Still a Chance for Vancouver 2026?

[Kent]

5 hours ago, Free kick said:

Yes but with a 48 team tournament and 16 groups that would mean that there will be groups of only three teams and hence only three games per group and per city.  The initial plan, as i recall, called for 3-3-4.  Whereby one canadian city gets 4 games (ie.:  3 group stage games and one in the knowckout round) 

I don't think the World Cup ever uses the same stadium twice within the same group (maybe if you go back far enough? Not in recent memory anyways). So I highly doubt the same stadium will be used for all group stage games of any given group. They want more places to get to host the big name teams and players.

Also, maybe I missed something, but I don't think they have ever said explicitly how many knockout round games Canada or Mexico would get. At the time of the bid (not sure if it has changed since then) they said USA would host all games from the quarter final stage and onwards. Remember that the knockout stages in 2026 will start with a round of 32. So it seems unlikely that they would give Mexico and Canada each 1 knockout round game, with at least one of those countries getting a round of 16 match and not a round of 32 match.

Glad to hear there is a shot Vancouver hosts. It would be relatively underwhelming if only 2 Canadian cities were hosting games. And as has been mentioned, BC Place is probably the most suitable stadium if they can get grass installed, since it seems they won't expand BMO field permanently.

[Free kick]

10 minutes ago, Kent said:

I don't think the World Cup ever uses the same stadium twice within the same group (maybe if you go back far enough? Not in recent memory anyways). So I highly doubt the same stadium will be used for all group stage games of any given group. They want more places to get to host the big name teams and players.

Also, maybe I missed something, but I don't think they have ever said explicitly how many knockout round games Canada or Mexico would get. At the time of the bid (not sure if it has changed since then) they said USA would host all games from the quarter final stage and onwards. Remember that the knockout stages in 2026 will start with a round of 32. So it seems unlikely that they would give Mexico and Canada each 1 knockout round game, with at least one of those countries getting a round of 16 match and not a round of 32 match.

Glad to hear there is a shot Vancouver hosts. It would be relatively underwhelming if only 2 Canadian cities were hosting games. And as has been mentioned, BC Place is probably the most suitable stadium if they can get grass installed, since it seems they won't expand BMO field permanently.

Yes, now that you mention it.  In the other thread,  there was talk of clustering cities within a few groups and moving games around withing the different cities.  I seem to recall also that they were going to make every effort to keep groups and brackets, at the knockout out stage, within the same region of North American.   in order to minimize travel.

We dont know for sure if they will go from group stage straight to a 32 team knockout.  they might have a second group stage of 4 X 8

Edited February 9, 2022 by Free kick

[Unnamed Trialist]

2 hours ago, Free kick said:

But i am not sure what you are getting here Ted.  You haven't attached anything whereas others have.    Everything  i post on this topic is supported with an attachment of a published report or media release.    I read all your posts on this thread and the only claim you are making is:  "FIFA required them to sign a non-negotiable commitment to pay for any and all 'security' associated with the games no matter what the cost and wothout having any clue what the final bill would be. "  

But the govt never specifically said " security costs" anywhere.   You are not showing supporting evidence.  They talked rather in broader sense of costs in general.  Well that Dec 27, 2020 article from Post media  (if you read it) specifically says what costs that they meant.  And they talk about security costs and it says the federal govt is picking up the tab.     The key to understanding the gaps in your argument is the timelines, 2018 versus 2020.

 

PS.:  that news conference also tells us a lot.  he makes its a point to state that "they were a minority Govt in 2018".  But today they are not.  This tells us that ideologically,  some elements of the coalition would never have supported this regardless of all this stuff about guarantees, costs etc etc. Again, everyone else (other city) has to face the same FIFA rules. 

The only thing "100% accurate" about Ted's version is that is fully reflects a fragment of the official reason given by the BC government at the time. 

I am not sure what % to put on the veracity of their claims, but since FIFA terms have not changed, what are we arguing here? That BC and the city are now dropping their pants and are showing willingness to sign an absolutely irresponsible document? Obviously not. 

