User:ILoveSport2006/sandbox
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Brzil win good stadiums over Europe bid Europe bid is good but lacked stadium and made no sense to return Europe Club world cup should go to Europe bid About time South America got WWC Brazil lack practicallity but redeemes with great stadiums and potencial development benefits Europe can no longer fob off feds with small stadiums, England should take notes. compensatio for 2030
This is the user sandbox of ILoveSport2006. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user and is not an encyclopedia article. Create or edit your own sandbox here. Other sandboxes: Main sandbox | Template sandbox Finished writing a draft article? Are you ready to request review of it by an experienced editor for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Submit your draft for review! |
Brazil are deserved winners in 2027 FIFA Women's World Cup bidding
A week ago in Bangkok, Thailand, 211 FIFA members had a big decision thta would choose the road that growth of women football would take in the near future. There were two great bids with differing strenghs, but also different naritives. Was it South America's turn to host the biggest women's sporting event in the world or would Europe reign supreme and host the event for the fourth time?
In the end, after a tight battle, the Brazilian bid brought the Women's World Cup the South America, with the golden letter showcasing a Bralian flag sparking excitement from the bidding team. Brazil's bid ended up winning by 119 votes to Belgium, Germany and Netherlands' 79.
My Thoughts
Overall, the right choice was made. While it wasn't South America's time in 2023 to receive the Women's World vup with the Colombian bid, Brazil, after withdrawing their 2023 bid came in this time round with more moventum than before. Unlike in 2023, where their bid came out of nothing, the 2027 bid was known about early in the bidding process. The government of Brazil offered support early on, plus the federsation lobbied to FIFA during the Copa Liberidores final at the Maracana in November 2023. In regards to the South American bids, the biggest difference between the Colombian bid in 2023 and Brazil's now is the plethora of stadiums the Brazilians had on offer. Brazil's stadiums were undeniably exceptional. Ten stadiums from the 2014 World Cup with lowest capacity stadium being the 42,788 capacity Arena Pantanal in Cuiabá. To put that into propective, Switzerland's biggest stadium for the 2025 Women's Euro, the St. Jakob-Park in Basel, is only 38,512. The Arena Pantanal has a bigger capacity than seven of the ten stadiums used at the 2023 Women's World Cup. Even though concerns have been raised about the lack of activity in some grounds, especially in Manaus, those worries should be fixed in no time. Practicallity is the only major problem in Brazil's bid, so while teams can be transported to each host city relatively easily by plane, fans of a country might struggle to keep up with their nation's journey unless you have money. Although, this issue could in thoery be fixed if groups were regionalised. An important plus for the application was the pontencial for subtanial growth in a whole continent that loves football but hasn't given women football the same interest as in Europe and North America. This tournament could be a huge stepping stone for the growth in women's football in South America. It's still a known fact that despite the leaps and bounds the women's game has made in the region, more still needs to be done to ensure a sustained development continues and that a platform, in the way of televising rights for league and better time slots etc, exists.
Now for a bit on the losing bid. The bid from Belgium, Germany and Netherlands was the first known application we had. The bid was great, and excessantly practial tournament with every proposed venue at a 300km radius of each other. Each national team would've had great support from their country and the stadiums would've almost 100% been sold out for every game, which is a slight worry I have for Brazil's bid. If I am being honest, the worst part of the bid was Belgium. Belgium offered very little. Unlike in Netherlands and Germany, where their venues were superb and those two clearly put all in their effort in the bid, Belgium seemed lazy. Belgium's proposed venues were only 20,000 capacity stadiums in medium-sized cities such as Anderlecht, Gent, Genk and Charloaroi (although Gent is a very nice city). The biggest three venues in Belgium, based in Brussels, Brugges and Liege, were not picked, with Brussels' excuse being they didn't have time to renevate the biggest stadium in the country's roof. It would have been a great backdrop for the Women' World Vyp in Belgium but they didn't bother. You could debate that FIFA should've statred the bidding process quicker and given the winning bid more time to prepare, but while that's a fair argument, the Belgians knew how much time they had and if they weren't able to give their best, they should've withdrawn as a co-host and let the other two apply instead. Also, in the bid book, it states that the legal framework of Belgium was also deemed very difficult to FIFA, which definately hindered the bid too. It is a shame because Netherlands and Germany really tried their best. Anpther big problem in the European's bid was their region they were reprrsenting. Had Europe won, it would've been the fourth Women's World Cup held in the region, which, to me, just wouldn't have made sense. Europe has a lot other competitions that at the moment do a solid job of continuing Europe's development of the sport (Women's Euro and Women's Champions League), so hosting a Women World Cup just isn't needed and wouldn't be used as well in regards to developmeting women's football as it could in other regions, like South America. They did propose a good legacy plan, promising to use all the revenue made by the tournament to invest in women's football across the world. Although, it's too vague in my opinion and doesn't merit giving the World Cup to Europe again.
Also, a big pet peeve I have when nations organise women's sporting events is when they don't used the best facilities in their country. But these days, especially in women's football, there is no excuse for it. So like I mentioned before, where Belgium's portion of the bid lacked great stadiums, Brazil's bid offered ten world-class venues that many any nation would dream of about having one of them. It's a common practice in women's football that is slowly becomig rarer and rarer to see. European bids in the past could get away with not using their best stadiums, (take France and England in recent history) but women's football is getting igger and bigger by te year and there's no excuse to not use the best you have got. So when Brazil's bid contains their best venues, it is not not a good look from Europe that they are not doing the same (it led to the European's bid getting a medium risk assessment on their stadiums, compared to Brazil's low risk). I hope my country England is taking notes for their future bid because from now on, only the best facilities are sufficient for a Women's World Cup bid.
However, despite my issues, I do think that Belgium, Germany and Netherlands could be great hosts for the inaugural Women's Club World Cup in 2026 due to their pratcially and likely relaxed rules regading stadiums for the new competition.
From a FIFA prospective also, giving CONMEBOL the 2027 tournsamnet after not really receiving the 2030 World Cup could act as the biggest compensation, and the biggest one so far, following a surge in South Americans hosting FIFA competitions.
To end this article, I will make a blunt statement. It was South America's time.
Club world cup should go to Europe bid