FIFA World Cup 2026 :Canada/Mexico/United States: Discussion Thread

[Leviathan.007]

True, but still I think it's best to have the world cup in a single place. There are so many issues that appear when you host it in multiple countries, and also each country has it's own rules, and laws, visas, etc.

And at the end of the day most of the games will be played in the US anyway, so I'm not sure why Canada and Mexico wanted to be there. Maybe Canada wanted to finally be able to host it, but the other two already have done so in the past.

At least to me FIFA is giving a signal to other countries, they are basically saying we are not letting one of the most powerful countries around the world to hold the world cup on their own and they need to have partners to even have a chance to do it, and if any country wants to host the world cup on the future then they need to find partners as well in order to do so, so I think that from now on multiple hosts will become the norm and we will not see a single country hosting the world cup for a very long time.

I think that when it is hosted in a single country is better but usually FIFA has done so when the host country has some other countries near it that love football also,I remember in 2002 this was the case and the World Cup was held in Japan and South Korea and it had a lot of contention because of the referees favoring the host countries in a clamorous way,Italy lost 3-0 to South Korea something which was unimaginable until then.That is why I am more in favor when a single country is hosting the World Cup rather than holding it with other partners which can bring us to this non grateful situations where big teams are out of the play because of referees favoring home countries,it is much better when it is just one home country. 

I agree about letting one country host the world cup instead of three countries but in fact, since we have more counties playing in the 2026 world cup maybe that's why FIFA let three countries host the world cup however, there won't be three hosts for the world cup, the country hosting the world cup in America and two other countries are just helping America.

[Naficopa]

True, but still I think it's best to have the world cup in a single place. There are so many issues that appear when you host it in multiple countries, and also each country has it's own rules, and laws, visas, etc.

And at the end of the day most of the games will be played in the US anyway, so I'm not sure why Canada and Mexico wanted to be there. Maybe Canada wanted to finally be able to host it, but the other two already have done so in the past.

At least to me FIFA is giving a signal to other countries, they are basically saying we are not letting one of the most powerful countries around the world to hold the world cup on their own and they need to have partners to even have a chance to do it, and if any country wants to host the world cup on the future then they need to find partners as well in order to do so, so I think that from now on multiple hosts will become the norm and we will not see a single country hosting the world cup for a very long time.

I think that when it is hosted in a single country is better but usually FIFA has done so when the host country has some other countries near it that love football also,I remember in 2002 this was the case and the World Cup was held in Japan and South Korea and it had a lot of contention because of the referees favoring the host countries in a clamorous way,Italy lost 3-0 to South Korea something which was unimaginable until then.That is why I am more in favor when a single country is hosting the World Cup rather than holding it with other partners which can bring us to this non grateful situations where big teams are out of the play because of referees favoring home countries,it is much better when it is just one home country. 

I agree about letting one country host the world cup instead of three countries but in fact, since we have more counties playing in the 2026 world cup maybe that's why FIFA let three countries host the world cup however, there won't be three hosts for the world cup, the country hosting the world cup in America and two other countries are just helping America.

It is also possible that most of the matches will be held in America and the remaining small or group matches may be held in other countries. The FIFA authorities can do something like that the final semi-final knockout stage matches will be held in America. Actually, it cannot be said right now, we hope to understand everything in the future.

[TopTort777]

It is also possible that most of the matches will be held in America and the remaining small or group matches may be held in other countries. The FIFA authorities can do something like that the final semi-final knockout stage matches will be held in America. Actually, it cannot be said right now, we hope to understand everything in the future.

Why possible, when all the stadiums are already known and most of them are in the US. I think when all the country teams will be knows, the drawing will be done so, that it will be convenient for countries to have games in specific countries. The South American countries will play in Mexico, European probably in US, African either in Mexico or Canada. And after prelims all the games probably be in US only.

[Dimitri94]

As I mentioned in one of my previous posts, USA is one of those countries which favor illegal immigrants over legal immigrants. If you apply for a legal visa, you need to wait for 3-4 years to get a hearing. An easier route is to travel to Mexico and then jump the fence over Mexico-US border. Every year millions of illegal immigrants take this step. Now I don't know whether the Americans will ease visa rules for the FIFA World Cup of 2026. If they don't do so, then I don't expect a large attendance from third world nations such as India and Indonesia.

