Tweet
What did England promise Africa or the Carribbean ?Kenny Dalglish: If Qatar can be hosts of the World Cup, why not Scotland?
Last updated at 1:15 PM on 5th December 2010Some of the more extreme reaction to Russia being given the World Cup seems to revolve around the theory that England is so detested around the globe, it will never be awarded anything.
I don’t really understand where the paranoia is coming from. After all, isn’t London getting ready to host the Olympic Games?
As a proud Scot who has spent the last 33 years living happily in England, I like to think I’ve got a balanced view about these things and I think what counted more against England was the fact there is a great deal of wealth here.
And FIFA probably felt the need was greater in Russia to host the tournament. I think that was the crucial thing in the vote, more crucial than people not liking England.
And the winner is... Why can't Scotland follow in Qatar's footsteps?
FIFA comment a lot on the ethos of the football family and helping the football family.
Having the World Cup for the first time will help Russia build new stadiums, develop the game for kids at grassroots level and improve facilities at the top end.
The English 2018 bid was excellent but you can see the logic in it if FIFA decided that the strength of the Premier League and the facilities meant a World Cup would have less impact here.
The real surprise was England received just two votes, of course, and there will be plenty of controversy and accusations surrounding that. I don’t subscribe to the view it was the Panorama programme or media scrutiny — the only outside vote England got was someone mentioned in the programme — I just think it showed they wanted Russia to get it rather than England and wanted to put the matter to rest as quickly as possible.
More from Kenny Dalglish...
For me, Qatar is the more difficult decision to defend. To give a tournament of the stature of the World Cup to a country with a population of only 1.5million looks a bit contradictory.
I know Qatar stressed the legacy and said they are going to flatpack their stadiums and send them to Africa afterwards. Why wait? Why not use the money and build the stadiums in Africa right away if it’s a good and moral thing to do?
What the Qatar victory does, however, is give every small nation the belief now that they can also host the World Cup.
If England are so miffed by what has happened to the 2018 campaign that they don’t want to bid for 2030, why shouldn’t Scotland have a go?
Just because England might not want it shouldn’t mean it not coming to Britain. Scotland’s population is three times that of Qatar and they’ve got a proper football history. The old theory that a country the size of Scotland couldn’t possibly run a World Cup has gone out of the window since Thursday’s vote, so I think it’s worthwhile to have a look at it.
And I don’t mean a joint-bid with England or Ireland or Wales, I mean a pure Scottish bid with Hampden, Ibrox, Celtic Park, Murrayfield, brand new stadiums in Aberdeen, Inverness and Dundee. Why not? The World Cup is achievable for anyone now.
I don’t think Scotland’s reputation is reliant on what England do or don’t do. It’s a separate country within the football family.
I hope England don’t over-react by losing out on the World Cup bid. Those who want to quit FIFA or withdraw from playing in the World Cup aren’t making any sense at all.
But if this week’s furore does cause a complete breakdown in relations between England and FIFA, don’t write off the chances of the World Cup still coming to Britain. Scotland can justify bidding for the World Cup. And after what has happened to Qatar, they might even win the vote.
KENNY'S CHALKBOARD: Liverpool find holes in Villa's gameplan
Aston Villa's results have not been great under Gerard Houllier but you cannot fault their entertainment value.
Villa play a very open game, which leads me to think there will be plenty of chances at Anfield on Monday night, just as there were in Liverpool’s match at Tottenham last weekend.
Villa have injury problems but Houllier has available a group of players who are more comfortable when going forward than they are defending.
Stewart Downing, Ciaran Clark, Stephen Ireland and Gabriel Agbonlahor all have creative elements to their games and when they are on song, as they were in the recent 2-2 draw at home against Manchester United, it looks great.
But the lack of defensive grit in the Villa team also gives the opposition a chance, which is why Houllier may decide to use Barry Bannan in a holding role to protect the backline as his team-mates bomb forward.
