Australia Bids To Stage 2018 World Cup
February 01, 2009 11:19 AM
By Neville D'Cruz

MELBOURNE, Feb 1 (Bernama) -- Australia have formally lodged their bid to host the 2018 or 2022 FIFA World Cup, Football Federation Australia (FFA) Chairman Frank Lowy said today.

Initial expressions of interest to FIFA, the world governing body for the sport, are required from bidding nations by Monday.

"We have submitted Australia's expression of interest in hosting either the 2018 or 2022 FIFA World Cup," Lowy said in a statement.

"This marks the beginning of a long and important journey, not just for football but for Australia, until we know the outcome in December next year.

"As a nation, sport has provided some of our most compelling and defining national memories," he said.

"The bid will also help the world understand that Australia is a 'can do' country, where important, major events can happen with a minimum of fuss and a minimum of worry," he said.

He was confident of success despite the strong field of candidates from around the world.

"We know we have the capacity, experience and expertise to deliver a successful FIFA World Cup," he said.

Lowy said the next milestone in the journey to host the FIFA World Cup would occur in mid-March when further bid documentation is required.

-- BERNAMA

i think that spain/portugal and benelux are in

Is it an England bid
or a UK bid (just in England or also in Scotland and Wales ...)
(speaking of joint bids) :)

purely england only, a uk bid would never happen, there was talk of wales and scotland having a bid for an upcoming euro tournament but nothing more has been said on that matter

so the battle for 2018 is between Russia and England without Spain and Ned

Add Mexico

I agree with most posters on here, its a straight fight for 2018 between England and Russia and 2022 between China and Australia. But dont knock other bidders whose chances seem remote. The way it works you have to bid at least once sometimes three times to be in with a chance. (unless you are mexico and usa who bid for every world cup and olympic games regardless!)

Found this story on another forum, sorry i don't have a link to it just yet though.....

China not bidding for World Cup

China will not submit bids to host the 2018 or 2022 World Cup finals, local media reports said on Monday.

After the successful hosting of last August's Beijing Olympics and the 2007 women's World Cup finals, China was expected to officially register its interest in bidding for the tournaments before Monday's FIFA deadline.

"In China, the decision of whether to bid for an international sports event like the World Cup is decided by the government ... the possibility of bidding for the World Cup is zero," Beijing Youth Daily quoted an unnamed official at the Chinese Football Association (CFA) as saying.

No one at the CFA was immediately available for comment.

A spokesman for the CFA said last October that China was mulling a bid for the World Cup finals and FIFA President Sepp Blatter said last month that the world's most populous nation was among 10 potential bidders.

Monday's report, however, cited several CFA officials as saying they had not heard of any intention to bid and the recent reorganisation of the governing body would have made it impossible to make a decision in time.

Nan Yong, who presided over China's successful hosting of the 2007 women's World Cup, formally replaced Xie Yalong as head of the CFA in mid January.

If no expression of intent is forthcoming from the CFA before Monday's deadline expires, it makes a bid for the 2018 Winter Olympics more likely.

Officials in the state-run sports administration previously said China would not bid for both the 2018 World Cup finals and Winter Games.

The governor of the northeastern province of Heilongjiang said in December that a successful Winter University Games in Harbin this month could be the catalyst for an attempt to attract the Winter Olympics to China in 2018 or 2022.

England, Japan, Qatar, Mexico, Australia, Russia and the United States have declared themselves in the running for the 2018 and 2022 World Cup finals. The decision will be announced in December next year.




Great news for Australia! :D

I agree with most posters on here, its a straight fight for 2018 between England and Russia and 2022 between China and Australia. But dont knock other bidders whose chances seem remote. The way it works you have to bid at least once sometimes three times to be in with a chance. (unless you are mexico and usa who bid for every world cup and olympic games regardless!)

I wouldn't discount the USA for 2022 if I were you. The quality of stadiums and money making potential of the US make it very, very appealing to FIFA. I think the US will get 2022, with Australia nabbing 2026.

heres a link http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/feedarticle/8338058

Found this story on another forum, sorry i don't have a link to it just yet though.....

China not bidding for World Cup

China will not submit bids to host the 2018 or 2022 World Cup finals, local media reports said on Monday.

After the successful hosting of last August's Beijing Olympics and the 2007 women's World Cup finals, China was expected to officially register its interest in bidding for the tournaments before Monday's FIFA deadline.

"In China, the decision of whether to bid for an international sports event like the World Cup is decided by the government ... the possibility of bidding for the World Cup is zero," Beijing Youth Daily quoted an unnamed official at the Chinese Football Association (CFA) as saying.

No one at the CFA was immediately available for comment.

A spokesman for the CFA said last October that China was mulling a bid for the World Cup finals and FIFA President Sepp Blatter said last month that the world's most populous nation was among 10 potential bidders.

Monday's report, however, cited several CFA officials as saying they had not heard of any intention to bid and the recent reorganisation of the governing body would have made it impossible to make a decision in time.

Nan Yong, who presided over China's successful hosting of the 2007 women's World Cup, formally replaced Xie Yalong as head of the CFA in mid January.

If no expression of intent is forthcoming from the CFA before Monday's deadline expires, it makes a bid for the 2018 Winter Olympics more likely.

Officials in the state-run sports administration previously said China would not bid for both the 2018 World Cup finals and Winter Games.

The governor of the northeastern province of Heilongjiang said in December that a successful Winter University Games in Harbin this month could be the catalyst for an attempt to attract the Winter Olympics to China in 2018 or 2022.

England, Japan, Qatar, Mexico, Australia, Russia and the United States have declared themselves in the running for the 2018 and 2022 World Cup finals. The decision will be announced in December next year.




Great news for Australia! :D

^^
Yeah i just found the link as well, cheers! ;)

That's quite a surprise to me, I really thought China would be bidding. I guess 2018 is for Europe and 2022 will be between the USA and Australia now!

^^ Wow, that is a bit of a shock. I could understand them being hesitant about 2018 but I would have thought they would have had great interest in 2022. I would have thought of them as frontrunners along with the U.S. (if England got 2018). Odd.

South Korea and Egypt are also in the race apperantly. So that makes:

- Japan
- Indonesia
- Qatar
- Australia
- England
- Russia
- Mexico
- USA
- Belgium / Netherlands
- Spain / Portugal
- South Korea
- Egypt

Looks like half the world is going to bid for these two world cups :nuts:

By the way, the Republic of Korea (now that's what I call a rivalry: they just love Japan) and Egypt are also in. But since Africa can't host the 2018 tournament I guess Egypt is only bidding for 2022.

South Korea and Egypt are also in the race apperantly. So that makes:

- Japan
- Indonesia
- Qatar
- Australia
- England
- Russia
- Mexico
- USA
- Belgium / Netherlands
- Spain / Portugal
- South Korea
- Egypt

Looks like half the world is going to bid for these two world cups :nuts:

Isn't it North Korea actually?

No, it's South.

South Korea and Egypt are also in the race apperantly. So that makes:

- Japan
- Indonesia
- Qatar
- Australia
- England
- Russia
- Mexico
- USA
- Belgium / Netherlands
- Spain / Portugal
- South Korea
- Egypt

Looks like half the world is going to bid for these two world cups :nuts:

is there an official comunication of fifa?

By Mark Ledsom

BERNE, Switzerland (Reuters) - Up to 12 bids from across four continents are expected to compete to host the 2018 and 2022 World Cups as the deadline approaches for countries to put their names forward.

The list of potential bidders to have expressed their initial interest in staging one of the tournaments grew to a dozen Monday when FIFA confirmed the late entry of Egypt and South Korea.

World soccer's governing body is due to publish the final list Tuesday. Barring any further late additions it should comprise five bids from Asia, four from Europe, two from the Americas and one from Africa.

South Korea and Japan, who jointly hosted the World Cup in 2002, will go up against each other this time round with Indonesia, Qatar and Australia completing the Asian quintet.

The 1966 World Cup hosts England face competition on their own continent from Russia and joint applicants Spain/Portugal and Netherlands/Belgium.

Egypt, Mexico and 1994 hosts the United States complete the list.

There is confusion though over FIFA president Sepp Blatter's opposition to joint bids and the extent to which his views reflect official policy.

Blatter told reporters at a meeting of the South American Football Confederation last week that "as soon as there is a (sole) candidacy or three or four relevant candidacies, we are directly going to reject the double candidacies."

SPAIN PRESSURE

A spokesman told Reuters Monday that FIFA would consider joint bids from countries who were not capable of hosting a World Cup on their own.

"Countries capable of staging the event alone should do so," added the spokesman in a clarification that will increase pressure on Spain to ditch its planned partnership with Portugal.

FIFA rules dictate World Cup finals can only be staged on continents that have not hosted either of the two preceding editions, meaning bidders will primarily have to concern themselves with seeing off their nearest geographical rivals.

If the European and Asian members of FIFA's executive committee fail to agree on the strongest candidate in their regions during the final vote in December 2010, the United States, Mexico or Egypt could benefit.

South American countries were unable to put themselves forward for either tournament due to Brazil's scheduled hosting of the 2014 version.

Following South Africa's staging of the 2010 World Cup, African nations were free to apply for the 2022 event but Egypt look set to be the only ones to do so

The bidding process has been further complicated by FIFA's decision to offer up two World Cups simultaneously.

FIFA is yet to reveal how the process will work or whether the 24-member executive committee will first choose the 2018 hosts before turning to 2022.

The ruling body will send full details of the bidding process to all applicants on February 16.

Final bid dossiers have to be submitted by May 2010 with FIFA's executive committee casting its decisive votes seven months later.

(Editing by Justin Palmer and Tony Jimenez)

http://www.reuters.com/article/sportsNews/idUSTRE51155V20090202?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0

is there an official comunication of fifa?

They'll show the final list tomorrow.

Isn't it North Korea actually?

That would be interesting! ;)

USA would have to play their games somewhere else. :lol:

Basing it on History and if all goes according to plans,,,

1998-France..........Europe
2002-Korea/Japan..Asia
2006-Germany......Europe
2010-S.Africa........Africa
2014-Brazil...........S.America

2018-?????............Europe, basing it on what the Euros are used to, on getting the WC every 8 yrs, would have been 12 yrs since 06 hosted in Germany. And plus the influence they have over FIFA.

2022-????.............N.America or Asia, who else? by that time it would be 28 yrs since CONCACAF last hosted and 20 for Asia.

Peter Butler: If Indonesia Puts Its House In Order, It Could Host A Great World Cup
Ex-West Ham midfielder Peter Butler has coached all around Asia. That stint included two years in the Indonesian league. The Englishman was thrilled to learn that the nation wants the 2022 World Cup but warns that widespread corruption in the game needs to be eradicated...

The thought of Indonesia bidding for a World Cup has me thinking how positive it could be for the game there. After spending two years of my coaching career in the hurly-burly world of Indonesian Football I learned a few things.

Anybody reading this thinking it’s a footballing backwater should take my advice: get on a plane and go to Indonesia to watch a game. The atmosphere at one of the top games will blow you away - big crowds week in, week out, full houses of 40- 50,000 are not uncommon.

Apologies to my Australian friends but if you go to a top game in the A-League, all you will probably hear for 90 minutes is ‘Ozzie Ozzie Ozzie, Oi Oi Oi !!!’

Go to Indonesia and you will get an atmosphere to rival anywhere in Asia. They are fanactical. Last season I was at Arema Malang for a game. Those fans are without doubt the best fans in Indonesia. There were over 45,000 in the stadium, constantly singing and dancing on the terraces.

I have always said and believed Indonesian football is the jewel in the crown of Asian Football. It will only get bigger and better and go forward if they can drive out the corruption which exists in the game there.

Sadly, corruption is rampant within the sport and the Asian Football Confederation and FIFA need to get a grip of it because it is out of control.

I myself am owed over $45,000 by my ex-club, Persiba Balikapapan, and over 50 players are presently fighting their cases with FIFPro at FIFA to receive what they are owed.

There is no protection for coaches and players, and sadly many club officials manipulate the system for their own personal gain, sack coaches and players at will and refuse to pay what is owed on their contracts. The Indonesian FA turn a blind eye.

I have had players on my doorstep and crying on the phone to me begging for help because their club will not pay their contract and they have a wife and kids to feed. The AFC are not interested.

