Go away!! The more things change, the more they stay the same!!


http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/7324/untit1151led1mt.jpg

i'm sure if u behaved yourself you will be fine :)
banter is fine but u do go overboard sometimes


I know, but bubomb may as well go more overboard now as he will be banned even if he doesn't!! He will be banned no matter what due to other posters reporting his IP as soon as they spot him (even if he has done nothing wrong)!!

I'm glad i'm not him!!


p.s - I would also agree with the figure 8,542 - although this does change the fact that most of Ulster is in Northern Ireland and not Ireland (real world meaning)

The reason for the US NFL having larger stadia as a rule: they only play big games and can fill it for every game.

In a way thats even more impressive, that American Clubs can afford to construct these huge stadia and not have frequent games to supplement their incomes from. Just shows how big the television rights are.

Its the public that normally pays for the stadiums, I remember reading that something like $12 billion of public money had been spent on them in the last couple of decades. Whether they make up for that or not in terms of income I don't know but the way the sport is structured seems to be based on giving the teams/franchinses that barginning power by allowing them to move that european football clubs lack.

Following on from a discussion with a colleague, it became clear to me that many people attribute different levels of importance to different aspects of sports stadiums.

For me (as a football fan) the most important aspect is the 'fear factor'. I like stadiums that make opposition players want to plaster their undercrackers, so that my team wins.

But there are people here who seem to think other aspects are more important. Perhaps quality of the pitch, unobstructed views, catering/executive/club facilities, atmosphere (although this isn't an aspect of the stadium, more the supporters that inhabit it, although the stadium may affect this), transport links, exterior, etc.

What to you is the most important aspect of a stadium?

(PICTURES WOULD BE HELPFUL)

i think the 'fear factor' as you put it is important but how do you define that? capacity? atmosphere? size of the stadium?

i'd have to go with astmosphere, im not bothered with facilites as long as the seat i sit in is comfortable enough, one of the best matches i went to was the norwich vs. birmingham divison 1 play off final a few years back at the millennium stadium. The roof was closed and with 70,000 crazed football fans in that tight stadium the atmosphere was electric (if not a little deafening!)and even though my team lost (im a norwich city fan btw) it was one of the best days out ive ever had and worth every penny of the ticket.

http://www.citizens2canaries.com/history/playoff/playoff3.jpg

Capacity, atmosphere and design are the most important elements for me.

I don't really give a damn about the exterior, although a nice modern exterior like that on the Allianz or New Wembley never fails to impress me.

i think the 'fear factor' as you put it is important but how do you define that? capacity? atmosphere? size of the stadium?
A combination of things I think. Basically its the impression the players get when they run out of the tunnel, which I suppose is made up by atmosphere, size of the stands, number of people there etc.

The 'fear factor' is Celtic Park's one saving grace. I can't imagine any player would enjoy running out to the sight of 50 odd thousand rabid tarriers salivating and shouting vile abuse at them. (50,000 because the tunnel comes out of the "main" stand which is tiny in comparison, and would scare no one).

http://i2.tinypic.com/xfdsn4.jpg
And close up:
http://i2.tinypic.com/xfn34l.jpg http://i2.tinypic.com/xfn3nc.jpg

Video: greeting opposition players http://media.putfile.com/Rangers-Getting-Abuse
Video: attacking the referee http://www.zippyvideos.com/1754606634072276/may99/

Knowing 60,000 unwashed hooligans were itching to attack you would put most people off their work.

Other grounds, although nice places, may not be as intimidating for opposition players. For example Emirates with its 'no expense spared' attitude will attract gentlemanly supporters who will scare no one.

http://www.henkelsandmccoy.com/corporate/timeline/images/2003Execs.jpg

Capacity, atmosphere and design are the most important elements for me.

I don't really give a damn about the exterior, although a nice modern exterior like that on the Allianz or New Wembley never fails to impress me.

i agree, exterior isn't important as long as the interior is good

http://www.ultrasinside.it/Concorso4/galatasaray.jpg
Ali Sami Yen
http://users.otenet.gr/~teoxariz/Toumba-6.jpg
Toumba

The most important aspect in a stadium is a capacity of over 50,549 or 51,600 from July.

I find the most important aspect to the quality that it offers rather than just some bells and whistles to make it look better.

For me is very important the location.
I love to see stadiums in the middle of a city.

I like if it has a rectractable roof

Good sightlines are extremely important imo.

Most important is functioning best for its main event and environment. Ask the Texas Rangers about that. If you have a snowy environment for a football stadium and your only concern is temperature control, you've likely lost a homefield advantage for your team. If you play baseball in a super hot environ that has winds that blow a certain direction, don't stop the wind and build a completely open air stadium. You are killing your pitchers. A lot of the time, atmosphere can be brought on by the fans themselves. But if you know you have quiet fans, design the stadium to have better acoustics. As an architect, be cognisant of who and where you are designing these places.

From a spectator point of view the most important aspect is the comfort it offers. By comfort I mean easy acess be it by car or by bus, a parking lot compatible with the capacity of the stadium, clean restrooms, nice restaurants and bars, comfortable seats, full pitch view, perfect playing field. If all that is correct, just leave for the supportes to create the right atmosphere and the necessary level of "fear factor" to the oponent. Unfortunately here in Brazil most of our stadiums are 30 plus years old. It was a different era back then and stadiums today must be self-sustainable and should open for the public not only on match days but ev´ry day of the week and offer museums, tours, shopping, restaurants, etc... We here have none of those. :cry:

history. i find older more historic stadiums to, more often than not, be superior over newer stadiums.

Capacity, atmosphere and design are the most important elements for me.

Atmosphere is the most important. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0zjhnZHXDQ&search=rollercoaster)

Atmosphere is the most important. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0zjhnZHXDQ&search=rollercoaster)

Anything but Old Trafford. An ugly, terrible terrible modern stadium with no atmosphere and a pathetic design. Terrible main stand, horrendous roofs on the others and corners that look like thet were designed by a tarrier after his 3rd bottle of Buckfast.

Love the idea of an NFL in Europe for soccer. It is inevitable to happen oneday.

Even now local trophies have become less and less interesting as the poorer clubs become more and more irrelevant. Even the grand old FA Cup is not like it once was.

Bring on the ESL!. Euro Soccer League.

Love the idea of an NFL in Europe for soccer. It is inevitable to happen oneday.

Even now local trophies have become less and less interesting as the poorer clubs become more and more irrelevant. Even the grand old FA Cup is not like it once was.

Bring on the ESL!. Euro Soccer League.

I can't think of a worse thing that could possibly happen to football in Europe!!

You just don't understand football!! It's part of the community, part of the people, part of our history and culture - not a franchise to be taken on tour from city to city!! The fans would kill those who try it!

Intimidating stands. Large, and (usually) complete around the field. A steep incline for the upper tier is always good to look at.


The outside look could not be further from important in my view, It's what on the inside that matters. And I like to have stands make an opposition player cr@p his dacks.

Atmosphere is the most important. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0zjhnZHXDQ&search=rollercoaster)

Thank you tocino. If anyone wants to see what makes a good stadium, watch this video.

one that has a winning team playing in it and good view. Perhaps if the fans are willing to pay the ticket price

^^^^^^^^

You won't get a choice. Just like high petrol prices a Super League of soccer is just around the corner.

Especially now that Rupert Murdoch has been marginalised by the EU over the EPL rights.

As sure as the sun rises tomorrow morning, Murdoch as his cronies will be plotting a hijack of European soccer. He has plenty of experience in Australia, Britain and USA. Why would some small time economies of Europe be any threat to a multi-national corporation?

I very much doubt they'd ever try simpley because the fans are more interested in their clubs tradisional rivarys, Liverpool/Everton, Man Utd/Man City or Arsenal/Spurs are bigger games for them than verus Inter Milan. The current champs league has the level of interest in does because of the limated number of fixtures and the importance behind them and even with that some group games get pretty poor attendances.

Thank you tocino. If anyone wants to see what makes a good stadium, watch this video.

This may come as a shock to you, but it is the fans that are singing, not the stadium.

The old Hampden was an open bowl, but the noise from 100000+ fans at the games was amazing. Fans make noise, not the stadium. Outside of European games, the atmosphere at Celtic league games is terrible!! The old parkhead had a far better atmosphere for most league games.


Here is a video of a really noisy stadium, but again it is not the stadium, it is the fans -

http://media.putfile.com/final-minute

It's very hard to decide what the most important aspect is in a stadium - I suppose you could play a mind experiment and play things off against each other.

I'd rather have unobstructed views than a perfect pitch, good transport links over good catering, decent toilet facilities over a pretty exterior, and capacity over location.

Unobstructed views over good transport links and decent toilet facilities over capacity.

Now, would I prefer unobstructed views if the queues for the toilets were so long that I missed half the game? Probably not.

There you have it - the most important aspect in a stadium is... decent toilet facilities.

I very much doubt they'd ever try simpley because the fans are more interested in their clubs tradisional rivarys, Liverpool/Everton, Man Utd/Man City or Arsenal/Spurs are bigger games for them than verus Inter Milan. The current champs league has the level of interest in does because of the limated number of fixtures and the importance behind them and even with that some group games get pretty poor attendances.

Maybe, but old NSWRL/ARL fans were just as pasionate, yet that didn't stop Australia's super league war.

I disagree. I never understand the publics obsession with toilets. I have a rock hard bladder, so only need to piss after 3/4 pints. I simply time things right and go for a piss before entering the stadium. As for a big shite, again, it once a day, maybe twice, so simple timing means you don't need to drop the kids off at the pool during a game. Even if I had the turtles head something awful, I would never use the toilets in a stadium. I only shite in quality bogs (my own), and would never lower myself to shitting in public toilets.


What kind of lowlife would release his guts in a stadium toilet??? This excludes celtic fans, as they live in public toilets (council houses)

I disagree. I never understand the publics obsession with toilets. I have a rock hard bladder, so only need to piss after 3/4 pints. I simply time things right and go for a piss before entering the stadium. As for a big shite, again, it once a day, maybe twice, so simple timing means you don't need to drop the kids off at the pool during a game. Even if I had the turtles head something awful, I would never use the toilets in a stadium. I only shite in quality bogs (my own), and would never lower myself to shitting in public toilets.


What kind of lowlife would release his guts in a stadium toilet??? This excludes celtic fans, as they live in public toilets (council houses)

Ever been to a cricket match?

Drunk Aberdeen fan at a Celtic Park toilet (although I don't think it is celtic park, their bogs are much worse!!) -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC10SPesms4&search=aberdeen%20fan%20at%20parkhead

Ever been to a cricket match?


No, thankfully. That's a bit different, as I think cricket games last all day. I meant football.

Europeans are in for a real shock pretty soon. History and the past mean bugger all when you are talking money.

Do you really think clubs like Man U will continue playing against sides like Wigan in the future?

