http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/4155856.stm

Football Association chief executive Brian Barwick says that England may bid to host the 2018 World Cup after the success of the 2012 Olympics campaign.

He said: "It's right and proper for the London Olympics bid to take precedence but why wouldn't we go for it?

"I think we would bid further down the line. The next time that it should come to Europe is probably 2018 and we have got enough time to get organised."

The FA, who missed out in the 2006 bid, have yet to make any firm decisions.

Next summer's World Cup will be staged in Germany and is not expected to return to Europe for another 12 years.

England hosted the World Cup in 1966 - when the home nation won the tournament - and also staged Euro 96.

But their efforts to host the 2006 World Cup ended in failure, with the English FA accused of breaking an agreement to support Germany after they backed England's Euro 96 campaign.

Barwick, meanwhile, is hopeful that England will win next summer's World Cup.

"I see 2006 as a big year for the Football Association. Hopefully we will qualify for the World Cup and give it a real go," he said.

"If and when we qualify, we would go into the World Cup as one of the teams that can win it. It's in the right climate and the right time-zone.

"We have a very good team and are making impressions on European club football too.

"I think we've made progress as an international footballing nation and can be expected to do well. This country will come to a halt if we do."

It would be good to know what forummers think would be the ideal venues.

Personally, I'd say it should be focused around 4 main centres - London, the midlands, the Northwest and the Northeast.

London (2) - Wembley 90,000, Arsenal 60,000

Midlands (2) - Villa Park 43,000, Derby County, 32,000, Birmingham City's new stadium (they will have a new home by then) 50,000.

Northwest (3)- Old Trafford 73,000, City of Manchester Stadium 48,000 and Anfield / New Stadium 60,000 / 45,000

Northeast (2)- Newcastle 52,000, Sunderland 48,000

That's a total of 10 stadiums, which is about right for a world cup.

Hillsbrough, Goodison and Elland Road are crap while Middlesbrough and Southampton aren't geographically convenient and the cities and stadiums don't merit their inclusion! You shouldn't have more than 2 stadiums in the same city, hence no Chelsea (which isn't great for international football) or Spurs, which is a dump.

I would have 12 Stadiums, like Germany are using next year.

Wembley
Ashburton Grove
Old Trafford,
New Anfield
St James Park
Stadium Of Light
Villa Park
Elland Road

St Mary's, expanded to 40000
Ewood Park, with a new Riverside Stand they could get up to near 40000
Either Derby or Leicester expanded to 40000
Birmingham City's new ground if it is built, otherwise an expanded Molineux

I wouldn't include Everton or Sheffield Wednesday because their grounds while large are rather outdated.

if we hosted it we would certainly get some more big new stadiums built.

we dont know what the football situation might be in 7-8 years time. notts forest might be back and want a big new stadium, sheff wed might be back and want one, everton might have built one, leeds too, a brand new villa park.

its certainly the norm that once a world cup is announced new stadiums are built and others renovated.

12 Stadiums

Wembley
Old Trafford
St James Park
Stadium of Light
City of Manchester Stadium
Emirates Stadium
Stanley Park
Hillsborough
Villa Park
Stamford Bridge
Elland Road
Goodison

People saying Hillsborough is crap are wrong, yes it is an old ground but basically all the ground needs is a lick of paint and the removal of afew supporting posts to bring the ground to standard

Imagine us getting them. Then we'd have the 2012 olympics in London, possibly Glasgow 2012 commonwealth games and then 2018 world cup. :happy:

nickswfc have you ever been to a good ground?? its just not right to have poor stadiums like hillsborough, goodison and elland road in a world cup, maybe 10 years ago, but not in 2018.


elland road is the worst of the lot, total dump. at least stamford bridge and villa park are keeping up with the times.

nickswfc have you ever been to a good ground?? its just not right to have poor stadiums like hillsborough, goodison and elland road in a world cup, maybe 10 years ago, but not in 2018.


elland road is the worst of the lot, total dump. at least stamford bridge and villa park are keeping up with the times.

Alot can change in 13 years though, Elland road with all the sides devolped in the same style as the east stand would be around 60,000 I'd guess and of WC standard. A world cup might well provide the impetus for Everton to finally get a new ground aswell plus Chelsea are obviously going to have either enlarged Stamford bridge or built a new stadium(larger than Emirates?) by then aswell.

I'd guess there would be at least 1 stadium in the south west aswell, such as the Millenium stadium(if allowed of course) or a new one to be shared by the the two Bristol teams.

To to correct you, Old Trafford will be about 76,190 when done (from memory).

You cant have Wemberley, Arsenal and Chelski's grounds because its a max of 2 grounds per city.

I'd have:

Southeast (2) - Wembley 90,000, Arsenal 60,000

West Midlands (2) - Villa Park 43,000, Birmingham City's new stadium

Northwest (4)- Old Trafford 76,000, City of Manchester Stadium 48,000 and
Anfield / New Stadium 60,000 / 45,000 plus either Ewood or Everton's ground whatever that is

Northeast (2)- Newcastle 52,000, Sunderland 48,000 (60,000 poss??)

then either - Glasgow/edinburgh (2) OR Bristol/Cardiff(2) OR Leeds + select both Ewood and Everton's ground.
Obviously you would need approval for some of those options.

I seem to remember reading that a fully extended Stadium of light would have a capacity of around 65,000 some time ago.

the gallowgate end of St.James park could also be extended, certainly if the club was given money to do so by the World Cup organising team. that would give the stadium a capacity of around 60,000 or more depending on how high they want to go.

it would look something like this.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/throwaway/gallowgate.jpg

I rekon we have a good chance of hosting this as it would be 52 years since 66.
Only 4/5 teams are capable of holding this event and all have hosted world cups since 66.
Espana 82
Italia 90
Duetchland 06
France 98
The only problem is the event is only six years after the olympics.