Because the official version Ted subscribes did not reflect the truth at the time. Anyways, Horgan has just basically admitted this with the official retraction. Any idiot knows that costs to host the WC for a city are perfectly laid out and can be consulted, it is not something new. And that the economic benefit of any major event of this nature easily outweighs the risk. 

Vancouver just went through an Olympics and a women's WC, in very recent memory, they are not fools. They just used the pretext in 2018 because the NDP were still finding their feet and did not feel like putting the matter on their plate with everything else. 

 

[Unnamed Trialist]

7 minutes ago, Free kick said:

Yes, now that you mention it.  In the other thread,  there was talk of clustering cities within a few groups and moving games around withing the different cities.  I seem to recall also that they were going to make every effort to keep groups and brackets, at the knockout out stage, within the same region of North American.   in order to minimize travel.

We dont know for sure if they will go from group stage straight to a 32 team knockout.  they might have a second group stage of 4 X 8

What you are saying coincides with the argument used by Horgan, that he was told there was a benefit to having Vancouver host if Seattle was too and other cities down the West Coast. He did not elaborate but it is what we are talking about, clusters if you like.

You enable travel for fans of a single team (which is essential as most group-stage ticketing is premised on it), you don't go nuts on time-zone changes. 

[Joe MacCarthy]

1 hour ago, Cheeta said:

Have to say as grand as it would be to see BC Place all sexed up with real grass it would be equally heartbreaking to also see it removed afterwards.

As someone who is as versed in this subject as anyone here I would be very interested in how it could be accomplished.  As a starting point I do know about the Silverdome in 1994 and the Jays recent efforts in looking to install turf in the RC.

[Soro17]

26 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

The only thing "100% accurate" about Ted's version is that is fully reflects a fragment of the official reason given by the BC government at the time. 

I am not sure what % to put on the veracity of their claims, but since FIFA terms have not changed, what are we arguing here? That BC and the city are now dropping their pants and are showing willingness to sign an absolutely irresponsible document? Obviously not. 

Because the official version Ted subscribes did not reflect the truth at the time. Anyways, Horgan has just basically admitted this with the official retraction. Any idiot knows that costs to host the WC for a city are perfectly laid out and can be consulted, it is not something new. And that the economic benefit of any major event of this nature easily outweighs the risk. 

Vancouver just went through an Olympics and a women's WC, in very recent memory, they are not fools. They just used the pretext in 2018 because the NDP were still finding their feet and did not feel like putting the matter on their plate with everything else. 

 

Yep, the NDP government at that time was very much in the 'we aren't the BC Liberals, down with our corporate overlords' phase (some might argue they are still in that phase). They also had a cabinet with zero business experience complete with several lifetime politicians, so the notion of a cost-benefit analysis and an indemnity for certain costs must have seemed overwhelming to them. They certainly didn't deal with those things at the Langara College student council. Much easier to blame FIFA with some nonsense excuse. They mayor of Vancouver is cut from the same cloth.  

[SthMelbRed]

44 minutes ago, Soro17 said:

Yep, the NDP government at that time was very much in the 'we aren't the BC Liberals, down with our corporate overlords' phase (some might argue they are still in that phase). They also had a cabinet with zero business experience complete with several lifetime politicians, so the notion of a cost-benefit analysis and an indemnity for certain costs must have seemed overwhelming to them. They certainly didn't deal with those things at the Langara College student council. Much easier to blame FIFA with some nonsense excuse. They mayor of Vancouver is cut from the same cloth.  

For fuck sake. Are you for real, or just a cartoon character?

[Unnamed Trialist]

40 minutes ago, Soro17 said:

Yep, the NDP government at that time was very much in the 'we aren't the BC Liberals, down with our corporate overlords' phase (some might argue they are still in that phase). They also had a cabinet with zero business experience complete with several lifetime politicians, so the notion of a cost-benefit analysis and an indemnity for certain costs must have seemed overwhelming to them. They certainly didn't deal with those things at the Langara College student council. Much easier to blame FIFA with some nonsense excuse. They mayor of Vancouver is cut from the same cloth.  