What kind of lowlife would release his guts in a stadium toilet??? This excludes celtic fans, as they live in public toilets (council houses)

you at it again :ohno:

True that,who does shit in a public toilet?
I've been to plenty cricket Test matches & ODI's I always empty'd my bowels up home first, so u go there as hungry as a lion :D Then u fill up again with da chicken Tikka from da paki's :eat:

Thank you tocino. If anyone wants to see what makes a good stadium, watch this video.
That must be the biggest hypocritical farce I have ever seen. Celtic fans signing a song about solidarity against terrorists and offering condolances in song for the tragedy in Madrid, yet every other game sees Celtic fans singing pro IRA songs and waving ETA and basque flags.

A recent article about the Celtic chief exec being embarrassed about celtic's IRA loving supporters
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/c/celtic/4982304.stm

And here you can hear them in full voice (2 minutes in)
http://www.bolt.com/fatfink/video/817200?cn=STREAM_fatfink_video_large_PAGE1

UTTERLY DISGUSTING BUNCH OF HYPOCRITICAL TERRORIST LOVING SCUMBAGS

That must be the biggest hypocritical farce I have ever seen. Celtic fans signing a song about solidarity against terrorists and offering condolances in song for the tragedy in Madrid, yet every other game sees Celtic fans singing pro IRA songs and waving ETA and basque flags.

UTTERLY DISGUSTING BUNCH OF HYPOCRITICAL TERRORIST LOVING SCUMBAGS

Please stay on topic and keep your bitter rants to yourself.

P.S. Too easy. :)

^^ It wasn't me who posted the video, nor was it me who was signing about the joys of terrorism.

^^ It wasn't me who posted the video, nor was it me who was signing about the joys of terrorism.

No, but it was you who went off on a rather embarassingly bitter rant. Let's just say your thread (which was started as a troll) has backfired big style for you.

It's cool though. You've properly let your guard down now so we all know what you're really like. You Rangers fans really do your club proud on this forum!

CARLYON ARMS FC SUNDAY LEAGUE TEAM PLAY AT THE 92000 SEAT PAR ATHLETICS TRACK, TREGONISSEY AT THE 64500 SEAT PENRICE SCHOOL PITCHES, DUKE OF CORNWALL WERE BASED AT 51000 SEAT POLTAIR PARK & WE SOMETIMES HAVE A KICK AROUND WITH A COKE CAN AT THE 58000 SEAT ALDI CAR PARK. BEAT THAT.

I remember a Champions League away game against Anderlecht and celtic fans could be heard singing disgusting IRA songs for the whole first half as some drunk ones were in the main stand beside the camera. It was so bad that a celtic official got the fans removed from the area beside the camera at half time so that they could not be heard live on TV around Europe.

Remember celtic fans mocking American Rangers player Claudia Reyna after the New York terrorist attack -

"A man in the Celtic section of the crowd was seen to imitate a plane as Reyna stepped up to take a corner during the match at Ibrox. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/1572616.stm

I remember a Champions League away game against Anderlecht and celtic fans .....

What relevance does the behaviour of Celtic fans have to the most importance aspect of a stadium, bubomb? In fact what relevance does it have to stadiums at all?

No, but it was you who went off on a rather embarassingly bitter rant. Let's just say your thread (which was started as a troll) has backfired big style for you.

It's cool though. You've properly let your guard down now so we all know what you're really like. You Rangers fans really do your club proud on this forum!
Honestly, how has this back fired? This is a classic example of being celtic-minded. Celtic fans do disgusting things, and I should be embarrassed for pointing it out?

What relevance does the behaviour of Celtic fans have to the most importance aspect of a stadium, bubomb? In fact what relevance does it have to stadiums at all?
You and your friend Tocino were happy to talk about celtic fans when it was complimentary

Honestly, how has this back fired? This is a classic example of being celtic-minded. Celtic fans do disgusting things, and I should be embarrassed for pointing it out?

Yes, you should be embarassed for bringing an irrelevant, off-topic and bitter rant into a thread you started.

You and your friend Tocino were happy to talk about celtic fans when it was complimentary

We were? Really?

If you look back, both of us were discussing atmosphere - which directly relates to the topic of the thread i.e. the most important aspects of a stadium.

What relevance does the behaviour of Celtic fans have to the most importance aspect of a stadium, bubomb? In fact what relevance does it have to stadiums at all?

then why did you post a video showing the (hypocritical) behaviour of celtic fans?

who is Bubomb?

then why did you post a video showing the (hypocritical) behaviour of celtic fans?


I didn't you moron.

Apology accepted.

Yes, my mistake, you didn't, but you didn't criticise the guy for posting it, yet you say to me "What relevance does the behaviour of Celtic fans have to the most importance aspect of a stadium, bubomb? In fact what relevance does it have to stadiums at all?"


You should of said that to the guy who posted the video, instead of praising him....so you are still a bead rattler!!

rattle those beads boy...RATTLE them!!

Why should I critisise the guy who posted it?

He posted a beautiful and poignant moment when Celtic fans fittingly paid tribute to a terrible tragedy that happened on the same day in Madrid. Goes to show what a stadium that promotes atmosphere and a fantastic support can achieve!

then why did you say to me -

"What relevance does the behaviour of Celtic fans have to the most importance aspect of a stadium, bubomb? In fact what relevance does it have to stadiums at all?"

Either the behaviour of fans should be posted/talked about, or they shouldn't be posted/talked about!! Which one is it bead rattler?

Out of curiosity, did celtic fans have any beautiful and poignant moments when IRA bombs resulted in terrible tragedies around the UK? Or do they pick and choose what terrorist attacks to use so they can play the good guys in front of the cameras and turn on the crocodile tears?

then why did you say to me -

"What relevance does the behaviour of Celtic fans have to the most importance aspect of a stadium, bubomb? In fact what relevance does it have to stadiums at all?"

Either the behaviour of fans should be posted/talked about, or they shouldn't be posted/talked about!! Which one is it bead rattler?
I realise you're struggling with this but it's really not a difficult concept.

It's irrelevant to discuss the general behaviour of Celtic fans in this thread... the only exception is below...
It's relevant to discuss Celtic fans in this thread if it's directly related to the atmosphere generated in a stadium

Now let's just move on before you embarass yourself further.

Out of curiosity, did celtic fans have any beautiful and poignant moments when IRA bombs resulted in terrible tragedies around the UK? Or do they pick and choose what terrorist attacks to play the good guys in front of the cameras?
Please stop discussing off-topic matters. This is of no relevance to stadiums.

It's relevant to discuss Celtic fans in this thread if it's directly related to the atmosphere generated in a stadium
[/list]
.

So if it relevant to talk about the atmosphere that celtic fans make in their stadium after Al-Qaeda terrorist attacks in Spain, then it must also be relevant to talk about the atmosphere they make after IRA terrorist attacks in the UK. So tell me, is the atmosphere in the stadium as 'beautiful and poignant' after an IRA terrorist attack?


This isn't the Jock Stein child rape scandal you know!! You can't brush this one under the carpet!

So if it relevant to talk about the atmosphere that celtic fans make in their stadium after Al-Qaeda terrorist attacks in Spain, then it must also be relevant to talk about the atmosphere they make after IRA terrorist attacks in the UK. So tell me, is the atmosphere in the stadium as 'beautiful and poignant' after an IRA terrorist attack?

I can't remember Celtic ever playing a game on the day of an IRA attack so I'm afraid I can't answer the question.

I can't remember Celtic ever playing a game on the day of an IRA attack so I'm afraid I can't answer the question.


I can, and the atmosphere was quite noisy, due to all the shouting and songs in support of the IRA.

I can, and the atmosphere was quite noisy, due to all the shouting and songs in support of the IRA.

You can? Date, match and bombing please?

You can? Date, match and bombing please?


every single game featuring celtic away from home for the last 30 years has had IRA chanting. Every single celtic home game before Fergus McCann had IRA chanting. So any of those games that occured on the same day as an IRA attack answers your question.

every single game featuring celtic away from home for the last 30 years has had IRA chanting. Every single celtic home game before Fergus McCann had IRA chanting. So any of those games that occured on the same day as an IRA attack answers your question.

So no actual evidence. Let's move on then.

So no actual evidence. Let's move on then.

So are you actually saying celtic fans have never sung IRA songs????? Get a grip sonny. You ain't fooling anybody!! I live in Scotland, so you can't fool me!! Every single football fan in Scotland will confirm celtic fans sing IRA chants/ songs.

I very much doubt they'd ever try simpley because the fans are more interested in their clubs tradisional rivarys, Liverpool/Everton, Man Utd/Man City or Arsenal/Spurs are bigger games for them than verus Inter Milan.

Rivalries don't go away in a NFL style league, they would probably get stronger. All of those english clubs would probably be in the same division, which would make the games more important. Every season in the NFL you play your division rivals twice(1 home, 1 away), there are 4 teams in each division so that is 8 of 16 games. You have to win in your division to make the playoffs.

Do the New York Giants play the New York Jets?

^yes they do though not often.

traditional rivalries seem to always stay intact in the NFL. The Dallas Cowboys' biggest rival is the Washington Redskins. Geographically, they should have been moved from the NFC East a long time ago, but they remain. Their next rivals are probably Philadelphia and then New York Giants. All have been kept in the same division, though Tampa or Carolina should have switched places with them long ago.

and are the Jets and Giants really rivals? Its like in baseball where I wouldn't call Oakland and SF or LA Angels and LA Dodgers rivals. Don't think Oakland and SF are football rivals either.

If European football ends up like the NFL then it would be the death of the game. I for one would refuse to watch such fake made up teams. It will never happen thankfully.

And Euro teams aren't made up???

No, most grew and developed from local communities over 100 years ago. Most clubs were formed for the benefit of local communities and the players were local boys/men. Some clubs formed from working mens groups/miners/shipbuilders etc or were formed from army groups/divisions to give the men something to enjoy away from work/war.

Browns - Steelers, as close to a European rivalry as they come.

Browns!!!!!!! sounds like a jobby!!

If an esl is to born it won't be an esl Bob. The name will be European Football League, the game isn't called soccer on this side of the atlantic. I like the names of some teams especially Paris Revolutionaires, I like it. But you can have Abramovitch and Murdoch... They are not the first multimilionaires in the sports Louis Dreyfus, Berlusconi and a bunch of all business oriented guys have been here for a while...
The idea of a football league nfl styles is good but tough to translate in something real.
Real-Arsenal is good, Real beating Barcelona is even better and if it gives them a national championship they got it all... Europe as something that doesn't exist in the united states a bunch of Nations proud of their own (meaningless for some soccer history)... Abrahamovitch might try to get something done with Murdoch and a few other g14 owners... the fans might like it for a while. But teams will still want to have a crapy Real-Atletico cause the point is that there is more or at least the same amount of money there and more prestige and more pride...

Money can top it except when your home team take a beating every week in the EFL. fan won't come to the stadium to see their team lose... In the US they do in Europe not so much Madrid has more chances to win a liga than an ESL in the liga tey are the top dogs in the EFL they might lose everyweek.