I rekon we have a good chance of hosting this as it would be 52 years since 66.
Only 4/5 teams are capable of holding this event and all have hosted world cups since 66.
Espana 82
Italia 90
Duetchland 06
France 98
The only problem is the event is only six years after the olympics.


The US had the World Cup in 94 and the Olympics in 96. Also Mexico held the Olympics in 68 and the World Cup in 70 so I don't think its that big a problem.

The time after the olympics would not be of great concern, I would love to see the Stadia in Wales Scotland and Northern Ireland being used:

Hampden, Millenium Stadium Murrayfield, and a refurbished Winsor Park yes I know they are in Scotland and Wales respectively, but these countries are never going to host a world cup themselves, so i think it would be great to have some group games there.

There would be no need to give the periferal countries qualification, if that didn't happen it could be a consolation for not making it to the finals proper, imagine the carnival atmoshpehere around the UK if they all had a slice of the action.

Also for coffers the FA would be foolish not to think of an 82000 capacity Twickenham before a sixty thousand Emirates or Stamford Bridge?

The time after the olympics would not be of great concern, I would love to see the Stadia in Wales Scotland and Northern Ireland being used:

Hampden, Millenium Stadium Murrayfield, and a refurbished Winsor Park yes I know they are in Scotland and Wales respectively, but these countries are never going to host a world cup themselves, so i think it would be great to have some group games there.

There would be no need to give the periferal countries qualification, if that didn't happen it could be a consolation for not making it to the finals proper, imagine the carnival atmoshpehere around the UK if they all had a slice of the action.

FIFA did make a point of saying that Korea/Japan would be the last duel host WC but I'd guess that was mainly based on not wanting the hassel of having to find an extra place for a second host. If they stick with their current system of desiding hosts internally rather than though a vote then games outside England would be more likely aswell IMHO.

Also for coffers the FA would be foolish not to think of an 82000 capacity Twickenham before a sixty thousand Emirates or Stamford Bridge?

It wasnt in our 2006 bid I due to the RFU not wanting football to be played their, the transport links are not that great aswell I believe and the stadium itself will be getting on a bit aswell.

As I said I would not be supprized to see Chelsea build a new stadium which if Roman's current attitude to spending is anything to go by could be rather spectacular and most likely larger than Emirates.

Rumours of a possible dry run bid for 2014


FA prepares bid for 2014 World Cup

· Barwick in Treasury talks to secure Brown's backing
·Football determined to build on Olympic success

Matt Scott and Larry Elliott
Friday September 16, 2005
The Guardian


The Football Association is holding talks with the Treasury to seek backing from Gordon Brown for a bid to stage the World Cup in England for the first time since 1966. Heartened by London's success in winning the 2012 Olympic Games, Brian Barwick, the FA's chief executive, has opened discussions with the chancellor over plans for England to host the tournament in 2014 or, more likely, 2018.
"Exploratory discussions have been held with a view to a bid," said one source close to the talks. He added that these centred on whether the FA could expect the support of Brown if, as expected, he has become prime minister by the time a formal pitch for the event is made.


Article continues

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

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

The Treasury confirmed that discussions were under way with the FA and stressed that Brown would be as supportive of a bid for the World Cup as Tony Blair had been during London's campaign for the 2012 Olympics. The FA believes its best chance of winning the right to hold sport's second biggest event will be in 2018, but is contemplating using the 2014 tournament as a dry run. It has already been decided that the 2010 World Cup will be held in South Africa and it is thought likely that the 2014 event will go to South America, which has not been host to the tournament since Argentina in 1978 - Colombia was awarded the 1986 tournament but pulled out and it moved to Mexico City.
Brazil, the five-times winners and favourites for next year's tournament in Germany, has not held the World Cup since 1950 and is expected to put up a strong case for 2014. "The next time that it should come to Europe is probably 2018 and we have got enough time to get organised," said Barwick last month. Treasury officials said the chancellor was enthusiastic about the prospects of bringing the tournament to England and believed that the cost to the taxpayer could be kept to a minimum. Blair's commitment to London's Olympic bid was seen as crucial when the votes were cast in Singapore two months ago and the FA has told Brown that it will need full ministerial backing if it is to fend off what is expected to be strong competition from other countries.

England's last World Cup bid, to stage the 2006 finals, ended in ignominy five years ago. The FA was accused of reneging on a gentlemen's agreement between the then chairman Sir Bert Millichip and the German football authorities. That accord, in which Germany's support for England's Euro 96 bid was pledged in return for reciprocity over its 2006 World Cup campaign, was struck in the presence of Uefa officials.

The FA then failed to keep its word and, despite a slick presentation which included an impassioned speech from the 1966 World Cup winner Sir Bobby Charlton, the bid was doomed to failure. Disturbances in Charleroi involving England fans at the Euro 2000 finals, a matter of weeks before the Fifa vote, added to the criticism of England's credentials. However, the conduct of England supporters at the 2002 World Cup and Euro 2004 finals in Portugal has restored confidence in the FA's ability to contain hooliganism.

The FA, whose leadership has changed several times since 2000, has told the Treasury that England will boast enough modern grounds, big and small, to cope with a 32-nation tournament. The final would be held at the new Wembley Stadium, with Old Trafford, St James' Park, Arsenal's new Emirates stadium and Villa Park all having the capacity to host big games. Games expected to draw smaller gates would be held at modern all-seat stadiums with smaller capacities.