People will always ask if Indonesia is safe to hold such a major event. All I can say is: I have never had a problem in Indonesia in my time and have always felt safe. The people in Jakarta are wonderful people, and Indonesians in general are wonderful. They are so vibrant.

2022 is a long way away and I would love for the hopes and dreams of Indonesian football, and the wonderful people of Indonesia, to come true and that they get a chance to host the tournament. It would be fantastic for a nation of genuine football lovers.

After all the tragic events which have happened in recent years it would be a dream come true for my Indonesian friends to see the spectacle of world football take place there, and I hopefully will be there with them watching England win the trophy at the Gelora Bung Karno. Dreams sometimes do come true!

Peter Butler

taken from:http://www.goal.com/en/news/1649/wcq-asia/2009/01/31/1086194/peter-butler-if-indonesia-puts-its-house-in-order-it-could-host-

A spokesman told Reuters Monday that FIFA would consider joint bids from countries who were not capable of hosting a World Cup on their own.

This would be good news for the Netherlands and Belgium. Both countries aren't able to host a WC on their own without leaving empty stadiums behind.

That would be interesting! ;)

USA would have to play their games somewhere else. :lol:

There actually was a rumor some time ago that they will bid :lol:
Probably U.S.A. wouldn't participate just like in 1980 at the Olympic Games. :)

fifa.com, February 3rd:

Remarkable interest in 2018 & 2022

FIFA has received a total of 11 formal expressions of interest to bid for the 2018 and/or the 2022 FIFA World Cups™ by the established deadline of 2 February 2009. The member associations that have confirmed their interest in hosting FIFA's flagship competition are, in alphabetical order: Australia, Belgium and the Netherlands, England, Indonesia, Japan, Korea Republic, Mexico, Qatar, Russia, Spain and Portugal, and the USA.

"It is remarkable that so many high-quality contenders have expressed an initial interest in hosting our flagship competition," said FIFA President Joseph S. Blatter. "Our world is one that is rich in natural beauty and cultural diversity, but also one where many are still deprived of their basic rights, or have to deal with the daily realities of conflict. FIFA now has an even greater responsibility to reach out and touch the world, using football as a symbol of hope and integration.

"The current worldwide economic crisis has brought another dimension of uncertainty into the lives of many people around the world. Football has an extraordinary power to unite people, as well as an ability to inspire emotions of hope, passion and joy.


"This is even more true when it comes to the FIFA World Cup, a truly global competition. For this reason, FIFA has asked the potential bidders to ensure that this power of football is used to urge solidarity and achieve positive change in the world; an opportunity to contribute to making a difference to people's lives, in line with our claim: For the Game. For the World.

"The bidding process for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups will be keenly contested and FIFA is eager to ensure that fair play prevails. For that reason, the FIFA Ethics Committee will be involved in the proceedings."

FIFA will now send the Bid Registration form on 16 February to the member associations which have formally expressed their interest to bid for the 2018 and the 2022 FIFA World Cups.

More details about the bidding process itself, the calendar and the conditions can be found in the circular letter, which can be accessed through the link on the right-hand panel of this article.


So... where's Egypt?

OK. Added a poll.
Although its a Multiple Choice Poll, please just vote for just one 2018 / 2022.

Is official the race without Egypt?

My votes.

England - 2018
Japan - 2022

My votes:

2018 Russia
2022 Australia

It could be interesting for every bids to make a realistic list of the cities.

For example which cities for Australia bid? Sidney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Darwin, Canberra, Perth and then?

And about Russia?

England 2018

Australia 2022

spain and portugal 2018

portugal and spain 2022

XD

If England where to get the nod to host in 2018 then from the list remaining the only viable option at this moment in time would be Australia to host in 2022. I would've said China but they aren't bidding.

England 2018

Not so sure about 2022, I think it will be between USA, Australia and (hopefully) Indonesia.
I hope for Australia or Indonesia, USA only had it in 1994 and the two other countries could profit much more from it.

My votes:

2018 Russia
2022 Australia

It could be interesting for every bids to make a realistic list of the cities.

For example which cities for Australia bid? Sidney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Darwin, Canberra, Perth and then?

And about Russia?

If you can choose 6 Australian cities you can surely have enough Russian cities for a World Cup since it's, damn, one big country :moods::

1.Moscow
2.Saint Petersburg
3.Novgorod
4.Yekaterinburg
5.Kazan
6.Omsk
7.Novosibirsk
8.Samara
9.Rostov
10.Perm

Of course, I only have examples of 10 cities with population over 1 million in the city limits. There are some of them that don't have football teams in the Russian Premier League since some of them are in smaller cities, though, Vladivostok would be a nice "democratic" one since it played some time in they're 1st Division :-D.
Then, I don't know how those Russian people appreciate football outside of Moscow and S.Petersburg, except these 2 cities I have heard nothing about other teams and they're fans and of course...7 of the 16 teams are in Moscow.

OK. Added a poll.
Although its a Multiple Choice Poll, please just vote for just one 2018 / 2022.

Thanks for adding that to the thread. I voted wrong but it doesn't really matter...

I've "exceeded my bandwidth" on Photobucket so most of my photos on this thread have been deleted. I'd like to re-do the first post of this thread but it'll take about a day - sounds like a challenge!

is the poll list the official Fifa list?

England 2018

Australia 2022

x2 :)

England 2018

USA 2022

Why the US will host in 2018 or 2022 (likely 2022). $$$$$$$$$. Right or wrong, money usually plays the biggest factor in FIFA's decisions and SoccerNet.com's Steve Davis explains the riches awaiting FIFA in the US. (http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/story?id=615735&sec=us&root=us&cc=3888)

At some point, this bid process is all about the facilities. (Well, really, it's about money. Because finances are inextricably linked to facility size, by extension, these bids are about physical structures.) The United States enjoys a stadium situation unrivaled in the rest of the world, thanks mostly to the country's love of American football and need to stack the racks with money-waving fans.

More seats mean more money for FIFA. It's that simple.

.....

Consider this: A World Cup today could be scattered quite easily around a roster of fabulous stadiums that didn't even exist when the United States hosted World Cup 1994.

Let that sink in. That's how deep the selection of stadiums is here.

And, of course, venerable facilities such as the Rose Bowl, which hosted the 1994 final, remain in play. That one also holds 100,000-plus fans.

The 1994 World Cup smashed previous records for attendance; the 52-game tournament averaged 68,991 fans, a mark that still stands. The next one here will easily surpass that record.

......

There's also a matter of sponsorship. Here, too, FIFA has reason to purr over prospects of a second World Cup in the United States.

"From a sponsorship perspective, the two countries that advertisers currently covet most are the United States and China, and this will probably continue to be the case in 2018 and beyond," said John Alper, vice president of Premier Partnerships, a national sales and marketing firm specializing in revenue generation for facilities, events and properties. "Obviously, FIFA considers a variety of factors for this decision. However, from a sponsorship perspective, having the USA as the host nation is definitely a plus."

And by "definitely a plus," he means more cash for the FIFA kitty. Ka-ching!

The 1994 World Cup was a rousing success, at least in terms of attendance and revenue. And soccer's profile has risen substantially in the United States in the 15 years since. That means hosting a World Cup in 2018 or 2022 would be a colossus.

The World Cup in Germany averaged 52,491 spectators per contest. Given the scale of the new facilities available to the U.S.' bid, the average crowd for a World Cup in the United States could climb to 75,000. That's an extra 22,000-plus fans for 64 matches. With an average ticket price of $140 or so (the World Cup in South Africa next year will charge an average of $139, so that is a very conservative estimate), that's an additional $197 million just in ticket revenue.

......

One more thing: Facilities in other countries, nice as some are, aren't designed with luxury boxes in mind. Not to the extent U.S. stadiums are, at least. Those opportunities for premium sales generate good money, too. Ka-ching, again.

Money talks. FIFA listens. Another World Cup is headed to the United States in your lifetime, and Feb. 2 is the day it all officially started.

usa want it for $$$$$$$
rest of the world want it for football

England 2018
Australia 2022

Ummm no, FIFA would want it for $$$$$$$$

Europe will get 2018 for sure, most likely England.

With China dropping out of 2022 bidding, it seems like a lock for the USA. China was the only country capable of matching what the USA can offer, as well as the potential to spread soccer through out the country. Australia just can't match up to the USA. The USA now can host the cup with 12 stadiums all over 70,000 and all less than 10 years old. Australia would have to build 40k stadiums that will be half empty most of the time after the WC. Also, would FIFA prefer to market the game to a country with 300 million people, or to one with 20 million people?

2018: Russia
2022: Indonesia

2018: Russia
2022: Indonesia^^ That would shock the world.

My favorites for WC 2018/2022 England and Australia, because they already have two championship outside Europe and because Australia is a country that has nothing to show

My favorites for WC 2018/2022 England and Australia, because they already have two championship outside Europe and because Australia is a country that has nothing to show

That's a great reason for us to get it! :lol:

EDIT: decided to post my response to ryebread's article in the USA thread since he put it in both threads (why??)

[B]Peter Butler: If Indonesia Puts Its House In Order, It Could Host A Great World Cup

Apologies to my Australian friends but if you go to a top game in the A-League, all you will probably hear for 90 minutes is ‘Ozzie Ozzie Ozzie, Oi Oi Oi !!!’

Yeah, ok (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzAf12Nzgeo&NR=1). :)

When is the final decision made?

I think that England will get it. They haven't been hosting anything for many years (since EURO 1996) and they have much to say in FIFA.

December 2010

usa want it for $$$$$$$
rest of the world want it for football

England 2018
Australia 2022

I think you'll find that the German government bankrolled the 2006 finals in order to reap the financial benefits of hosting (and promote Germany as a tourist destination).

The Aussie government has already stated that the $45m pledged to the 2018/2022 bid is nothing compared to the financial benefits the country will gain if we win the bid.

I think that England will get it. They haven't been hosting anything for many years (since EURO 1996) and they have much to say in FIFA.

London olympics?

London olympics?


ja, england can't win. it has already won the olympic. russia will win.

nobody of you has voted for qatar? :lol:

ja, england can't win. it has already won the olympic. russia will win.

nobody of you has voted for qatar? :lol:

Pretty sure the Olympics will have no bearing on weather England gets it or not.

The Olympics has nothing to do with FIFA.

The FIFA would rather see the World Cup in the US of 305 millions than in a big Island of 20 millions.

^^
Well we'll see, won't we? I wouldn't get too far ahead of myself if i were you.

The FIFA would rather see the World Cup in the US of 305 millions than in a big Island of 20 millions.

someone like blatter would maybe, but even he would want it in a country like australia where footie is growing more and more, i dont think the voters will give a stuff how many millions are in oz compared to the usa, if that was so important why didnt china even bother bidding?
australia is probably why china didn't bother!

A big :| for this article..... :ohno:

U.S. likely to host a World Cup in 2018 or 2022
By Steve Davis, ESPNsoccernet

Feb. 2, 2009, will own a historic place in U.S. soccer history. It's the date U.S. Soccer officials joined the race to host a World Cup tournament and officially announced their intention to pursue either the 2018 or 2022 World Cup.

Reliant Stadium in Houston is one of many modern facilities the U.S. can boast.
And they'll get one of them. Book it.

Want to know why? The answer is in the whir of construction cranes encircling suburban Dallas, where the Cowboys' new behemoth of a stadium is rising. And it's in the shadow of Giants Stadium, where yet another futuristic NFL stadium is going up. And it's in all the other fabulous, mammoth athletic facilities that dot the country.

The stadium outside Dallas will have the ability to accommodate perhaps 100,000 fans for special events. The $1.3 billion project in New Jersey will seat 82,500.

Beautiful, recently opened buildings in Philadelphia, Seattle, Denver, Houston and elsewhere also will brace the bid. These are grand in scale, monuments to the place where architecture, imagination and capitalism collide. No other country is so sophisticated in exploiting sales and sponsorship opportunities inside these modern arenas.

At some point, this bid process is all about the facilities. (Well, really, it's about money. Because finances are inextricably linked to facility size, by extension, these bids are about physical structures.) The United States enjoys a stadium situation unrivaled in the rest of the world, thanks mostly to the country's love of American football and need to stack the racks with money-waving fans.

More seats mean more money for FIFA. It's that simple.