If Europe had a league comprising the top 32 teams from various countries, European soccer would be a lot more interesting. I think the reason would be parity. Every year, for the most part, you have the same teams dominating the individual leagues. Combine them all and you have one hell of a competitive league. Imagine Barca, Real Madrida, the Milan teams, Juve, Roma, Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester U., Lyon, Fayenhoord, Ajax, etc. etc. all in the same league. Have them in divisions seperated by country. Playoffs are 16 teams, and the Euro League Championship. To maintain the value of the smaller leagues, like serie B, etc. have the bottom team from each division leave to be replaced by the top team of the minor leagues.

I think that would do wonders for competition, rivalries, and team equality. The only other thing i think Europe should do with soccer is have a salary cap. It is essential for equal competition.

North
Isle Division
Arsenal
Man U.
Chelsea
Liverpool
Tottenham
Blackburn
Celtic
Rangers

North Euro Division
Bayern Munich
Hamburg SV
Werder Bremen
PSV Eindhoven
Fayenoord Rotterdam
AJAX
AZ Alkmaar
Schalke 04

South
West
Barcelona
Real Madrid
Valencia
Osasuna
FC Sevilla
Lyon
Bordeaux
FC Porto

Mediterranean
Juventus
AC Milan
Inter Milan
Roma
Lazio
Fiorentina
Lille
Chievo Verona




...These teams battle it out for the European Club Championship, with the rest of the current leagues trying to become champions of their intracountry championships so that they can take the place of the worst team from each of the divisions.

Sort of like Champions League except you would only play Euro Super League games while in the Euro Super league, rather than in addition.

I think that would do wonders for competition, rivalries, and team equality. The only other thing i think Europe should do with soccer is have a salary cap. It is essential for equal competition.

Salary cap? Have a day off mate.

annoying people

then why did you post a video showing the (hypocritical) behaviour of celtic fans?

who is Bubomb?

Once again, that would be you

North
Isle Division
Arsenal
Man U.
Chelsea
Liverpool
Tottenham
Blackburn
Celtic
Rangers

North Euro Division
Bayern Munich
Hamburg SV
Werder Bremen
PSV Eindhoven
Fayenoord Rotterdam
AJAX
AZ Alkmaar
Schalke 04

South
West
Barcelona
Real Madrid
Valencia
Osasuna
FC Sevilla
Lyon
Bordeaux
FC Porto

Mediterranean
Juventus
AC Milan
Inter Milan
Roma
Lazio
Fiorentina
Lille
Chievo Verona




...These teams battle it out for the European Club Championship, with the rest of the current leagues trying to become champions of their intracountry championships so that they can take the place of the worst team from each of the divisions.

Sort of like Champions League except you would only play Euro Super League games while in the Euro Super league, rather than in addition.


and where do the hundreds of other professional clubs around the UK and Europe fit in to this plan? In England for example, the supports of the teams ouside the top 10 far outweigh the number of fans who support the top 10. What happens to the supports of those 82 clubs outside of the top 10? In Scotland, more fans pay to watch non old firm teams each week than those who pay to watch Rangers and Celtic. What happens to these teams/fans?

If they bring in the "Euro Soccer League" then they can finally ditch those useless cup competitions and have a proper finals/playoff system to decide the premier team.

At the moment in England you have the ludicrous situation which seems to happen every year where the championship is all wrapped out months before the season ends. With a "Grand Final" in England Chelsea could get their lunch cut by an upstart right at the end of the season which keeps interest up, unlike the ridiculous "Euro system" in place currently.

When they bring in the ESL, it will be 20 odd clubs. The Group 14 plus a few add ons all playing each other twice so it will be around 38/40 game season. Cannot wait.

i thought i explained it. the other teams not of the elite league, play as normal. in lesser cups all vying for a chance to gain entrance via lower league championships into the main super league. lowest of the super league teams are relegated to the lesser leagues. it creates a drive to the main league, steady competition to win those leagues, and a drive to not be on the bottom in the super league.

as for the salary cap, i really want someone of the opposite mindset to explain this to me. why are you so against it? in the NFL, the cap has created an opportunity for the lesser markets to win, using strategy and managing skills, player development. in baseball, however, without the cap, the same teams are ALWAYS in it. The yankees spending 150 mil a year will never not be a dominant team, and the devil rays, only able to spend 40 or so, will NEVER be in it. their players get too pricey once developed and leave to bigger markets. You see the Kansas City Chiefs consistently competing with the likes of the NEW YORK giants. Why because of a salary cap.

So, please...why is a salary cap an awful idea? Do soccer leagues want Juve to ALWAYS win the league, with Inter and AC milan right behind, Roma nearby, and maybe ONCE in a decade the likes of a lesser market team. I dont see how that is interesting at all to watch.

Sofa's

The first page of this thread was interesting...

people?

Please discuss the pros and cons of any country having a national stadium?

thanks

^^^^^^^^^

There is an investigation of sorts going on in Italy now I saw on the news as to why Juventus "somehow" manage to win the league in Italy every season.

Stadium should they have an athletics track and jump pit around the pitch?

Some well-known national stadiums allegedlly according to Wikipedia are:

Argentina
El Monumental (football)
Australia
Melbourne Cricket Ground (Australian rules football, and athletics)
Telstra Stadium (rugby league, rugby union, and football)
The Australian cricket team plays at a range of grounds throughout the country. The Melbourne and Sydney cricket grounds are the major venues.
Belgium
King Baudouin Stadium (football and athletics)
Brazil
Maracanã (football)
Bulgaria
Vasil Levski National Stadium (football and athletics)
Canada
Commonwealth Stadium (football and athletics)
China
Beijing Olympic Stadium (football and athletics)
England
Lord's Cricket Ground (cricket)
Twickenham (rugby union)
Wembley Stadium (football, rugby league)
Finland
Helsinki Olympic Stadium (football and athletics)
France
Stade de France (football, rugby union, and athletics)
Germany
Olympiastadion (football and athletics)
India
Eden Gardens (cricket)
Salt Lake Stadium (football and athletics)
Ireland
Croke Park (Gaelic games)
Lansdowne Road (football and rugby union)
Israel
Ramat gan stadium (football and athletics)
Italy
Stadio Olimpico (football and athletics)
Japan
Nissan Stadium (football and athletics)
Tokyo Dome (baseball)
South Korea
Seoul Olympic Stadium (football and athletics)
Mexico
Estadio Azteca (football)
Netherlands
Olympisch Stadion (athletics)
New Zealand
Eden Park (rugby union and cricket)
Norway
Ullevaal stadion (football)
Bislett stadion (athletics)
Paraguay
Estadio Defensores del Chaco (football)
Peru
Estadio Monumental "U" (football)
Portugal
Estádio do Jamor (football and athletics)
Russia
Luzhniki Stadium (football and athletics)
Scotland
Hampden Park (football)
Murrayfield (rugby union)
South Africa
FNB Stadium (football)
Newlands Cricket Ground (cricket)
Newlands Stadium (rugby union)
Uruguay
Estadio Centenario (football)
Wales
Millennium Stadium (football and rugby union)

which is the best and why?

there's an error on that Wikipedia list.
in Italy we haven't any National Stadium!
the Stadio Olimpico in Rome is the home of Roma and Lazio for football and is a location for a Grand Prix of Atlethic.
nothing more!

Italy national team of football play matches in the whole Italy, and for the must part of time it play in small-medium size city and not in the top 5 cities.
except for big matches or in the past for Euro and World Cup.
in the last 10-15 years the National Team played very often in mid-size cities of South-Central Italy, where there are very few football clubs at top level (in the first 2 Divisions) and people is "hungry" of football.

the first match of Italy was played in Milan at the Arena Stadium (that still exists and host the home matche of the third team of Milan, the Brera FC, with a capacity of 30.000 people all seats and it's located in the city centre).
then for many decades the city with more caps was Milan, that is the capital of Italian Football and also the city with the biggest stadium of the country.
only in the end of 80's Roma became the city with more caps.
San Siro have another record. it's the only stadium of Italy where the National Footbal Team never lost a match!

Italian National Team played 52 time in Rome

10 matches at the Stadio Nazionale del Partito Fascista during the 30's (today the stadium is called Flaminio and hosted Rugby matches)
42 matches at the Stadio Olimpico from the mid 50's

Italian National Team played 50 time in Milano

36 matches at San Siro from the 30's (where never lost)
6 matches at the Arena in the 20's
6 matches at the old Lombardia Stadium in the 20's
2 matches and the Velodromo Vigorelli in the 20's

If it's an athletics stadium, or wants to host atheletics...then yes.

Pour example...

http://www.kieferfloors.com/images/news_install_01_lg.jpg

track and jump pit no no no they suck unless its olympics

Does anyone know of any stadia that were built with athletics tracks that have never been used?

Stadium should they have an athletics track and jump pit around the pitch?

Er, some should, yes - otherwise where are you going to hold the Olympics, European and World Championships, European and World Cups, Commonwealth Games, Asian Games, Goodwill Games etc. etc. etc.?

There´s a difference between olympic style stadiums with a lot of space between the track and the first row compared to stadiums where spectators are right next to the outer lane like Zurich (Weltklasse), Oslo (Bislet), Monaco, Stockholm stadium just to name a few.

^^^^^^^^^

There is an investigation of sorts going on in Italy now I saw on the news as to why Juventus "somehow" manage to win the league in Italy every season.

I don't really follow soccer, but I have a strong feeling it's something to to with them having more points than all the other teams...

No, Berlin is the stadium I class as Germany's national stadium. It is the most famous, most classy, it is in the capital and it hosts cup finals.


there is no national stadium in Germany. And there will probably never be one.
We are a federalistic country. It just doesnt work here.
The Olympiastadion may have been the centrepoint for sports under the Nazis, but thats about it really.

If we argue on the historical context, then the Olympic stadium in munich would probably snatch the title :)

I keep thinking it's going to be sad to see the end the England road trip round the country....but i'm sure after the first game is announced at Wembley I wont care anymore.

I honestly didn't know which way to vote on this one.

^^^^^^^^^^^

Supposedly Juventus has been getting "extra" good treatment from referees according to the accusations.

Could well be sour grapes.

I would still class Berlin as a sort of German national stadium as it is a huge stadium, it is very classy and grand looking, it's in the capital and will be used for the World Cup final as well as German Cup finals.

To a lesser extent, I class the Olimpico in Rome as an Italian national stadium due to it being a large modern stadium in the capital that held the last World Cup final in Italy. In these countries they may not be classed as national stadiums, but to most foreigners, these stadiums give the impression of national stadiums (mainly bacause they are big and in the capital).

It is sour grapes.

I would still class Berlin as a sort of German national stadium as it is a huge stadium, it is very classy and grand looking, it's in the capital and will be used for the World Cup final as well as German Cup finals.