Barwick is seeking assurances from the Treasury that it would match any favourable tax treatment other bidders might offer in order to win the support of the members of Fifa, and that the right infrastructure would be in place across the country to cope with overseas supporters coming to England.

The FA's enthusiasm to press ahead with a bid has increased since London's surprise victory over Paris to host the Olympics. Good reports from the International Olympic Committee about the readiness of the capital to host the games has inspired confidence that a bid would be successful. The FA could turn to key figures in the 2012 Olympic bid process, such as the communications director Mike Lee, to provide expertise in the politicking for the World Cup.

All the large European countries - Germany (twice), Spain, Italy and France -have held the World Cup since England was host in 1966, and Sepp Blatter, the president of Fifa, said 12 months ago that he would urge a bid. "I would say yes, they should bid - it is the homeland of football. They are building stadia and other facilities for the Olympics, Wembley is almost finished and maybe they would be used for a World Cup bid."

FA confirms 2018 World Cup target (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/4155856.stm)

germany 2006 is using 12 stadiums, all over 40,000 capacity. from what i can tell three are 60,000+, three are 50,000+, and the remaining six are 40,000+.

so it'd seem that we need 12 stadiums with 40,000+ capacity. not much of a problem there really. i'm guessing these are the definates:
1) wembley (90,000)
2) old trafford (75,000 > 90,000 if redeveloped further)
3) new anfield (61,000)
4) emirates stadium (60,000)
5) st james' park (52,000+ if redeveloped further)
6) stadium of lights (48,000+ if redeveloped further)
7) city of manchester stadium (48,000)
8) villa park (42,000)
9) stamford bridge (42,000+ if redeveloped further)

after that take your pick from a whole host of 30-something-thousand stadiums that could easily be redeveloped, such as st mary's, walkers, the riverside, the valley, and so on. throw on top of that a possible new spurs stadium and the new olympics stadium, with a possible redesign to accomodate football after 2012 a la the city of manchester stadium after the commonwealth games.

there is also the possibility of using england's rugby home of twickenham (82,000) and the millenium stadium (74,500) which, while it is the welsh national stadium has, while wembley's being rebuilt, pretty much been absorbed into a part and parcel piece of the english footballing calender.

This was in the Manchester Evening News tonight.

BROWN BACKS 2018 WORLD CUP BID

GORDON Brown has pledged goverment backing for Britain to stage the football World Cup in 2018.
The chancellor said it was "about time" the competition came back to Britain and said would provide a chance to become "sporting nation of the world".
He also appeared to predict success for England at the next year's event, saying the cup would be "back in England next year".
Mr Brown, a scott, is thought to want to spearhead a successful World Cup bid if, as expected, he succeeds Tony Blair as Prime Minister.
He said: "We are announcing that we'll support the Football Association when they make their application and if they make their appication."
He added: "It's about time it came to us. I believe we've got a very, very good chance of winning this.
"It's a decision for the FA, but we want to do everything we can, like we did with the Olympics. It is great opportunity for us to be the sporting nation of the world."
The announcement comes three days after the Treasury said the government was in "preliminary discussions" with the FA over a bid.
Mr Brown and Culture Seretary Tessa Jowell were launching a feasibility study for the tournament today at a football project for youngsters in London's East End.

2018 seem like such a long time away :sleepy:

We'll probably be bidding against China which is tough competition as FIFA are keen to expand football to new markets and China is the ultimate new market. Closer to home Spain is tipped to bid and they have good stadiums and better weather. However I think China is the real competition. Spain hosted back in 1982 wheras England was 1966 - 56 years before 2018.

Spain would have the latin American support though which is a very big thing.... As for China, yep they'll be strong competition but a lot will depend on how successful the Olympics are.

we could always dig the dirt on china's human rights record. as for spain, they had it in '82 so they can, how do i put this politely, fuck right off. :)

We'll probably be bidding against China which is tough competition as FIFA are keen to expand football to new markets and China is the ultimate new market. Closer to home Spain is tipped to bid and they have good stadiums and better weather. However I think China is the real competition. Spain hosted back in 1982 wheras England was 1966 - 56 years before 2018.

By 2018 the world cup will most likely not have been in Europe for 12 years which would obviously count in our favour considering its normally rotated between europe and elsewhere. I'm supprized that Spain have not gone for a european champions, they have a much better selection of stadiums than we will see in 2008 and from most of the bidders for 2012.

As for 2014 I think that depends on Brazil, if look but at the stadiums they have now its going to require an almost total redevolpment. If they fail to convince FIFA they can manage that or fail behind then we would provide a nice fallback(with them hosting in 2018 instead) considering our stadiums are being constructed independantly of the WC.

- the home of football, the land of historic clubs, world-renowned competitions and a plethora of footballing legends.
- won't have hosted the world cup in 52yrs (and the world cup won't have been in europe for 12yrs)
- with a track-record of hosting big, international football tournaments (eg. euro '96), as well as other huge sporting events (eg. the olympics 2012)
- that has plenty of historic, famous, modern purpose-built stadiums
- with guarenteed public enthusiasm

seriously, fifa, just hand it over.

