Saudi Arabia World Cup 2034: Why is it controversial? Will it be in the winter? FIFA's key questions and process explained | Football News

Why is Saudi Arabia a controversial host country?

The situation in Saudi Arabia is that there is no free speech, there is no free press, there is gender inequality. Women and girls have few rights. It is an absolute monarchy. Human rights groups say it has one of the worst human rights records in the world. You are not allowed to express any political views, you are not allowed to criticize the monarchy.

Saudi would say that we are changing the country, the country is opening up to the world, our society is changing, we are a country that has been dependent on oil, we want to be a tourist destination, an entertainment, financial and tech destination. hub and that's why we invest in sports'.

Critics would say that's only part of the story. The biggest part of the story is that you are doing this to wash your image with fun. You're using sport to change your image, to project soft power, so when people think of Saudi Arabia, they don't think of human rights abuses, for example, they think on Cristiano Ronaldo, Formula 1 or golf. I think these are valid concerns.

FIFA has said that human rights have been part of the bid evaluation process but many believe that human rights have not played a sufficient role in the process.

Why has the FIFA process also attracted criticism?

After having a very controversial vote in 2010, when Russia got 2018 and Qatar 2022, we thought that was going to be a catalyst for change, where everything in the future was to be open and transparent. But now we have a situation where everything seems to be done behind closed doors. And it is difficult to defend a process where there is only one bid for each World Cup.

Surely there are more countries around the world who want to host the World Cup than our single bids for each edition?

For example, 2030, with the World Cup on three continents – because there will also be games in South America, as well as Spain, Portugal and Morocco – which will eliminate Europe, Africa and South America in right away when it comes to hospitality. World Cup in 2034.

And FIFA said because of the principle of distribution of the confederation, 2034 must be in Asia or Oceania. They announced this last October. They said anyone who wants to host has 25 days to submit their applications. And, within minutes, Saudi Arabia had submitted its bid. No one else had time to make an offer because it takes months and months to put together an offer. Australia thought about it but decided not to bid too soon.

It is very controversial to have the World Cup in Saudi Arabia, but at least if we had had an open and transparent process where there had been other bids, had there been media scrutiny, had there been there was an open and free vote, then we could say that Saudi Arabia won fair and square.

However, FIFA will say that its auditors have concluded that both evaluation processes were implemented with objectivity, integrity and transparency.

And the FIFA Congress went to confirm the World Cup online?

Normally you would have a FIFA Congress where all the best people from the 211 member associations would fly in. There would be a lot of journalists, there would be opportunities for us to talk to a lot of people, there would be a press conference afterwards. But everything was done online, which from our point of view means there is less media scrutiny.

FIFA would say it makes more sense in this day and age and we need to be aware of our carbon footprint to do it almost.

But should we have ended up in a situation where we had the FIFA Congress online only, there was no real vote, it was done by proposal? I would have been much happier if we had had a process where there had been competitive bids, where they were not on the fast track, where we had checked with the media and where we could to have asked the right questions and it was really the vote. real vote and we could report who voted for what and what they won.

What is the position of the FA, SFA and Welsh FA?

The FAs of England, Scotland and Wales supported both applications.

Should the FAs take a stand? I think a lot of people would say it would be good if they came out and stood up for what they believed in on a point of principle. But I think sometimes things get very political and you have to bring a lot of other things into your decision making process.

For example, we know that if England qualify for the World Cup in 2034, the England team would go there. So would the FA look like hypocrites if they hadn't supported him? And also we know that English companies do a lot of business in Saudi Arabia.

The Prime Minister was there on Monday talking to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, inviting him to a football match in England, strengthening defense partnerships between the two countries. So you could say, well if everyone else is doing business in Saudi Arabia, why shouldn't football be doing business there too?

Will it be a winter World Cup?

The World Cup has traditionally always been in the summer, until Qatar in 2022 when it moved to the winter. The weather in Saudi is similar to Qatar so it is difficult to see how we can have a summer World Cup in 2024.

I have spoken to the president of the Saudi FA, the head of the bid, and they have always told me that we are not ruling anything, we are looking at the possibility of having the World Cup in the summer

The international fixture calendar has only been agreed until 2030 so we will have to wait and see, but most observers would tell you we are looking at another winter World Cup.

We already know how tight the fixture calendar is, with the Champions League also expanding. I think we are looking at the World Cup in January or February.

There are some people – I am not one of them – who would say, 'we would like to have the winter World Cup in Qatar because the quality of football was better, because the players were not so tired, because it was it was the middle of the season. and it was long, dark nights in Western Europe and it was good to have a big competition to watch in the winter'. That's the only kind of positive spin I think could be put on it.

How did the Saudi bid get the highest evaluation score ever from FIFA?

Even though there were only bids for each World Cup, FIFA still said you have to go through the ​proper bid process. 'We will evaluate applications, we will send people to the applicant countries to look at their applications and stadiums'. And, as part of the bidding process, FIFA will now also look at the human rights of the countries bidding to host the World Cup.

Controversially, in their bid evaluation reports, published close to midnight on Friday night, Saudi Arabia received the highest mark ever given for a bid. I think it was 4.2 out of 5.

The bid evaluation report stated that the human rights risk posed by hosting the World Cup in Saudi Arabia was moderate. A lot of people have criticized the process, they've criticized that tender evaluation report.

Is this a sports wash?

This is a very important question. Why does Saudi Arabia want the World Cup? Saudi Arabia's sports minister has said above, that the crown jewels of world sport they want are F1, which they have, the World Cup, which they are going to get, and also the Olympics , which I have. I'm sure they will be looking at them in the future.

Why do they want it? Okay, critics will say it's down to the washing of sports, as they want to change their image on the world stage. So when people think of Saudi Arabia, they don't think of a brutal, oppressive regime. They think instead of Cristiano Ronaldo, or of Lewis Hamilton, or they think of the World Cup.

The Saudis themselves, the Saudi officials I've spoken to, will say that's not true, it's not related to sports washing, that's a very simplistic way of looking at it. “The reason we are doing it is because we want to change our country and our economy from a country dependent on oil revenue, to an economy based on tourism, entertainment. We want to turn Saudi Arabia into a financial and technological center'.

When it comes to human rights and reforms, they will tell you that they have made some reforms, but there is still a lot of work to be done. Critics say that many of these reforms are superficial and are simply done for PR purposes.

And the situation on the ground when it comes to civil liberties and human rights has not changed much in Saudi Arabia.