Yes, this is true, but there is a logical explanation for this - many residents of third world countries after entering the United States will "get lost" and stay there illegally. By the way, I don’t know how it is now, but earlier, for everyone entering the US legally, vaccination (from covid) was mandatory, and for illegal immigrants who crossed the border and demanded citizenship/asylum, there was no such requirement  Thus, it was safer to enter the US illegally.

There are many people who think letting America host the 2026 world cup was a wrong decision and that they will have problems visiting this country to watch the World Cup games but I disagree and I think since America got the experience of hosting other great tournaments, they won't disappoint us and we are going to see a better world cup than what we saw in Qatar.

I don't think any other country can organize the World Cup in such a brilliant way in Qatar. The amount of money and initiatives they have spent around just one football world cup is not usually seen in other countries. Qatar finished the 2022 World Cup in good fashion.
It is not possible to enter America as easily as it is possible to enter other countries. When the World Cup is held in America, I hope that the American government will stabilize the rules for the World Cup visitors only.

The Qatar World Cup holds a unique place in football history. The amount of money they have spent around World Cup football is truly commendable and FIFA President Gianni Infantino has already acknowledged it. He also mentioned that in the World Cup in Qatar, each team has been accommodated in the very close to the stadium because of this player can reach early to their room, which would be very difficult to do in any other country. He thinks that even if the United States, Canada and Mexico make similar efforts, it will not be like Qatar. But they are trying. These issues came to light on May 17.  2026 Football World Cup logo was officially unveiled there. For those who haven't seen the World Cup 2026 football log yet, I've attached it.

[Daniel91]

As I mentioned in one of my previous posts, USA is one of those countries which favor illegal immigrants over legal immigrants. If you apply for a legal visa, you need to wait for 3-4 years to get a hearing. An easier route is to travel to Mexico and then jump the fence over Mexico-US border. Every year millions of illegal immigrants take this step. Now I don't know whether the Americans will ease visa rules for the FIFA World Cup of 2026. If they don't do so, then I don't expect a large attendance from third world nations such as India and Indonesia.

Yes, this is true, but there is a logical explanation for this - many residents of third world countries after entering the United States will "get lost" and stay there illegally. By the way, I don’t know how it is now, but earlier, for everyone entering the US legally, vaccination (from covid) was mandatory, and for illegal immigrants who crossed the border and demanded citizenship/asylum, there was no such requirement  Thus, it was safer to enter the US illegally.

There are many people who think letting America host the 2026 world cup was a wrong decision and that they will have problems visiting this country to watch the World Cup games but I disagree and I think since America got the experience of hosting other great tournaments, they won't disappoint us and we are going to see a better world cup than what we saw in Qatar.

I don't think any other country can organize the World Cup in such a brilliant way in Qatar. The amount of money and initiatives they have spent around just one football world cup is not usually seen in other countries. Qatar finished the 2022 World Cup in good fashion.
It is not possible to enter America as easily as it is possible to enter other countries. When the World Cup is held in America, I hope that the American government will stabilize the rules for the World Cup visitors only.

The Qatar World Cup holds a unique place in football history. The amount of money they have spent around World Cup football is truly commendable and FIFA President Gianni Infantino has already acknowledged it. He also mentioned that in the World Cup in Qatar, each team has been accommodated in the very close to the stadium because of this player can reach early to their room, which would be very difficult to do in any other country. He thinks that even if the United States, Canada and Mexico make similar efforts, it will not be like Qatar. But they are trying. These issues came to light on May 17.  2026 Football World Cup logo was officially unveiled there. For those who haven't seen the World Cup 2026 football log yet, I've attached it.

Thanks for this log, it's interesting.
As for the world cup in Qatar, I think that from the financial side it was all excessive and unnecessary.
Qatar built a lot of stadiums just for that world cup, but most of those stadiums they will never need again and it's actually a waste of money.
Obviously, the sole purpose of all this insane spending of money was to change the image of an undemocratic and totalitarian country and raise its international reputation and prestige.
How many foreign workers died building all those big and unnecessary stadiums in very difficult climatic conditions? FIFA and Qatar completely covered up this very unpleasant news for their reputation.
Unfortunately, for FIFA, money has become the only criterion when organizing world cups in football.