^ I hope you're right. It's true that the World Cup has always alternated between Europe and the other continents. European World Cups have never been more than 8 years apart. With 2010 in Africa (South Africa) and 2014 in Latin America (Brazil), therefore an already unprecedented 12 year gap, there is a fair case for your insistence that it has to come back to Europe for 2018. However Asia has a larger population than the whole of the rest of the world combined and China is the ultimate emerging market. By 2018 it won't have been in Asia for 16 years. If they choose England or Spain for 2018 it would be 20 years before it returned to Asia. I'm not so sure FIFA will want to miss that opportunity. Note that China will also have a successful Olympics, Expo, Formula 1 etc behind it and will be a very powerful economy by then. There won't be any shortage of public enthusiam there either. I agree that we will have a very strong bid but we will also be up against the strongest possible competition. If we lose 2018 to China we should definitely try again for 2022 because the tournament will by then be virtually guaranteed to return to Europe and I think we would probably have a slight edge on Spain.

i agree, china's going to have a very strong bid.

the two main things we have over them are:

1) europe is the undisputed and unrivalled continental home of the most respected club football in the world. the premiership, la liga, serie a - all attract the best players, the biggest international audiences, and generate the most money - for the world cup not to be hosted in asia for 16yrs is unfortunate, for it not to be hosted in europe for 12yrs is a disgrace! once we establish that we then worry about the other european competition - spain. spain had it in 1982, we're the home of football, we have all the stadiums, etc, etc, bingo.

2) the international appeal of english football - let's not forget that chinese kids walk around chinese cities, not wearing local team's strips, but wearing man utd shirts and liverpool shirts, and so on. our bid needs to ram that home. you either give it to us or you give it to yet another country whose population spends almost all its football-viewing time in awe of us.

as for australia, despite them being predictably full of it (and what "it" is i'll leave to your imagination) i just don't think they understand the reality of the world cup. you cannot expect the footballing world to up sticks to the other end of the globe to contest the world cup in front of a largely apathetic audience in a bunch of cricket grounds. it'd be like watching table tennis at wimbledon.

beyond the stadia and all that stuff (because let's face it - if china really wants to build modern stadiums to equal ours, they can) these are the sorts of things (off the top of my head) that we need to ram home, internationally renowned symbols of unique, profound and emotional footballing significance that china just doesn't have:

http://blog.so-net.ne.jp/_images/blog/gerrard/1145560.jpg

http://www.bbc.co.uk/threecounties/content/images/2005/01/10/shankley_gates_203_203x152.jpg

http://www.cas.lancs.ac.uk/papers/roger/16.%20statue%20of%20sir%20matt%20busby%20old%20trafford.jpg

http://liverpool.rivals.net/media/jpg/2000050703340890.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/8c/1966_final_bobby_moore.jpg/300px-1966_final_bobby_moore.jpg

http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/park/yfh45/manuclock1.jpg

as for australia, despite them being predictably full of it (and what "it" is i'll leave to your imagination) i just don't think they understand the reality of the world cup. you cannot expect the footballing world to up sticks to the other end of the globe to contest the world cup in front of a largely apathetic audience in a bunch of cricket grounds. it'd be like watching table tennis at wimbledon.Oh I never mentioned Auistralia. I agree that Australia has zero chance against bidders like England, Spain, and China.

So what about Spain? Even if China won 2018 (far from certain) we would still have to contend against Spain for 2022. France, Italy, and Germany will all have hosted recently, and so will be out of the picture, and FIFA have indicated since Japan/Korea that they don't want to do duel hosting again which rules out the smaller European countries. That leaves only us and Spain as credible contenders. Does Spain have such good stadiums as England will by 2018? Obviously Barcelona and Real Madrid have superb stadiums but what about the rest of the country?

They have great stadiums in such places as Valencia, Seville, Bilbao. I don't think they could muster 12 though. Wait a sec and I'll do a comparison.

All pics and info from Stadiumguide.com

Barcelona - 2 possible stadiums

Camp Nou - 98,000 seats

http://www.stadiumguide.com/noucamp5.jpg

Olyimpic Stadium - 56,000 seats

http://www.stadiumguide.com/montjuic4.jpg

Madrid - 2 Possible Stadiums

Vicente Caldron - 57,500 seats

http://www.stadiumguide.com/vicentecalderon1.jpg

Bernebau - 80,000 seats

http://www.stadiumguide.com/bernabeu4.jpg

Bilbao - 40,000

http://www.stadiumguide.com/sanmames4.jpg

Seville - 3 Possible stadiums

Real Betis - 52,000

http://www.stadiumguide.com/ruizdelopera4.jpg

Sevilla - 45,000

http://www.stadiumguide.com/ramon2.jpg

Olympica - 72,000

http://www.stadiumguide.com/cartuja2.jpg

Valencia - 55,000

http://www.stadiumguide.com/mestalla2.jpg


so you can see that spain currently has 5 cities with capable stadiums. There are a few other cities with stadiums requiring some capacity expansions such as san Sebastian (32,000), Malaga (37,000), La Coruna (35,000), Eleche (38,000), Oviedo (30,000), etc

Would the glasgow stadia, Murrayfield and the Millenium stadium be available for any bid?

England alone:

London: from
Wembley - 90,000
Twickenham - 83,000
Emirates - 60,000
Stamford Bridge - 42,500

Manchester: From
Old Trafford - 76,500
City of Manchester - 48,500

Birmingham - 43,300

Liverpool: from
Goodison - 40,200
Anfield - 45,400

Newcastle/sunderland: from
St James' - 53,000
Stadium of Light - 48,300

Leeds - 40,000

Sheffield - 40,000

with other possible extended stadia being located in Middlesborough, Blackburn, Hull, Derby, Nottingham, Leicester, Coventry, Wolverhampton, Southampton, Ipswich etc

^ I doubt it. The Millennium Stadium is used for the (English) FA cup finals but I'm almsot sure the Scottish grounds would not be available. We will have to compete with what we have ourselves. So what have we got?