Yes, there are nice (and nicely sized) venues scattered throughout the world. Some countries have a respectable volume of facilities with impressive capacities. England, probably the front-runner for the 2018 World Cup, can get into the conversation, at least. But even England can't come close to matching the glut of structural riches available to FIFA by awarding one of the future World Cups to the United States.

Consider this: A World Cup today could be scattered quite easily around a roster of fabulous stadiums that didn't even exist when the United States hosted World Cup 1994.

Let that sink in. That's how deep the selection of stadiums is here.

And, of course, venerable facilities such as the Rose Bowl, which hosted the 1994 final, remain in play. That one also holds 100,000-plus fans.

The 1994 World Cup smashed previous records for attendance; the 52-game tournament averaged 68,991 fans, a mark that still stands. The next one here will easily surpass that record.

The 2006 World Cup was a wonderfully well-received tournament, generally spilling out without a hitch and to everyone's pleasure. Germany is a modern country with several contemporary arenas. And yet, tournament organizers still needed to employ stadiums in Kaiserslautern, Nuremberg, Leipzig, Hanover and Cologne, all of which hold 46,000 spectators or fewer. There probably won't be a single bid from a stadium in the U.S. with a capacity so small. Everybody loves all those swell U.S. soccer-specific stadiums that have done so much for the game in our country, but you don't send a boy to do a man's job, so to speak.

There's also a matter of sponsorship. Here, too, FIFA has reason to purr over prospects of a second World Cup in the United States.

"From a sponsorship perspective, the two countries that advertisers currently covet most are the United States and China, and this will probably continue to be the case in 2018 and beyond," said John Alper, vice president of Premier Partnerships, a national sales and marketing firm specializing in revenue generation for facilities, events and properties. "Obviously, FIFA considers a variety of factors for this decision. However, from a sponsorship perspective, having the USA as the host nation is definitely a plus."

And by "definitely a plus," he means more cash for the FIFA kitty. Ka-ching!

The 1994 World Cup was a rousing success, at least in terms of attendance and revenue. And soccer's profile has risen substantially in the United States in the 15 years since. That means hosting a World Cup in 2018 or 2022 would be a colossus.

The World Cup in Germany averaged 52,491 spectators per contest. Given the scale of the new facilities available to the U.S.' bid, the average crowd for a World Cup in the United States could climb to 75,000. That's an extra 22,000-plus fans for 64 matches. With an average ticket price of $140 or so (the World Cup in South Africa next year will charge an average of $139, so that is a very conservative estimate), that's an additional $197 million just in ticket revenue.

And don't forget that every person who passes through a turnstile is a candidate to buy T-shirts, hats, silly foam fingers and such. The way a typical stadium deal works, the facility keeps parking and most concession revenues. But all the merchandise money goes to the event organizers, which in this case is FIFA. So the extra 22,000 or so per match adds up further considering the multiplier, whatever that is. Let's say the foam-finger factor is $10 per customer. The extra 22,000 customers can potentially generate up to an additional $220,000 per match, or an additional $14 million for the tournament.

As they say: Pretty soon, you're talking about real money.

These are very basic formulas. The actual accounting will be far more complex, of course. But you get the point. Suffice to say, if FIFA can pour more customers into stadiums during the monthlong tournament, the financial payload will expand significantly.

There could be one potential road hump. Each of these grand, new U.S. facilities comes with a lucrative naming-rights deal already in place. And that's not part of FIFA's financial template. Because world soccer's governing body doesn't already have its hand in that pie, it demands a blank slate in terms of venue sponsorship, and that includes naming rights. That's why the AOL Arena in Hamburg became, officially speaking, the World Cup Stadium in Hamburg for 2006.

Will this pose an issue? Not likely, Alper said. First, FIFA is such a global heavyweight that it can demand a blank slate. Most existing stadium contracts have clauses that cover opportunities to host extraordinary events. Plus, Alper says a FedEx or an AT&T or whatever corporate sponsor won't jeopardize important relationships and risk a firestorm of bad publicity by saying no to a chance to host World Cup games.

One more thing: Facilities in other countries, nice as some are, aren't designed with luxury boxes in mind. Not to the extent U.S. stadiums are, at least. Those opportunities for premium sales generate good money, too. Ka-ching, again.

Money talks. FIFA listens. Another World Cup is headed to the United States in your lifetime, and Feb. 2 is the day it all officially started.

Other countries that have expressed interest in bidding for either the 2018 and 2022 World Cup:

Australia: Officials there hope FIFA's desire to grow the game in Asia and the Pacific Rim can enhance the chances. Although Australia has hosted other major events (such as the 2000 Olympics in Sydney), the odds here appear long.

England: The country's effort received a significant boost when FIFA rulers shot down the notion of joint bids. So the Spain-Portugal effort and a bid from the Benelux countries (Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg) went kaput before they even got started. Thus, England is the clear front-runner if FIFA is to return the tournament to Europe.

Indonesia: The world's fourth-most-populated country (237 million) has seen its economy and political scene stabilize significantly since the turbulent 1960s. Although Indonesia might be considered a strong national team in southeast Asia, its relative weakness in the world soccer structure is a detriment.

Japan: Japan has the stadiums, the infrastructure and organizational might to pull it off, but proximity to the 2002 World Cup (which the Japanese co-hosted with Korea) hurts.

Mexico: Several new stadiums are going up in Mexico. But the U.S. neighbor would become the first country to host three World Cups, a factor that probably will work against it.

Qatar: The oil-rich Arab emirate has the world's highest GDP per capita, according to some estimates. Although money isn't an issue, physical size could be. Qatar occupies only about 4,400 square miles, roughly the size of Pennsylvania.

Russia: Talk of a bid from the world's largest nation (by area) sounded much better a year ago, before falling oil prices and ongoing crisis in the Russian financial markets crunched the nation's economy.

Steve Davis is a Dallas-based freelance writer who covers MLS for ESPNsoccernet. He can be reached at BigTexSoccer@yahoo.com

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/story?id=615735&sec=us&root=us&cc=3436

I am convinced England will be the host in 2018. 2022 is more open. I doubt the Anglo American world will host two WC in a row, so I rule out Australia and the US.

^^ Do you really think that Indonesia/Qatar/Japan/Korea can beat the USA and Australia?

No way.

someone like blatter would maybe, but even he would want it in a country like australia where footie is growing more and more, i dont think the voters will give a stuff how many millions are in oz compared to the usa, if that was so important why didnt china even bother bidding?
australia is probably why china didn't bother!

It's growing in the USA as well, and again there are 300 million here instead of just over 20 million.

The population of China is the main reason they would have been the front-runner for 2022. FIFA would have been DROOLING at the chance to expand the sport in a country of 1.3 billion.

Russia in 2018
Indonesia in 2022

ja, england can't win. it has already won the olympic. russia will win.

(1) The two organisations are unrelated - hosting a major competition in one city has nothing to do with hosting a major competition across an entire nation.

(2) Theory also disproved by this - USA World Cup '94, Atlanta Olympics '96; Mexico Olympics '68, Mexico World Cup '70.

As for Russia... I'm very interested to see how they'd cope. I know we're talking about 9 years in the future, but they really struggled to handle two sets of English fans coming over for a one off Champions League match - I don't know how they'd cope with supporters from all over the world arriving in droves and wanting to travel around from host city to host city, etc.

someone like blatter would maybe, but even he would want it in a country like australia where footie is growing more and more, i dont think the voters will give a stuff how many millions are in oz compared to the usa, if that was so important why didnt china even bother bidding?
australia is probably why china didn't bother!

I suspect that the culture shock of the Olympics - all those foreigners running around, especially the media, expecting (urggh) freedom of speach and movement - probably put the authorities right off the idea of trying for an even bigger event.

They struggled to handle it all even with the draconian advance measures. Now, as I mentioned about the Russians, multiply it over an entire country - imagine the authorities trying to deal with 15000 Dutch fans pouring out of Beijing and travelling over to Wuhan. The authorities would have a nervous breakdown.

It's growing in the USA as well, and again there are 300 million here instead of just over 20 million.
Of which just 20 million care.

I suspect that the culture shock of the Olympics - all those foreigners running around, especially the media, expecting (urggh) freedom of speach and movement - probably put the authorities right off the idea of trying for an even bigger event.

They struggled to handle it all even with the draconian advance measures. Now, as I mentioned about the Russians, multiply it over an entire country - imagine the authorities trying to deal with 15000 Dutch fans pouring out of Beijing and travelling over to Wuhan. The authorities would have a nervous breakdown.

China was considering bids for the Winter Olympics in 2018 or 2022 as well as a World Cup bid. They weren't going to bid on both and by the looks of it, they've decided to bid on the Olympics.

Well, considering the Beijing Olympic Stadium is to become a shopping mall, one would have to wonder what several large purpouse build football stadiums would be put to use for after the world cup in China when their top league matches only average around 12,000.

There is the potential for a massive league out there, but the same was true of the states and whilst the MLS has grown steadily since '94, it's still a minority sport. Huge potential doesn't always equal huge success and growing a football league in a country where it isn't the national sport is tricky. The US is very lucky in many ways in that the promise to have a national league (and indeed a world cup) could be fulfilled with fewer problems because one of their national sports happened to use stadiums and pitch sizes similar to soccer.

China, for its population has a terrible attendence record and a very poor national league. They don't have large stadiums from another sport they can borrow for a world cup bid either, unlike the US. On top of that, their national team is already out of the reckoning for qualification for the 2010 world cup and has recently slipped to its lowest over FIFA world ranking of 104!

All in all, China is probably right to focus on a Winter games.

Of which just 20 million care.Don't confuse the general ambivalence towards soccer with the appreciation for the World Cup as an event. Many games from the last World Cup and even 2 of last year's Euro matches scored higher TV ratings than most MLB telecasts, and even pundits who usually pan soccer, like Frank Deford and Colin Cowherd, like the nationalism and social event behind the World Cup. Lastly, say what you want about the US lacking a large fervent fanbase, but it's growing both in size and status. To wit...

There is the potential for a massive league out there, but the same was true of the states and whilst the MLS has grown steadily since '94, it's still a minority sport. Huge potential doesn't always equal huge success and growing a football league in a country where it isn't the national sport is tricky. MLS will likely never be on par with the MLB, NBA and NFL, nor will it be considered among the highest echelon of soccer leagues in the world. It can be very good and profitable, however, and is light years ahead of its US predecessors. The investment into a league and development infrastructure, complete with club-owned/managed stadia is HUGE, and the fact that lay people even know there is a stable league is a step forward. Those that debunk the sport at least begrudgingly accept that it's here to stay, and now young American's can dream of playing at home at the professional level. Give it another generation or two to ingrain this league in our culture and US soccer won't be the punch line it was two decades ago. The MLS, meanwhile, will also achieve a decent level of profitability and I truly expect the league will have an international presence and appeal. (might be a small one, but it will be there! :cheers: )

Evaluation phase for euro 2016
The third phase will involve evaluation, with the European body making official visits to the various bidders from March 2010. The UEFA administration and experts appointed by UEFA will then examine the bid dossiers and prepare a written report on each one, before passing these to UEFA's National Team Competitions Committee, with a final decision expected by the UEFA Executive Committee at the end of May 2010

so if, for example, euro 2016 goes to scotland , england can't win the bid process for the world cup 2018

it's more probable that euro 2016 will not awarded to scotland, because england is candidated for the world cup

I don't necessarily disagree with that, I was just using it as an example showing how countries like the US and China can't, without a lot of work, become instant cash-cows or footballing big-guns in the sport off of the back of one world cup. The US may get there eventually, but it's a bottom-up rather than a top-down process.

People speak of China getting a world cup (and always point out they have a population of 1.2bn) as if the biggest league in the world will suddenly spring up out of the ether. The reality is, like the Olympics, things will be back to the way they were afterwards, China would have had another moment in the spotlight, but Chinese football will still probably be a rather small deal.