To a lesser extent, I class the Olimpico in Rome as an Italian national stadium due to it being a large modern stadium in the capital that held the last World Cup final in Italy. In these countries they may not be classed as national stadiums, but to most foreigners, these stadiums give the impression of national stadiums (mainly bacause the are big and in the capital).

It's a bad and wrong impression.
Italia team never palyed in Roma until the mid 30's, cause in Roma there aren't stadium!
from the end of the fascism to the 70's there was just one stadium that had the criteria that you wrote: the biggest and located in the biggest city: San Siro in Milan. (San Siro was and is the main stadium of Italy and Milan is the biggest city of the country).
the World Cup of the 90 had the final match in Roma only for a geographical reason: Roma is settled in the middle of Italy, Milan in the North. so, Roma is a perfect location for National Event as the final of the World Cup.
but not sure, cause it's the Capital of Italy!
the OLimpico is one of the worst stadium of the world to see a footbal match!
there is the atlethic field, is a bowl stadium with dozens of meters between the field and the seats!
and at the end, Roma have a sport tradition close to ...zero.
sports in Italy means Milan, Turin, Bologna, Genoa.

In the 4 principal sports of Italy (Football, Basketball, Volleyball and Rugby) the clubs outside North Italy that won National Championships are:

Football: 5 in Roma, 2 in Napoli, 1 in Cagliari.
Basket: 4 in Roma, 1 in Caserta
Volleyball: 3 in Roma, 1 in Catania
Rugby:5 in L'Aquila, 5 in Roma and 2 in Napoli.

that's all!

the only Milan's teams won in the 5 principal sports around 140 National Championships!

It's a bad and wrong impression.
Italia team never palyed in Roma until the mid 30's, cause in Roma there aren't stadium!
from the end of the fascism to the 70's there was just one stadium that had the criteria that you wrote: the biggest and located in the biggest city: San Siro in Milan. (San Siro was and is the main stadium of Italy and Milan is the biggest city of the country).
the World Cup of the 90 had the final match in Roma only for a geographical reason: Roma is settled in the middle of Italy, Milan in the North. so, Roma is a perfect location for National Event as the final of the World Cup.
but not sure, cause it's the Capital of Italy!
the OLimpico is one of the worst stadium of the world to see a footbal match!
there is the atlethic field, is a bowl stadium with dozens of meters between the field and the seats!
and at the end, Roma have a sport tradition close to ...zero.
sports in Italy means Milan, Turin, Bologna, Genoa.

In the 4 principal sports of Italy (Football, Basketball, Volleyball and Rugby) the clubs outside North Italy that won National Championships are:

Football: 5 in Roma, 2 in Napoli, 1 in Cagliari.
Basket: 4 in Roma, 1 in Caserta
Volleyball: 3 in Roma, 1 in Catania
Rugby:5 in L'Aquila, 5 in Roma and 2 in Napoli.

that's all!

the only Milan's teams won in the 5 principal sports around 140 National Championships!


Yes, I know all that. But that doesn't change the fact that most people are going to associate any large stadium in the capital as a countries national stadium.

Yes, I know all that. But that doesn't change the fact that most people are going to associate any large stadium in the capital as a countries national stadium.


not here in Italy, not in Germany, not in Netherlands....and many other countries.
National Stadiums are a tradition of only 2 type of State:
the British ones, or the ones that were formerly colonies of England and the Dictatur!
during Fascism in Italy we had a National Stadium in Roma (but the National Team played everywhere)
During the Nazism there was a National Stadium in Berlin.
during the long dictatorship of Francisco Franco there was a National Stadium in Sevilla.
during the Stalinism and also for many years after the death of Stalin there was a National Stadium in Mosckva.

the only country that is an exception of that 2 categories is the France, but 'cause it's a Nation with a strong centralism (political, ecnomical, in the sports and also for population - Paris have 1/5° of the entire population!).

in all the countries that have a Federalist constitution, in all the countries as Italy that have strong Regional differences, in all the countries where there was never that tradition...there isn't a National Stadium.
and this happened in the MOST part of the Countries of the World.

In Spain the most beautiful stadium, and also the biggest is in Barcelona, in Italy the most beautiful and biggest is in Milan, in Germany for many years was in Munich and now in Dortmund, in Turkey is in Istanbul, in the formerly USSR it was in Kiev, in USA it isn't sure in Washington, in Brasil isn't located in Brazilia, in Australia main stadium are in Sydney and Melbourne and not in Canberra, as in Canada are in Toronto and Montreal and not at Ottawa!

so, i think that only FEW countries have a National Stadium (England, Ireland, Scotland?, India, Pakistan, Malaysia....North Korea...).
so in your list i think there are more or less 8 or 10 right National Stadiums.
all the rest ...are supposions. your, and also completely wrong.

With current stand technologies, it shouldn't be necessary to build stands that permanently have the track exposed unless its specifically an athletics stadium and is always used as such.

not here in Italy, not in Germany, not in Netherlands....and many other countries.
National Stadiums are a tradition of only 2 type of State:
the British ones, or the ones that were formerly colonies of England and the Dictatur!
during Fascism in Italy we had a National Stadium in Roma (but the National Team played everywhere)
During the Nazism there was a National Stadium in Berlin.
during the long dictatorship of Francisco Franco there was a National Stadium in Sevilla.
during the Stalinism and also for many years after the death of Stalin there was a National Stadium in Mosckva.

the only country that is an exception of that 2 categories is the France, but 'cause it's a Nation with a strong centralism (political, ecnomical, in the sports and also for population - Paris have 1/5° of the entire population!).

in all the countries that have a Federalist constitution, in all the countries as Italy that have strong Regional differences, in all the countries where there was never that tradition...there isn't a National Stadium.
and this happened in the MOST part of the Countries of the World.

In Spain the most beautiful stadium, and also the biggest is in Barcelona, in Italy the most beautiful and biggest is in Milan, in Germany for many years was in Munich and now in Dortmund, in Turkey is in Istanbul, in the formerly USSR it was in Kiev, in USA it isn't sure in Washington, in Brasil isn't located in Brazilia, in Australia main stadium are in Sydney and Melbourne and not in Canberra, as in Canada are in Toronto and Montreal and not at Ottawa!

so, i think that only FEW countries have a National Stadium (England, Ireland, Scotland?, India, Pakistan, Malaysia....North Korea...).
so in your list i think there are more or less 8 or 10 right National Stadiums.
all the rest ...are supposions. your, and also completely wrong.

You seem to be struggling with the concept that i'm talking about the opinions of people outside of Italy, mainly people in the UK.

Most football fans in the UK, if asked to name the national stadium in Italy, would reply Rome. This is what they would reply regardless of whether is it is factually wrong or not. I class national stadiums as mostly large stadiums in a countries capital, so to me Rome is the national stadium of Italy. This may not be what Italians think, but that is irrelevant to me. The fact that Rome held the World Cup final also helps to make it Italy's national stadium in my opinion.


Even though the San Siro is a far better football stadium, I will always class the Olimpico as Italy's national stadium.


Also, it wasn't my list, and the best stadium in Germany, in my opinion is Berlin and the best in Spain is in Madrid.

Scotland has 2 national stadiums (one in my personal opinion).


an 80000+ stadium in the capital of a country and the stadium held the biggest sporting event in the world - the World Cup final......that for me is almost the very definition of a national stadium.

Of course this is all just my own opinion, and I realise you are from Milan so you will obviously have some kind of spaghetti rivalry going on between cities, but you have to realise that Mussolini has gone and people are now allowed to have different opinions.

Any football stadium with an athletics track circling the pitch should not be allowed to charge spectators more then £5 to watch the football. (Although us Brits do not build football stadiums with tracks round them so the price should be the equivelant in Euros for our continental friends who do)

Although I generally agree that football stadia should not be built with running tracks, its led to the problem that in England at least we do not have a first-rate athletics stadium anywhere (until presumably the Olympics). This is probably one of the reasons we've gone from an athletics superpower, to what we are today. Athletics is scorned and mocked in this country.

There is no large first rate athletics venue in the U.S. either. Most are small, stadiums built for college athletics. Most meets, professional or amateur are either indoors or at these small(20-30,000 seat collegiate athletics specific stadiums) venues. Some of the larger college stadiums recently got rid of their tracks, so I can't think of any. Husky Stadium maybe?

Stadium should they have an athletics track and jump pit around the pitch?

you didn't word that properly,
If the stadiums is for Athletics(mainly) then Yes of course, pretty straight forward.

i think u meant should a football(etc) stadium have an athletics stadium then of course no.

hi Socrates

It makes the stadium worse if athletics is not the primary sport (which it usually is not), but if it is, then there should be. I seem to be pretty much reiterating what everyone else has said. IMO though, there are far too many football stadiums that have unecessary tracks around them, while at the same time there are far too few quality athletics stadiums around.

(Although us Brits do not build football stadiums with tracks round them so the price should be the equivelant in Euros for our continental friends who do)

Wrong (http://images.google.com/images?q=withdean&hl=en)

If it is an Olympic or athletic Stadium my answer would be yes, but if it is only a soccer stadium i´d vote for no.

Yes, I know all that. But that doesn't change the fact that most people are going to associate any large stadium in the capital as a countries national stadium.

Yes, this is Australia's National Stadium...
http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyunion/worldcup2003/images/canberrastadium330.jpg
The magnificant Canberra stadium. Capacity: A whopping 25,000.

:jk:

No, obviously, unless they gonna do something like Sta Denis, where by, the bottom bowl moves forward to hide the track so to speak, but still its gonna be quite a distance for the guys higher up. & someone metioned what stadium has an athletics track & they dont use it, If anyone from Istanbul is reading this, can you please clarify if they use that running track or not? I know its an olympic stadium but I just want to know if its been used?

You seem to be struggling with the concept that i'm talking about the opinions of people outside of Italy, mainly people in the UK.

Most football fans in the UK, if asked to name the national stadium in Italy, would reply Rome. This is what they would reply regardless of whether is it is factually wrong or not. I class national stadiums as mostly large stadiums in a countries capital, so to me Rome is the national stadium of Italy. This may not be what Italians think, but that is irrelevant to me. The fact that Rome held the World Cup final also helps to make it Italy's national stadium in my opinion.


Even though the San Siro is a far better football stadium, I will always class the Olimpico as Italy's national stadium.


Also, it wasn't my list, and the best stadium in Germany, in my opinion is Berlin and the best in Spain is in Madrid.

Scotland has 2 national stadiums (one in my personal opinion).


an 80000+ stadium in the capital of a country and the stadium held the biggest sporting event in the world - the World Cup final......that for me is almost the very definition of a national stadium.