01) Wembley - 90,000
02) Old Trafford - 76,000
03) Millennium Stadium - 74,500
04) Emirates - 60,000
05) City of Birmingham - 55,000 (??)
06) St James's Park - 52,400
07) Stadium of Light - 49,000
08) City of Manchester - 48,000
09) Anfield - 45,300
10) Stamford Bridge - 42,500
11) Goodison Park - 42,300
12) Elland Road - 40,250


Edit: do you think Twickenham can be used for football?

1) they would all be english stadiums (no welsh, no scottish). fifa have expressed a desire to keep the competition strictly within one country and the fa wouldn't want to share any £££ with any other fa's.
2) twickenham would not be used - local residents are very strict on what the stadium's used for, and how often, and they've already expressed dissaproval when the ground was mentioned as a possible venue for aresenal's champions league campaign a few years back. on top of that the fa wouldn't want to share the £££ with the rfu.

possible england 2018 venues:

1. wembley
capacity: 90,000
primary use: home to the england national football team, and the home of football
status: currently under total redevelopment, due for completion by march 2006

http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/2551/1wembley8ka.jpg


2. old trafford
capacity: 76,000
primary use: home to manchester united fc
status: north east and north west corners currently under redevelopment, due for completion by august 2006
possible future expansion: the main (south stand) could be redeveloped, taking the capacity to 91,000, but this is at the moment only speculative

http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/5314/3oldtrafford1cc.jpg


3. new anfield
capacity: 60,000-61,000
primary use: home to liverpool footbal club
status: has planning permission, the club are currently securing funding

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/1549/newanfield5jc.jpg


4. emirates stadium
capacity: 60,000
primary use: home to arsenal fc
status: currently under construction, due for completion by august 2006

http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/1614/4emiratesstadium6hc.jpg


5. new city of birmingham stadium
capacity: 55,000
primary use: multipurpose
status: proposed

http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/857/newbrum1ww.jpg


6. st james' park
capacity: 52,316
primary use: home to newcastle united fc
possible future expansion: expansion of the gallowgate end is a possibility, though no firm plans exist

http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/3082/5stjamespark5er.jpg


7. stadium of light
capacity: 48,300
primary use: home to sunderland afc
possible future expansion: a second tier could be added to the metro fm (south) stand, taking the capacity to 55,000, and then the mcewans stand, taking the capacity to 64,000. this would only be likely to happen should sunderland magically start competing for trohpies or, more likely, england secure the 2018 world cup

http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/4217/6stadiumoflight7iv.jpg


8. city of manchester stadium
capacity: 48,000
primary use: home to manchester city fc

http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/8273/7cityofmanchesterstadium7zj.jpg


9. villa park
capacity: 42,573
primary use: home to aston villa fc
possible future expansion there are rumours of 51,000, but nothing concrete

http://img348.imageshack.us/img348/5784/9villapark9bb.jpg


10. stamford bridge
capacity: 42,449
primary use: home to chelsea fc
possible future expansion: possible redevelopment to somewhere in the region of 50,000, though relocation also remains a possibility.

http://img348.imageshack.us/img348/7219/10stamfordbridge6ji.jpg


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

other possible venues:

new everton stadium / redeveloped goodison park (50,000+?): only speculation right now, could simply redevelop goodison park

new spurs stadium / redeveloped white hart lane (?): only speculation right now, could simply redevelop white hart lane

... plus a load of 30,000 seaters that are designed to, and could quite easily, be redeveloped into 40,000+ seater venues.

1) they would all be english stadiums (no welsh, no scottish). fifa have expressed a desire to keep the competition strictly within one country and the fa wouldn't want to share any £££ with any other fa's.
2) twickenham would not be used - local residents are very strict on what the stadium's used for, and how often, and they've already expressed dissaproval when the ground was mentioned as a possible venue for aresenal's champions league campaign a few years back. on top of that the fa wouldn't want to share the £££ with the rfu.Yes but the World Cup is special. The residents of Twickenham may well consent to a one-off World Cup match. The FA may also consider working with the RFU to land a World Cup. It's such a huge and popular event that it will bring people together.

Yes but the World Cup is special. The residents of Twickenham may well consent to a one-off World Cup match. The FA may also consider working with the RFU to land a World Cup. It's such a huge and popular event that it will bring people together.

to me and you that completely makes sense, yes, but we're dealing with nimbys here!

fair point, though - it shouldn't be ruled out.

what we should rule out, though, is sharing this event with wales and/or scotland. we don't need their help - we can do it ourselves. and, like i said, fifa don't want the headache of more than one nation automatically qualifying for the finals as joint-hosts.

@Jerv
I like that your list doesn't include Twickenham or the Millennium Stadium and yet still shows better stadia than Germany's for 2006.

Aye Monkey, Keith Wyness of Everton released a press statement a couple of weeks ago stating a new staduim is back on the agenda, and the club is in advanced discussions with financiers over funding. The new stadium is to be within 2 miles of the current ground and will cost around £125m. Likely sites include Central Docks (favourite), Gilmoss (cheap) or my idea of Netherton (close to motorway network, club owns academy there, and primary school next door closes this summer). I'll find the link and post it in a bit. :)

The site I mentioned in Netherton will be surplus to requirements once the new academy and training centre at Halewood opens. Bellefield is likely to be sold for housing dvelopmets as the land there is valuable, but the former Littlewoods pitches site in Netherton isn't worth much, yet is a vast site on a major dual carriageway heading to Switch Island.