Evaluation phase for euro 2016
The third phase will involve evaluation, with the European body making official visits to the various bidders from March 2010. The UEFA administration and experts appointed by UEFA will then examine the bid dossiers and prepare a written report on each one, before passing these to UEFA's National Team Competitions Committee, with a final decision expected by the UEFA Executive Committee at the end of May 2010

so if, for example, euro 2016 goes to scotland , england can't win the bid process for the world cup 2018

it's more probable that euro 2016 will not awarded to scotland, because england is candidated for the world cupWTF?? Even if this is true as you're presenting it it doesn't make sense. Why would a confederation want to hamstring themselves this way? Why would FIFA let regional events dictate WC locations? Something doesn't sound right, here.
People speak of China getting a world cup (and always point out they have a population of 1.2bn) as if the biggest league in the world will suddenly spring up out of the ether. The reality is, like the Olympics, things will be back to the way they were afterwards, China would have had another moment in the spotlight, but Chinese football will still probably be a rather small deal.Oh, I know and I agree, but both markets remain ripe for increased merchandising from existing product lines. Sponsors will sell more WC merchandise in the host nation than elsewhere, hence the appeal of hosting in populous nations with lots of money. A WC may not yield improvements league-wise, but they could increase general appeal for soccer programming, youth participation, selling of global merchandise, etc. To be sure, the US and Asia are hotbeds for creating thousands of bandwagon pose-, er fans, for the likes of Chelsea, Meeeeelan, Real... :|

I suspect that the culture shock of the Olympics - all those foreigners running around, especially the media, expecting (urggh) freedom of speach and movement - probably put the authorities right off the idea of trying for an even bigger event.

They struggled to handle it all even with the draconian advance measures. Now, as I mentioned about the Russians, multiply it over an entire country - imagine the authorities trying to deal with 15000 Dutch fans pouring out of Beijing and travelling over to Wuhan. The authorities would have a nervous breakdown.

That is the only reason I can think of as well. Though I am sure the idea was attractive for the CCP to show their people they can deliver another stage prize I think the Olympics made them a bit more guarded about jumping at the bit for another one. A world cup means a lot more people (foreigners especially) moving all over the country, more spotlighting of domestic policies etc. Having an Olympics in one city in a sense makes things more manageable and contained to to speak and those are aspects the CCP puts high priority on.

Plus perhaps it didn't feel like its national team would b very good by then (unlike the Olympics) and don't want to put up a dud for the home fans. Also I wonder how much Chinese fans would have interest in other teams other then their own.

imagine the authorities trying to deal with 15000 Dutch fans pouring out of Beijing and travelling over to Wuhan. The authorities would have a nervous breakdown.Especially when you consider it might be closer to 40k from the Dutch alone, to say nothing of Argentines, Brazilians, Germans... Scots! :banana:

Hey, I can dream! :cheers:

One city allowed to use two stadiums only, this is may be only suggestion in order to the games separate to anothers city.

England: The country's effort received a significant boost when FIFA rulers shot down the notion of joint bids. So the Spain-Portugal effort and a bid from the Benelux countries (Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg) went kaput before they even got started. Thus, England is the clear front-runner if FIFA is to return the tournament to Europe.

A spokesman told Reuters Monday that FIFA would consider joint bids from countries who were not capable of hosting a World Cup on their own.

"Countries capable of staging the event alone should do so," added the spokesman in a clarification that will increase pressure on Spain to ditch its planned partnership with Portugal.

Don't rule out the Benelux, both the Netherlands and Belgium can't host the event on their own. And it will have 1 organisation, pretty simulair as the Euro 2000 (which was in every aspect very successful) only bigger. During the bidding for Euro 2000 it was also said that the Benelux wasn't allowed to host by members of the UEFA.

My vote is

2018 England
2022 between Australia and Indonesia
It is a little bit strange for Indonesia, they never held a such big event but i think they still have a chance,....because they have really fanatic fans, and they just build some big stadium ( of course not such a big as in Europe or US but still more than 50.000 spec )

Just like World Cup 2010 South Africa, all people not sure about that,...but it happen...

My vote is

2018 England
2022 between Australia and Indonesia
It is a little bit strange for Indonesia, they never held a such big event but i think they still have a chance,....because they have really fanatic fans, and they just build some big stadium ( of course not such a big as in Europe or US but still more than 50.000 spec )

Just like World Cup 2010 South Africa, all people not sure about that,...but it happen...

Bung Karno Stadium in Jakarta can hold up to 88,000 people, it was used during the 2008 AFC Asian Cup. Indonesia also has another big stadiums, Palaran stadium and Jakabaring stadium can hold up to 60,000 and 40,000 people respectively. Indonesia is also building several other modern stadiums accross the country. I think they'll be ready to host it in 2022, not in 2018.

vote Indonesia for 2022.... ;)

Indonesian National Anthem @ Gelora Bung Karno Stadium :)

Indonesia Raya @ Indonesia vs Australia

J0PVvpZcWmI



i will post the reason why i choose Indonesia for 2022 later.. ;)

Please do cuz I'd love to hear it...as well as australia's case

Indonesian BIG Stadium so far ( there's many more but the capacity is too small )

Jakarta = represented by Gelora Bung Karno Stadium ( Host for Final Match AFC Cup 2007 )
http://www.jakmania.org/ind//images/joomleague/stadion/sugbk.jpg http://en.structurae.de/files/photos/wikipedia/Gelora_Bung_Karno_Stadium_2C_Night.jpg

Palembang = Jakabaring Stadium ( Host for 3rd place AFC Cup 2007 )
http://www.fussballtempel.net/afc/IDN/Jakabaring.jpg

Samarinda = represented by Palaran Stadium ( Our best stadium so far )
http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/838/dsc0017rl6.jpg

Malang = represented by Gajayana Stadium ( U/C )
http://photos-p.friendster.com/photos/46/72/10152764/36674629564020l.jpg

Sleman = represented by International Stadium of Sleman ( U/C )
http://img41.exs.cx/img41/7777/stadionbaru4he.jpg

Pekanbaru = represented by PON 2012 Stadium ( Proposed )
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2213/2657565469_47fdc1eec0_m.jpg

Tenggarong = represented by Perjiwa Stadium ( proposed )
http://i363.photobucket.com/albums/oo79/centroval/Rendering/DSC06143.jpg

Bandung = represented by Gede Bage Stadium ( Propsed )
http://photos-p.friendster.com/photos/07/41/47871470/1_269253681l.jpg

Dompak Island = represented by Dompak Stadium ( Proposed )
http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/8/31/1397821/Dompak-stadium.jpg

Surabaya = represented by Gelora Bung Tomo Stadium ( U/C )
http://jawapos.com/imgall/1/imgori/32849large.jpg

To become host World Cup 2022, i hope some stadium will be modify until meet the maximum capacity..
let's say around 50.000 - 70.000 seats.. :)

2022 is a long way journey.. and i hope Indonesia will be the next host WC in 2022
i think we will be ready.. ;)

Athletics tracks everywhere :down:

^^ except one.. :D

as i said above, some Stadium needs to be modified.. ;)

^^ except one.. :D

as i said above, some Stadium needs to be modified.. ;)

What about infrastructure? How are the airports? Are they large enough and are they in all the major cities? How's travel from city to city? Roads, trains, etc.? How about hotels and open areas to watch matches on large screens? Obviously the country won't have all of this right now, but do they have the money to build all of this and not go into major debt? Do they have the money for all the stadium upgrades? I doubt FIFA will fund much of it with other options in the region. It's not like S. Africa where any African country needed FIFA help so they;re going to have to fund things themselves.

(Sorry if this sounds pessimistic and doubtful. I'm just asking questions because frankly, I know next to nothing about the country)

^^ about infrastructure.. you can visit our Indonesian Forum..

we are constructing soma new airports...and enlarge the old one.. :)
and this year will implemented Bus Rapid Transportation System in some cities...
and subway for Jakarta, Proposed Mega Bridge to connect Java-Sumatra island.. ;)
bullet Train in Java island, etc etc

I think 2022 all that massive projects will be completed.. i hope.. :angel:

We also host Visit Indonesia Year 2008 and 2009
so many hotels you can search from Google.. :D
let's hope many more hotels built in 2022.. :D

it's okay to be pessimistic, me too... :D
but when we succeed to host Asian Cup..
why we can't try for a bigger one.. it's World Cup.. ;)

This is what I think will happen. England 2018, and USA 2022. But I think Indonesia is wild card for 2022.

What about infrastructure? How are the airports? Are they large enough and are they in all the major cities? How's travel from city to city? Roads, trains, etc.? How about hotels and open areas to watch matches on large screens? Obviously the country won't have all of this right now, but do they have the money to build all of this and not go into major debt? Do they have the money for all the stadium upgrades? I doubt FIFA will fund much of it with other options in the region. It's not like S. Africa where any African country needed FIFA help so they;re going to have to fund things themselves.

(Sorry if this sounds pessimistic and doubtful. I'm just asking questions because frankly, I know next to nothing about the country)

Hi... just for sharing, 2022 is a long time and i think it is realistic for indonesia chasing infrastructure to meet wc requirements. Actually the cost for proposed stadiums posted by Nanda are coming from regional government them self and another fact that maybe will make you surprise that the development plan in regional are even better than jakarta.

As example in my hometown, palembang is really different from the time i move to jakarta. They have international stadium: jakabaring, international hotel:aston,horizon, and coming more, they have international airport, they have lots of shoping mall, they start to build MRT (starting with busway), and manymore underconstruction and upcoming project. And other good news are those developments are planned well.

with the exclusion of mass transit..other infrastructures such as airports are a fast fix for the Indonesian government. Jakarta's Soekarno Hatta's new terminal 3 which will accommodate A380's and Low Cost Carriers is in it's finishing stages and slated to be open in two months. Makassar,South Sulawesi has a brand new airport in operation. A new International Airport in Medan, North Sumatera called Kuala Namu is in its planning stages and is expected to be completed in 2014. As for the fans, just to let most soccer/football fans around the world to know, the first Manchester United Cafe in Asia opened in Indonesia. Those Athletic tracks are there for the National Olympics, which are held every four years, and the host city usually constructs a new stadium for it.

-It's a wild card, but not impossible in my opinion:cheers:

Nothing is Imposibble...

VOTE FOR INDONESIA 2022!

Deduciendo llegue ala siguiente conclucion, europa tendra 12 años sin un mundial, por lo tanto 2018 practiamente sera el europa.

La final para elegir la sede del mundial de 2006 fue Alemania e Inglaterra... por lo tanto los ingleses tienen deceos de ser sede de ya hace un buen tiempo, Blatter ha dicho en varias ocaciones que es mas favorable una sola sede que dos, por lo tanto Bel-Hol y Esp-Por quedarian fuera...

los unicos serian Inglaterra y Rusia.

Para el mundial del 2022, obviamente todos los paises europeos quedaran descalificados, quedando asi, USA, Mexico, Indonesia, Japon, Korea, Qatar y Australia..

Japon y Corea fueron los ultimos paises en organizar un mundial en asia, ademas su mundiale s muy reciente..

Qatar e Indonesia a apesar de ser poderosos economicamente son paises que no son futboleros, por lo cual las entradas serian muy bajas.. Qatar es un pais chico y batallaria para sacar las sedes. Ademas estos paises no tienen el potencial de Australia..

USA y Mexico, tienen a futuro estadios de buen nivel, capacidad hotelera y ya han rganizado mundiales, aunque el ultimo pauis en ser anfitrion fue USA..

por lo tanto Mexico y Australia serian los que para mi tendrian mas oportunidades de ser sede..

Mexico fue el 2do pais que mas venta tuvo en el mundial 2006, Mexico fue el pais con mas ventas durante el mundial del 2006..

este es mi punto de vista sobre las elecciones para mundiales del 2018 y 2022..

saludos de monterrey mexico...

Erm, this is an English language forum.

Indonesia for South East Asian!!! 2022! :okay:

- edited -

Personally it's a pity that China didn't bid. It's the strongest candidate for WC 2022

^^ :?

At least in football, English is not the only official language. Spanish, Portugese and French are also official languages. You can see it in FIFA official reports. They are not written only in English. They don't fail to have another version with the same content but in different languages.

England 2018..
and Indonesia/USA 2022!

At least in football, English is not the only official language. Spanish, Portugese and French are also official languages. You can see it in FIFA official reports. They are not written only in English. They don't fail to have another version with the same content but in different languages.

^^
but this is international forum,....as we know official international language is English,.....
:ohno::ohno::ohno::nuts::nuts::nuts:

This forum language is English.

And think about it: what would be the point of this forum if everybody started to write in their own language? Would you like me to call you 'son of a bitch' without you noticing at all?