[shogun47]

Exactly, I think since we had an economic crisis in most of the countries and they don't have good situations it was a wise move to let a country like America host the world cup because they have enough potential to host the great events and even if Mexico and Canada were not co-hosting the world cup America could easily host the world cup by itself.

I doubt that this has anything to do with the economic crisis or with the pandemic as the bid to become the World Cup host was made in 2017. I think that the USA along with Mexico and Canada had the strongest application in the field. I don't know whether this trend that there will be joint co-hosting will continue in the future, but I am still an advocate of this decision. There are so many countries in the world and if you want to give most of them a fair chance to host a World Cup anytime soon, allowing for co-hosting makes a lot of sense.

I think it would certainly help smaller countries or countries with no economical resources to host the whole event to still be part of it. They would not need to invest so much in infrastructure, security or places to keep tourists happy, since all the event would eventually move to a neighbor country.

For example, Nepal and Mongolia are counties that by their own could not host a World Cup but they could if decided to co-host with China.

Of course, all of it would not be that easy, there are neighbor countries which have political and ideological disagreements among them, which would not allow them to coordinate such big event as orderly and quickly as it is supposed to. Whether we like it or not, when talk about more than one country, we need to think of geopolitics.

Especially when it comes to World Cups a decision has to be made between inclusion in terms of size of the World Cup and the capacities of the hosting countries, and still a sense of exclusivity to keep the tournament exciting.

Due to the idea to include more countries also as participants, many potential host countries are not able to pull that off anymore. The USA could do it and countries with unlimited resources like Qatar could do it, but now that more and more nations are added to the final round of the tournament, lots of infrastructural limits in many countries are exceeded. That is why I expect that several host nations will be the norm for the World Cup going forward.

[Gosgosking]

True, but still I think it's best to have the world cup in a single place. There are so many issues that appear when you host it in multiple countries, and also each country has it's own rules, and laws, visas, etc.

And at the end of the day most of the games will be played in the US anyway, so I'm not sure why Canada and Mexico wanted to be there. Maybe Canada wanted to finally be able to host it, but the other two already have done so in the past.

At least to me FIFA is giving a signal to other countries, they are basically saying we are not letting one of the most powerful countries around the world to hold the world cup on their own and they need to have partners to even have a chance to do it, and if any country wants to host the world cup on the future then they need to find partners as well in order to do so, so I think that from now on multiple hosts will become the norm and we will not see a single country hosting the world cup for a very long time.

I think this is the first time that fifa will be hosting in 3 countries,  I don't know how this will come out good because I haven't experienced it before.  For fifa to make this plan I'm very sure they have good plans for this tournament, let's just watch how it will go. I think people will just choose countries according to where there favorite teams will be playing.

[Leviathan.007]

Exactly, I think since we had an economic crisis in most of the countries and they don't have good situations it was a wise move to let a country like America host the world cup because they have enough potential to host the great events and even if Mexico and Canada were not co-hosting the world cup America could easily host the world cup by itself.

I doubt that this has anything to do with the economic crisis or with the pandemic as the bid to become the World Cup host was made in 2017. I think that the USA along with Mexico and Canada had the strongest application in the field. I don't know whether this trend that there will be joint co-hosting will continue in the future, but I am still an advocate of this decision. There are so many countries in the world and if you want to give most of them a fair chance to host a World Cup anytime soon, allowing for co-hosting makes a lot of sense.

I think it would certainly help smaller countries or countries with no economical resources to host the whole event to still be part of it. They would not need to invest so much in infrastructure, security or places to keep tourists happy, since all the event would eventually move to a neighbor country.

For example, Nepal and Mongolia are counties that by their own could not host a World Cup but they could if decided to co-host with China.

Of course, all of it would not be that easy, there are neighbor countries which have political and ideological disagreements among them, which would not allow them to coordinate such big event as orderly and quickly as it is supposed to. Whether we like it or not, when talk about more than one country, we need to think of geopolitics.

Especially when it comes to World Cups a decision has to be made between inclusion in terms of size of the World Cup and the capacities of the hosting countries, and still a sense of exclusivity to keep the tournament exciting.