Who will fund a new Goodison? Dec 22 2005




By Nick Coligan, Liverpool Echo





EVERTON could qualify for millions of pounds of European funds if they choose the right site for a new stadium.

A financial jackpot could be on offer if the club identifies the right location for its proposed £125m, 50,000-seater ground.

Yesterday chief executive Keith Wyness confirmed the club is looking at three options, with the preferred being a new ground within two miles of Goodison.

Today one leading city economist identified the Central Docks, home to this year's Summer Pops, as "perfect" for a stadium.






Located in Vauxhall, one of the most deprived neighbourhoods in the country, it is ripe for regeneration funds.


The club was today silent about the plans, but the ECHO will be passing fans' questions directly to Mr Wyness from our website and letters pages.


Peter Stoney from Liverpool University's management school, said: "Grounds are now about more than just football, they need retail and leisure facilities.


"Central Docks is a 100-acre, brownfield site, available to develop and big enough for other facilities.


"It is easily accessible for many people and is walking distance from the city centre.


"A new railway station could be built between Moorfields and Sandhills.


"It is very close to some of the most deprived areas in the whole country. You can make a good case for it."

Liverpool FC were awarded £9m of European money for their own plan to build a new stadium on Stanley Park.

Although public money cannot be used to pay for the ground itself, it can fund the regeneration of surrounding areas.

But any site will face a rigorous investigation by city planners before the green light is given.

City council chief executive Sir David Henshaw said: "We have had discussions with Everton about a number of options.

"We are always anxious to support the club, and we look forward to receiving proposals from the club when they are ready."

Council leader Warren Bradley, an Everton season-ticket holder, still prefers the idea of the two rivals sharing a stadium.






He said: "You go to watch the spectacle on the pitch, not where you sit.


"One 70,000-seater stadium would suffice for Liverpool and Everton and the clubs would have more money to put players on the pitch, which is what the fans want to see.


"If they joined forces, they might receive public money from the Northwest Development Agency and Europe to deliver a first-class stadium."

Central Docks
http://img287.imageshack.us/img287/1575/centraldocks5ai.jpg

Netherton Academy site, with Netherton Park primary school (deceased)
http://img287.imageshack.us/img287/1039/netherton14fz.jpg

Netherton site (bottom left) with Switch Island (top) and Aintree Racecourse (right)
http://img287.imageshack.us/img287/7179/netherton26yz.jpg

Stanley Park, showing jut how hemmed in Liverpool and Everton currently are, and the site of New Unfilled.
http://img287.imageshack.us/img287/8642/stanleypark4sc.jpg

Likely sites include my idea of Netherton (close to motorway network, club owns academy there, and primary school next door closes this summer).

!!!! :)

Aye Aled! The club haven't mentioned what is happening with the Littlewood site, but my theory is that along with the primary school next door, it would be capable of accomodating a 50,000+ seater stadium. Nowt has been said about this so far, but it would be a bit of a no-brainer seeing as Everton own the land already, it's on the main northern artery into the city, and Sefton Council would allow practically any form of investment in the area. :) Wyness, it's over to you. :cheers:

Don't FIFA only allow 1 city to have more than 2 stadiums in the WC? In this case it would be London.

Therefore I think the following cities could stage the WC.

London: Wembley and probably Emirates.

Birmingham: Villa Park at the Moment but if that new one is built that one instead.

Manchester: Old Trafford

Liverpool: Anfield or the new ground they are going to build. If Evertons new ground is better though they could stage it.

Newcastle: St James Park.

Sunderland: Stadium of Light, one minor problem is that Newcastle and Sunderland are very close to each other.

Sheffield: Hillsborough, holds enough but its facillities would need updating.

Leeds: Elland Road, similar to Hillsborough, it would need money spending on it.

Blackburn, Ewood Park, this ground is often over looked but 3 sides of it are modern. If the 4th side was rebuilt it could get near 40000, especially if an extra tier was added to the main stand.

Southampton: St Mary's, if extra tiers were added to 2 or more stands it would get to 40000.

There is one more slot to be filled which IMO could be filled either by an expanded City Ground in Nottingham, an expanded KC Stadium in Hull or a new ground for Bristol City.

Hillsborough and Elland Road need massive and I am talking £100 million plus improvements to them, which is money neither team has and won't for many years, Wednesday especially.

^ I hope you're right. It's true that the World Cup has always alternated between Europe and the other continents. European World Cups have never been more than 8 years apart. With 2010 in Africa (South Africa) and 2014 in Latin America (Brazil), therefore an already unprecedented 12 year gap, there is a fair case for your insistence that it has to come back to Europe for 2018. However Asia has a larger population than the whole of the rest of the world combined and China is the ultimate emerging market. By 2018 it won't have been in Asia for 16 years. If they choose England or Spain for 2018 it would be 20 years before it returned to Asia. I'm not so sure FIFA will want to miss that opportunity. Note that China will also have a successful Olympics, Expo, Formula 1 etc behind it and will be a very powerful economy by then. There won't be any shortage of public enthusiam there either. I agree that we will have a very strong bid but we will also be up against the strongest possible competition. If we lose 2018 to China we should definitely try again for 2022 because the tournament will by then be virtually guaranteed to return to Europe and I think we would probably have a slight edge on Spain.

As to devolping China I think the relative failire of the world cup to help increase interest in football in the US and Japan after the event showed that its more effective when given to countries where the game is aready reasonabley popular like South Korea. Waiting until 2022 to give it to China when you'd expect the game to have advanced further might be a wise move.