This forum language is English.

And think about it: what would be the point of this forum if everybody started to write in their own language? Would you like me to call you 'son of a bitch' without you noticing at all?

^^
agreed

^^
but this is international forum,....as we know official international language is English,.....
:ohno::ohno::ohno::nuts::nuts::nuts:

But as long as the subject is related to football, English is not the only international language. French, Portugese, Spanish are also official languages in football. So, anyone doesn't have the right to ban forumers from speaking them, IMO. :banana:

Whatever....

Whatever....

^^
right,....whatever,.......:nuts::nuts::nuts:

I was agreeing with you co cool and disagreeing with Carrerra!

Anyway, back to this thread. It's heartening to see such a positive response to England 2018!

:ohno: But how peoples from other countries like me will understand the posts? Lets try to write in english. For me it's difficult too because my native language is portuguese but i'm trying.

I think England is a lock for 2018. More than 12 years without a world cup in Europe is so much.

:ohno: But how peoples from other countries like me will understand the posts? Lets try to write in english. For me it's difficult too because my native language is portuguese but i'm trying.

Don't get me wrong but... that's your problem. We have to find a common language for everybody and English is the most widely known language. My native language is also Portuguese but what would happen if someone starts writing in Russian here? What would we understand? What would be the point of that?

Erm. Bezzi was actually agreeing with that. Read his post again!

Oh yeah...


But... co_cool was also agreeing with you. :P

We're even.

OK. Well, page 148 hasn't been the most constructive in this thread!

Guys please write in English.

This is the international section and the official language is English.

Otherwise i cannot understand it :D

hello, I ask an apology for writing in English but my native language is Spanish, although not much English and not English to write a bad decision to write in my native language, understand your position and try to write in English, only if I ask a sorry if my English is not good.

greetings

Why is everyone so bent out of shape about another language?

No problem.
Look at me. My english is bad and i am a mod.

Actually its juts a stadium and arena forum
You just need these word
Cool satdium. Whats capacity
steep stands
seats
suites = palcos


:)

yes we should all talk in english as theres a certain je nais sais quois about english :)

I think the only real dispute will be in 2022. If England with Wembley, Emirates and company realy wins 2018, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Netherlands and Russia will be eliminated. Japan and Korea 2002 is very recent. México already host 2 times. Catar have money and can build 10 stadiums but will build were? They have only 3 or 4 important cities. Doha have the infrastructure but has eliminated from 2016 olympic race. The other cities are desert. The whole population is 1 million, less the womans that can't go to stadiums, we have 400000 mens. FIFA don't want a world cup in a country with empty stadiums and without fans from Scotland or Germany that like drunk with wisky or beer (like me :cheers:). Indonesia is a modern country but their stadiums not. The other bids will be better. So the only disput in my opinion is between Australia and USA for 2022.

arena
That's a Spanish word! Get out of here!

Hi I'm new in this forum .. does anyone knows if australia and Mexico submitted a bid to the FIFA in order to host a world cup??? well I think besides England and Spain the US is more than ready to host another WC let's see who's gonna win that bid Belgium and Holland well they have nice venues but I don't know if both countries can handle a lot of people during the tournament .........

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/internationals/7856716.stm#unitedstates

The race to host World Cup 2018

When Bobby Moore wiped his hands on his shorts before collecting the World Cup trophy from the Queen at Wembley, he provided one of the most iconic images in British sport.

That was more than 42 years ago, and England fans need no reminding that it was the last time their team lifted the World Cup or, indeed, any major tournament.

But it is not only the England team that suffered many a painful World Cup exit. The Football Association was also left with a bitter taste in its mouth after Germany won the right to stage the 2006 tournament ahead of England.

The FA is mounting a strong campaign to host the 2018 World Cup and recently put the finishing touches to its bid team.

Fifa has gone for a more "Olympic-style" bidding war for 2018, with its 24-man executive committee to make its decision in December 2010, when the world governing body will also choose the 2022 hosts.

Of the 18 World Cup tournaments held since 1930, 10 have been staged in Europe, six in Latin America and one each in the United States and Asia.

With South Africa and Brazil to host the 2010 and 2014 competitions respectively, Fifa has said no African countries can bid for the 2018 showpiece while South America must wait until 2026 for the chance to bid again.

Successful hosts must meet certain conditions if they are to win the right to stage the World Cup, providing at least 12 stadiums with minimum capacities of 40,000, with the final to be held in a stadium with a capacity of at least 80,000.

BBC Sport profiles the opposition England faces if it is to host the tournament again.

England
Fifa World Ranking: 8
Main Stadium: Wembley, 90,000 (London)
Last World Cup hosted: 1966 Odds: 11-8
Bringing football home is part of the government's proposed "decade of sport", which includes the London 2012 Olympics, the 2014 Commonwealth Games in Glasgow and the 2019 Cricket World Cup. Prince William and former England captain David Beckham will be out on schmoozing duty for England as they try to win over the Fifa panel.

Stadium-wise, England, who staged the European Championships in 1996, should have a very strong case, with Wembley the potential venue for the 2018 World Cup final. Several clubs have expressed an interest in extending their stadiums to put themselves forward should England win the right to host the World Cup.

Bid chief executive Andy Anson said: "Our intentions have obviously been well known for some time but there's a real sense of significance and excitement in the fact that we're now acknowledged as an official bidding nation.

"We believe we have a very strong case to bring the tournament to England and the challenge now is to put together a compelling presentation to showcase to the world."

Indonesia
Fifa World Ranking: 144
Main Stadium: Bung Karno Stadium, 88,000 (Jakarta)
Last World Cup hosted: n/a Odds: 50-1
In a bidding war full of heavyweights, no-one can criticise Indonesia for not thinking big.

With a population of 235m, it does fulfil one of the major requirements for hosting the world's most-watched sports event: it has a stadium capable of holding at least 80,000 spectators for the opening match and final.

Jakarta boasts the government-owned Bung Karno Stadium, which has a capacity of 88,000 and staged the 2007 Asian Cup final, when Iraq beat Saudi Arabia 1-0.

Indonesia became the first Asian team to play at a World Cup at the 1938 tournament in France, appeared under the colonial name of the Dutch East Indies.

Finding a dozen 40,000-seater stadiums, sufficient policing and transport links within the country may prove a problem and would require some serious infrastructure planning.

Indonesia Football Association secretary general Nugraha Besoes said: "10 years are enough for us to build, renovate or expand our stadiums to meet the requirement. This seems like only a dream for us now, but we must dare to dream big."

Portugal and Spain
Fifa World Ranking: Portugal - 11, Spain - 1
Main Stadium: Portugal - Estadio da Luz, 62,000 (Benfica)
Spain - Santiago Bernabeu, 80,354 (Madrid)
Last World Cup hosted: Spain - 1982 Odds: 4-1
After Japan and South Korea teamed up to stage the 2002 World Cup, Spain and Portugal have followed suit to submit a joint bid to host the 2018 tournament.

But the issue of joint bids is still a big sticking point and Fifa president Sepp Blatter has sent out mixed messages over whether they will be considered.

Still, Portugal and Spain are likely to be strong contenders if joint bids considered. Spain hosted the World Cup in 1982 and the European Championship in 1964, while Portugal hosted the 2004 European Championship after beating a rival bid from their Iberian neighbours.

Spain's biggest stadiums are Barcelona's Nou Camp (98,772) and Real Madrid's Santiago Bernabeu (80,354), and seven other football grounds throughout the country exceed a 40,000 capacity, including the Estadio Olimpico de Sevilla, where the 2003 Uefa Cup final between Celtic and FC Porto was held.

Portugal built seven modern stadiums from scratch and renovated three others for Euro 2004 as well as upgrading the country's transport infrastructure.

Benfica's Estadio da Luz is the country's biggest venue, with a 62,000 capacity for international games, while Sporting Lisbon's Estádio José Alvalade and FC Porto's Estadio do Dragao each hold 52,000.

Qatar
Fifa World Ranking: 86
Main Stadium: Qatar Khalifa International Stadium, 50,000 (Doha)
Last World Cup hosted: n/a Odds: 33-1
Qatar is looking to become the first Arab country to host the World Cup finals after unsuccessful attempts in the past from Egypt, Morocco and a joint bid from Tunisia and Libya.

The oil and gas-rich state failed in its attempt to host the 2016 Olympics but successfully hosted the 2006 Asian Games. It will also host football's Asian Cup in 2011 and is already home to successful international tennis and golf events as well as an impressive MotoGP circuit.

The Jassim Bin Hamad Stadium is the home ground of club side Al-Saad and, despite the fact it only has a capacity of 18,000, it is where the national team play because of the intimidating atmosphere that it can generate.

The Qatar Khalifa International Stadium in Doha is an impressive "mini-Wembley", while there are also two 25,000-capacity grounds but far more would need to be built if the country was to hold the World Cup.

This might make Fifa less inclined to go for Qatar especially considering the country only has a population of just over 1.3m people.

But the idea of playing the tournament in the June desert heat, when temperatures regularly top 40C, will probably provide an insurmountable obstacle. The country is planning to build a first-ever underground football stadium, but it is only designed to hold 11,000.

That said, Qatar enjoys considerable influence in Asian football given that it is home to Asian Football Confederation chief Mohammed Bin Hammam, a close ally of Blatter.

Qatar FA general secretary Saud Al Mohannadi said: "We have the stadiums and we have experience hosting top sports events."

Japan
Fifa World Ranking: 34
Main Stadium: International Stadium, 72,000 (Yokohama)
Last World Cup hosted: 2002 Odds: 20-1
The fact that Japan co-hosted the World Cup seven years ago with South Korea makes it unlikely that the competition will return there so soon.

The country is also bidding for the 2016 Olympics, having staged the Games back in 1964, and has plans to build a new 120,000 capacity stadium as well as renovate the National Stadium in the capital, Tokyo.

At present, Japan's biggest venue, the International Stadium in Yokohama, falls 8,000 seats short of Fifa's requirement of 80,000 for the final.

Japanese Football Association president Motoaki Inukai said: "We will definitely need the success of the 2016 Tokyo Olympics bid. If they don't win it, it will be physically impossible for us to host the World Cup."


Australia
Fifa World Ranking: 29
Main Stadium: Melbourne Cricket ground, 100,108 (Melbourne)
Last World Cup hosted: n/a Odds: 4-1
Australia's government has pledged to put £20.36m into the bid over three years and already has a strong track record organising big sporting events, such as the 2000 Olympics, the 2003 Rugby World Cup and the 2006 Commonwealth Games.

The country has never held a football World Cup before which will work in its favour, but given both the 2010 and 2014 World Cups will take place in the southern hemisphere, the best hope may be for 2022.

Stadium-wise, Australia has some huge facilities, although most are based around the oval field used for Aussie Rules football or Cricket.

The giant Melbourne Cricket Ground would potentially stage the final as it can hold 100,108 spectators. The ANZ Stadium in Sydney was the venue for the Olympic track and field events in 2000 and holds 83,500, so it would be in contention for the opening game and final.

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said: "Winning the right to host the 2018 Fifa World Cup is a Herculean task, but overcoming tough odds is what Australian football does best."


Netherlands and Belgium
Fifa World Ranking: Belgium - 54, Netherlands - 3
Main Stadium: Belgium - King Baudouin Stadium, 50,122 (Brussels)
Netherlands - Feyenoord Stadium (de Kuip), 51,577 (Rotterdam)
Last World Cup hosted: n/a Odds: 14-1
Belgium and the Netherlands successfully hosted the Euro 2000, but as far as stadiums go, there's a bit of work to do.

The King Baudouin Stadium (formerly known as Heysel) in north Brussels was used for the opening game of Euro 2000 but has a capacity of just 50,122.

The Feyenoord Stadium, which hosted the Euro 2000 final, holds 51,577, again short of Fifa's requirements, while Ajax's Amsterdam Arena can accommodate just 51,628.

As with the joint bid from Portugal and Spain, the chance of Belgium and the Netherlands winning the right to host the World Cup looks doubtful.

Fifa president Sepp Blatter said: "As long as we have single-country bids which provide all the necessary guarantees, we will reject co-hosting bids."

