MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, September 19th 2018 - 11:14 UTC

FIFA tells Brazil beer must be sold at the 2014 World Cup matches

Thursday, January 19th 2012 - 05:55 UTC
Full article 15 comments

Beer must be sold at all venues hosting matches in the 2014 World Cup in Brazil, football's world governing body, Fifa, has insisted. Fifa General Secretary, Jerome Valcke, said the right to sell beer must be enshrined in a World Cup law the Brazilian Congress is considering. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Teaboy2

    Well nothing agianst Brazil as no doubt if they can come to an agreement with FIFA, the world cup in brazil would be a great spectacle to watch. But in the event they can not agree and/or the infastruce is not going to be in place or completed to a degree where it can cope with the influx of traveling fans. Then the obivious alternative would be England, since we were robbed of the 2018 world cup and considering we have the infastructure already in place and the finest and most famous stadiums in the world, that are more than capable of hosting world cup matches and of course the final itself. Hell we could even have the 3rd place match played at the olympic stadium.

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 12:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Idlehands

    I hope that Brazil tells FIFA to get lost and I wish the UK would do the same to the IOC. Both organisations stride around the world like supranational despots demanding tribute at every turn.

    The money spent is astronomical and rising - somebody sometime is going to have to say enough is enough.

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 12:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Yuleno

    Is it because the UK don't allow beer in stadia that they can't get the world cup.It certainly rules out Islamic states,doesn't it

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 01:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • briton

    so World Cup law , now over rides the law of the land, brazil should tell FIFA to go jump,

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 01:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Teaboy2

    @3 Actually Yuleno we do allow purchasing of alcholic drinks, such as beer and lager etc in our stadiums. Search mike Ashley the newcastle united owner, he is regular photographed drinking pints of lager in the stadium.

    I really wish the argentinians would search for the facts first instead of just posting rubbish. But i geuss if they can not get the facts about the falklands right then its unlikely they'll get the facts about anything else right ;-))

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 03:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    I think the confusion is over Champions League games played in England. Alcohol is banned for those games; at least it was the last time I watch Chelsea. By far the majority of games, league, cups etc. are allowed to serve alcohol.

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 04:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Yuleno

    Bad habit to suppose thing.Since when could you buy alcohol at football stadia in the UK?

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 04:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    @7 Often. At Chelsea they serve alcohol with the exception of the family enclosure and for Champion League matches, where it is banned.

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 04:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • O gara

    1 Teaboy you are deluding yourself as usual.Nobody wants England to host the Mundial you have tried and failed to host it many times since the debacle of 1966 when old Stanley Rous made Blatter look like a choir boy.There is no chance Brasil wont host the tournament and lets be honest the most famous stadium in the World is the Maracana which will join the Azteca as the only stadiums to hold two World cup finals in 2014.I hope the Monumental will be the third in the centenary year of the competition.

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 06:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Teaboy2

    O'gara the only person here that is deluded is the pretend irishman..ohh sorry i forgot thats you!

    How you can claim i am deluded when i made it clear that Brazil hosting the world cup would be a spectacle to watch (a reference to the carnival spectaculars Brazil are known for). I only stated that the UK would be the ideal choice should Brazil and FIFA fail to resolve their differences or should brazil not have the stadiums and infrastructure in place in time. Why? Because the UK has world class and world famous stadiums and the infrastructure in place already.

    As for the the Maracana and the aztec stadium, sorry but they don't even come close to the likes of Old Trafford, Anfield, Emirates, Stamford Bridge and off course the most famous stadium in the world - Wembly. Hell you ask someone in asia or africa if the have heard of the Maracan or the aztec stadium and they'll not have a bloody clue. Ask them what the name of the stadium was the last world cup was played in and alot won't remember, with the exception of south african people. Ask them if they know the stadiums called Old Trafford, Anfield, Emirates, Stamford Bridge and wembley and they'll start screaming about their favourite teams and favourite players. But then the premier league is the only league where matches are televised in almost every single country on earth.

