Made in Iberia: Sepp Blatter with the Spain/Portugal bid team

HOLLAND/BELGIUM

Key Points
The Low Countries' Bid Book highlighted the success of Euro 2000, the importance of the competition as a stimulus for player development in the area, while the bid's green credentials were highlighted by the book's arrival in Zurich by bike.

Strengths
A strong infrastructure and a proven track record make Holland and Belgium very much a safe pair of hands, but it is the environmental card which they hope will prove to be the trump. All 14 stadiums are green and sustainable and an Environmental Protection Plan is already in place.

Weaknesses
Blatter reiterated yesterday that he has withdrawn his initial objection to joint bids, though the impression remains that Fifa would rather see one nation hosting the tournament than two.

Prospects
England, Russia and the joint Spain and Portugal bid would all be considered more likely destinations than the Low Countries. While their environmental plans may yet enable them to spring a surprise, Holland and Belgium remain outsiders.

---------------------------------

SPAIN/PORTUGAL

Key Points
Where others talk about legacy or destiny, Spain and Portugal are keen to emphasise the fun. Labelled the “happiest” hosts of all the options, the Iberian bid is centred around the notion that the two countries are best-placed to offer a festival of football.

Strengths
Both countries have relatively recent experience of hosting tournaments, while Spain already possess more UEFA five-star stadia than any other nation, including two of the most iconic venues in football, as well as a strong infrastructure for travel and tourism.

Weaknesses
As with the joint Holland and Belgium proposal, though Sepp Blatter insists he has no objection to joint bids, there is a chance that may count against the Iberian offer. Spain have also hosted a tournament more recently than any of the European bids, while both countries’ economic troubles may prove an obstacle.

Prospects
Good, though that Spain chose to bid jointly with Portugal may prove a mistake. Should Blatter’s insistence on his impartiality to shared bids hold firm, Iberia may prove a threat to England and Russia.

------------------------

USA

Key Points
The United States have done it before, and done it well, drawing record attendances to the 1994 edition of the tournament. A return, they suggest, would seal football's status as an increasing American passion.

Strengths
No rival bid can offer the sheer scale of the US bid — the 21 stadiums included in the Bid Book boast an average capacity of more than 76,000 — while much has been made of football’s ability to bond together the country's diverse ethnic groups. The USA’s infrastructure is second to none.

Weaknesses
The relative proximity to the 1994 tournament is likely to be an issue, as is the perception that Fifa would rather host the 2018 edition in Europe. The USA have still not ruled out choosing to apply only for 2022.

Prospects
Though not as widely favoured as Russia, England and Iberia, the USA simply cannot be ruled out for the economic possibilities hosting the World Cup there would offer. 2022 is more likely, though.

------------------

AUSTRALIA

Key Points
Much was made by Frank Lowy, chairman of the Australian Football Federation, of Australia's status as the “gateway to Asia,” while the country has a proven track record of hosting major international events. The Australian bid team, though, may yet choose to withdraw their entry for 2018 and concentrate on 2022 instead.

Strengths
With the 2000 Sydney Olympics and the 2003 Rugby World Cup still fresh in the mind, there are no doubts over Australia’s ability to host a successful World Cup. A strong, sophisticated tourist infrastructure to handle the weight of visitors the tournament would bring is a bonus, while Lowy has been keen to point out the sheer number of world-class stadia ready and available for use.

Weaknesses
Those stadia have caused some internecine infighting among the country’s other sporting codes — Rugby Union, Rugby League and Australian Rules Football — but Lowy insists such disputes should not affect the bid. The most likely obstacle for 2018 remains the suspicion that, 12 years on from Germany 2006, Fifa would favour a tournament in Europe.

Prospects
Much depends on whether the bid team choose to remain in the race for 2018, rather than following Japan, Qatar and South Korea and deciding to concentrate on 2022.

---------------------------

RUSSIA

Key Points
Legacy remains the *leitmotif *of Russia's bid. The country has promised 16 stadiums in 13 cities in an attempt to “surprise and astound” the world, all of them of the highest specification and capable of making Russia a football superpower for years to come.

Strengths
That Russia does not have the infrastructure of England, the Low Countries or Iberia may appeal to Fifa, who are keen for the World Cup’s impact to last on football, business and everyday life in the host nation. Sepp Blatter, Fifa’s president, has already called Russia’s plans “remarkable.”

Weaknesses
Russia's sheer size may detract from the ambition of their plans, while problems with travel and tourist infrastructure may not appeal to a governing body wary of a repeat of the difficulties faced by South Africa and Brazil. That Zenit St Petersburg's new stadium, a centrepiece of the bid, is already behind schedule does not bode well.

Prospects
Good. Blatter's backing is essential, while the tournament's legacy would be far greater in Russia than anywhere else. A heavyweight contender.