Mexico
Fifa World Ranking: 26
Main Stadium: Aztec Stadium, 105,000 (Mexico City)
Last World Cup hosted: 1986 Odds: 16-1
Mexico has already hosted the World Cup twice: in 1970, when the tournament was won by Brazil, and 1986, when a Diego Maradona-inspired Argentina triumphed over West Germany.

Colombia should have staged the 1986 tournament but decided they could not afford to host it under the terms that Fifa demanded. Mexico was eventually chosen instead, beating bids from the US and Canada to become the first country to hold the tournament twice.

Mexico City's Estadio Azteca, which holds 105,000, hosted both the opening match and the final of the 1986 World Cup, as well the quarter-final between Argentina and England, which witnessed Maradona's infamous "Hand of God" goal.

Renovated in 1999, the Jalisco Stadium in Guardalajara holds 72,600 and hosted games during the previous World Cups.

High temperatures might prove a possible disadvantage when it comes to winning votes, but Mexico can boast a proven track record when it comes to staging the biggest football event in the world.

Russia
Fifa World Ranking: 9
Main Stadium: Luzhniki Stadium, 78,360, (Moscow)
Last World Cup hosted: n/a Odds: 6-1
Russia looks like being a major contender to England, but the vast distances between stadia - there are nine time zones - and the problems Euro 2012 hosts Ukraine and Poland are experiencing may persuade Fifa members to opt for a safer bet.

It can offer plenty of top-class venues with Moscow alone containing eight stadiums, the biggest of which is the Luzhniki Stadium, which holds 78,360 and acts as home to Torpedo and Spartak Moscow.

The stadium also hosted the 1999 Uefa Cup final and last season's Uefa Champions League final.

Moscow hosted the 1980 Olympics and made a bid for the 2012 Games, losing out in the first round of voting to Britain.

Should Russia triumph in 2018, then England would be immediately ruled out of the running for 2022, given Europe would not be allowed to stage the tournament twice in a row.


United States of America
Fifa World Ranking: 22
Main Stadium: Rose Bowl, 91,000, (Pasadena)
Last World Cup hosted: 1994 Odds: 20-1
The United States is still waiting for "soccer" to truly capture the nation's imagination, despite staging the World Cup in 1994, when over 3.58m people attended.

And the impact of David Beckham's time in Major League Soccer with LA Galaxy should not be underestimated, even if he does cut his time there short to stay with AC Milan, in terms of boosting the profile of the sport.

USA 94 was hailed as a huge success even though high temperatures during games and awkward kick-off times for European television audiences were definite minus points.

Massive television and marketing opportunities mean it will be a strong contender this time around as well, and the US Soccer Federation has also suggested the election of President Barack Obama could help persuade Fifa to award them either the 2018 or 2022 tournament.

Federation president Sunil Gulati said: "Given everything that President Obama has said, everything he stands for, everything he's talked about in terms of reaching out to the world, trying to bring the global game to the US and opening our borders up for a festival of 32 countries and hundreds of thousands of people from all corners of the world would be viewed in a very positive way."

The US says it has 25-35 stadiums that would be capable of hosting matches.

The Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California, which hosted Brazil's victory over Italy in the 1994 final, has not been refurbished but holds 91,000.


South Korea
Fifa World Ranking: 42
Main Stadium: Seoul World Cup Stadium, 64,677, (Seoul)
Last World Cup hosted: 2002 Odds: 20-1
South Korea, surprise late entrants for 2018, have been there and done it, co-hosting the World Cup with Japan in 2002. They built 10 new stadiums in the process, all of which can hold more than 40,000 people.

The Seoul World Cup Stadium hosted the opening ceremony and holds 64,677 while the Daegu World Cup Stadium, the country's biggest, can accommodate 68,014.

Despite the fact neither hold the required 80,000, there should be little problem building another stadium or expanding an existing ground.

Seoul also hosted the 1986 Asian Games, as well as the 1988 Olympic and Paralympic Games, and earned rave reviews for the hospitality and efficiency when hosting the 2002 World Cup.




..

I think the only real dispute will be in 2022. If England with Wembley, Emirates and company realy wins 2018, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Netherlands and Russia will be eliminated. Japan and Korea 2002 is very recent. México already host 2 times. Catar have money and can build 10 stadiums but will build were? They have only 3 or 4 important cities. Doha have the infrastructure but has eliminated from 2016 olympic race. The other cities are desert. The whole population is 1 million, less the womans that can't go to stadiums, we have 400000 mens. FIFA don't want a world cup in a country with empty stadiums and without fans from Scotland or Germany that like drunk with wisky or beer (like me :cheers:). Indonesia is a modern country but their stadiums not. The other bids will be better. So the only disput in my opinion is between Australia and USA for 2022.
I still thinking that the US will host the Games in 2022. :happy:

From the polling, rank in WC 2022 we have :

1. Australia
2. Indonesia
3. USA
4. Mexico
5. England

Where are Qatar, South Korea and Japan? :lol:

I am convinced England will be the host in 2018. 2022 is more open. I doubt the Anglo American world will host two WC in a row, so I rule out Australia and the US.


Hmm. Silly thing to say.

'78, '82, '86 WCs were all hosted by Spanish speaking nations.

ＦＩＦＡ　ｈａｄ　ｐａｉｎｆｕｌ　ａｎｄ　ｓｕｆｆｅｒ　ｅｎｏｕｇｈ　ｆｏｒ　ｇｉｖｅｎ　ｔｈｅ　ｃｈａｎｃｅ　ｔｏ　ｓｅｌｅｃｔ　ｈｏｓｔ　ｂｙ　ｃｏｎｔｉｎｅｎｔ　ｅｓｐｅｃｉａｌｙ　ｉｎ　２０１０　ａｎｄ　２０１４．
Ｉ　ｔｈｉｎｋｓ　ｔｈａｔ　ｉｎ　２０１８，ｔｈｅｙ　ｗｉｌｌ　ｎｏｔ　ａｌｌｏｗ　ａｎｙｃｏｕｎｔｒｙ　ｗｉｔｈ　ｉｎｃｏｍｐｌｅｔｅ　ｔｏ　ｂｅ　ｈｏｓｔ　ａｇａｉｎ．

From the polling, rank in WC 2022 we have :

1. Australia
2. Indonesia
3. USA
4. Mexico
5. England

VeRy surprising!~
Indonesia is the runner-up

With the difference that this is just an opinion from everyone else.. And not official from the FIFA..

That's a Spanish word! Get out of here!

It's Latin.

how many stadiums does indonesia has in order to be ready for a world cup?? minimum 12..

how many stadiums does indonesia has in order to be ready for a world cup?? minimum 12..

I'm pretty sure FIFA prefers 10 stadiums and will allow 12 if necessary (for example in the US because it's such a large country).

yeah ryebreadraz ..actually I remember when the WC 94 took place in the U.S. they only used 9 stadiums but the difference was that each stadium was gigantic I mean supergigantic in fact everyone of these stadiums had a capacity of 70,000 and over I guess if any country builds at least nine or ten stadiums as you said it should be for a large capacity each one no?? in a way will satisfy FIFA demands..

how many stadiums does indonesia has in order to be ready for a world cup?? minimum 12..

actually, right now we have 5 - 6 International Stadium...

when the anouncement later, who gonna be the host..
and Indonesia announced... ( i hope ) :angel: we will build more than 7 BIG stadiums.. :) with huge seat capacity and modify the old one to meet FIFA needs for WC host.. ;)

Main Stadium: Portugal - Estadio da Luz, 62,000 (Benfica)

Benfica's Estadio da Luz is the country's biggest venue, with a 62,000 capacity for international games

65.647.

There we're 65.000 in Euro 2004's Portugal-England.

how many stadiums does indonesia has in order to be ready for a world cup?? minimum 12..

Indonesia don't need a ready stadium now. The World Cup will be in 2022. I think the only candidate that have all the stadiums ready now is the USA. We (I'm brazilian) don't have a single stadium ready for 2014. All the stadiums have to be build/rebuild, but we have 5 years and FIFA agree that we can. FIFA want to know if Indonesia will have all the stadiums ready for 2022, not now. I think they can but the problem is the quality of the other bids. For 2010 and 2014, South Africa and Brazil don't have strong opponents, but now Indonesia have to contest with many strongs opponents.

^^ our main opponents for 2022, IMO, is Qatar and Australia.. :)

^^ our main opponents for 2022, IMO, is Qatar and Australia.. :)I feel pretty comfortable in saying you can remove Qatar and replace them with the USA. However, I'm thinking more and more that Australia will get the nod. For some reason, here's the pattern I'm predicting:

'18 England
'22 Australia
'26 Mexico
'30 Spain
'34 Japan/China
'38 USA
'42 Netherlands/Belgium
'46 Argentina

One man's whimsical projections, anyway. :cheers:

I feel pretty comfortable in saying you can remove Qatar and replace them with the USA. However, I'm thinking more and more that Australia will get the nod. For some reason, here's the pattern I'm predicting:

'18 England
'22 Australia
'26 Mexico
'30 Spain
'34 Japan/China
'38 USA
'42 Netherlands/Belgium
'46 Argentina

One man's whimsical projections, anyway. :cheers:

I think it inevitable that Russia will be a real contender for one of the next three European World Cups.

China will definitely get the nod before Japan gets another shot at hosting.

And I'd also expect another African host within 20-24 years of 2010 - maybe Egypt or a joint bid from Morocco and Tunisia?

i think USA still difficult to host such a big event ( i mean like olympic and WC ) after Sept 11, just to big risk,...( i ever read about that articels but i am forgot where )

and a little bit quite boring if I must waiting more than 3 hour in airport because of security check....:ohno::ohno::ohno:

i think USA still difficult to host such a big event ( i mean like olympic and WC ) after Sept 11, just to big risk,...( i ever read about that articels but i am forgot where )

and a little bit quite boring if I must waiting more than 3 hour in airport because of security check....:ohno::ohno::ohno:

If FIFA start pandering to terrorists, then you effectively rule out India; Pakistan; England; Spain; Peru; Colombia; Indonesia and a whole host of other Muslim countries. Probably a whole host of other European countries too.

Therefore, I very much doubt that FIFA will go down that route. They will simply ensure that security provisions for any bid are as thorough as they possibly can be.

Only if there is an unacceptable level of risk (ie war or civil war) would FIFA refuse to consider a bid.

2018 England is a must....

I think 2022 will go for USA, for me is great because Mexico will be like the local team ( we get 60,000 or more fans every international friendly... imagine that on a world cup)

but what I dont like about a USA WC, is that when there is a big event, security is so tight, that fans cant "enjoy" I mean, no big flags on stadiums, not a lot of beer, usually police spreads crowds celebrating in the streets, a big headache the US migration (a lot of fans having trouble for a US visa). Still we will seee again huge crowds.

And I say this because, I have been able to attend big US events (baseball world series, collage football bowl games, Indy racing, NFL playoffs, etc), and they just dont let the fans do stuff, amercian fans are so use to a lot of security that dont even seem to bother.

If FIFA start pandering to terrorists, then you effectively rule out India; Pakistan; England; Spain; Peru; Colombia; Indonesia and a whole host of other Muslim countries. Probably a whole host of other European countries too.

Therefore, I very much doubt that FIFA will go down that route. They will simply ensure that security provisions for any bid are as thorough as they possibly can be.

Only if there is an unacceptable level of risk (ie war or civil war) would FIFA refuse to consider a bid.

^^
i didnt said about terrorist
but we talk about fans all over the world.....

just for example
i think before we go to stadium we must have more than 3 security control, and maybe beer is not allowed to enter stadium because of too dangerous, or maybe not allowed to bring big flag because too dangerous,...or brought a bag is not allowed to enter the stadium,...etc...etc.....

and i am sure if USA to be host, they will have really and extreme2 tight security control start from their embassy where u apply a visa.... ( the most difficult country to get visa is still USA ) and as a fans that will be a really big problem.

better Australia or other country as a host,...they are a little bit "open"....

yeah I'm sure the security will be pretty tight !!!!! no flags no beer"cerveza gallo,corona" haha no nothing !!!oh man!!! could be.