    You say 1966 was a debacle.. I now ask you, how was it a debacle when at the time it was one of the best world cups ever and widely acknowledged as such? Shamrock rovers being in europe was the biggest debacle i had seen in football for 30 years. Though all credit to them for getting there.

    Though an even bigger debacle is the fact it took the republic of ireland 6 decades to qualify for a world cup.

    By the way O'gara, at least we have held a world cup and won it. You Republic of ireland has done neither. So am not surprised to see your post evidently showing your jealously. Now why don't you go cry to argentina ;-)))

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 06:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • briton

    lets be fair,
    England won the world cup in 1966,
    and thats the end of it,
    this is not about england, its about brazil,

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 06:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • O gara

    10 Good on you teaboy that had to be the most sycophantic prejudiced post in the history of blogging.May I be the first to congratulate you.
    The notion that old Trafford,Anfield or the emirates are comparable to the Maracana or Azteca merely emphasizes that you are the perfect 100% little Englander who hasnt just his head in the sand but his cojones as well.
    BTW Am I the fake Paddy who is really Argentine or the Shamrock Rovers supporter?Well if I am the latter well what can I say? well actually England hasnt beaten Ireland in futbol since 1985 maybe you should take up Hurling!!
    if I am the latter well how about Argentina 2 World cups England 1, Argentina 14 continental titles England 0!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    11 Briton indeed England did win the World cup in 1966.Let me congratulate you on that and even though it was bitter for Argentina at the time it brought us to the situation where South America will never allow the likes of Rous in power ever again.

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 07:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Teaboy2

    O'gara the only person here guilty of sycophantic prejudice posting here is you. In my post i merely pointed out the facts of my first post in the face of your accusing myself of being deluded. So my post was not an attempt to gain favour nor was i making an assumption or judgement about brazil and its ability to hold a world cup. I made clear both in my first post and my second post that they it be a great spectacle if the world cup was in brazil (A COMPLIMENT To Brazil and something am looking forward to watching).

    Though i also took in the facts of the article above and there is no way fifa would allow a world cup in brazil if they can not get their way, there is far to much money at risk, same if brazil doesnt have the infastructure or stadiums ready in time. Or would you prefer they played in open fields and grounds stood on the touchline, while thousands of others are stuck at train stations with not enough trains or other transport to get them to the matches that they had bought tickets for and paid for filghts to brazil for. The UK is the only obvious alternative country where a world cup can be held and organized in a very short period of time i.e. 3-6 months.

    As for the last time we beat ireland at football... who cares, this is not about whos team is better than others. You insulted my country so i insulted yours in return.

    If you think Maracana or aztec stadiums are more famous then the likes of old trafford, emirates, standford bridge or even wembley, then it is clearly you who is deluded.

    Oh and for your information o'gara England and Ireland have played 14 matches England have won 6 lost 2, Ireland have won 2 and lost 5, the other 6 were draws. The last time we played you was in 1995 where you won by 1 goal. So that was 16 years ago, our current generation of players have never played against each other, and its safe to say we have the talent to beat you any day.

    Jan 19th, 2012 - 09:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • O gara

    I love your assumtions that now I am Irish and how.England will win.Perhaps you will get your chance yet again in the European championships.But lets be honest they are both pathetic ugly teams when you compare them to any team which can play Messi.Higuain.Aguero,

    Jan 20th, 2012 - 01:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Teaboy2

    I am not assuming your irish at o'gara i have made it clear many times that i believe your an argentina irishman wannabe - It must be the thought of all the leprechaun's gold you heard about as a kid. Besides its yourself that tries to mantain that you are Irish, the rest of us here simply just go along with it.

    I agree neither Ireland or England have the likes of messi or others, well apart from Rooney. But it was only 2-3 months ago when England beat the world number 1 team, Spain.

    Jan 20th, 2012 - 09:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!