Due to the idea to include more countries also as participants, many potential host countries are not able to pull that off anymore. The USA could do it and countries with unlimited resources like Qatar could do it, but now that more and more nations are added to the final round of the tournament, lots of infrastructural limits in many countries are exceeded. That is why I expect that several host nations will be the norm for the World Cup going forward.

In fact, America got more resources than a country like Qatar and they got much more potential for the world cup than Qatar because in Qatar they didn't have enough sports facilities and they had to spend too much money for it while in America there is enough stadiums and all they to do is to repair all they got, this way America will not spend money like Qatar.

[shogun47]

In fact, America got more resources than a country like Qatar and they got much more potential for the world cup than Qatar because in Qatar they didn't have enough sports facilities and they had to spend too much money for it while in America there is enough stadiums and all they to do is to repair all they got, this way America will not spend money like Qatar.

The biggest issue about these huge events is that they are often supposed to spread good messages in terms of human rights, sport connects the people, sustainability and so on and so forth.

When you choose a country like Qatar to be hosting the World Cup, nothing from those messages mentioned above actually applies. No need to discuss human rights again and what the conditions were for the workers to build the infrastructure. Sport connects the people, I don't know. I have no idea whether we were presented with the true state of affairs during the World Cup via the media. Sustainability is a joke when you consider that some stadiums will even be demolished after the World Cup. You build a stadium for billions and even people die doing so, and then you demolish it again spending hundreds of millions to get rid of it. All of that in times when a lot of people are suffering around the world. That is not the message I would expect from such an event.

[tygeade]

Yeap, that logo looks cheap. I am not a designer, but that looks cheap, when probably thousands were spent on design. Using black and white seems very simple. I think that is gonna look bad on posters at sunny days. And 26 looks shitty What is it about? Year 2026? 26th World Cup? 26 team participate ? Coloured version destroys my eyes Really bad combination of colours, as if I am on drugs or have licked hypnotoad from Futurama 

LOL.. looks as if they wanted to compensate for the anti-LGBT themes at the Qatar edition, and therefore created a rainbow themed logo. 2026 edition of the FIFA World Cup will be held in North America and it is expected that FIFA will receive around $6 billion in revenues from this event. They could have spent a few hundred USD to create a good logo. Any of the freelancers would have created a better design. Anyway, I still believe that these logos are very preliminary and FIFA will finalize on some good designs as the tournament approaches.

I mean it's only fair right? If one side is saying there is no lgbt flag and it's all banned, then the other side could do whatever they want as well? Why would Fifa give the right to ban it, but not give the right to promote it? Wouldn't it be unfair to just pick one side and support that?

I understand that if Qatar wanted to ban it, because it's "against their culture", when it's a WORLD cup and not QATAR cup, they were given that right and I get that. But then in this case we are talking about same world cup and giving the same right to USA to promote all the lgbt people all they want should be only fair. I respect that, and you are right there could be a better design for sure, even if keeping the idea the same, and support it, there could be a better one.

[alastantiger]

He thinks that even if the United States, Canada and Mexico make similar efforts, it will not be like Qatar. But they are trying. These issues came to light on May 17.  2026 Football World Cup logo was officially unveiled there. For those who haven't seen the World Cup 2026 football log yet, I've attached it.

The 2026 world cup will be a unique and interesting one - 3 countries hosting it and looking forward to what it would look like. Will they be able to top what Qatar did? In terms of the quality of the stadium, security and all. With regards to the logo which was unveiled somedays back, my opinion on this is that it's the worst logo in World Cup history. It would have been suitable for the 2030 or another distant year edition, but for this World Cup, I don't see it as very original and creative. Besides, it's evident that they didn't even make an effort to create that logo.

[n0ne]

He thinks that even if the United States, Canada and Mexico make similar efforts, it will not be like Qatar. But they are trying. These issues came to light on May 17.  2026 Football World Cup logo was officially unveiled there. For those who haven't seen the World Cup 2026 football log yet, I've attached it.

