Qatar

The report savaged Qatar’s bid on a number of issues including the conditions, security and transport.

“Tthe fact that ten out of the 12 stadiums are located within a 25-30km radius could represent an operational and logistical challenge, “ FIFA wrote.

“Any delay in the completion of the transport projects could impact FIFA’s tournament operations. Moreover, it appears to be difficult to test a transport concept prior to the event under conditions comparable to the FIFA World Cup. The fact that New Doha International Airport would be the primary air gateway for the entire tournament period also requires careful consideration.”

Logistics and security was described similarly as risky.

“The Bidder’s plan implies a new operational model for all stakeholder groups and in doing so raises certain questions, especially in terms of logistics and security. The realisation of the plan depends on centralised decision-making and is largely based on construction of projected general and event infrastructure,which represents a risk by restricting FIFA’s contingency planning.”

FIFA added that a World Cup in the hottest part of the year in Qatar was a poor choice.

“The fact that the competition is planned in June/July, the two hottest months of the year in this region, has to be considered as a potential health risk for players, officials, the FIFA family and spectators, and requires precautions to be taken.”

USA

The bid impressed FIFA in most if not all key areas however there were some concerns about rights protection and the size of the country. “The country’s vastness and geographic location imply a dependence on air travel in view of the lack of alternative means of long-distance transport within the country.”

But in the key area of revenue, FIFA wrote: “In terms of TV, should the FIFA World Cup be hosted in the USA, the TV ratings and media rights income in the Americas are likely to be higher.”

Japan

FIFA noted the proposed arrangements for the FIFA HQ were not yet satisfactory. And revenue from TV was a concern. “Should the FIFA World Cup be hosted in Japan, there is a risk of a reduction in TV income and, as a result, commercial revenue from Europe."

Korea Republic

In the Korea Republic the report made mention of the fact that their bid for 2022 would include playing some games in DPR Korea.

And like Japan, FIFA was worried about a reduction in revenue. “The income from Asia/Oceania would need to be increased substantially to offset the likelihood of loss of revenue in Europe.”

The group also put the nations bidding for the 2018 competition under the microscope.

Russia

Russia’s bid had a number of ticks but money was again an issue as was the size of the country.

“The major event and football sponsorship market in Russia is growing and not yet fully developed. In terms of TV, even in the case of matches in Russia’s European time zones (Moscow and Saint Petersburg are UTC+4), there might be an impact on European ratings, although this would most likely be limited. Russia might offer some time zone advantages for the Asian markets, but the effect of these advantages would also be limited and might impact the Americas.”

England

While praised for its experience in hosting large events, IT infrastructure and geographical accessibility, question marks were raised about accommodation arrangements.

“In terms of accommodation, the Bidder proposes a relatively large inventory. However, the fact that not many of the rooms have been contracted in full compliance with FIFA’s template Hotel Agreement requires further analysis and potentially renegotiation. FIFA could be exposed to excessive pricing and booking conditions and the constituent groups may choose not to use the relevant properties.”

Holland and Belgium

Holland and Belgium’s bid was given a tick for areas such as event safety and IT but was short on venue specific training sites.

FIFA also noted: “FIFA’s rights protection programme cannot be ensured in either country. Belgium’s listed-event legislation adversely affects the free exploitation of media rights in Belgium and would have to be reviewed.”

Spain and Portugal

The report required more information in certain areas "in order to provide a more complete basis for evaluation of the co-hosting concept, further key operational details would be required, especially in view of the administrative, logistical and financial challenges of co-hosting.”

FIFA though praised the planned high speed rail network and felt revenue targets were likely to be met with this bid.