As we're unlikely to see terraces again at football, this is the virtual equivalent where you can chat to your hearts content about all football matters and, obviously, Arsenal in particular. This forum encourages all Gooners to visit and contribute so please keep it respectful, clean and topical.
Iceman29 wrote:
Don't you think thats a shocking and an absolute disgrace in this day and age???!??!!
I would love us to unleash plane loads of britains on them, see how they handle it.
Also how are they going to handle having twice their population flooding into their country.
F1 is one thing but a world cup is a completely different kettle of fish
Not really as they have their own laws and regulations that people need to respect just as they need to respect UK's laws and regulations. UK needs to respect their customs while being there and they need to respect UK's customs while being here.
Trust me, they have loads of Brits who live and work in that country. You have no idea. I have on multiple occasions gone to Doha and seen the plane fully packed with Brits. Sometimes I got the feeling that I was in the UK rather than Doha. They have a big enough country and plenty of finance to build all the infrastructure required.
These guys employ some of the best people in the world who will give them all the advice and help to manage the event.
So its homosexuality being illegal is alright then
Again not a concern from a personal level but if people over here say that women should not be allowed to wear the veil so if they don't approve of homosexuality, I don't see an issue. Its their culture and needs to be respected similarly as UK's culture needs to be respected
are you being serious???, I dont fucking care that is part of their culture. Its disguisting. You may not have had any issues there, but amnesty international are very concerned with their treatment of women and foreigners.
Amnesty International have a problem with every single country in the world including the UK and US.[/quote]
So do you not agree that its a fucking disgrace that homosexuality is illegal???
What if theres is an openly gay player by then?[/quote]
I don't think that will be a problem. What I would think is illegal is marriage between same sex and stuff like that. If any foreigner is a gay / lesbian or even a player, it won't be an issue.[/quote]
its a huge issue, its not the 1900s anymore.[/quote]
You're making a mountain out of a mole hill my friend.[/quote]
Arsenal 1991 wrote:Also what the hell is going to happen to all the infrastructure when the world cup is over. I think almost 4 times the population of qatar went to matches the sa world cup.
Its good for the country and tourism. Ever seen anyone complain about excessive infrastructure. Qatar also plan to dismantle some of the stadiums and donate them to the poorer countries and re-build them in those countries
So do you not agree that its a fucking disgrace that homosexuality is illegal???
What if theres is an openly gay player by then?
that is my point, even if they are not "out" as gay it is still bad, russia also has problems with racist supporters, which if it where up to me I would want them to make an effort to address before letting them host the world cup.
Arsenal 1991 wrote:Also what the hell is going to happen to all the infrastructure when the world cup is over. I think almost 4 times the population of qatar went to matches the sa world cup.
Its good for the country and tourism. Ever seen anyone complain about excessive infrastructure. Qatar also plan to dismantle some of the stadiums and donate them to the poorer countries and re-build them in those countries
The stadiums do look beautiful but I just don't understand how a country with qatars human rights record can get the bid.
Another thing their population is smaller than birmingham's. That just sums it up really.
What about youth football, grassroots programmes? there are dozens of more worthwhile countries to hold it that qatar, not including the rival bidders.
Don't the people of Qatar and the middle east have a right to having youth football and grassroots programmes? As the previous world cup belonged to Africa this will belong to Middle East and I am all for it
Theyre a rich country who could afford to do that stuff without the world cup.
Its all about prestige. Nothing else. They have no base.
Arsenal 1991 wrote:Also what the hell is going to happen to all the infrastructure when the world cup is over. I think almost 4 times the population of qatar went to matches the sa world cup.
Its good for the country and tourism. Ever seen anyone complain about excessive infrastructure. Qatar also plan to dismantle some of the stadiums and donate them to the poorer countries and re-build them in those countries
The stadiums do look beautiful but I just don't understand how a country with qatars human rights record can get the bid.
Another thing their population is smaller than birmingham's. That just sums it up really.
US has similar human rights record....guantanamo bay springs to mind. Why is it acceptable for them to host the thing then?
By your account smaller nations have no right to hold a world cup then? Can't see how that is right
What about youth football, grassroots programmes? there are dozens of more worthwhile countries to hold it that qatar, not including the rival bidders.
Don't the people of Qatar and the middle east have a right to having youth football and grassroots programmes? As the previous world cup belonged to Africa this will belong to Middle East and I am all for it
Theyre a rich country who could afford to do that stuff without the world cup.
Its all about prestige. Nothing else. They have no base.
In that case the world cup will never be held there. Is that right then?
Arsenal 1991 wrote:Also what the hell is going to happen to all the infrastructure when the world cup is over. I think almost 4 times the population of qatar went to matches the sa world cup.
Its good for the country and tourism. Ever seen anyone complain about excessive infrastructure. Qatar also plan to dismantle some of the stadiums and donate them to the poorer countries and re-build them in those countries
The stadiums do look beautiful but I just don't understand how a country with qatars human rights record can get the bid.
Another thing their population is smaller than birmingham's. That just sums it up really.
