Latest Breaking News

They put in for it mainly because 2030 is the centennial of the first World Cup - played in Uruguay in 1930.

But because Uruguay is so small (it's Latin America's least populous, at 3.5 m), the original idea was to share hosting duties with neighboring Argentina - with whom they have much in common.

But then, around 2018, Trump's pal Macri triggered a massive foreign debt crisis - known locally as the "Macrisis."

It would now be that much more difficult for Argentina to spend the billions needed to upgrade their stadia (most of them, from the '70s), airport terminals and such - at least to meet the monumental demands of today's World Cups.

So Chile was added to the bid - to share the cost, as it were.

But then Paraguay - an impoverished, notoriously corrupt backwater - insisted on being added. They're a member of the Mercosur common market and home to the Conmebol football federation HQ, so the others couldn't refuse (even Bolivia wanted in at one point).

It had become - pardon my French - a cluster fuck.

Ultimately, FIFA decided that none of them could meet the gazillions needed to host a modern, über-glitzy World Cup - but as a consolation, they were allowed to host the first three games.

I would've kept Chile on, and nixed Paraguay (which, again, was kept on because the Conmebol HQ is there).

If you do go to Paraguay - as they say - don't drink the water.