^^
i didnt said about terrorist
but we talk about fans all over the world.....

just for example
i think before we go to stadium we must have more than 3 security control, and maybe beer is not allowed to enter stadium because of too dangerous, or maybe not allowed to bring big flag because too dangerous,...or brought a bag is not allowed to enter the stadium,...etc...etc.....

and i am sure if USA to be host, they will have really and extreme2 tight security control start from their embassy where u apply a visa.... ( the most difficult country to get visa is still USA ) and as a fans that will be a really big problem.

better Australia or other country as a host,...they are a little bit "open"....

I've travelled to the USA and within the USA frequently.

I've never experienced 3 hour security delays - at sporting events, at concerts or even at airports. I have, however, suffered appalling delays and been subjected to disgraceful treatment by police when entering stadiums in continental Europe.

You say that we may not be allowed to take beer into a stadium in the US.....where on earth can you take beer into a stadium? Never, in all my years of going to football matches have I been able to do that.

As to big flags, I have rarely, if ever, seen them at World Cup finals. They are usually only ever seen at club matches - not international matches. So things will be no different in the USA.

And bags? I'm sure that bags would be allowed but, as is always the case in England at least (and probably elsewhere), bags will be checked. It's not a problem.

And yes, the US strictly monitors the distribution of visas. But it's not so very different from other countries in that respect - Russia, for instance and China, to name but two. So long as you are sufficiently organised and don't leave it to the last minute, you will be able to get your visa.

Finally, you should remember that any security measures are in place for the benefit of the fans. So why complain?

I'm quite certain that, whatever other reasons there may be for FIFA not to award a particular World Cup to the US, security issues will not be among them.

FIFA do not allow alcohol to be sold at venues for competitive internationals anywhere. I found this when I went to Wembley to watch England in one of their World Cup qualifiers last year. They do sell beer at Wembley but couldn't at this match as it was under FIFA's juristication (for want of a better word).

Security will be just as tight anywhere because FIFA will be overseeing it and making sure it's up to their standards. And as JimB said, if I had a choice between the Spanish and the US police, I'd go for the yanks every time; policing football on parts of the continent is something they really need to improve.

FIFA do not allow alcohol to be sold at venues for competitive internationals anywhere. I found this when I went to Wembley to watch England in one of their World Cup qualifiers last year. They do sell beer at Wembley but couldn't at this match as it was under FIFA's juristication (for want of a better word).

Security will be just as tight anywhere because FIFA will be overseeing it and making sure it's up to their standards. And as JimB said, if I had a choice between the Spanish and the US police, I'd go for the yanks every time; policing football on parts of the continent is something they really need to improve.

The behaviour (and lack of organisation) of Italian police for football matches also leaves much to be desired.

Yeh, but the Italians aren't bidding, that's why I didn't mention them.

2018 England is a must....

I think 2022 will go for USA, for me is great because Mexico will be like the local team ( we get 60,000 or more fans every international friendly... imagine that on a world cup)

but what I dont like about a USA WC, is that when there is a big event, security is so tight, that fans cant "enjoy" I mean, no big flags on stadiums, not a lot of beer, usually police spreads crowds celebrating in the streets, a big headache the US migration (a lot of fans having trouble for a US visa). Still we will seee again huge crowds.

And I say this because, I have been able to attend big US events (baseball world series, collage football bowl games, Indy racing, NFL playoffs, etc), and they just dont let the fans do stuff, amercian fans are so use to a lot of security that dont even seem to bother.
So what?? That's not an excuse, i preffer that than not having safety.

even in other countries.. Security check is a must... :yes:

remember, you enter a stadium with 50.000 people, and there is one person
want to do same chaos?? oh no.. :ohno:

I don't understand why everyone is focussing on the stadiums so much, we're talking about 2018 and 2022 here! You can easily build new stadiums in that time, and the ones that are modern now will be old fashioned by then.

Personally I think The Netherlands deserves to host, they are the biggest footballing country that has never hosted the World Cup. (A very big World Cup history and a current fifa ranking of #3) but I don't think they will get it.

2002 for Japan and Korea, my feeling on 2022 for amazing island.... Indonesia.
They have a good theme for this event... I heard from TV, "GREEN WORLD CUP 2022":okay:

2002 for Japan and Korea, my feeling on 2022 for amazing island.... Indonesia.
They have a good theme for this event... I heard from TV, "GREEN WORLD CUP 2022":okay:

Indonesia upbeat to host `green' World Cup



Tony Hotland , The Jakarta Post , Jakarta | Tue, 02/10/2009 2:40 PM | Sports

The Soccer Association of Indonesia (PSSI) is moving to kick off its campaign to host the 2022 World Cup, its chairman Nurdin Halid said.

PSSI is campaigning for the heart of world's soccer ruling body FIFA by sounding out its World Cup host country proposal to FIFA members and hosting the FIFA president next month.

In a presentation Monday, Nurdin said he believed Indonesia stood a chance to win FIFA's approval to host the 2022 World Cup, despite the relatively poorer infrastructure, coupled with the low quality of the national squad compared to other candidates.

He said Indonesia had proposed a "Green World Cup 2022", hoping to capitalize on the current green and global warming movement worldwide.

"Our deforestation rate has contributed much to world pollution. By hosting the World Cup, we wish to build infrastructure and facilities that are environmentally friendly so we can give more to the planet," he said.

The PSSI, he said, would send its proposal this week to FIFA members to give them an idea of what Indonesia was offering.

Nurdin added that FIFA president Joseph S. Blatter would pay a visit to Indonesia "sometime in March", but declined to disclose the agenda.

He also said the construction of 10 new stadiums across the country, ranging in capacity from 40,000 to 50,000 spectators, were expected to be completed by 2015.

These stadiums are in Surabaya, Makassar, Medan, Tangerang, Yogyakarta and Gianyar.

Indonesia currently has three stadiums - Gelora Bung Karno in Jakarta, Gelora Sriwijaya in Palembang and Palaran in Samarinda.

Other countries also bidding for the 2022 World Cup are Australia, Belgium and the Netherlands (as co-hosts), England, Japan, Russia, Mexico, the United States, South Korea, Qatar and Spain and Portugal (as co-hosts).

State Minister for Sports and Youth Affairs Adhyaksa Dault said the government was upbeat about the proposal and would "provide assistance in all aspects".

"What needs to be remembered is that all efforts must be integrated and coordinated," he said.

Adhyaksa also pointed out that Mexico and Brazil, which he said were not well-off countries, had twice played host to world soccer's showpiece event.

"Hoping that we'll be better in 2022, I think we could be a good host," he said.

FIFA is scheduled to announce the 2022 host on Dec. 10, 2010.

Indonesia has hosted a number of international conferences and sporting events, including the 2007 UN Climate Change Conference and last year's inaugural Asian Beach Games.

However, critics have snubbed the proposal, saying Indonesia needs to improve the quality of its national squad first (currently ranked 144th in the world) before seeking to hog the world stage.

Despite the sport's wide popularity here, soccer is barely an industry yet, while thousands of clubs are still rated amateur.

In addition, fanaticism among local soccer fans has led to several chaotic incidents that have resulted in fatalities and financial losses.

I don't understand why everyone is focussing on the stadiums so much, we're talking about 2018 and 2022 here! You can easily build new stadiums in that time, and the ones that are modern now will be old fashioned by then.

Personally I think The Netherlands deserves to host, they are the biggest footballing country that has never hosted the World Cup. (A very big World Cup history and a current fifa ranking of #3) but I don't think they will get it.

Countries like England, Spain and the US with advanced sports infrastucture will not be doing much building work before a world cup. The focus is therefore on the current stadiums, what can be expanded and what's needed.

What else do you suggest we focus on? :)

All bid countries has a same chance... nothing is possible, and economic crisis still continue..:D

When the Bid Books with stadiums plans will be released??? I'm curious.

I don't understand why everyone is focussing on the stadiums so much, we're talking about 2018 and 2022 here! You can easily build new stadiums in that time, and the ones that are modern now will be old fashioned by then.Maybe it's because this is an architectural based forum and stadiums are needed to host sporting events.

I don't know, I could be wrong.

When the Bid Books with stadiums plans will be released??? I'm curious.I can't find an exact timeline but I don't think we'll have anything like an official draft for each bid until next year. The decision is made in late 2010, and between now and then the bidding nations will be doing internal feasibility studies to identify candidate cities and venues for FIFA to consider. If Brazil is a valid model then we're looking at about 14-18 candidates per host, and it will take several months for various nations to identify the serious contenders for those spots. Yes, most allocations are already assured but there's going to be a lot of discussion about the options for the last 3-4 sites. I'm guessing between now and December we'll also see 1-2 bids withdrawn or "scaled back" once they realize the return on investment isn't there and/or they realize they're unlikely to win.

I'd imagine that about this time next year is when we see the potential venue improvements for candidate cities, in time to build hype for both their bid and for the fans of the local clubs heading into the close of season.

Only Portugal and Spain, England and USA meet preliminary requirements of FIFA

The alliance Iberian Portugal / Spain, England and the United States are the only three projects that the official interest in organizing the world of football in 2022 or 2018 that meet the initial requirements of FIFA.

In the preliminary draft circulated to all members for consideration to compete for the two editions, FIFA said that the hosts will offer 12 levels with minimum capacity of 40,000 seats to be able to enter a race that will be completed in December 2010, when will announce the two winners.

In this lot, at least one of the premises must have a capacity less than 80,000 seats, requirement for the opening and final games.

The same letter stated that the technology of telecommunications, television broadcasts, information, transport and accommodation were the "last generation".

The February 02 deadline for closing the official from FIFA intends to enter the race twice and the list closed on 11 suitors: Portugal / Spain, England, Russia, Holland / Belgium, Australia, Mexico, United States, Japan, South Korea , Qatar and Indonesia.

As for sports facilities, only Iberian, British and American answer at this time, the requirements of FIFA, with overwhelming area of the United States, which have an offer that "destroy" all the competition, with over a hundred stages of "eligible".

Given that after a 76-year history, which account for 18 editions between 1930 and 2006, the World will first move away from Europe in two consecutive editions (South Sul'2010 and Brasil'2014) is almost certain that the "Old Continent" to return to competition in the dual route of choice in late December of next year.

Thus, according to the determinations of FIFA, only Portugal / Spain and England meet the requirements of European suitors, beating Russia and Holland / Belgium with regard to the stages available.

On the proposal Iberian Portuguese, Stadium of Light (65,000), Dragon (52,200) and Alvalade (50,000) have recent experience of Euro2004 and meet the manning proposal by FIFA, but none of them is capable, according to the number of minutes to the two games of media World.

In this chapter, Camp Nou (98,945) in Barcelona, and Santiago Bernabeu (80,354), Madrid, beyond the "minimum" for opening and final, adding to the Spanish list seven stages with the ability to host the remaining games.

La Cartuja (72,000), Ruiz de Lopera (55,500) and Pizuan Sanchez (55,000), three in Seville, Vicente Calderón (57,500), Madrid, Montjuic (56,000) in Barcelona, mestalla (53,000) in Valencia, and San mames (40,000), in Bilbao, are the other places that may be included in the application Iberian.

Spain has yet to move projects to five stages, one set to be inaugurated by mid year, the new stadium of Valencia, with a capacity of 75,000 seats.

The Olympic Stadium La PEINETA, which usually serve to evidence of athletics, will also be renovated to adapt to football and should be occupied by Atlético de Madrid so that the work ends in 2012.Concluídos the work, the Madrid enclosure to accommodate almost 74,000 people .

They are also still envisaged the construction of the new stadium San mames (with capacity for 56,000 seats, with completion expected by 2013) in Bilbao, Nou Sarria (41,000) in Barcelona, and New Romareda (42,500), in Zaragoza, although the latter remains embargoed since 2007, unknown when the work will resume.

As Portugal and Spain, also in England currently has 12 stadiums with 40,000 or more seats, but can only provide one with greater capacity to 90,000 seats, the new Wembley Stadium for.

If you also count the geographical constraint of a maximum of two levels per city - a principle violated only in the first 18 editions, in Uruguay, in 1930, concentrated on editing Montevedeo) - English reduces the supply is only 10 to 12 stages since four of them are in London.

As part of the Spanish Iberian project has three venues in Seville, the tradition of the World also eliminate one of them, but even so, with one more available to the English stage.

As in Spain, England also has some projects on paper, as the New Anfield, the new home of Liverpool, with 61,000 seats, and The Valley, a venue that will serve the Charlton, London, and will have capacity for 40,600 people .

