game. I'm sure if there was an important match, even with a higher temperature, I'd push myself more and be around people who make sure I'm doing the right things... like staying hydrated.

And I think FIFA already have a water break rule if the temperature's above a certain level but it's around halfway through each half, though common sense says that can easily be added to if the situation calls for it. The introduction of video referees might allow a few more informal water breaks as well...

Quote    Reply   

#9 [url]

May 31 17 9:20 AM

Luca wrote:
Without going too far, the Intertoto Cup matches played in July and August in the summer of 2003, especially in southern Europe, were a valid example of extreme conditions. That was a dramatic summer because of the worst heat wave since time immemorial.
And what about all the clubs that willingly go on summer tours to USA/Australia/Singapore/Portugal?

Quote    Reply   

#10 [url]

May 31 17 2:57 PM

Well, at least the tours are often well paid. I don't think the good old Intertoto was very remunerative...

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#11 [url]

May 31 17 10:55 PM

> critics will say that those countries in Asia and Africa are 'used to it'

This point has some merit, but nowadays World Cup hosts are announced many years in advance - teams know what they should be preparing for. The difficulty is to tally that with the variable conditions in qualifying campaigns, where you can have two very different climates three days apart (also applicable in the finals with two cities in a large country). This is something South American teams seem to be better at than European teams.

The mid-half water break was long overdue. It's not in anyone's interest to make players play without sufficient water regardless of the conditions.

Quote    Reply   

#12 [url]

Jun 1 17 2:00 PM

> This point has some merit, but nowadays World Cup hosts are announced many years in advance - teams know what they should be preparing for.

Exactly, that's why teams go on training camps (although a lot of the time those pre-tournament neutral venue matches seem to be in Switzerland or Austria regardless of whether the tournament's being played in a mountainous region), it doesn't stop some people using the different climate excuse when things go pear-shaped though.

I'm not saying it's wrong as they have the free choice to pick anywhere in their country to play, but the most blatant example of exploiting the conditions is when the USA play someone like Costa Rica or Mexico in winter months and they specifically pick somewhere with a colder climate to hold the match.

Quote    Reply   

#13 [url]

Jun 1 17 2:09 PM

Probably just revenge for all those years of being taken to altitude and forced to play in the mid-day heat after being kept up all night by mariachi bands and random phone calls to their hotel rooms. It was common in Africa for the home team to make it as difficult as possible for the away team, messing about their hotel transfers, taking them back and forth between different hotels (some without running water etc), using rickety old buses with no air conditioning, failing to send FA officials to greet the team at the airport, changing the kick-off time or venue at late notice, etc etc.

Quote    Reply   

#16 [url]

Well, the Confederations Cup history teaches that Germany have never taken this competition seriously. In 1999 they fielded a "B" team, while in 1997 and in 2003 they refused to enter. Only in 2005 they employed their strongest squad, obviously because they hosted the tournament.

Quote    Reply   

#17 [url]

And yet the other 'big teams' in this year's tournament (Chile and Portugal) appear to be taking it very seriously going by their squad selection, while Germany decide to not even bother calling replacements for their injured players in a weakened squad. Considering they easily have the means to call someone new into the squad it shows a complete lack of respect for the tournament and to the many possible players who would have loved the chance to be in that atmosphere gaining experience (even if they weren't likely to play much).

I don't know what Germany's problem is with this tournament, but whatever it is it seems to be exactly that - their problem.

Quote    Reply   

#19 [url]

after Chile-Cameroun I wonder who is still in favour of the video-referee? it only delays the game, brings confusion  and its decisions are not perfect.... I was and am not in favour...

Quote    Reply   

#20 [url]

I am in favour of the principle.

I am not in favour of playing around with a new system in an important international competition. Testing should be done in friendlies or youth cups only.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help