The 2026 world cup will be a unique and interesting one - 3 countries hosting it and looking forward to what it would look like. Will they be able to top what Qatar did? In terms of the quality of the stadium, security and all. With regards to the logo which was unveiled somedays back, my opinion on this is that it's the worst logo in World Cup history. It would have been suitable for the 2030 or another distant year edition, but for this World Cup, I don't see it as very original and creative. Besides, it's evident that they didn't even make an effort to create that logo.

We can't easily downgrade them. Qatar doesn't had good number of infrastructure and for that reason it spend a lot as well as started its work long years back. With the upcoming FIFA World Cup host nations, they already have got good infrastructure. All that needs to be done is just making things better as people from all around the world will be visiting the country.

As said the logo doesn't had much of creativity. Just the 26 is added to showcase it to be the 2026 World Cup. Apart it is just the World Cup that is made as the logo. We don't know what relies behind, maybe it too have got wrapped meaning within it.

[Hispo]

Exactly, I think since we had an economic crisis in most of the countries and they don't have good situations it was a wise move to let a country like America host the world cup because they have enough potential to host the great events and even if Mexico and Canada were not co-hosting the world cup America could easily host the world cup by itself.

I doubt that this has anything to do with the economic crisis or with the pandemic as the bid to become the World Cup host was made in 2017. I think that the USA along with Mexico and Canada had the strongest application in the field. I don't know whether this trend that there will be joint co-hosting will continue in the future, but I am still an advocate of this decision. There are so many countries in the world and if you want to give most of them a fair chance to host a World Cup anytime soon, allowing for co-hosting makes a lot of sense.

I think it would certainly help smaller countries or countries with no economical resources to host the whole event to still be part of it. They would not need to invest so much in infrastructure, security or places to keep tourists happy, since all the event would eventually move to a neighbor country.

For example, Nepal and Mongolia are counties that by their own could not host a World Cup but they could if decided to co-host with China.

Of course, all of it would not be that easy, there are neighbor countries which have political and ideological disagreements among them, which would not allow them to coordinate such big event as orderly and quickly as it is supposed to. Whether we like it or not, when talk about more than one country, we need to think of geopolitics.

Especially when it comes to World Cups a decision has to be made between inclusion in terms of size of the World Cup and the capacities of the hosting countries, and still a sense of exclusivity to keep the tournament exciting.

Due to the idea to include more countries also as participants, many potential host countries are not able to pull that off anymore. The USA could do it and countries with unlimited resources like Qatar could do it, but now that more and more nations are added to the final round of the tournament, lots of infrastructural limits in many countries are exceeded. That is why I expect that several host nations will be the norm for the World Cup going forward.

In fact, America got more resources than a country like Qatar and they got much more potential for the world cup than Qatar because in Qatar they didn't have enough sports facilities and they had to spend too much money for it while in America there is enough stadiums and all they to do is to repair all they got, this way America will not spend money like Qatar.

Yes, you have got a good point when comes to the infrastructure of the United States. They may be able to save some money on it, but because America is more likely to receive more people than Qatar, it would translate on increasing expenses on security and probably management of Visas or personnel to take care of the immigration papers of all that people who wish to attent do the event.

Also, I am sure it has been mentioned before, but Qatar likely had some bribed European politicians so they would talk wonders about the country and downplay the accusations of mishandling of workers and human right violations. Mexico, USA and Canada won't need to bribe anyone, I guess.

[Bobrox]

We can't easily downgrade them. Qatar doesn't had good number of infrastructure and for that reason it spend a lot as well as started its work long years back. With the upcoming FIFA World Cup host nations, they already have got good infrastructure. All that needs to be done is just making things better as people from all around the world will be visiting the country.

As said the logo doesn't had much of creativity. Just the 26 is added to showcase it to be the 2026 World Cup. Apart it is just the World Cup that is made as the logo. We don't know what relies behind, maybe it too have got wrapped meaning within it.

Seems funny when many people downgrade with Qatar as the host for FIFA World Cup 2022 from infrastructure, LGBT, drink alcohol until racism issues. I don't know why many people judge with Qatar because they have been the best host in FIFA World Cup than last several edition time with good infrastructure and nothing bad or controversial on all World Cup 2022 matches.