Thing is, may be true, but objectively the caucus is bigger, has more experience, and something else: Horgan they say is a soccer fan. Not sure if this is true, but he said so when they rejected the FIFA proposal in 2018: "I have a higher oblilgation than being a soccer fan."

Also he's an MLS for Langford and lives in Langford, I heard he was fully aware of what was going on with Pacific. 

BTW, already last summer, in July, Horgan came out saying he'd be willing to get back into talks on the matter, immediately after Montreal pulled out (also a bonehead move). So this is not even new news.

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/british-columbia-to-entertain-hosting-2026-fifa-world-cup-in-vancouver-premier-1.5507739

[Soro17]

38 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

For fuck sake. Are you for real, or just a cartoon character?

Look at their key cabinet members from the time and tell me who had any meaningful experience outside of politics. Horgan (nope), Dix (nope), Farnworth (nope), James (nope). I'll give Eby a half-credit. The list goes on. Then re-read their non-sensical justifications for the World Cup decision. They were in over their heads at the time and decided to punt for political reasons, which was their prerogative. The decision follows a grand NDP tradition of failing to build or achieve any project or event of significance. The last time they tried a big idea, we got three ferries that didn't work. They are a party of small ideas that plays its safe, which inherited a sound financial position and has preserved it, which I suppose has served us well the last two years. I am no fan of the BC Liberals, they were rightfully swept out the door by the narrowest of margins, but let's not now pretend that the NDP government at the time was filled with A-list candidates. It was a party of novices and political hacks at the time and they carried themselves accordingly. 

[Free kick]

deleted.

Edited February 9, 2022 by Free kick

[Unnamed Trialist]

2 minutes ago, Free kick said:

That one was a bit of a different scenario.  The reported costs to upgrade the Big O (in order to meet standards) was quoted and reported to $300-$500 million.  They made a decision that spending this kind of money for only three games, was not worth it.  

With the Montreal bid no one was objecting to anything related to "giving blank cheques"  or "hidden costs" or getting assurances etc etc.  Unlike the BC gov't.   With Montreal, they knew what it would cost and said:  the ROI is no good given that its only for three games.  

Thanks, I really did not know that.

Seems a shame though, but as is, we have rather thin facilities in Canada. 

[Free kick]

15 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Thanks, I really did not know that.

Seems a shame though, but as is, we have rather thin facilities in Canada. 

My figures were incorrect,  so i deleted my post.  When i checked further i realized that the Quebec govt complained becasue teh costs rose from 50 mill to 103 mill.    imaging that 😗

so yes,  they were equally naive

Edited February 10, 2022 by Free kick

[theaub]

3 hours ago, Kent said:

I don't think the World Cup ever uses the same stadium twice within the same group (maybe if you go back far enough? Not in recent memory anyways). So I highly doubt the same stadium will be used for all group stage games of any given group. They want more places to get to host the big name teams and players.

Also, maybe I missed something, but I don't think they have ever said explicitly how many knockout round games Canada or Mexico would get. At the time of the bid (not sure if it has changed since then) they said USA would host all games from the quarter final stage and onwards. Remember that the knockout stages in 2026 will start with a round of 32. So it seems unlikely that they would give Mexico and Canada each 1 knockout round game, with at least one of those countries getting a round of 16 match and not a round of 32 match.

Glad to hear there is a shot Vancouver hosts. It would be relatively underwhelming if only 2 Canadian cities were hosting games. And as has been mentioned, BC Place is probably the most suitable stadium if they can get grass installed, since it seems they won't expand BMO field permanently.