I was just pointing out that Ireland is in with a shot for new stadium
AS for Human Rights record, as I stated earlier:
1938
1978
1994 World Cups were held in countries with questionable human rights record. You can also add Russia to this.
Arsenal 1991 wrote:Also what the hell is going to happen to all the infrastructure when the world cup is over. I think almost 4 times the population of qatar went to matches the sa world cup.
Its good for the country and tourism. Ever seen anyone complain about excessive infrastructure. Qatar also plan to dismantle some of the stadiums and donate them to the poorer countries and re-build them in those countries
The stadiums do look beautiful but I just don't understand how a country with qatars human rights record can get the bid.
Another thing their population is smaller than birmingham's. That just sums it up really.
US has similar human rights record....guantanamo bay springs to mind. Why is it acceptable for them to host the thing then?
By your account smaller nations have no right to hold a world cup then? Can't see how that is right
The world cup should just go to the country with the best bid.
How on earth are they going to handle 4 million people descending on their country at once, when their population is 900,000. If homosexuality is still banned by the time they come to host it then that will be an utter, utter disgrace.
Iceman29 wrote:
Its good for the country and tourism. Ever seen anyone complain about excessive infrastructure. Qatar also plan to dismantle some of the stadiums and donate them to the poorer countries and re-build them in those countries
The stadiums do look beautiful but I just don't understand how a country with qatars human rights record can get the bid.
Another thing their population is smaller than birmingham's. That just sums it up really.
US has similar human rights record....guantanamo bay springs to mind. Why is it acceptable for them to host the thing then?
By your account smaller nations have no right to hold a world cup then? Can't see how that is right
The world cup should just go to the country with the best bid.
How on earth are they going to handle 4 million people descending on their country at once, when their population is 900,000. If homosexuality is still banned by the time they come to host it then that will be an utter, utter disgrace.
So who, in your opinion, had a better bid than Qatar?
What about youth football, grassroots programmes? there are dozens of more worthwhile countries to hold it that qatar, not including the rival bidders.
Don't the people of Qatar and the middle east have a right to having youth football and grassroots programmes? As the previous world cup belonged to Africa this will belong to Middle East and I am all for it
Theyre a rich country who could afford to do that stuff without the world cup.
Its all about prestige. Nothing else. They have no base.
In that case the world cup will never be held there. Is that right then?
Is it right that in the country that invented football, two generations of people won't get to see a world cup even though we have the best stadiums etc.
Arsenal 1991 wrote:Also what the hell is going to happen to all the infrastructure when the world cup is over. I think almost 4 times the population of qatar went to matches the sa world cup.
Its good for the country and tourism. Ever seen anyone complain about excessive infrastructure. Qatar also plan to dismantle some of the stadiums and donate them to the poorer countries and re-build them in those countries
The stadiums do look beautiful but I just don't understand how a country with qatars human rights record can get the bid.
Another thing their population is smaller than birmingham's. That just sums it up really.
I was just pointing out that Ireland is in with a shot for new stadium
AS for Human Rights record, as I stated earlier:
1938
1978
1994 World Cups were held in countries with questionable human rights record. You can also add Russia to this.
I would add Japan to that list. They have one of the worst mafia around in the form of the Yakuza who do whatever they like
The stadiums do look beautiful but I just don't understand how a country with qatars human rights record can get the bid.
Another thing their population is smaller than birmingham's. That just sums it up really.
US has similar human rights record....guantanamo bay springs to mind. Why is it acceptable for them to host the thing then?
By your account smaller nations have no right to hold a world cup then? Can't see how that is right
The world cup should just go to the country with the best bid.
How on earth are they going to handle 4 million people descending on their country at once, when their population is 900,000. If homosexuality is still banned by the time they come to host it then that will be an utter, utter disgrace.
So who, in your opinion, had a better bid than Qatar?
Australia, have the stadiums love sport, Im sure they would get into football.
Probably a good thing though as we don't want them being as good at football as they are at cricket and rugby!
Iceman29 wrote:
Its good for the country and tourism. Ever seen anyone complain about excessive infrastructure. Qatar also plan to dismantle some of the stadiums and donate them to the poorer countries and re-build them in those countries
The stadiums do look beautiful but I just don't understand how a country with qatars human rights record can get the bid.
Another thing their population is smaller than birmingham's. That just sums it up really.
US has similar human rights record....guantanamo bay springs to mind. Why is it acceptable for them to host the thing then?
By your account smaller nations have no right to hold a world cup then? Can't see how that is right
The world cup should just go to the country with the best bid.
How on earth are they going to handle 4 million people descending on their country at once, when their population is 900,000. If homosexuality is still banned by the time they come to host it then that will be an utter, utter disgrace.
Have Qatar done anything over the past 30 years in grassroots football, because they could certainly afford to so, more than other countries with a fraction of their wealth. What social programmes is the World Cup likely to bring into effect, or affect?
Iceman, I know you have a hard-on for Qatar, because you went there on holiday, or your brother lives in a country near to it, but would you deny that the compelling reason for FIFA executive to choose Qatar was money - after all, they had an average FIFA inspection.
I think I would have prefered a country that has tried, and tries, to insitute a football culture, than one that sees the World Cup was an affirmation of itself in the world.
Just because the Middle East hasn't had a world cup, does not mean it deserves it, and it is clearly not compelling reason enough. I have yet to see a compelling argument for Qatar.