Depend on last FIFA World Cup edition, I think Qatar have more upgrade and beautiful infrastructure when another countries become host for FIFA World Cup, but its controversial because many people disagree with LGBT, alcoholic and not marriage can't sleep together. We have respect with other countries culture and can't change norms in force in that country.

[nullama]

~snip~
Seems funny when many people downgrade with Qatar as the host for FIFA World Cup 2022 from infrastructure, LGBT, drink alcohol until racism issues. I don't know why many people judge with Qatar because they have been the best host in FIFA World Cup than last several edition time with good infrastructure and nothing bad or controversial on all World Cup 2022 matches.

Depend on last FIFA World Cup edition, I think Qatar have more upgrade and beautiful infrastructure when another countries become host for FIFA World Cup, but its controversial because many people disagree with LGBT, alcoholic and not marriage can't sleep together. We have respect with other countries culture and can't change norms in force in that country.

I think the main issue with Qatar was that they don't have a football team that actually has the required level to play at a world cup.

They only had the money, which is why the tournament was hosted there, but in the games that Qatar played it was so clear that they don't have enough skill. They lowered the quality of the tournament.

But overall, yeah, it was a great tournament.

[Leviathan.007]

We can't easily downgrade them. Qatar doesn't had good number of infrastructure and for that reason it spend a lot as well as started its work long years back. With the upcoming FIFA World Cup host nations, they already have got good infrastructure. All that needs to be done is just making things better as people from all around the world will be visiting the country.

As said the logo doesn't had much of creativity. Just the 26 is added to showcase it to be the 2026 World Cup. Apart it is just the World Cup that is made as the logo. We don't know what relies behind, maybe it too have got wrapped meaning within it.

Seems funny when many people downgrade with Qatar as the host for FIFA World Cup 2022 from infrastructure, LGBT, drink alcohol until racism issues. I don't know why many people judge with Qatar because they have been the best host in FIFA World Cup than last several edition time with good infrastructure and nothing bad or controversial on all World Cup 2022 matches.

Depend on last FIFA World Cup edition, I think Qatar have more upgrade and beautiful infrastructure when another countries become host for FIFA World Cup, but its controversial because many people disagree with LGBT, alcoholic and not marriage can't sleep together. We have respect with other countries culture and can't change norms in force in that country.

The only reason some people so sat Qatar was a good host for the world cup was because of the money they spent for the world cup and nothing else, it doesn't matter if you build great stadiums and spend money for it if you take the freedom from people, you can't be a good host for the world cup and Qatar rules and cultures were the problems.

[Gosgosking]

We can't easily downgrade them. Qatar doesn't had good number of infrastructure and for that reason it spend a lot as well as started its work long years back. With the upcoming FIFA World Cup host nations, they already have got good infrastructure. All that needs to be done is just making things better as people from all around the world will be visiting the country.

As said the logo doesn't had much of creativity. Just the 26 is added to showcase it to be the 2026 World Cup. Apart it is just the World Cup that is made as the logo. We don't know what relies behind, maybe it too have got wrapped meaning within it.

Seems funny when many people downgrade with Qatar as the host for FIFA World Cup 2022 from infrastructure, LGBT, drink alcohol until racism issues. I don't know why many people judge with Qatar because they have been the best host in FIFA World Cup than last several edition time with good infrastructure and nothing bad or controversial on all World Cup 2022 matches.

Depend on last FIFA World Cup edition, I think Qatar have more upgrade and beautiful infrastructure when another countries become host for FIFA World Cup, but its controversial because many people disagree with LGBT, alcoholic and not marriage can't sleep together. We have respect with other countries culture and can't change norms in force in that country.

The only reason some people so sat Qatar was a good host for the world cup was because of the money they spent for the world cup and nothing else, it doesn't matter if you build great stadiums and spend money for it if you take the freedom from people, you can't be a good host for the world cup and Qatar rules and cultures were the problems.

Fifa tournament is not just about football, it is also an event people travel to come have fun.  Qatar was good when it comes good arrangement and management but it was too strick for many visitors.  This is only the challenge that made the tournament not to be enjoyable the way it is suppose to be.

[keyscore44]

We can't easily downgrade them. Qatar doesn't had good number of infrastructure and for that reason it spend a lot as well as started its work long years back. With the upcoming FIFA World Cup host nations, they already have got good infrastructure. All that needs to be done is just making things better as people from all around the world will be visiting the country.