As per page 140 of the bid book, the split would be

• City 1: 4 games (Canada match #1, two other group matches, R16 match)
• City 2: 3 games (2 group stage matches, R32 match)
• City 3: 3 games (2 group stage matches including Canada match #2, R32 match)

The R32 match in City #2 and R16 match in City #1 would feature 1A (aka Canada's group) if they were to advance to that stage.

https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/3c077448dcd5c0ab/original/w3yjeu7dadt5erw26wmu-pdf.pdf

That is why I absolutely don't buy this whole '2 match promise' BS.  

I personally am extremely looking foward to the debates when (insert city here) is named as City #1 over (insert other two cities here).

e: to save everyone a trip here is the schedule

Edited February 10, 2022 by theaub

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 hour ago, Free kick said:

My figures were incorrect,  so i deleted my post.  When i checked further i realized that the Quebec govt complained becasue teh costs rose from 50 mill to 103 mill.    imaging that 😗

so yes,  they were equally naive

I'm not going to take back my like just because you did a bit of "research"!

Anyways, so you are saying that the Big O is in conditions to host a WC game? At least we know that much.

[Free kick]

22 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

I'm not going to take back my like just because you did a bit of "research"!

Anyways, so you are saying that the Big O is in conditions to host a WC game? At least we know that much.

I think that the Big O upgrade costs of 300-500 Mill were planned regardless of the WC 2026 requirements.  That's why i removed my post.   I know for sure that i read that 300-500 mill figure somewhere but when i searched old articles from Quebec they kept quoting an increase of costs from 50 to 103 Mill as the reason of the pull out.

[ted]

7 hours ago, Free kick said:

But i am not sure what you are getting here Ted.  You haven't attached anything whereas others have.    Everything  i post on this topic is supported with an attachment of a published report or media release.

Nope, nothing has been posted that contradicts, "my version".

For a good summary from March 14, 2018 you can read this Article by Rob Williams from Daily Hive which includes the following statement from Lisa Beare, BC’s Minister of Tourism, Arts and Culture:
 

Quote

 

So far, the bid committee has rejected our requests to clarify how much British Columbians could be expected to contribute. And they have declined to negotiate with the province regarding the concerns we raised.

Should the bid committee reconsider, our door remains open to bringing some of the 2026 World Cup games to Vancouver.

 

If you have something from FIFA, CONCACAF, or the CSA that challenges, "my version" I look forward to reading it.

[xcalibre]

Have to think they still desperately want the FIFA congress that goes alongside the World Cup in Vancouver as well, or at least some showpiece events. Remember half these guys will try and avoid US airspace wherever possible

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 hour ago, ted said:

Nope, nothing has been posted that contradicts, "my version".

For a good summary from March 14, 2018 you can read this Article by Rob Williams from Daily Hive which includes the following statement from Lisa Beare, BC’s Minister of Tourism, Arts and Culture:
 

If you have something from FIFA, CONCACAF, or the CSA that challenges, "my version" I look forward to reading it.

"What my Premier Horgan said..."

[TGAA_Star]

16 hours ago, Kent said:

I don't think the World Cup ever uses the same stadium twice within the same group (maybe if you go back far enough? Not in recent memory anyways). So I highly doubt the same stadium will be used for all group stage games of any given group. They want more places to get to host the big name teams and players.

Also, maybe I missed something, but I don't think they have ever said explicitly how many knockout round games Canada or Mexico would get. At the time of the bid (not sure if it has changed since then) they said USA would host all games from the quarter final stage and onwards. Remember that the knockout stages in 2026 will start with a round of 32. So it seems unlikely that they would give Mexico and Canada each 1 knockout round game, with at least one of those countries getting a round of 16 match and not a round of 32 match.

Glad to hear there is a shot Vancouver hosts. It would be relatively underwhelming if only 2 Canadian cities were hosting games. And as has been mentioned, BC Place is probably the most suitable stadium if they can get grass installed, since it seems they won't expand BMO field permanently.

Yeah but for 2026, BMO Field are still expanding regardless. But that expansion probably won't start until 2024 at the latest.