Of course this is all just my own opinion, and I realise you are from Milan so you will obviously have some kind of spaghetti rivalry going on between cities, but you have to realise that Mussolini has gone and people are now allowed to have different opinions.

i respect your opinion...also if is a stupid opinion, as in that case.
i explained you that that list can be thinked only by some people, as you (Englishman).
and, as in many case English people think that the world is only something around THE Island (UK) and thinked to that entity (the world) that MUST be very similar to THE Island.

it's obvious that the world isn't a UK suburb, and so if you wrote a list of National Stadium with UK criteria about all the world can be only a stupid small game, nothing more.

i think that this forum is good also to link people from all the world, and to have a large vision of the different cultures.

unfortunally when you wrote something like this:
"Most football fans in the UK, if asked to name the national stadium in Italy, would reply Rome" i can only explain you that it's a mistake and try to explaine why.
after that you wrote that the UK vision of the world is the right one....

so i think that should be better if you come back to write on a Forum of English Beers or on a Forum of UK Lovers.
in that way you'll never find different opinions and sure, you'll never find someone that thinks to the world in a different way than the your.

have a happy life in your small island.

Most football fans in the UK, if asked to name the national stadium in Italy, would reply Rome.

I disagree I don't think that MOST football fans in the UK would say that at all. Maybe a FEW might mistakenly think that, but MOST would say that there is no national Stadium in Italy.

i explained you that that list can be thinked only by some people, as you (Englishman).

He's Scottish, not English.

If there will be a NFL(NHL/NBA/MLB) style league I really think there could and should be lots of teams outside England/Germany/Italy/Spain/France. Hope for a team in Stockholm with a new 65000 arena. :cheers:

Wrong (http://images.google.com/images?q=withdean&hl=en)
By the looks of it that was built by the Romans more than 2000 years ago.

I'd like to see a franchise in Scandinavia, maybe one of the Island Teams could be relocated, or one of the Turkish Teams.

Wrong

No, not wrong. It was built as an athletic stadium, with athletics being its primary purpose and function. And you know as well as I do - or should do, if your not just an overseas fan whose idea of following English Football, is to know the name of the team you support and nothing else - that it is merely a temporary measure that Brighton took reluctantly (travelling to Gillingham to play home matches is hardly ideal) until they get a proper stadium sorted out, which hopefully should be soon. The current plans for the stadium look magnificent.

It was not built for football, but for athletics.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Barcelonadragons.pnghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3a/NFLE_Dragons.gif

Barcelona Dragons played in the World League of American Football from 1991 and 1992, and in NFL Europe from 1995 to 2003.

Against.

But really that is in the context of Australia, where there is none, and should be no definitive 'national stadium'.

A little known fact is that Australia DID have an official National Stadium between 1977 and 1990.In 1990 the athletics track was ripped up and was no more.

Man city stadium is a perfect example in what to do after olympic games or com wealth

A little known fact is that Australia DID have an official National Stadium between 1977 and 1990.In 1990 the athletics track was ripped up and was no more.

Which stadium was that? Bruce Stadium? :?

Which stadium was that? Bruce Stadium? :?
yep...

The National Athletics Stadium in Canberra was built in 1977 and renamed Bruce Stadium in 1990 as the track was ripped out.In 1997,the ground was then reconfigured into a rectangular shaped field and renamed Canberra Stadium.

RIP Australia's National Stadium

note: still remains the venue that holds the Womens 400m and Womens 4x100m track and field World Records way back in 1985!

Most football fans in the UK, if asked to name the national stadium in Italy, would reply Rome. This is what they would reply regardless of whether is it is factually wrong or not. I class national stadiums as mostly large stadiums in a countries capital, so to me Rome is the national stadium of Italy. This may not be what Italians think, but that is irrelevant to me. The fact that Rome held the World Cup final also helps to make it Italy's national stadium in my opinion.



I think you have to respect the fact that the concept of having a national stadium simply doesnt exist in some countries.
France and Britain may be the prominent two european counries that have a national stadium, however, most of the other bigger states dont have one.
You mostly find national stadiums in countries that are more centralized.
As Germany being a country with a heavy federalistic approach, it just doesnt work here.

France and Britain may be the prominent two european counries that have a national stadium, however, most of the other bigger states dont have one.

Britain doesn't have a national stadium. Please have the decency of not confusing England with Britain, it gets very frusrtating and tiresome, and shows a lack of respect.

yep...

The National Athletics Stadium in Canberra was built in 1977 and renamed Bruce Stadium in 1990 as the track was ripped out.In 1997,the ground was then reconfigured into a rectangular shaped field and renamed Canberra Stadium.

RIP Australia's National Stadium

note: still remains the venue that holds the Womens 400m and Womens 4x100m track and field World Records way back in 1985!

Hey then it looks like i was actually half-right when I posted this, albeit with tongue-in-cheek...


Yes, I know all that. But that doesn't change the fact that most people are going to associate any large stadium in the capital as a countries national stadium.
Yes, this is Australia's National Stadium...
http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyunion/worldcup2003/images/canberrastadium330.jpg
The magnificant Canberra stadium. Capacity: A whopping 25,000.

:jk:

France and Britain may be the prominent two european counries that have a national stadium, however, most of the other bigger states dont have one.

Britain doesn't have a national stadium. Please have the decency of not confusing England with Britain, it gets very frusrtating and tiresome, and shows a lack of respect.

Yeah sorry my fault.

I meant national stadiums in Britain in general.

I keep thinking it's going to be sad to see the end the England road trip round the country....but i'm sure after the first game is announced at Wembley I wont care anymore.

I honestly didn't know which way to vote on this one.

While I like the idea of at least the friendlies touring around the county I think the move away from Wembley is one of the reasons they've become such dull worthless affiars. Playing at Wembley ment a great deal to both our players and perhaps more importantly the opposition which ment the games themselves were much more keenly contested.

While I like the idea of at least the friendlies touring around the county I think the move away from Wembley is one of the reasons they've become such dull worthless affiars. Playing at Wembley ment a great deal to both our players and perhaps more importantly the opposition which ment the games themselves were much more keenly contested.

I see, play the decent games at Wembley and throw the shit to the provinces. Playing at Wembley means nothing to a player who regularly competes in the Champions League.

I see, play the decent games at Wembley and throw the shit to the provinces. Playing at Wembley means nothing to a player who regularly competes in the Champions League.

I live in the "provinces" so don't confuse me with someone who doesnt know a world outside the M25 exists. You have to admit that pretty much every home friendly England have played since leaving Wembley has been terrible, I certainly wouldnt have bothered with most of them if they were near me. Theres no garentee a return to Wembley will fix but but at least it will mean the FA have to make the games into events again to sell the tickets.

North
Isle Division
Arsenal
Man U.
Chelsea
Liverpool
Tottenham
Blackburn
Celtic
Rangers

North Euro Division
Bayern Munich
Hamburg SV
Werder Bremen
PSV Eindhoven
Fayenoord Rotterdam
AJAX
AZ Alkmaar
Schalke 04

South
West
Barcelona
Real Madrid
Valencia
Osasuna
FC Sevilla
Lyon
Bordeaux
FC Porto

Mediterranean
Juventus
AC Milan
Inter Milan
Roma
Lazio
Fiorentina
Lille
Chievo Verona




...These teams battle it out for the European Club Championship, with the rest of the current leagues trying to become champions of their intracountry championships so that they can take the place of the worst team from each of the divisions.

Sort of like Champions League except you would only play Euro Super League games while in the Euro Super league, rather than in addition.


Why so many teams from England, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands? I believe the market and demand is bigger in cities like Stockholm, Copenhagen, Vienna, Istanbul, St. Petersburg, Athens etc. than Lille, Verona and Blackburn...

Actually before every(most) player wanted to play at wembley, to walk through the tunnel and run onto the famous pitch and struck with the roar of the crowd, any young englishmen would dream of playing at wembley one day, so it did matter.

I've never felt any desire to play at Wembley myself. (And thats not a slur before the proffesional offence takers start PMing mods)

I've never felt any desire to play at Wembley myself. (And thats not a slur before the proffesional offence takers start PMing mods)

don't worry i get you ;)

Thank God :okay:

Heard some rumours that a completely new Crucible Theatre, with a 3500 capacity will be built, hosting the World Snooker Championship, boxing fights etc. Can someone confirm this? If it is true, it will be, IMHO, one of the most interesting architectural tasks in many years.

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucible_Theatre )

Found any stadia which has any ongoing activity? :)

^^ I hope not. Crucible theatre is a legend for all snooker fans with graet atmosphere, although it's the smallest place to host a Main Tour tournament.
So: Don't destroy the lagend!

:bash: ^^ I hope not. Crucible theatre is a legend for all snooker fans with graet atmosphere, although it's the smallest place to host a Main Tour tournament.
So: Don't destroy the lagend!

KNOCK IT ALL DOWN!

Well, I haven't heard that the old one should be demolished...just that a new one will be built.

Actually before every(most) player wanted to play at wembley, to walk through the tunnel and run onto the famous pitch and struck with the roar of the crowd, any young englishmen would dream of playing at wembley one day, so it did matter.

I'd prefer to play at Twickenham, personally.

i respect your opinion...also if is a stupid opinion, as in that case.
i explained you that that list can be thinked only by some people, as you (Englishman).
and, as in many case English people think that the world is only something around THE Island (UK) and thinked to that entity (the world) that MUST be very similar to THE Island.

it's obvious that the world isn't a UK suburb, and so if you wrote a list of National Stadium with UK criteria about all the world can be only a stupid small game, nothing more.

i think that this forum is good also to link people from all the world, and to have a large vision of the different cultures.

unfortunally when you wrote something like this:
"Most football fans in the UK, if asked to name the national stadium in Italy, would reply Rome" i can only explain you that it's a mistake and try to explaine why.
after that you wrote that the UK vision of the world is the right one....

so i think that should be better if you come back to write on a Forum of English Beers or on a Forum of UK Lovers.
in that way you'll never find different opinions and sure, you'll never find someone that thinks to the world in a different way than the your.

have a happy life in your small island.

Chill out, no need to be so offended. and there's nothing wrong with living on an island!

Snooker is known about, outside England and the Barbarian (Celtic) Countries?

Yes

http://www.snooker.se/Galleri/slides/Kim.JPG

Heard some rumours that a completely new Crucible Theatre, with a 3500 capacity will be built, hosting the World Snooker Championship, boxing fights etc. Can someone confirm this? If it is true, it will be, IMHO, one of the most interesting architectural tasks in many years.
There are (were?) plans to build a new one though i dunno to what extent they are irreversible!

This is SO cool!

My personal anti-arguments for renovations are Old Trafford (how much did the new corners cost???) and Westfalenstadion (maybe good amosphere with that enormous Südtribune, but it looks like a dirty mess IMO).

Depends on the renovation. Sounds like we've had a lot better results with renovations here in the states. Lambeau, Soldier Field, Anaheim and Comiskey Park are some of the major ones I can think of. College stadiums have them all the time as well.

Actually it is usually cheaper to build a completely new stadium than it is to totally renovate an existing facility and bring it up to modern standards.

Lambeau Field, Green Bay, WI

Before
http://football.ballparks.com/NFL/GreenBayPackers/aerial.jpg
After
http://images.packers.com/images/wallpaper/dt040807_8_800.jpg

Rantanamo what are you talking about for Comiskey? It's new built in the 90's Most of the US markets pretty much demand a new stadium every ten to fifteen years. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I saw if the people will play then lets build!