As to Venues being used in the rest of the UK I'd say that depends on what FIFA are willing to allow as I can't see the FA risking a joint bid in an open bidding process with real rivals. If however they desided they wanted say an English world cup with some games in the rest of the UK(with spots set aside for the other nations to play at home if they do qualify) I can see the goverment preffering what would be a more PC option. Even if it was an English world cup I could see them pushing to use the Millenium stadium as it would provide a venue near the south west.

...and if the millenium stadium was allowed to be used (although seriously doubt it). It's capacity by 2018 could well be 80,000+. The millenium stadiums long term plan is to fill in the North stand to complete a full bowl, once cardiff rfc get their own stadium or share with cardiff city. One of those two will probably happen in the coming decade

Cardiff is not in England.

Hence the 'seriously doubt' bit of my comment. Just stating a fact about possible capacities. Dont get me wrong, if it;s staged in England, it should stay in England, but who would have thought the english fa cup final would be played in wales 10 years ago.

Also, 1 other stadium that's not been mentioned yet is the London Olympic Stadium.

If England does win the world-cup bid, would they postpone downgrading the Olympic Stadium to after 2018?

Someone also mentioned that 2018 is so far away - it's 12 years away now. The London Olympic bid kicked off, if I remember rightly, around 2000? So that was 12 years before the actual event as well....

Hence the 'seriously doubt' bit of my comment. Just stating a fact about possible capacities. Dont get me wrong, if it;s staged in England, it should stay in England, but who would have thought the english fa cup final would be played in wales 10 years ago.

Yes, I completely disagree with that decision - plenty of English Grounds that could have been used instead - just a sop to Wales really. But your teams have been playing in our league for over a century - time for us to both go our own way surely.

Also, 1 other stadium that's not been mentioned yet is the London Olympic Stadium.

If England does win the world-cup bid, would they postpone downgrading the Olympic Stadium to after 2018?

i doubt it and i hope not. we already have enough outstanding purpose-built football stadia in london, and who wants to watch a game miles away from the action stuck behind an athletics track? not me! :)

Dont forget Fifa like to see new stadias built for the games, so why we may have excellent recent stadiums at:

Wembley - 90000
Ashburton Grove - 60000
Old Trafford - 75000
City of Manchester Stadium - 48000
New Anfield - 55000
St James Park - 51000 (possible 60000 if funding given for Gallowgate end)
and
Sunderland - 48500 (possible 61000 if funding given for new tiers on east and south stands)

They would probably want to see large investment in other stadiums

Using the above would leave 3 vacencies so I could imagine seeing

New Birmingham Stadium funded (60000) or redevelopment of Villa Park (to 55000 capacity)
Wholescale redevelopment/New Stadium in Sheffield/Leeds

Wholescale redevelopment Southampton/Portsmouth/Bristol

I doubt FIFA care that much about new stadiums aslong as whats on offer is of a suitable standard, very little if any new facilites were built for the US 94 world cup for example. You'd think that the sense history of the game here would be a big attraction aswell which you'd get more of by including a few older grounds rather than only purpose built/new ones.

Elland Road only needs two stands having work on, the adding of an extra tier, doubt it would be even £50m to do it tho. Only problem, as it always has been, is that one end is substantially smaller than the other with no possible expansion.
And if the work did cost more than that, a new ground from scratch on the current site would be more cost effective.

It is already bigger than 3 grounds at the upcoming world cup in germany

Hillsborough and Elland Road need massive and I am talking £100 million plus improvements to them, which is money neither team has and won't for many years, Wednesday especially.

Hillsborough is in need of alot of updating, but I doubt it would cost 100m.

http://www.stadiumguide.com/hillsborough1.jpg

The good thing about Hillsborough compared to Elland Road or Goodison is that only one corner has been filled in. Surely it is cheaper to fill a corner in than building on top of a stand. With every corner developed the capacity would be around 50,000.

Then its just a tidying up project.

Hillsborough is in need of alot of updating, but I doubt it would cost 100m.

http://www.stadiumguide.com/hillsborough1.jpg

The good thing about Hillsborough compared to Elland Road or Goodison is that only one corner has been filled in. Surely it is cheaper to fill a corner in than building on top of a stand. With every corner developed the capacity would be around 50,000.
Then its just a tidying up project.
No I think both end would have to come down, and to exttend the corners the grandstand roof would have to be re done as it has massive supporting uprights at each end. I would say 50 to 80 million at least. Could look good if they copied the design of the famous cantilever roof around the other 3 sides and corners and give a 50,000 capacity

Leeds also needs 3 new stands. They could get over the problem of one smaller end by moving the pitch towards the Don Revie Stand. They would have to cut a bit off one end of the only modern stand. A bit like the way the moved the pitch in the 70's ?

Also, 1 other stadium that's not been mentioned yet is the London Olympic Stadium.

If England does win the world-cup bid, would they postpone downgrading the Olympic Stadium to after 2018?

Someone also mentioned that 2018 is so far away - it's 12 years away now. The London Olympic bid kicked off, if I remember rightly, around 2000? So that was 12 years before the actual event as well....
no i dont think they would wait til 2018...the olympic stadium will have an athletics track and is specifically meant to be an athletics facility to leave behind a legacy...much better alternatives exist in london in addition to wembley..

Can I mention Bramall Lane?

Already redeveloped for their first season back in the premiership and now at 33,000, a new Kop in the medium-term plans (assuming, I guess, premiership survival) will raise capacity to around 37-38,000 and when the corner stand is built between the Kop and the main stand, we have a 40,000+ stadium.