BC Place putting in the grass is inevitable but probably won't happen until '24 or '25

[Daniel]

13 hours ago, Free kick said:

I think that the Big O upgrade costs of 300-500 Mill were planned regardless of the WC 2026 requirements.  That's why i removed my post.   I know for sure that i read that 300-500 mill figure somewhere but when i searched old articles from Quebec they kept quoting an increase of costs from 50 to 103 Mill as the reason of the pull out.

Pretty sure there are no upgrades planned for the Big O. We've been waiting for a roof replacement for 23 years and counting... It's politically suicide to say "we're investing $500M+ to redo the roof and renovate the Big O". So there's that, even before the retracted $100M direct provincial contribution to the WC operations.

There's broad social consensus in QC and Montreal that FIFA's conditions were unacceptable (even among soccer fans): blank cheque, plus no other major events in the city for the ENTIRETY of the WC, plus buffer time before and after. For a city like Montreal, who's made of summer festivals, this was a non-starter.

This article in French is a good summary of the situation.

[EJsens1]

43 minutes ago, Daniel said:

There's broad social consensus in QC and Montreal that FIFA's conditions were unacceptable (even among soccer fans): blank cheque, plus no other major events in the city for the ENTIRETY of the WC, plus buffer time before and after. For a city like Montreal, who's made of summer festivals, this was a non-starter.

Really?  That’s a stipulation?  The first thing that comes to mind with Montreal for that is the Grand Prix.

The other big one would be the Blue Jays.  I don’t know if their games constitutes major events as they have so many games, but in theory the Jays can jam around 50 grand into Rogers Centre every night (I realize they don’t get crowds like that). I can’t imagine the city saying to the Jays (who have been there for almost 50 years) or MLB you have to be out of town for that duration of time because FIFA said. Plus I can’t see they Jays/MLB giving a shit what FIFA says.

[Free kick]

56 minutes ago, Daniel said:

, plus no other major events in the city for the ENTIRETY of the WC, plus buffer time before and after. For a cit

This article in French is a good summary of the situation.

Yes, i recall that being mentioned.  That meant no Grand prix

[Free kick]

36 minutes ago, EJsens1 said:

Really?  That’s a stipulation?  The first thing that comes to mind with Montreal for that is the Grand Prix.

The other big one would be the Blue Jays.  I don’t know if their games constitutes major events as they have so many games, but in theory the Jays can jam around 50 grand into Rogers Centre every night (I realize they don’t get crowds like that). I can’t imagine the city saying to the Jays (who have been there for almost 50 years) or MLB you have to be out of town for that duration of time because FIFA said. Plus I can’t see they Jays/MLB giving a shit what FIFA says.

FIFA has a non compete clause for their events.   In other words, they request that no other major sporting event (or even no other major non-sporting event) occurs in the city hosting a fifa event during that time of the FIFA event.   This is nothing new,  this applied for the U20 WC in 2007 when it was held in Canada.

Edited February 10, 2022 by Free kick

[Approve My Account Pls]

12 minutes ago, Free kick said:

FIFA has a non compete clause for their events.   In other words, they request that no other major sporting event (or even no other major non-sporting event) occurs in the city hosting a fifa event during that time of the FIFA event.   This is nothing new,  this applied for the U20 WC in 2007 when it was held in Canada.

Could they not just move the Grand Prix? FIFA used the Qatar Grand Prix as a promotional tool for the World Cup (and Arab Cup) earlier this year and F1 has shown they're able to do some gymnastics with their schedule over the past few years

[theaub]

34 minutes ago, Free kick said:

FIFA has a non compete clause for their events.   In other words, they request that no other major sporting event (or even no other major non-sporting event) occurs in the city hosting a fifa event during that time of the FIFA event.   This is nothing new,  this applied for the U20 WC in 2007 when it was held in Canada.

Yeah I'm sure Major League Baseball is just going to shut down in 2026 for the World Cup...

(also needless to say the Jays didn't play on the road for a month in 2007).

Edited February 10, 2022 by theaub