What am I talking about?

Pre - renovation

http://internet2.motlabs.com/pics/galleries/072401Winstar/dscf0011.jpg


Post - renovation

http://www.ballparkwatch.com/images/us_cellular/DSC008851.jpg
http://www.ballparkwatch.com/images/us_cellular/DSC008731.jpg
http://www.ballparkwatch.com/images/us_cellular/DSC008701.jpg
http://www.ballparkwatch.com/images/us_cellular/DSC008921.jpg


Upper deck reduced and re-stylized. Lower deck reduced, plazas added. Outfield plazas renovated and seats added. Cool black ironwork added all over.

Depends on the renovation. Sounds like we've had a lot better results with renovations here in the states. Lambeau, Soldier Field, Anaheim and Comiskey Park are some of the major ones I can think of. College stadiums have them all the time as well.


Up untill very recently there always used to be huge resistance to moving grounds in the UK. Most clubs have been renovating periodically over the last hundred odd years.

Stamford Bridge
http://www.photomax.com/volume7/webpics/medpics/314/90/31490_140959_14573673_1147502019md6651d37c16c0d94c01c0ae1f005e99b9.jpg

Veltins Arena
http://www.photomax.com/volume7/webpics/medpics/314/87/31487_140959_14573670_1147502008mdf75d586d0e0e157b622fffd6e3f80ca5.jpg

Westfalenstadion
http://www.photomax.com/volume7/webpics/medpics/314/86/31486_140959_14573669_1147501998mda0e3198bace7dae4e2b389591ecd564f.jpg

Croke Park
http://www.photomax.com/volume7/webpics/medpics/314/91/31491_140959_14573674_1147502028mda2cd68b168b96b92e830c91b26c77404.jpg

Sidney Olympic Stadium
http://www.photomax.com/volume7/webpics/medpics/314/96/31496_140959_14573679_1147502039mdc7b43a72b64b1f55baed4360d57aea57.jpg

Shanghai Stadium
http://www.photomax.com/volume7/webpics/medpics/314/97/31497_140959_14573680_1147502048md98e31a1d2ad4d659e9ae437364909067.jpg

Reliant Stadium
http://www.photomax.com/volume7/webpics/medpics/314/98/31498_140959_14573681_1147502059md5b73d6ad71ba24ba5f00451d1d8237f4.jpg

Munich Olympic Stadium
http://www.photomax.com/volume7/webpics/medpics/315/08/31508_140959_14573691_1147502098mdfc7cf9e65a867b43c8eaf34ca6b8b603.jpg

Berlin Olympic Stadium
http://www.photomax.com/volume7/webpics/medpics/315/04/31504_140959_14573687_1147502078md8b9780c290ce97314dec38967199b76a.jpg

Camp Nou
http://www.photomax.com/volume7/webpics/medpics/315/05/31505_140959_14573688_1147502088md6df5ed898050da7717003c2593336b33.jpg

Melbourne Cricket Ground
http://www.photomax.com/volume7/webpics/medpics/315/11/31511_140959_14573694_1147502108md6ca65e581023f4681f11069bc87ddf69.jpg

Athens Olympic Stadium (U/C):
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/160/oaka2ch.jpg
Complete:
http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/8672/done3bo.jpg

Melbourne Cricket Ground
http://www.photomax.com/volume7/webpics/medpics/315/11/31511_140959_14573694_1147502108md6ca65e581023f4681f11069bc87ddf69.jpg

The Google Earth shots over Melbourne must be years old, that shot was taken when the Ponsford stand was pulled down (mid-late 2002).

Strange how some shots are more up-to-date than others, but how did we cope without Google Earth before now, what an amazing application...

here's a couple random US stadiums from Local Live

Quest Field, Seattle
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/gf_curtis/hfhf.jpg

The clarity is excellent on these shots, do you have a different type of Google Earth, than standard?

Actually it is usually cheaper to build a completely new stadium than it is to totally renovate an existing facility and bring it up to modern standards.

Yep. But new stadiums often lack atmosphere, which we in Europe (I guess you're American) really want. A good atmosphere can flip the match from a loss to a win and when there's a crappy atmosphere, players often play bad. The crowd stimulates the players when they sing and shout and a match can change in an instance. That's why a lot of stadiums are renovated and not newly built.

Strange how some shots are more up-to-date than others, but how did we cope without Google Earth before now, what an amazing application...

The clarity is excellent on these shots, do you have a different type of Google Earth, than standard?

I don't think Local Live is essentially Google Earth

Local Live is a Microsoft application if I'm not mistaken

Old Wembley was still going strong in google earth last time i looked.

that looks like its from the microsoft viewer

moroccan stadiums u/c:
Marakkesh:

http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/342/cf89d5be09a21da6d7f1008f95ef7g.jpg[IMG]

[IMG]http://img360.imageshack.us/img360/3105/stademarrakech112wr.jpg

http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/3989/438e778f0c3ad8548f624b13a6240q.jpg

http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/2866/7848cb13ec08f61e0dd3f7978d9f4k.jpg

Tanger:

http://www.yenoo.com/fr/modules/xcgal/albums/userpics/10001/stade-de-tanger.jpg

http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/9251/image264mg.jpg

http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/8351/image256qc.jpg

http://moha-h.skyblog.com/pics/352125112.jpg

Google Earth is worldwide and satellite images only. Microsoft's Local Live is satellite of US only, but with aerial (i.e. shot from an aeroplane) images if about a dozen cities.

That's why the quality is better and the angle is more oblique than the satellite images, which are always more or less taken from the vertical.

Hope this helps :)

Those are some crappy stadiums. I really like the one in Tehran though (it's not on the pictures)

http://img47.imageshack.us/img47/3306/image240jq.jpg

http://img47.imageshack.us/img47/7724/image319oj.jpg

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/4769/image278ri.jpg

http://img469.imageshack.us/img469/1010/image302hc.jpg

http://www.morocco-2010.com/stades.asp

here you can find moroccan stadiums that are in place or are u/c or will be built soon.

ahhh

Why so many teams from England, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands? I believe the market and demand is bigger in cities like Stockholm, Copenhagen, Vienna, Istanbul, St. Petersburg, Athens etc. than Lille, Verona and Blackburn...


You are definitely right. I was just picking teams that i could think from the major leagues. I think there should be representation from everywhere.

The main thing though is that the best teams are all in a singular league playing each other and only each other for a Super league championship.

And my other point was, the individual country leagues would still have incentive and be a draw for fans because those teams would be fighting for entrance into the super league kicking out the lower tier teams of the super league.

I think that would make the European Soccer Community much more interesting. I hate always, always, always seeing Juve, Inter, and AC Milan in the top 3 year after year after year after year. They should be playing in

Although rennovations may seem bad for a number of old stadiums and arenas, it does bring them up to date along with the others w/o having to demolish it and build something totally new.

as for the salary cap, i really want someone of the opposite mindset to explain this to me. why are you so against it? in the NFL, the cap has created an opportunity for the lesser markets to win, using strategy and managing skills, player development.


We don't like salary caps. We like competition. With a franchised system working with the same budgets you cannot, by definition, have a truly competitive league.

We don't like salary caps. We like competition. With a franchised system working with the same budgets you cannot, by definition, have a truly competitive league.

That is not true, in fact that is totally false.

Look at Australia's AFL or NRL.

Both leagues are made up of clubs (Australian football and Rugby League clubs respectively).

AFL has 16 teams, NRL has 15 teams, both have salary caps and both are fiercly competitive to the bitter end of the season.

The salary cap promotes competition, you never (definitively) know who will make the 8 and who will win the grand final.

And teams performance goes up and down from year to year.

Take the NRL and compare it to Englands Rugby Super League. In Eng's RSL only 3 sides (the same 3 sides) ever have a chance at winning the league. In Australia's NRL you have around 6 sides this year realistically vying for the title, next year you will have different sides in with a chance. It is much more interesting to watch, and more viable as a successful competition.

Worried about quality? the NRL even with its salary caps is far above the quality of the English League.

The English FA Premier League is not competitive at all, in fact by the end of the season the only focus is on who will lose and be relegated. Anybody else see something wrong with just hoping your team doesn't lose so it can be totally outplayed by far superior clubs for another season? thats just not sport.

Salary caps are great.

^^^^^^^^

Except for the fact the AFL is compromised by allowing the Sydney and Brisbane clubs an extra million to spend on players compared to all other clubs and the 3 bottom clubs are completely out of their depth in the league. Just painful to watch a lot of the matches because it is so uncompetitive.

Any wonder they have won the last 4 of 5 premierships.

You've been listening to too many AFL propagandists "Victory"!

^^^^^^^^

Except for the fact the AFL is compromised by allowing the Sydney and Brisbane clubs an extra million to spend on players compared to all other clubs and the 3 bottom clubs are completely out of their depth in the league. Just painful to watch a lot of the matches because it is so uncompetitive.

Any wonder they have won the last 4 of 5 premierships.

You've been listening to too many AFL propagandists "Victory"!

I think looking at the differences between Major League Baseball and the NFL should show why a salary cap would be the best idea European Soccer has ever utilized. A capless league allows for those surprise success stories, but over a longer period of time, teams that are more able to spend are consistently dominant whereas the smaller market teams are successful for a short time, and then must reload with talent because players get too expensive. This creates the Yankees, Red Sox of the world, Juve, AC and Inter, etc.

In the NFL, you use player development and salary cap management to create dynasties. Smaller teams can gain and maintain power. You have the major market teams that are successful like the cowboys at time, and then you have teams like the Chargers who are creating success through smart management, teams like the Seattle Seahawks, the new England Patriots. They can be both real good or real bad depending on how they manage their cap and develop players.

And do we really need to ask which league is the healthier more popular league in the money driven world that both leagues find themselves in? No, the NFL and it SALARY CAP are way more successful and fun to watch as a fan.

Europe needs the salary cap, and quick!

In the NFL, you use player development and salary cap management to create dynasties. Smaller teams can gain and maintain power. You have the major market teams that are successful like the cowboys at time, and then you have teams like the Chargers who are creating success through smart management, teams like the Seattle Seahawks, the new England Patriots. They can be both real good or real bad depending on how they manage their cap and develop players. No need to sell the SC to us Australians . . . in fact our SC and draft system was based on American models.

And do we really need to ask which league is the healthier more popular league in the money driven world that both leagues find themselves in? No, the NFL and it SALARY CAP are way more successful and fun to watch as a fan. My club suffers under the rules governing salary caps and draft mainly due to our own miss management and failure to embrace it, and there's no doubt we would prosper under the free market and zone system we used to have but IMHO the competition itself is the better for it.

Europe needs the salary cap, and quick! What I find disappointing about European leagues is the monotony of it. The rich clubs will always dominate and the less financially endowed clubs seem to just be making up the numbers.

There is hope though. I have several Italian import friends who are nothing short of ecstatic that Serie B is adopting a salary cap as a test.

Can you tell my friends aren't fans of the Juve, AC, Inter or Roma. THey actually root for a smaller team, and wish to actually have a chance in hell.

^^^^^^^^

Except for the fact the AFL is compromised by allowing the Sydney and Brisbane clubs an extra million to spend on players compared to all other clubs and the 3 bottom clubs are completely out of their depth in the league. Just painful to watch a lot of the matches because it is so uncompetitive.

Any wonder they have won the last 4 of 5 premierships.

You've been listening to too many AFL propagandists "Victory"!

Yes that is one flaw, because they (sydney and brisbane) do not have a "true" Salary Cap.

If they did it would be good.

BTW, I fo for Essendon (the richest, biggest, most successful club), so you would assume I hate salary caps because without them my team would always be top 3 (compared to 15th currently), but I am still a fan of salary caps.

The NRL has got it right, look at Nth Queensland, a few years ago they were hopeless, last year they made the final, they are currently second on the ladder. Same thing with Wests, a battler who won it last year. The only smight on the NRL's system is that Sth Sydney still exist, no Salary Cap will make them competitive.

A good question to ask is...

who will wisen up and set up a salary cap first, Major League Baseball or the various European Soccer Leagues?

My money is on the soccer leagues. Baseball is hopeless.

A good question to ask is...

who will wisen up and set up a salary cap first, Major League Baseball or the various European Soccer Leagues?

My money is on the soccer leagues. Baseball is hopeless.


I would agree. To many east coast and NYC backers who beleive that the Yankees (to a smaller extent Boston as if only to set up an interesting rival) ARE baseball and in fact bigger then the game. I know many Yankee backers that actually try to sell you that it is good for the Yankees to be able to get the top free agent every year and for them to be able to dominate. If they actually had a good GM then they would be close to unbeatable. Thankfully they don't have one of the smartest GM's in baseball.

I have the idea of salary caps because I think money should be able to flow freely wherevever it may. However baseball with its anti-trust exemption is not really playing in the basic rules of capitolism either.

Nice ones!

You are definitely right. I was just picking teams that i could think from the major leagues. I think there should be representation from everywhere.

The main thing though is that the best teams are all in a singular league playing each other and only each other for a Super league championship.

And my other point was, the individual country leagues would still have incentive and be a draw for fans because those teams would be fighting for entrance into the super league kicking out the lower tier teams of the super league.

I think that would make the European Soccer Community much more interesting. I hate always, always, always seeing Juve, Inter, and AC Milan in the top 3 year after year after year after year. They should be playing in

I agree, it feels that Sevilla - Middlesborough is a more inter-national game, whereas Arsenal - Barcelona feels more global...

BTW, I fo for Essendon (the richest, biggest, most successful club)
Steady on there son . . . the bombers are none of the above.

btw...did you have a nice mothers day :)

I'm puzzeled. The one in Marrakech is supposedly holding 70,000 once finished. How on earth is that possible? It looks like a 25,000 seater to me :?

http://www.morocco-2010.com/imgs/marrakech_G.jpg

http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/2866/7848cb13ec08f61e0dd3f7978d9f4k.jpg

Steady on there son . . . the bombers are none of the above.

btw...did you have a nice mothers day :)

Most successful, definatly, 16 Premierships will couch for that (Carlton may also have 16, but they are almost bankrupt ATM).

Biggest: In Melbourne at ;east, the only reason some other teams are larger is because they dont have to compete in a city with 8 other clubs.

Richest, they sure are.

Lets not talk about today's results, Rather than dwell on the fact that my AFL team went from 2nd last to last this weekend in a bottom of the table clash, I choose to celebrate the fact that my NRL team went from 2nd to First in a top of the table clash, Come on the Melbourne STORM!

I'm puzzeled. The one in Marrakech is supposedly holding 70,000 once finished. How on earth is that possible? It looks like a 25,000 seater to me :?


I agree, looks like a 35,000 seater max.

This is going to be a crampy stadium

well i think we can't tell until we see a person next to the stands in those pictures

I cant wait for Dubai to build the stadium with a capacity of 1,000,000 :|

http://www.morocco-2010.com/Video/Stadiums/Marrakech.asf

I think what some people are failing to appreciate is that if the Premier League introduced a salary cap then most of the best players would leave for Italy/Spain immediately. While I've nothing against a limit of perhaps 60 or 70% of revenue being spent on player wages in reality common sense and the free market should have placed a similar 'restriction' on the teams. If such a cap were introduced it would still mean we could keep the element of competition that we so cherish. Though it would prevent the likes of Chelsea and their sugar-daddy being able to invest however much they like in bringing in some of the finest players from around the world. Overall I'd still prefer the system we already have. The talk at this stage is that Chelsea will bring in 3 players this summer, Eto, Shevchenko and Ballak, threee fantastic players who I'd love to see in the Premier League, even if they're not playing for my team. Does anyone honestly think this caliber of player would be coming if the Premier League had a salary cap? So, are we better off without a salary cap? Of course we are.

Another misconception is that some kind of European League would be incredibly popular. It wouldn't. Most people want to see their team win their own league as a number one priority and the Champions League/UEFA Cup as a secondary issue.

Another problem with the system is what would happen to all the smaller clubs that dream of the chance to get promoted to the Premier League? Where is the room for the likes of Wigan and Reading?

The only examples of sucessful salary cap system I've ever seen are in minority sports where there is only one league (of any consequence). In a sport with broader appeal like football there is no dominant league able to enforce it's will on the entire sport.

See, it all comes down to competition.

Jaber Al Ahmed Stadium in Kuwait (60,000)

http://mpg.cc/NewSkyscrapersRais/hhf_large.jpg

http://mpg.cc/NewSkyscrapersRais/kuwait-aussen_large.jpg

Image by Faisal.
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g179/F9y/JaberStadium.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v678/tsp_thesmallprint/seahawksstadium.jpg

doesnt get much cooler than that

marrakesh

http://img493.imageshack.us/img493/1893/chantierstademarrackech28kn.jpg

tanger

http://www.morocco-2010.org/en/imgs/stade_tanger11.jpg

http://img108.exs.cx/img108/1079/stade-tanger.jpg

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/7588/28vi.jpg

http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/9022/image256qc3wu.jpg

íraq:

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_menu/past_future/pictures/future_stadiums/baghdad_olympic.jpg

Abu dhabi:

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/middle_east/uae/abu_dhabi_zayed.jpg

íraq:

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_menu/past_future/pictures/future_stadiums/baghdad_olympic.jpg

Abu dhabi:

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/middle_east/uae/abu_dhabi_zayed.jpg

saudi arabia:

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/middle_east/saudi_arabia/riyadh_king_fahd1.jpg

Qatar:

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/middle_east/qatar/doha_khalifa1.jpg

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/middle_east/qatar/doha_khalifa2.jpg

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/middle_east/qatar/doha_hamad.jpg

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/middle_east/qatar/umm_affai_stadium.jpg

Lebanon:

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/middle_east/lebanon/beirut_chamoun.jpg

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/middle_east/lebanon/tripoli_olympic.jpg

Tunisia
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/africa/tunisia/rades_7_novembre1.jpg

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/africa/tunisia/rades_7_novembre2.jpg

algeria:
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/africa/algeria/algiers_national.jpg

egypt:
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/middle_east/egypt/cairo_stadium.jpg

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/middle_east/egypt/suez_canal.jpg

Morocco:

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/africa/morocco/casablanca_mohammed_v2.jpg

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/africa/morocco/rabat_abdellah2.jpg

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/africa/morocco/fes_complexe1.jpg

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/africa/morocco/fes_complexe2.jpg

http://www.morocco-2010.com/Video/Stadiums/Marrakech.asf

Well that explains a lot. You can fit two pitches in there instead of one. Still, it will be very cramped indeed.

I agree that a salary cap would only work if all leagues adopted the policy. Otherwise, the players would leave that league for the uncapped leagues. So, if it were to work, then all leagues would have to adopt the cap.

Even if the super league isnt a popular idea amongst european fans, having all the leagues capped would create a chance for teams like reading and wigan because it would be HOW they spent their money, not HOW MUCH.

but the entirety of FIFA needs to enforce this action, and then let parity and competition blossom.

Google Earth is worldwide and satellite images only. Microsoft's Local Live is satellite of US only, but with aerial (i.e. shot from an aeroplane) images if about a dozen cities.

That's why the quality is better and the angle is more oblique than the satellite images, which are always more or less taken from the vertical.

Hope this helps :)

Cheers - Didn't realise there was something similiar to Google Earth that Microsoft had been involved in.

i found a placemark which pins all the major football staduims;

http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showthreaded.php?Number=35038

But there is already a chance for teams like Wigan and Reading. Wigan have had a much smaller budget than many other Premier League teams last season yet they've excelled and I for one was expecting them to drop down straight away. You're dead right about the critical factor being how the money is spent, not how much. Look at Real Madrid. They've underperformed for a few seasons yet have a colossal budget and more star players than they know what to do with. Literally.

AT&T Park, San Francisco
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b281/patw92984/opnen.jpg

nice stadia, a shame of the atletic tracks, but that's just me and my footballfetish I gues, specialy the Jaber Al Ahmed Stadium in Kuwait I like.

http://img48.imageshack.us/img48/8549/allianz5ca.jpg
Allianz arena (u/c)

I agree with Toronto's Rogers Centre ... the world's first retractable stadium roof!

this thread is about websites dedicated to stadiums.

World Stadiums (http://www.worldstadiums.com/)

Stadium Guide (http://www.stadiumguide.com/index.htm)

Any more???

http://ballparks.com/ but some parts are severely outdated (olympics)

about greek stadia and arenas stadia.gr (http://stadia.gr/intro.html)

excellent

stadionwelt.de (http://stadionwelt.de/) and stadiony.net are good resources. Neither are written in English though, so if you don't speak German or what appears to be Polish then you'll just have to make do with looking at the pictures.

I've been to World Stadiums countless times, but I've never been to The Stadium Guide before. Excellent site, it is.

Ivan Drago, it is Polish indeed

www.footballgroundguide.co.uk

It has a cool message message board (http://footballgroundguide.ipbhost.com/) also it's not just British stadia.

www.fussballtempel.net

http://www.fussballtempel.net/titelbg.jpg

I've been to World Stadiums countless times, but I've never been to The Stadium Guide before. Excellent site, it is.

The Stadium Guide is the best

www.footballgroundguide.co.uk

It has a cool message message board (http://footballgroundguide.ipbhost.com/) also it's not just British stadia.
Don't forget its sister site, http://www.scottishgroundguide.co.uk/ for Scottish League grounds.

Scottish non-League grounds
http://freespace.virgin.net/snl.online/index.htm

Irish grounds
http://www.ifgrounds.com/

Don't know of a site dedicated to Welsh grounds, but there is this
http://www.welsh-premier.com/stadia.php

www.austadiums.com is a great site for Australian and New Zealand stadiums and Arenas. It also has a healthy Forum community.