I’m sure Liverpool’s players like Raul Meireles, Fernando Torres and Joe Cole, who I think will play some part, will be licking their lips at the opportunities and space that might come their way.
With two attack-mind teams, expect thrills, spills and goals at Anfield.
Enlarge
Let’s hear it from the referees
Refereeing problems north of the border were highlighted by last weekend’s strike action but don’t think there aren’t similar issues in England.
Of course, referees want respect but they still have to earn it. Not only through their professionalism but also by explaining how they came to make certain decisions and even owning up to mistakes when they occur.
If you stick a manager in front of a microphone minutes after a defeat and the first question is about a refereeing decision, it is inevitable the response will be emotional.
But what would take the heat out of the situation is if the official also came out or gave a statement giving his side of things.
Instead of speculating, we would then know why a certain decision happened.
Lessons to be learnt: Dougie McDonald reacts after talking to assistant Steven Caven
I think referees are worried that having to explain themselves will make them appear weak. I take the opposite view. Nobody is immune from making mistakes — players and managers do it all the time — so I think referees will be more respected and look stronger if they are more open about their decisions.
In Scotland, Dougie McDonald’s retirement from refereeing was a bit late maybe but he still deserves credit for doing it. His removal from the scene after he admitted lying to Celtic manager Neil Lennon will calm the waters between bosses and officials and they can now sit down together and sort something out.
Like most managers, I’ve said a lot of things after a game about referees when emotions were running high. But I would have appreciated and learned things from hearing the ref’s point of view as well.
More openness might prevent a repeat of the Scottish situation in England.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz17FfkSNF7
Last updated at 1:15 PM on 5th December 2010Some of the more extreme reaction to Russia being given the World Cup seems to revolve around the theory that England is so detested around the globe, it will never be awarded anything.
I don’t really understand where the paranoia is coming from. After all, isn’t London getting ready to host the Olympic Games?
As a proud Scot who has spent the last 33 years living happily in England, I like to think I’ve got a balanced view about these things and I think what counted more against England was the fact there is a great deal of wealth here.
And FIFA probably felt the need was greater in Russia to host the tournament. I think that was the crucial thing in the vote, more crucial than people not liking England.
And the winner is... Why can't Scotland follow in Qatar's footsteps?FIFA comment a lot on the ethos of the football family and helping the football family.
Having the World Cup for the first time will help Russia build new stadiums, develop the game for kids at grassroots level and improve facilities at the top end.
The English 2018 bid was excellent but you can see the logic in it if FIFA decided that the strength of the Premier League and the facilities meant a World Cup would have less impact here.
The real surprise was England received just two votes, of course, and there will be plenty of controversy and accusations surrounding that. I don’t subscribe to the view it was the Panorama programme or media scrutiny — the only outside vote England got was someone mentioned in the programme — I just think it showed they wanted Russia to get it rather than England and wanted to put the matter to rest as quickly as possible.
More from Kenny Dalglish...
- Kenny Dalglish: Ancelotti is the real Special One, not manipulator Mourinho 27/11/10
- Kenny Dalglish: Don't crucify the kids, England's best team will beat France 20/11/10
- Kenny Dalglish: Oh Andy Carroll, please don't be a fool... 13/11/10
- Kenny Dalglish: City are paying the price for spending too much too soon 06/11/10
- Kenny Dalglish: Managing Newcastle is crazy, as Hughton is now finding out 30/10/10
- KENNY DALGLISH: Manchester United's players can't blame Rooney for having ambition 23/10/10
- Kenny Dalglish: After all the glory years, this Mersey derby is now more a battle for survival 16/10/10
- Kenny Dalglish: Wilshere is good enough and old enough for England 09/10/10
- VIEW FULL ARCHIVE
For me, Qatar is the more difficult decision to defend. To give a tournament of the stature of the World Cup to a country with a population of only 1.5million looks a bit contradictory.
I know Qatar stressed the legacy and said they are going to flatpack their stadiums and send them to Africa afterwards. Why wait? Why not use the money and build the stadiums in Africa right away if it’s a good and moral thing to do?
What the Qatar victory does, however, is give every small nation the belief now that they can also host the World Cup.
If England are so miffed by what has happened to the 2018 campaign that they don’t want to bid for 2030, why shouldn’t Scotland have a go?
Just because England might not want it shouldn’t mean it not coming to Britain. Scotland’s population is three times that of Qatar and they’ve got a proper football history. The old theory that a country the size of Scotland couldn’t possibly run a World Cup has gone out of the window since Thursday’s vote, so I think it’s worthwhile to have a look at it.
And I don’t mean a joint-bid with England or Ireland or Wales, I mean a pure Scottish bid with Hampden, Ibrox, Celtic Park, Murrayfield, brand new stadiums in Aberdeen, Inverness and Dundee. Why not? The World Cup is achievable for anyone now.
I don’t think Scotland’s reputation is reliant on what England do or don’t do. It’s a separate country within the football family.
I hope England don’t over-react by losing out on the World Cup bid. Those who want to quit FIFA or withdraw from playing in the World Cup aren’t making any sense at all.
But if this week’s furore does cause a complete breakdown in relations between England and FIFA, don’t write off the chances of the World Cup still coming to Britain. Scotland can justify bidding for the World Cup. And after what has happened to Qatar, they might even win the vote.
KENNY'S CHALKBOARD: Liverpool find holes in Villa's gameplan
Aston Villa's results have not been great under Gerard Houllier but you cannot fault their entertainment value.
Villa play a very open game, which leads me to think there will be plenty of chances at Anfield on Monday night, just as there were in Liverpool’s match at Tottenham last weekend.
Villa have injury problems but Houllier has available a group of players who are more comfortable when going forward than they are defending.
Stewart Downing, Ciaran Clark, Stephen Ireland and Gabriel Agbonlahor all have creative elements to their games and when they are on song, as they were in the recent 2-2 draw at home against Manchester United, it looks great.
But the lack of defensive grit in the Villa team also gives the opposition a chance, which is why Houllier may decide to use Barry Bannan in a holding role to protect the backline as his team-mates bomb forward.
I’m sure Liverpool’s players like Raul Meireles, Fernando Torres and Joe Cole, who I think will play some part, will be licking their lips at the opportunities and space that might come their way.
With two attack-mind teams, expect thrills, spills and goals at Anfield.
Enlarge
Let’s hear it from the referees
Refereeing problems north of the border were highlighted by last weekend’s strike action but don’t think there aren’t similar issues in England.
Of course, referees want respect but they still have to earn it. Not only through their professionalism but also by explaining how they came to make certain decisions and even owning up to mistakes when they occur.
If you stick a manager in front of a microphone minutes after a defeat and the first question is about a refereeing decision, it is inevitable the response will be emotional.
But what would take the heat out of the situation is if the official also came out or gave a statement giving his side of things.
Instead of speculating, we would then know why a certain decision happened.
Lessons to be learnt: Dougie McDonald reacts after talking to assistant Steven Caven I think referees are worried that having to explain themselves will make them appear weak. I take the opposite view. Nobody is immune from making mistakes — players and managers do it all the time — so I think referees will be more respected and look stronger if they are more open about their decisions.
In Scotland, Dougie McDonald’s retirement from refereeing was a bit late maybe but he still deserves credit for doing it. His removal from the scene after he admitted lying to Celtic manager Neil Lennon will calm the waters between bosses and officials and they can now sit down together and sort something out.
Like most managers, I’ve said a lot of things after a game about referees when emotions were running high. But I would have appreciated and learned things from hearing the ref’s point of view as well.
More openness might prevent a repeat of the Scottish situation in England.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz17FfkSNF7
Comment