As said the logo doesn't had much of creativity. Just the 26 is added to showcase it to be the 2026 World Cup. Apart it is just the World Cup that is made as the logo. We don't know what relies behind, maybe it too have got wrapped meaning within it.

Seems funny when many people downgrade with Qatar as the host for FIFA World Cup 2022 from infrastructure, LGBT, drink alcohol until racism issues. I don't know why many people judge with Qatar because they have been the best host in FIFA World Cup than last several edition time with good infrastructure and nothing bad or controversial on all World Cup 2022 matches.

Depend on last FIFA World Cup edition, I think Qatar have more upgrade and beautiful infrastructure when another countries become host for FIFA World Cup, but its controversial because many people disagree with LGBT, alcoholic and not marriage can't sleep together. We have respect with other countries culture and can't change norms in force in that country.

The only reason some people so sat Qatar was a good host for the world cup was because of the money they spent for the world cup and nothing else, it doesn't matter if you build great stadiums and spend money for it if you take the freedom from people, you can't be a good host for the world cup and Qatar rules and cultures were the problems.

Fifa tournament is not just about football, it is also an event people travel to come have fun.  Qatar was good when it comes good arrangement and management but it was too strick for many visitors.  This is only the challenge that made the tournament not to be enjoyable the way it is suppose to be.

Qatar hosted the Football World Cup beautifully and the stadiums made for a beautiful sight to behold. However, many football fans could not enjoy this event properly due to some strict rules in Qatar. But hopefully in the next World Cup they will be very relaxed and football fans will be able to enjoy the World Cup very much.

[Strongkored]

I think the main issue with Qatar was that they don't have a football team that actually has the required level to play at a world cup.

They only had the money, which is why the tournament was hosted there, but in the games that Qatar played it was so clear that they don't have enough skill. They lowered the quality of the tournament.

But overall, yeah, it was a great tournament.

That's quite strange indeed because Qatar was chosen as the host of the 2022 World Cup not suddenly there was quite a long time from when it was chosen to the time it was held, and that was about 12 years, and in a decade they were not able to prepare a national team that could compete very well with other teams in the group phase, it even seems that their target is just how to score goals in every match and it turns out that that doesn't always happen. So it's enough to prove that they only focus on the fame that will be obtained if they host the world cup and also the money that will be obtained even though they are already a wealthy country without having to organize this big event not to develop football in their country even better, but in Asia, before the WC 2022 held The Qatar national team had obtained good results by winning the Asian Cup by defeating one of the other strong Asian teams, namely Japan, but at the World Cup Japan appeared more impressive as well as several other Asian teams such as South Korea and Iran.

So if there is a country that is not very good at football development and intends to host the World Cup, it should not only focus on infrastructure development but also its national team so that at the time of holding it is not just a weak team who can even get embarrassing results in matches.

[freedomgo]

~snip~
Seems funny when many people downgrade with Qatar as the host for FIFA World Cup 2022 from infrastructure, LGBT, drink alcohol until racism issues. I don't know why many people judge with Qatar because they have been the best host in FIFA World Cup than last several edition time with good infrastructure and nothing bad or controversial on all World Cup 2022 matches.

Depend on last FIFA World Cup edition, I think Qatar have more upgrade and beautiful infrastructure when another countries become host for FIFA World Cup, but its controversial because many people disagree with LGBT, alcoholic and not marriage can't sleep together. We have respect with other countries culture and can't change norms in force in that country.

I think the main issue with Qatar was that they don't have a football team that actually has the required level to play at a world cup.

They only had the money, which is why the tournament was hosted there, but in the games that Qatar played it was so clear that they don't have enough skill. They lowered the quality of the tournament.

But overall, yeah, it was a great tournament.

As a host, there is no doubt that Qatar made a successful run but that's it.

They only excel as a host because that is what they do best and they've got a ton of resources waiting at their own disposal that made the event more splendid. But when it comes to the viewer's opinion (who watched the event live)and as well as the players, they are not that free to do what they are used to do like drinking for slight celebration because there are lots of prohibited things in Qatar which needed to be observed at all times.