1-GERMANY, Ammenities, Safety, Size
2-England, " "not as many large stadia though.
3-Spain, Size, Aesthetics
4-Italy,Crap but Classic
5-Portugal
6-France
7-Holland
8-Scotland
9-Turkey
10-Romania

All agreed?

LOL. Where did Romania at 10 come from?

I'd put Portugal at number 3. And I'd also say, that Holland's got better stadiums than France, bar of course the obvious big one. Scotland might also even edge ahead of France. French stadiums are a disgrace, like their club football.

LOL. Where did Romania at 10 come from?

I'd put Portugal at number 3. And I'd also say, that Holland's got better stadiums than France, bar of course the obvious big one. Scotland might also even edge ahead of France. French stadiums are a disgrace, like their club football.

Ok then Denmark at 10 jus for you.

1.- Portugal
2.- Germany
3.- England
4.- France
5.- Spain
6.- Italy
7.- Holland
8.- Switzerland
9.- Scotland
10.- Austria

Portugal First? You have to be kidding.

The Stadium Guide is the best
It has more in-depth info. but it's just European football stadia. World Stadiums has all types of stadia, from all over the world. I like them both though.

A good example would be Neyland Stadium on the campus of the University of Tennessee in Knoxville. The stadium holds 108,000 people and the original lower part of the stadium that held about 20,000 people was built in 1921.

UT is currently starting phase one of a five phase, 8-12 year project to renovate the concourse, bathrooms, suites, etc, etc. It is going to cost about $107 million for the upgrades and renovation throughout the inside and outside of the stadium. Estimates for a brand new stadium like Neyland that holds a little over 100,000 people are $400-$600 million dollars.

It has more in-depth info. but it's just European football stadia. World Stadiums has all types of stadia, from all over the world. I like them both though.

They Still have plenty from all around the world

depends. If you get a stadium like San Siro, personally i believe that no matter how many times they renovate the ground it still looks old.

Then again you get a stadium like Kobe Wing Stadium, where a minor set of renovations changes the entire complexion of the stadium

San Siro is one of the most amazing stadiums in the world, sure it has like a million ramps but the styling is unique, they should complete the bowl now.

See some stadium are built to expand, eg: San Siro, old trafford & some are built to stay as they are, eg: Benfica stadium & emirates. Most mordern Stadia are designed as features to the aream taking away that old boring stadium look that we all associated to, some people say these new designs make the stadium look like shopping malls, but thats just their opinions, some people like all types of stadiums it all depends on what the client/ team wants & what suits the area.

So it really depends, yes it is cheaper on the whole to build a new stadium but if the exsisting stadium has provision for expansion, why go through all that trouble?

As DurbsBoi notes, we have to differ from "expansion" and "renovation". Some stadia are better than others when coming to the capability to expand.

Sorry, but it's just plain wrong to say that building a new stadium is cheaper than renovation.

I'd agree that, on a seat for seat basis, it is probably cheaper to build a completely new stadium. The difference is, however, that renovation rarely involves the whole stadium. Certainly in England, renovation has usually meant redeveloping one stand at a time.

If a club has, say, a 40,000 capacity stadium and wants to increase to 50,000, then it is far cheaper (if at all possible) to add 10,000 seats by redeveloping one stand than to build a brand new 50,000 stadium.

The reason why new stadium builds are so rare in England is that English clubs own their own stadia and therefore have to bear the full burden of the costs of building them. Therefore, redevelopment is the preferred option because it can occur over a number of years, thereby spreading the cost. Not always so in other countries, where the stadia are owned and paid for by the local government.

On another point, I see some posters talking about renovated stadia (such as the Westfalenstadion) as looking messy. That's typical of this board, I'm afraid. There is a heavy bias towards what is new and without aesthetic flaw. It is the standpoint of someone who is interested in architecture for its own sake - as if it exists in a vacuum.

The truth of the matter, however, is that football fans (those whose opinion really matters) like tradition. Of course they want decent facilities too, and good sight lines. But not at the expense of character. They like their stadia to have little idiosyncrasies.

Give me an awkward looking, redeveloped Westfalen or Fritz Walter stadion any day over a pristine looking, uniform but ultimately characterless stadium like Aufschalke or Allianz Arena.

This is the list for me:
Spain
England
Germany
Portugal
Netherlands
France
Italy
the rest

This is the list for me:
Spain
England
Germany
Portugal
Netherlands
France
Italy
the rest

Germany 3rd, u kiddin?

San Siro is one of the most amazing stadiums in the world, sure it has like a million ramps but the styling is unique, they should complete the bowl now.

See some stadium are built to expand, eg: San Siro, old trafford & some are built to stay as they are, eg: Benfica stadium & emirates. Most mordern Stadia are designed as features to the aream taking away that old boring stadium look that we all associated to, some people say these new designs make the stadium look like shopping malls, but thats just their opinions, some people like all types of stadiums it all depends on what the client/ team wants & what suits the area.

So it really depends, yes it is cheaper on the whole to build a new stadium but if the exsisting stadium has provision for expansion, why go through all that trouble?

True

Germany 3rd, u kiddin?
who else, Poland?

1-GERMANY, Ammenities, Safety, Size
2-England, " "not as many large stadia though.
3-Spain, Size, Aesthetics
4-Italy,Crap but Classic
5-Portugal
6-France
7-Holland
8-Scotland
9-Turkey
10-Romania

All agreed?

A now I understand, You want Germany first... mmmm I think something like never!!! and that has nothing to do with sentament (this time)
I just do not like the designs, there big and that is about it. allthough better then a few years ago with all the atletic tracs.
Excuatly I am tempted to put Portugal before Germany, but then I guess it would be sentement...
How can you put Italy there, there all except two Milan and Genoa, crap

It's between Germany and England, but I think Germany has it in the bag. If England ever get to hosting another World Cup and the smaller stadiums are given a make over, England will overtake though.

Even without the world cup, england is catching up what with the new wembley, emirates, Old Trafford redevelopment etc etc.

Hmm. I would say that Germany has the best stadiums at the moment.
England is second and is certainly catching up.

3rd would probably be Spain for me followed by the Netherlands and Portugal.

At the moment it looks really good in Germany.
Bremen has just announced to rebuilt their stadium to a 50 or maybe even 60k 3 tier football-only stadium.
And then theres Stuttgart which is still thinking about building a new stadium with 50 or 60k.
Leverkusen will also upgrade in the nearer future.
So there will be enough to talk about in the next years.

I don't think anyone can argue that Germany has the best football stadia. However, as others have said, England is in second place and definitely making progress. Emirates looks absolute quality, and New Wembley just looks absolutely fantastic.

Perhaps Spain in some years

New Stadiums:
- Valencia
- Atletico de Madrid
- Español (Barcelona)
- Bilbao
- Betis (Sevilla)
- Zaragoza

Remodelations:
- Real Sociedad (San Sebastian)
- Sevilla
- Barcelona

Nowadays, Germany

who else, Poland?

Poland should definitely take Germany's place.

Perhaps Spain in some years

New Stadiums:
- Valencia
- Atletico de Madrid
- Español (Barcelona)
- Bilbao
- Betis (Sevilla)
- Zaragoza

Remodelations:
- Real Sociedad (San Sebastian)
- Sevilla
- Barcelona

Nowadays, Germany


+ Murcia ofcourse!
any news about the new Valencia stadium?
Remodelation Barcalona? Tell me, or is that on the Spanish stadiums thread
any news about Betis? haven't seen real plans yet, and what are they going to do with the 'olympic' stadium there. Couldn't that be adjusted Paris style for football? Atletico i haven't seen anything yet, But it is a nice stadium as it is no? well I guess I'll check the Spanish stadium thread to see if anything happens there, I am afraid not, but well. :runaway:
Sorry to get of the topic. Spain nr 1, England nr 2, Germany nr 3

San Siro is one of the most amazing stadiums in the world, sure it has like a million ramps but the styling is unique, they should complete the bowl now.

See some stadium are built to expand, eg: San Siro, old trafford & some are built to stay as they are, eg: Benfica stadium & emirates. Most mordern Stadia are designed as features to the aream taking away that old boring stadium look that we all associated to, some people say these new designs make the stadium look like shopping malls, but thats just their opinions, some people like all types of stadiums it all depends on what the client/ team wants & what suits the area.

So it really depends, yes it is cheaper on the whole to build a new stadium but if the exsisting stadium has provision for expansion, why go through all that trouble?

Emirates can be expanded on. But it would be very hard work. Add another ring around the top ring supported by towers like the San Siro and Elevate the roof whilst adding an extension to the suface of the dish.

They'd likely just lower the pitch to add seats. Then you can stack in a mid tier of club seats. This was the talk for the proposal of renovating Texas Stadium. Drop the lowest tier straight down and add an overhanging tier of club seats. Would have added about 10,000 seats.

They'd likely just lower the pitch to add seats. Then you can stack in a mid tier of club seats. This was the talk for the proposal of renovating Texas Stadium. Drop the lowest tier straight down and add an overhanging tier of club seats. Would have added about 10,000 seats.

But didn't someone say on an earlier thread, that a main pipeline or something runs under the stadium ??, so lowering the pitch ain't possible.

But didn't someone say on an earlier thread, that a main pipeline or something runs under the stadium ??, so lowering the pitch ain't possible.

Don't know about that but they couldn't lower the pitch to add extra seats anyway. The seats at the Emirates are already as close to the pitch as UEFA allow.

Some renovations:

Before:
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_menu/past_future/pictures/past_stadiums/lisbon_alvalade.jpg

After:
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/portugal/lisbon_alvalade1.jpghttp://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/portugal/lisbon_alvalade2.jpg


Before:
http://www.stadionwelt.de/stadionwelt_stadien/templates/stadionguides/deutschland/hertha_bsc_berlin/images/alt_05.jpg

After:
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/germany/berlin/berlin_olympiastadion2.jpg


Before:
http://www.stadionwelt.de/stadionwelt_stadien/templates/stadionlisten/griechenland/spyros_louis/350.jpg

After:
http://www.stadionwelt.de/stadionwelt_stadien/templates/stadionlisten/griechenland/spyros_louis/180.jpg

Alvalade is an new construction

It depends.
Sometimes its better to renovate. In Athens case it was much better to renovate than to build a whole new stadium.

The new ice rink in Jaca...
under construction..

http://www.jaca2007.es/images/jaca2007/pista/pistanocheg.gifhttp://www.jaca2007.es/images/jaca2007/pista/pista6g.gif

http://www.jaca2007.es/images/jaca2007/pista/obras/2006/05/24/240506-4g.jpg

http://www.jaca2007.es/images/jaca2007/pista/obras/2006/05/09/090506-3g.jpg

http://www.jaca2007.es/images/jaca2007/pista/obras/2006/04/07/070406-2g.jpg