The John Street family stand was built in '96, and is very modern, very smart and has character. A new Kop would add to this modern feel (it currently has very poor facilities). One corner was built this summer, and the other about 4-5 years ago, so are also very new. The Main stand is from the mid-70's, but the hotel is already approved, and a casino in planning which would generate the money to revamp the stand (which still has very nice facilities) and the Bramall Lane stand is from '67, but still has lovely facilities.

It could be 40,000 in 6 years, giving us 6 more years to maybe make it 45-50,000.

seems to have overtaken Hillsborough

In terms of capacity, nowhere near yet (about 6,000 behind), but it could be close within 4 or 5 years and I say the facilities certainly will be superior once the Kop is redeveloped (it's currently partially built into a hillside, so there's no food/bar/bookies inside the building itself!)

In terms of capacity, nowhere near yet (about 6,000 behind), but it could be close within 4 or 5 years and I say the facilities certainly will be superior once the Kop is redeveloped (it's currently partially built into a hillside, so there's no food/bar/bookies inside the building itself!)


well,if we do get any world cups in the near future,either clubs will find the money to redevelop their grounds,or money would be made available.Can see clubs like Wendesday and United in hot competition to get the nod if the FA makes it known they want a ground from the Yorkshire area(you can throw Leeds in their as well)

One thing that could count against England hasn't yet been pointed out...

How many countries have the stadiums, the support, and the infrastructure to be able to host a world cup at short notice? I suspect that England would probably be top of the list (counting out recent hosts) - and I reckon that counts against us.

I remember when the German's won the bid for 2006, there were supposed to be some doubts about whether they'd have the stadiums in place in time (and frankly, some of the stadiums didn't make the 40k minimum FIFA had stated), the same doubts are being raised now about South Africa. I think it's entirely possible that if FIFA got nervous about the host's ability to pull it off (as in 1986?) they'd pull it and send it to a country that's already ready - namely, Engerland.

Also, having sampled Germany 06, I'd say that it doesn't matter how you break the country up geographically - just pick the best stadiums and let the teams and the supporters travel around... Germany was quality, and the travelling, seeing different areas and grounds was part of it.

The rate stadiums are expanding these days - I'd be curious to see just how many 40k plus sites there will be in 2018, with or without the finals.

Did anybody else hear Lennart Johansson on the Today programme on Radio 4 this morning? Apparently he's been chatting with Gordon Brown about the possibility of an English World Cup in 2018, and the two points he clearly made were that:

1. The other confederations have apparently agreed that Europe should host every third World Cup.

2. Spain, Italy, Germany etc. have hosted the World Cup fairly recently, whereas England haven't hosted since 1966.

I don't know how much clout Johansson has within FIFA (or more importantly will have in 2011 when the vote is cast), but the way he was talking England are firm favourites to host in 2018...

Government to back World Cup bid

The government is willing to back an English bid for the 2018 World Cup, says Sports Minister Richard Caborn.

Caborn revealed Chancellor Gordon Brown, who met Uefa president Lennart Johansson on Wednesday, was "very, very keen" on the idea.

Asked whether the government would support a bid, Caborn told BBC Radio 4: "Absolutely. I have no doubt."

The Football Association is still weighing up its options but chairman Brian Barwick said: "We would like it."

The 2010 World Cup is being held in South Africa, with the 2014 tournament set to go to a South American country.

From 2010, every third World Cup is expected to be awarded to a European country.

Barwick added: "If that is the year when it comes back to Europe, we're going to go for it.

"We don't have to decide now how we go about it, we have to learn the lessons of when we didn't get these things and learn the lessons of when we did - like the Olympics.

"I think (bid leader) Lord Coe was very clever, a brilliant guy and a really huge contributory factor, as was the playing of the major officials at the right time."

Coe has already indicated he would be willing to assist the FA in its bid.

If the FA does decide to bid, it could face competion from Australia.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/6109226.stm

Australia or Wembley, Old Trafford, Emirates Stadium, City of Manchester Stadium and St James' Park. I know what I'd go with.

about bloody time COMEON ENGLAND!!!!!!

Not sure if it has been mentioned but a fair few UK stadiums are unusable for a world cup bid due to the lack of space for one of the main FIFA earners...marketing...

eg Ashburton Grove has no car parking space to allow for media tents.
St.James is the same I believe..

New Anfield..will they be allowed to concrete over more of the park?

There are in fact very few UK grounds that meet these strict criteria and it is something the FA is aware of:

Uk Grounds:
Wembley
Old Trafford
Hampden
Millenium Stadium
Stadium of Light
City of Manchester


Definite no-no's are:
Emirates
Chelsea

Does anyone know anything more about this or plans to get round the issue?

If we host a World Cup, I wouldn't want Hampden or the Millennium stadium used. It would be England's event, why allow it to benifit Wales and Scotland?? They won't be part of an Olympic team, but if it suited them, I'm sure they would leap on the bandwagon of England 2018

English stadiums on the whole, the Emirates and OT especially, have a lot more hospitallity units, restaurants etc built in than your average European Stadium, therefore the number of marquees required on car parks should be significantly lower. Also grounds will not reach there full "Premiership" capacity for the tournemant due to additional super large luxury seats and places for reporters. (The attendance for the European Cup final in 2003 at Old Trafford was 63,215 as oppossed to a regular capacity of 67,000). So to be a 40,000 stadium then you probably need to be 45,000 regularly.

China may bid for World Cup:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/sports_olympics/2006-03/15/content_539608.htm

Also Australia might:
http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/160055/australia-may-bid-for-2018-world-cup

COMEON ENGLAND!!!:cheers: :banana: :cheers: :banana: :cheers: :banana: