Portugal has got the big 3
Turkey and England the big 4
And Switzerland? 5?
Grasshoppers
Basel
FC Zürich
Young Boys
Servette

?

Switzerland doesn't have any "big something". Teams are popular mainly in their city/region. There are no real nationwide popular clubs like in Portugal or Turkey.

Grasshoppers and Servette have gained an impressive number of titles, but that doesn't make them more popular than other teams - Servette is even playing only in the 2nd Division right now. Zurich and Geneva are cities with a big population turnover every year - the percentage of locally-born inhabitants is quite small which doesn't make it easier for the football teams to build a steady fan base. In the all-time statistics it looks like this: http://www.rsssf.com/tablesz/zwitalltime.html

The "big 4" in England is not the same like in Portugal, Turkey and Greece. It's just a phenomenon of the last few years only, connected also to a certain self-sustaining dynamic by repeated Champions League participations, but it can change again.

@Qaabus: you are right in the sense that in a league with 10 teams in Portugal, the 3 top teams would have more weight in calculating the average attendance. On the other hand, anyway, starting from team nr.6 downwards, the average attendance is higher in Switzerland.

So, if one sees only the big derbies in a country like Portugal, one could draw the conclusion that popularity of football in Portugal is far ahead of Swiss football. But if one looks more closely and sees the average League games, then the picture looks quite different. Plus the most important league games in Switzerland have 30'000-40'000 spectators which is not the level like in some other countries, but also not bad. Switzerland is a decentralised country, not only politically with 26 self-sustaining states/cantons, but also in football.

I might be one of the few but I really like the stadiums that are being used. Sure, they are relatively small but so what? It is not like it matters a lot whether a place holds 50 or 30k. The chances of getting a ticket are still slim to none. In the end, no team ends up with a stadium that is way to big (Braga, Faro or Aveiro anyone?).

Six of the eight (Basel, Bern, Geneva, Innsbruck, Klagenfurt and Salzburg) are real football stadiums with steep stands close to the pitch. Vienna and Zurich are athletic stadiums but temporary seating has closed the distance to the pitch as much as possible and both stadiums can hardly be called ugly or unsuited.

I agree. The stadiums in Klagenfurt and Innsbruck look a bit wonky due to the single smaller stand but overall they look quite nice, much better than Nuremberg and Stuttgart for example.

Comparing these stadiums to Portugal is unfair.

Portugal should never have hosted a European championship in the first place. Before the EU extension to the east, Portugal was by far the poorest country in the EU. If you compare the average standard of living between Portugal (apart from the 2 big cities) and the Northern eu countries the difference is huge... They're sort of a third-world country by EU standards. They probably used the EU subsidies that they get for being a poor country to build all these lovely, empty stadiums...

Hosting the Euro's is in fact a statement for that since they build 9 stadiums of which 6 are only filled for 10% when the home team plays there... Thats third world country politics in a nutshell. Prestige before people... The money that they've spend on those stadiums could have been given to the normal people. Farmers could have been given a tractor. Instead of them still ploughing the field with an ox...

Don't get me wrong, the stadiums in Portugal are wonderful. I'm just a bit sad that Uefa awarded the tournament to a country that doesn't deserve and without eu subsidies can't afford it. And to think they even build 1 more than required... Money wasted... And now they're even thinking of hosting a WC... Ridiculous!!!

Switzerland and Austria have build things they need and although the stadiums aren't huge, they are all nice in their own way.

Comparing these stadiums to Portugal is unfair.

Portugal should never have hosted a European championship in the first place. Before the EU extension to the east, Portugal was by far the poorest country in the EU. If you compare the average standard of living between Portugal (apart from the 2 big cities) and the Northern eu countries the difference is huge... They're sort of a third-world country by EU standards. They probably used the EU subsidies that they get for being a poor country to build all these lovely, empty stadiums...

Hosting the Euro's is in fact a statement for that since they build 9 stadiums of which 6 are only filled for 10% when the home team plays there... Thats third world country politics in a nutshell. Prestige before people... The money that they've spend on those stadiums could have been given to the normal people. Farmers could have been given a tractor. Instead of them still ploughing the field with an ox...

Don't get me wrong, the stadiums in Portugal are wonderful. I'm just a bit sad that Uefa awarded the tournament to a country that doesn't deserve and without eu subsidies can't afford it. And to think they even build 1 more than required... Money wasted... And now they're even thinking of hosting a WC... Ridiculous!!!

Switzerland and Austria have build things they need and although the stadiums aren't huge, they are all nice in their own way.

Don't worry, we can all read between the lines that you sincerely hate Portugal.

That was indeed one dumb post.

dudu24, maybe dudu in your ID is the Brazilian born Croatian forward who got serious ankle injury in an EPL game?

Don't worry, we can all read between the lines that you sincerely hate Portugal.

On the contrary. I've been there on holiday a few times. Lovely country, lovely people. I don't really like there national team though... I'll give you that.

I might have exaggerated a bit, but

1. they are a very poor country within a EU context
2. More than half of the 30000 capacity stadiums are filled with 1 to 5 thousand people for the average league match.

These are 2 measurable facts that don't really align with hosting a EC. Whether anyone likes it or not...

Again, I don't hate Portugal, I just think they should never have hosted a EC for those reasons.

dudu24, maybe dudu in your ID is the Brazilian born Croatian forward who got serious ankle injury in an EPL game?

Correct, he also used to be no24 in Dinamo :)

On the contrary. I've been there on holiday a few times. Lovely country, lovely people. I don't really like there national team though... I'll give you that.

I might have exaggerated a bit, but

1. they are a very poor country within a EU context
2. More than half of the 30000 capacity stadiums are filled with 1 to 5 thousand people for the average league match.

These are 2 measurable facts that don't really align with hosting a EC. Whether anyone likes it or not...

Again, I don't hate Portugal, I just think they should never have hosted a EC for those reasons.

Those things you said are a perfect reason to give someone Euro. To improve Economy and improve standard of football infrastructure and infrastructure in general. And Portugal didn't loose nothing from it, on contrary it gained far more (earned, if you want).

Those things you said are a perfect reason to give someone Euro. To improve Economy and improve standard of football infrastructure and infrastructure in general. And Portugal didn't loose nothing from it, on contrary it gained far more (earned, if you want).

uhm ok.

uhm ok.

Same reason why South Africa got it.. let's not kid ourself.

Those things you said are a perfect reason to give someone Euro. To improve Economy and improve standard of football infrastructure and infrastructure in general. And Portugal didn't loose nothing from it, on contrary it gained far more (earned, if you want).

I doubt the Euro really had a noticeable impact on Portugal's economy. I don't really get your point that they gained anything either. What's the point in building white elephants all over the country when the money could be used for more useful purposes (general infrastructure etc...same thing with South Africa). Building a 30,000 seater for a team that draws an average of 3,000 spectators is pointless and downright dumb.

I might have exaggerated a bit, but

1. they are a very poor country within a EU context
2. More than half of the 30000 capacity stadiums are filled with 1 to 5 thousand people for the average league match.

These are 2 measurable facts that don't really align with hosting a EC. Whether anyone likes it or not...

Some see that Euro might be a chance for the developing ones, not only a pleasure for rich ones. If FIFA, IOC and UEFA used your criteria, then Athens would have never hosted Olympics, same for RSA World Cup, Euro 2004 an our 2012. It would all just go around from Spain through France and England to Germany and back. I bet you would be soooo pleased.

Give farmer a tractor?! :lol: so you're the good communist and Portgual the bad communists cause they cared more for prestige? Spare it...

Some countries shouldn't host these events until they've reached a certain level of development. Judging by some newspaper articles, Poland/Ukraine 2012 could turn into a disaster. I'm not opposed to those countries (eg South Africa) hosting these kinds of events but they need to do their homework beforehand.

Judging by some newspaper articles, Poland/Ukraine 2012 could turn into a disaster. I'm not opposed to those countries (eg South Africa) hosting these kinds of events but they need to do their homework beforehand.

Judging by some newspaper articles, Poland and Ukraine wouldn't ever be given the chance to host Euro and Austria and Switzerland are too small (in case you read nothing before the Euro 2008 selection was made- that was the mood). Still, they did it, accepted enormous amounts of supporters and are doing surprisingly well coping with the crowds. Also, Euro in Prtugal was also said to be a possible disaster- I remember apocalyptic news that the will never build the stadiums (Somgaue's subcontractors blocking construction sites, etc.). Thankfully it's not the newspapers to decide.

Some see that Euro might be a chance for the developing ones, not only a pleasure for rich ones. If FIFA, IOC and UEFA used your criteria, then Athens would have never hosted Olympics, same for RSA World Cup, Euro 2004 an our 2012. It would all just go around from Spain through France and England to Germany and back. I bet you would be soooo pleased.

Give farmer a tractor?! :lol: so you're the good communist and Portgual the bad communists cause they cared more for prestige? Spare it...

The debt that the current Greek administration is in is staggering. They'll still be paying of those debts in 50 years time. All thanks to the Olympics.

The tractor example I gave was merely an attempt to show the extend in which way Portugal was behind in GDP to the other EU members. NOT to insult the Portuguese in any way. I'm all for the Ukraine/Poland bid. These are countries that are relatively poor because they come from a communist background. In 20 years time however I wouldn't be surprised if they were more prosperous than many western european countries. And above all, they have the amount of people to sustain the stadiums. Portugal has has 10 million inhabitants. Poland and Ukraine 85 million combined...

I'm from a small (but relatively rich) country myself (Holland) and I would love to see a World Cup or Olympics in my country. But not at the EXPENSE of my country. The Greeks are either to ignorant or to proud to organize an event that puts their country on the verge of bankruptcy...

The money that they've spend on those stadiums could have been given to the normal people. Farmers could have been given a tractor. Instead of them still ploughing the field with an ox... .

Class :D

I think the Greeks were too uneconomical and their bid wasn't well thought through. If countries of size and potential (in filling the venues to make them profitable) of Austria and Switzerland can host a Euro that will be beneficial for them, then Greece shouldn't have a problem hosting smaller Olympics (I know, number of venues is high, but their standard doesn't have to be and more of them can be built temporarily). The fact they made no good outcome is their fault, but not an argument against giving the organization to smaller countries.

You think Holland wouldn't make good Olympics? I think you would do fantastic and have a lot of benefits from it without the white elephant effect. Just like the World Cup for which you are bidding after all...

By the way- calling Holand a relatively rich is either false modesty or ignorance my friend ;)
Or at least it shows the difference in scale considering viewpoints. For me Poland is a relatively rich country. Sierra Leone is poor...

PS: I still have problem understanding you point of view after what you wrote about Poland and Ukraine...

The tractor example I gave was merely an attempt to show the extend in which way Portugal was behind in standard of living to the other EU members.
My parents didn't use an ox to plough, we had a horse... Does the communist background make us proviliged in any way if our situation is quite like Portugal's?

BTW, today we need to say goodbye to Stade de Genève! :wave:

I think the Greeks were too uneconomical and their bid wasn't well thought through. If countries of size and potential (in filling the venues to make them profitable) of Austria and Switzerland can host a Euro that will be beneficial for them, then Greece shouldn't have a problem hosting smaller Olympics (I know, number of venues is high, but their standard doesn't have to be and more of them can be built temporarily). The fact they made no good outcome is their fault, but not an argument against giving the organization to smaller countries.

You think Holland wouldn't make good Olympics? I think you would do fantastic and have a lot of benefits from it without the white elephant effect. Just like the World Cup for which you are bidding after all...

By the way- calling Holand a relatively rich is either false modesty or ignorance my friend ;)
Or at least it shows the difference in scale considering viewpoints. For me Poland is a relatively rich country. Sierra Leone is poor...

