DON’T BELIEVE ALL THE BADMOUTHING OF WORLD CUP BID
North America’s pursuit of soccer’s biggest event will not be an expensive boondoggle
“Catastrophic” costs. “Blank cheques.”
A “heist” like no other. You’d think FIFA suits were set to descend on Canada in black helicopters and tinted SUVs.
The hyperbole surrounding North America’s “United 2026” World Cup bid has been extreme.
It’s been ratcheted to the point Morocco, the North American group’s only opposition, highlighted gun safety as part of its antagonistic pitch.
Meanwhile, few have bothered to scrutinize the looming disaster and boondoggle Morocco presents. Domestic fearmongering is an easier sell.
The aforementioned phrases were just a snippet of what one informed source connected to United 2026 said amounted to “misinformed” claims about a FIFA bid process consisting of two options: A “solid” United bid or a risky Moroccan proposal worthy of a trash bin.
Remember, the North Africans struggled to put on a seamless seven-team Club World Cup four years ago when heavy rains wreaked havoc at Prince Moulay Abdellah Stadium. Embarrassment ensued when stadium workers took to the pitch with giant sponges and buckets in a laughable attempt to alleviate field-level flooding.
The country’s disgraced sports minister was sacked after it was revealed builders cut corners and didn’t bother installing a drainage system beneath a pitch that was supposed to host the world’s best footballers.
“(The Moroccan bid) couldn’t host a national championship,” the well-placed source quipped, adding Morocco’s plan to blow $16 billion — and likely “way more” — is an unfathomable injustice to its people.
The Moroccan bid is a disaster waiting to happen compared to a safe United 2026 bid unfairly criticized at home.
Again, you’d think FIFA were conjuring up a con job of epic proportions based on some of the comments.
“To a certain extent, it was surprising,” Canada bid director Peter Montopoli said, adding “maybe the columnists haven’t done all their research” before trashing Canada’s bid to welcome a men’s World Cup.
Critics warn of huge and unpredictable costs associated with hosting FIFA’s marquee tournament.
“It’s not accurate. It’s not accurate at all,” Montopoli responded. “The candidate host cities have a keen awareness of what their expenditures (could be).”
There are few surprises — and nothing “catastrophic.”
Host cities are on the hook for four initiatives, he said: Beautification, public transportation, FIFA Fan Fests and local security.
The responsibilities aren’t daunting when placed side by side with revenue generation and economic impact.
Beautification is provided by FIFA at no cost to host cities, while public transport demands are offset through ticket sales.
The FIFA Fan Fests, Montopoli said, provide an opportunity for cost recovery through revenue generation. Even local security costs are recovered in “certain ways,” he said.
“We felt it’s a pretty good model for candidate host cities to regroup their costs,” he added.
The Canadian Soccer Association claims FIFA events held in Canada have generated $750 million in economic impact.
Hosting a portion of a men’s World Cup would see that number balloon to $1.3 billion. Montopoli called it a “substantial” return on investment.
Remind us again why the B.C. government wasn’t interested in that infusion of cash?
There’s more to that story, a source said ominously.
But rather than focus on provinces set to lose out on the opportunity, the United Bid is moving forward with Edmonton, Montreal and Toronto, and dispelling erroneous allegations levelled against them.
“It’s unfair for X, Y, Z journalist to say something based off something they cherry-picked,” Montopoli said.
Case in point: The hoopla surrounding FIFA’s request to temporarily suspend labour laws.
“There are (specialized) positions for these World Cups … that require an international worker,” Montopoli explained, noting “world class” TV directors — specializing in world football — are the simplest example.
Additional broadcasting jobs and responsibilities would be filled by Canadians.
“It wasn’t a fair assessment if someone didn’t understand the application of laws,” Montopoli said.
Some detractors have highlighted Brazil as being an epic boondoggle that must be considered.
The 2014 World Cup displaced vulnerable Brazilians and cost an eye-blinking $15 billion, leaving a sour taste in the mouths of FIFA critics, many insisting the embattled organization does more harm than good.
“I think, maybe, the context was missing,” Montopoli said. “The context is that we’re not hosting 100 per cent of the FIFA World Cup in 2026. If we look at the strict numbers, we’re hosting 12.5 per cent of the competition — which is 10 matches. That scope is so much narrower and less in terms of the responsibility to a country. I read a lot about Brazil and maybe some of the issues with Brazil hosting in 2014,” Montopoli said.
“But we’re not building stadiums in Canada. We’re not hosting it to the tune of however many billions of dollars it was. Russia is building stadiums for billions of dollars. That’s just not our case. It’s not a fair story if someone doesn’t look at it from 12.5 per cent; 10 matches in Canada in relation to past competitions.”
And what about the immeasurable impact FIFA events have had on this country?
Montopoli questions whether Toronto’s BMO Field would exist if the CSA didn’t bring the FIFA U20 World Cup to Canada a decade ago. The stadium brought Toronto FC.
Toronto FC, in some ways, provoked the Montreal Impact and Vancouver Whitecaps to buy into the league.
FIFA tournaments have boosted the sport for Canadian men and women.
“I still go across the country and people say, ‘Wow, that was a great Women’s World Cup.’ Or, ‘That changed my life because it meant everything to me and my daughter,’ ” Montopoli said. “How do you measure that? I’m saddened some journalists aren’t able to see that part of nationbuilding.”
The 2015 FIFA Women’s World Cup should be remembered as the greatest female competition in history, he said.
“If we’re lucky enough for 2026 we could recreate everything we captured on the women’s side with the men.”
It’s why there should be an outpouring of support for United 2026 to combat confused comments the movers and shakers in Edmonton, Toronto and Montreal rightfully ignored in throwing their support behind the bid.
“I’ve read that FIFA was trying to get away with things,” Montopoli said. “It’s just not true in our country. It’s just not possible, nor are we asking for it … The federal government decides what is possible within the laws and jurisdiction and constitution of the country. We feel very comfortable.”
Seems reasonable, doesn’t it?