PS: I still have problem understanding you point of view after what you wrote about Poland and Ukraine...


My parents didn't use an ox to plough, we had a horse... Does the communist background make us proviliged in any way if our situation is quite like Portugal's?

The Olympics aren't smaller than an EC! Last time I checked, the Olympics were still bigger than a WC... Although I think it depends on the basis of which you define big... Attendance, Cost, Revenue, attending nations, tv audience, ...

I definitely think we could host the Olympics and a WC. But if our economy would suffer from it we shouldn't do it.

I don't think building 9 new stadiums for a three week event of which 6 will cost more in maintenance than comes in from revenues (let alone building costs) is not the way to do it. Our (the dutch side at least) WC bid will probably include not even 1 "world cup stadium". All stadiums that would be used will be build regardless of a worldcup.

Organizing these kind of events will always mean you're doing extra than absolutely necessary. It' shouldn't mean however going completely overboard like Portugal did with their stadiums.

When I said "relatively rich" I said that because we're a small country. On total GDP we're 20th in the world. On GDP per capita 10th. If you want to call that rich that's fine by me. ;)

You're communist background doesn't make you privileged. It is however a clear reason as to why your infrastructure, economy, and so forth is still behind on the western European countries. Even "eastern" Germany is economically still behind the western part although they've been the same nation again for nearly 20 years.

Hello.
Can someone post photos taken before, during and after the matches of Euro 2008? Both inside and outside the stadium ... if possible.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/football_stadiums_technical_recommendations_and_requirements_en_8211.pdf


BTW, Allianz is 6m and 7,5m (main stand is 9m) nad it was a WC 2006 venue :)


But looking at new projects, many architects used 8,5m and 10m.

Thats one of the reason why i love our Aslantepe more.
Its 6,2 and 8,2m and just 20cm above the pitch :D

Thanks, can you give me the link to the UEFA aswell?

Actually i have never seen a UEFA regulations about Stadiums.
Could be the same like FIFA ones

Actually i have never seen a UEFA regulations about Stadiums.
Could be the same like FIFA ones

But that was why I was wondering whether the FIFA and the UEFA impose different rules since the spectators seem to be pretty close to the pitch in some stadiums?

As i know the first rows stay empty in some english stadiums.

But that was why I was wondering whether the FIFA and the UEFA impose different rules since the spectators seem to be pretty close to the pitch in some stadiums?

Which stadiums in particular are you talking about?
The distance may look close on the TV because of the camera angle but I don't think it is as close as f.e. in some english stadiums where they sit more or less directly behind the advertising boards.

Some countries shouldn't host these events until they've reached a certain level of development. Judging by some newspaper articles, Poland/Ukraine 2012 could turn into a disaster. I'm not opposed to those countries (eg South Africa) hosting these kinds of events but they need to do their homework beforehand.

What sort of homework. I dont think being a part of the world by hosting events and addressing the issues of a country are entirely exclusive concepts. I think both can be achieved. South Africa has steadily built up a track record by bidding for world cups, the olympic games, and hosting rugby,cricket world cups and tons of high profile conferences and events. The 2006 and 2010 bids were both highly detailed and satisfied FIFA requirements.

The World Cup in South Africa is extremely significant in terms of the acceleration of the development of infrastructure. Billlions of rands are finally being allocated to projects from transport to communications. Some projects date back to the 70's e.g. Durbans new airport. This would not have happened without the world cup.

At the same time poverty is being addressed with a substantial increase in social grants due to record tax revenues. The issue is rather the underspending of funds rather than a lack of funds to host events and meet the needs of citizens.

Each country has its own challenges and I dont doubt that Poland and Ukraine will overcome these and host a fantastic tournament at the same time. From the list of venues proposed and in planning, it certainly looks to be a success.

What sort of homework. I dont think being a part of the world by hosting events and addressing the issues of a country are entirely exclusive concepts. I think both can be achieved. South Africa has steadily built up a track record by bidding for world cups, the olympic games, and hosting rugby,cricket world cups and tons of high profile conferences and events. The 2006 and 2010 bids were both highly detailed and satisfied FIFA requirements.

The World Cup in South Africa is extremely significant in terms of the acceleration of the development of infrastructure. Billlions of rands are finally being allocated to projects from transport to communications. Some projects date back to the 70's e.g. Durbans new airport. This would not have happened without the world cup.

At the same time poverty is being addressed with a substantial increase in social grants due to record tax revenues. The issue is rather the underspending of funds rather than a lack of funds to host events and meet the needs of citizens.

Each country has its own challenges and I dont doubt that Poland and Ukraine will overcome these and host a fantastic tournament at the same time. From the list of venues proposed and in planning, it certainly looks to be a success.

:applause::applause::applause:

Thanks, can you give me the link to the UEFA aswell?
I've only got our Polish translation right now (can't remember what name it was in English to find- surely was about cup finals), but it clearly says that distances of 6m (sidelines) and 7,5m (endlines) are recommended.
If that is of any help...

What sort of homework. I dont think being a part of the world by hosting events and addressing the issues of a country are entirely exclusive concepts. I think both can be achieved. South Africa has steadily built up a track record by bidding for world cups, the olympic games, and hosting rugby,cricket world cups and tons of high profile conferences and events. The 2006 and 2010 bids were both highly detailed and satisfied FIFA requirements.

The World Cup in South Africa is extremely significant in terms of the acceleration of the development of infrastructure. Billlions of rands are finally being allocated to projects from transport to communications. Some projects date back to the 70's e.g. Durbans new airport. This would not have happened without the world cup.

At the same time poverty is being addressed with a substantial increase in social grants due to record tax revenues. The issue is rather the underspending of funds rather than a lack of funds to host events and meet the needs of citizens.

Each country has its own challenges and I dont doubt that Poland and Ukraine will overcome these and host a fantastic tournament at the same time. From the list of venues proposed and in planning, it certainly looks to be a success.

:banana::banana::cheers::cheers::)

Pirlo goal!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Forza Italia!!!!!!!!!!!

Pirlo goal!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Forza Italia!!!!!!!!!!!

wrong thread.

After seen all stadia in TV, my impression is that the one in Genève is the ugliest. Basel's is a good one.

After seen all stadia in TV, my impression is that the one in Genève is the ugliest. Basel's is a good one.
true. TV impression of St. Jakob Park is by far the best. I'd put Klagenfurt 2nd and have a lot of sympathy for Letzigrund as well...

http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/9506/sidc255nu4.jpg


http://img66.imageshack.us/img66/8473/unbenanntbo2.jpg

:hilarious

Euro 2008 under guard of Euro Fighter

http://img.blog.yahoo.co.kr/ybi/1/24/56/shinecommerce/folder/81/img_81_18772_2?1213184258.jpg

http://img.blog.yahoo.co.kr/ybi/1/24/56/shinecommerce/folder/81/img_81_18772_3?1213184258.jpg

http://img.blog.yahoo.co.kr/ybi/1/24/56/shinecommerce/folder/81/img_81_18772_1?1213184258.jpg

http://img.blog.yahoo.co.kr/ybi/1/24/56/shinecommerce/folder/81/img_81_18772_5?1213184258.jpg

amazing photos

Which stadiums in particular are you talking about?
The distance may look close on the TV because of the camera angle but I don't think it is as close as f.e. in some english stadiums where they sit more or less directly behind the advertising boards.

I dont remember the exact stadium to be honest (Ill have another look on the net) but just generally I had the impression that in some games the fans were quite close to the pitch which caught my attention since I rememberd that they demolished the front rows of the sideline stands in Dortmund before the wc.

I've only got our Polish translation right now (can't remember what name it was in English to find- surely was about cup finals), but it clearly says that distances of 6m (sidelines) and 7,5m (endlines) are recommended.
If that is of any help...

Well yes thanks. I just would have liked to read through it myself to see whether there are any exemptions or whether different rules are imposed in the CL etc.

Imo:

1) Vienna
2) Basel (very nice inside but one facade is very ugly)
3) Klagenfurt

In Innsbruck they have already started removing the temporary stands.

In Salzburg, the 2nd tier will stay according to stadionwelt.de

In Innsbruck they have already started removing the temporary stands.


They did a good job during EURO. They were very steep and atmosphere seemed very good on TV.

Also in Letzigrund the stadium is in no time already now during Quarter Finals nearly the original athletics stadium with 26'000 capacity again. And in a few weeks the Swiss football championship will start again.

They did a good job during EURO. They were very steep and atmosphere seemed very good on TV.


I got tickets for ESP-RUS and the atmosphere was really great.!:applause:

Hello.
Can someone post photos taken before, during and after the matches of Euro 2008? Both inside and outside the stadium ... if possible.

inside ernst happel during euro 08



http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3047/2624379497_b064d53795_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3206/2614580560_8f41a6ed97_o.jpg

Great stadium!

Thanks ahab for the ernst happel photos. They are spectacular! The first one seems taken from tv, but it's good quality.

Also the view from euro-fighter is spectacular :nuts:

Thanks ahab for the ernst happel photos. They are spectacular! The first one seems taken from tv, but it's good quality.

Also the view from euro-fighter is spectacular :nuts:

Thank you for your compliment! :lol:

Ernst Happel Stadion is not good for soccer. The stands are too far from the pitch, especially at midfield.

Ernst Happel Stadion is not good for soccer

indeed. luckily, they were playing footbal...

Lovely stadium

Outside Ernst Happel during Euro 08

http://at.fotoalbum.eu/images1/200806/34429/78821/00000006.jpg

http://at.fotoalbum.eu/images1/200806/34429/78821/00000016.jpg

Ernst Happel Stadion is not good for soccer. The stands are too far from the pitch, especially at midfield.

It's hard to believe that now, after three weeks of matches proving the opposite, there are still people who don't get it. Did you watch a match?

Ernst Happel Stadion is not good for soccer. The stands are too far from the pitch, especially at midfield.

It's hard to believe that now, after three weeks of matches proving the opposite, there are still people who don't get it. Did you watch a match?

inside ernst happel during euro 08



http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3047/2624379497_b064d53795_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3206/2614580560_8f41a6ed97_o.jpg

Beautiful stadium, beautiful & amzing city of Wien. Vienna was a perfect host city, thank you Austria&Switzerland for a wonderful EURO 2008.
And Spain deserved to win, congratulations from Germany!

Yep.
Ernst Happel is maybe one of the best stadiums with track to watch a match

great roof and damn steep stands :cheers:

Here some pictures also of Wankdorf & Letzigrund with Swiss army jets before the tournament:

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/07MgdFVcBq9nL/610x.jpg

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0dO13cHfKHaep/610x.jpg

Jet d'Eau in Geneva: ;)

http://i1.trekearth.com/photos/12257/392._geneve_-_jet_deau.jpg

Thank you for your compliment! :lol:

Yup, those Eurofighter pictures are spectaclulair. Thanks for postin them.

Too bad there is not a pic like that from the St. Jakobs Park in Basel. I attended the Netherlands - Russia game (which we "sadly", but well deserved lost) and I really liked the inside of the stadium. The three tier stand looks like a smaller version of the Allianz Arena. Quite an impressive venue for a relative small city as Basel!

If that stadium would have three tiers all around I would estimate the maximum capacity of the Basel stadium to be about 55.000. But the 42.000 is now holds is not bad either!

indeed. luckily, they were playing footbal...

Soccer and football are the same sport, you dimwit. :bash:

But the traditional name is Football. Not Soccer.

"Soccer" is not a word that should be accepted by people who care about the game.

Thats great!

From where did you get this lots of information?

they could host for a WC

they could host for a WC

:weird:

they could bid for a WC