Although competition between Europe, the other two suitors, Russia and Holland / Belgium, are clearly losing the bid on this.

The Russians have only two places that meet the requirements, curiously both capable of opening and final, the Luzhniki Stadium (84,745) in Moscow and the Kirov Stadium (80,000) in St Petersburg, the city has also planned to Gazprom Arena , future hall of FC Zenit, for 62,200 seats.

After the victorious alliance for the organization of Euro2000, the Netherlands and Belgium again new challenge together, this time on a global scale, although a range of small enclosures meet the requirements of FIFA.

The 40,000 seats of the bar is only fulfilled by the Amsterdam Arena (51,324), the Feyenoord Stadium (51,180) in Rotterdam, and King Baudouin Stadium (50,024), Brussels, and there is no capacity equal to or greater than 80,000.

In the "paper" is also the new historical stage of Anderlecht, with the same name, Constant Vanden Stock, but 12,000 seats (28,000 to 40,000).

so, the final decision is going to those 4 countries?

Yes ^^ so the probability that the US is going to host the WC in 18/22 are 50% :banana:

so, the final decision is going to those 4 countries?

I don't think so.

It just means that, at things stand, only USA, England and Spain / Portugal already comply with FIFA requirements. In other words, they have at least one stadium of 80,000+ and at least 12 stadiums of 40,000+.

But the vote will not be held until December 2010. So each of the bidders has 22 months to finalize their plans - including plans for the building of new stadiums or the expansion of existing stadiums.

That article is rather amusing, though. It seems to be a translation and I rather suspect that it is a translation from Spanish or Portuguese. It implies that the English bid is compromised by the fact that it only has one stadium with a capacity of 90,000+ and that it is further compromised by the fact that four of its stadiums are in London.

The article neglects to mention the fact that Spain / Portugal also has only one stadium with a capacity of 90,000+. It also neglects to mention that it has cited 3 stadiums in Seville, 3 in Madrid, 3 in Barcelona and 2 in Valencia!

No, the article talks about the situation at the moment, not in 2018.

That article is rather amusing, though. It seems to be a translation and I rather suspect that it is a translation from Spanish or Portuguese.

It's not.

It implies that the English bid is compromised by the fact that it only has one stadium with a capacity of 90,000+ and that it is further compromised by the fact that four of its stadiums are in London.

It doesn't. It even says that there are 3 stadiums in Seville.

The article neglects to mention the fact that Spain / Portugal also has only one stadium with a capacity of 90,000+.

So what? The minimum is 80.000.

It also neglects to mention that it has cited 3 stadiums in Seville

Does it? I think you should read it again.

If it's not a translation it's very, very poor English.

I don't think so.

It just means that, at things stand, only USA, England and Spain / Portugal already comply with FIFA requirements. In other words, they have at least one stadium of 80,000+ and at least 12 stadiums of 40,000+.





England has 12 stadia with 40,000+ in place that meet FIFA requirements?

What a crappy article.
so much written but no clue
hwo cares about current stadiums?
Even capacity of La Cartuja or Pizuan Sanchez is wrong

what's the source of that article?

It's not.

How do you know that the article isn't a translation from Spanish or Portuguese? It was most certainly not written by someone whose first language is English. It looks as though it has been translated on the internet. And it is heavily biased towards the Spain / Portugal bid. So it seems logical and likely that it was written originally in Portuguese or Spanish.

It doesn't. It even says that there are 3 stadiums in Seville.

I suggest that you read the article again. It states: "English reduces the supply is only 10 to 12 stages since four of them are in London". The point being that the article places far greater emphasis on the fact that London has four stadiums than it does on the fact that Seville has three, Madrid has three, Barcelona has three and Valencia two.

So what? The minimum is 80.000.

Yes. I know. However, the article says, "England currently has 12 stadiums with 40,000 or more seats, but can only provide one with greater capacity to 90,000 seats, the new Wembley Stadium". The use of the words "but" and "only" clearly (and wrongly) implies that the Spain / Portugal bid is superior in that respect.

Does it? I think you should read it again.

I know perfectly well what the article said. It's interesting that you felt the need to edit my post selectively. I wrote that the article, "neglects to mention that it has cited 3 stadiums in Seville, 3 in Madrid, 3 in Barcelona and 2 in Valencia". To clarify, I wasn't making a specific point about Seville. I was making a point about Seville, Madrid, Barcelona and Valencia combined.

Besides, as sercan has said, the article is utterly worthless because it is so comically full of inaccuracies. It's not worth our further attention.

what's the source of that article?

The author's arse would be my guess.

England has 12 stadia with 40,000+ in place that meet FIFA requirements?

I doubt it. I was only speculating as to what the author meant.

England does currently have twelve 40K+ all seater stadia. But most of them would require some degree of work. And some of them won't even feature in the eventual bid.

I doubt it. I was only speculating as to what the author meant.

England does currently have twelve 40K+ all seater stadia. But most of them would require some degree of work. And some of them won't even feature in the eventual bid.

South Africa's 2010 LOC Venue Manager was part of editing and writing and the setting of FIFA's technical requirements for world cup venues since pre 2006 they were sketchy in some areas.
So if a tunnel/entrance needs to be moved we know at least one person to blame.

How do you know that the article isn't a translation from Spanish or Portuguese? It was most certainly not written by someone whose first language is English. It looks as though it has been translated on the internet. And it is heavily biased towards the Spain / Portugal bid. So it seems logical and likely that it was written originally in Portuguese or Spanish.

Because he also posted it in English in the Portuguese Forum... and he's Portuguese. Yet you have to ask him to clarify the situation.

I suggest that you read the article again. It states: "English reduces the supply is only 10 to 12 stages since four of them are in London". The point being that the article places far greater emphasis on the fact that London has four stadiums than it does on the fact that Seville has three, Madrid has three, Barcelona has three and Valencia two.

Yes. I know. However, the article says, "England currently has 12 stadiums with 40,000 or more seats, but can only provide one with greater capacity to 90,000 seats, the new Wembley Stadium". The use of the words "but" and "only" clearly (and wrongly) implies that the Spain / Portugal bid is superior in that respect.

It's interesting for you to say that, because you're almost doing the same thing. You're emphasizing some comments about the English bid and forgetting others like:

"with overwhelming area of the United States, which have an offer that "destroy" all the competition, with over a hundred stages of "eligible"

"On the proposal Iberian Portuguese, Stadium of Light (65,000), Dragon (52,200) and Alvalade (50,000) have recent experience of Euro2004 and meet the manning proposal by FIFA, but none of them is capable, according to the number of minutes to the two games of media World."

I know perfectly well what the article said. It's interesting that you felt the need to edit my post selectively.

Of course I did. What's the point on quoting something I'm not going to talk about?

I wrote that the article, "neglects to mention that it has cited 3 stadiums in Seville, 3 in Madrid, 3 in Barcelona and 2 in Valencia". To clarify, I wasn't making a specific point about Seville. I was making a point about Seville, Madrid, Barcelona and Valencia combined.

The problem with the article is that they consider that more than one city can have two stadiums.

Besides, as sercan has said, the article is utterly worthless because it is so comically full of inaccuracies. It's not worth our further attention.

Guess what: I was the first one to call it stupid in the Portuguese Forum - long before you did it - since it will only matter at the end of 2017.

It's interesting for you to say that, because you're almost doing the same thing. You're emphasizing some comments about the English bid and forgetting others like:

"with overwhelming area of the United States, which have an offer that "destroy" all the competition, with over a hundred stages of "eligible"

"On the proposal Iberian Portuguese, Stadium of Light (65,000), Dragon (52,200) and Alvalade (50,000) have recent experience of Euro2004 and meet the manning proposal by FIFA, but none of them is capable, according to the number of minutes to the two games of media World."

Eh? I didn't mention the USA bid because it's not relevant. Either 2018 or 2022 will be held in Europe. Consequently, the only bids that are competing against England are Spain / Portugal, Holland / Belgium and Russia. As to what the author wrote about Portugal, I didn't comment because there were no inaccuracies or inconsistencies for me to point out or correct.

Of course I did. What's the point on quoting something I'm not going to talk about?

But it's not okay to change the meaning of what I had written by selective editing. It merely reduces you to setting up a "straw man argument".

The problem with the article is that they consider that more than one city can have two stadiums.



Guess what: I was the first one to call it stupid in the Portuguese Forum - long before you did it - since it will only matter at the end of 2017.

Well, I'm glad that we can agree on both those points at least!

Mexico 2018
ESTADIO AZTECA
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/7786/s13sc.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/09/Azteca_008.gif/800px-Azteca_008.gif
ESTADIO JALISCO(old chivas stadium)
http://www.fussballtempel.net/concacaf/MEX/Jalisco.jpg
ESTADIO CHIVAS NEW
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/4039/screenhunter01apr292216pa1.gif
http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/8295/chivasstadiumsc9.jpg[/IMG
[IMG]http://www.estadiochivas.com.mx/images_pag/ventajas4.jpg
ESTADIO VICTORIA
http://stades.du.monde.free.fr/sdm/modules/Sdm/images/Mexique/photos/EstadioVictoria1.jpg
ESTADIo CUATHEMOC
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u317/Luizitto/estadios/puebla095649_2be9492b5d.jpg
estadio CU
http://www.plataformaurbana.cl/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/412cu.jpg
POSSIBLE MONTERREY STADIUM FOR MONTERREY,TIGRES,AND MEXICAN NATIONAL TEAM..PLANNED
http://www.mediotiempo.com/images/noticias/56169.jpg
ESTADIO CLUB MONTERREY
http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/3702/estadiointeriorrp0.jpg
ESTADIO TIGRES UNIVERSITARIO
http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/6195/volkan3ul.jpg
ESTADIO INDIOS ARENA
http://mediotiempo.com/images/galerias/1048_1.jpg
http://mediotiempo.com/images/galerias/1048_10.jpg
ESTADIO CORONA
http://www.femexfut.org.mx/portalv2/img/noticias2/Primera/apertura07/111407santos8.jpg
theres more ..pics of these stadiums if u wanna see more ill put some more..

wow.. great stadium.. :okay:

I'd expect them to put forth Azul as a second Mexico DF stadium instead of two GDL if they did a double city.

My forecast :

(WC)
2018 -> England
2022 -> South Korea
2026 -> Egypt
2030 -> Russia

(Euro)
2016 -> Turkey
2020 -> France
2024 -> Italy

My forecast :

(WC)
2018 -> England
2022 -> South Korea
2026 -> Egypt
2030 -> Russia

(Euro)
2016 -> Turkey
2020 -> France
2024 -> Italy

Haha! Nice try. But not a snowball's chance in hell!

Australia and China will both host the World Cup in Asia before either Japan or South Korea get it again.

ESTADIO AZTECA>
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Estadio_Azteca_07a.jpg/800px-Estadio_Azteca_07a.jpg
http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/2646/s29ak.jpg
http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/2068/azteca2ax8.jpg
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/north_america/mexico/central_mexico/mexico_city_azul1.jpg
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u317/Luizitto/estadios/azul1cq2.jpg
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/4415603.jpg
AZUL PLANS TO MAKE IT BETTER
http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/6764/estadiocruzazul015hk8.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/43/NEsAz.PNG/250px-NEsAz.PNG
ESTADIO JALISCO
http://i24.tinypic.com/jrv8sx.jpg
http://www.fussballtempel.net/concacaf/MEX/Jalisco.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2359/2331547922_c8ccb03b85.jpg
http://www.mediotiempo.com/images/noticias/55875.jpg
http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/9752/ejal1mw2.jpg
ESTADIO CHIVAS NEWWW
http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/8295/chivasstadiumsc9.jpg
http://www.estadiochivas.com.mx/images_pag/ventajas4.jpg
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q124/ferstereo/J%20V%20C/ESTADIO_02.jpg
http://www.adtec.com.mx/Estadio%20Chivas.jpg
ESTADIO SAN LUIS
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/2497666.jpg
ESTADIO VICTORIA
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/8798/estadiovictoriazi4.jpg
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/north_america/mexico/central_mexico/aguascalientes_victoria1.jpg
http://www.geocities.jp/infoags2004/estadioVictoria.jpg
ESTADIO MONTERREY INTERNACIONAL
http://regioside.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/estadiointernacionalmonterrey.jpg
http://sepalabola.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/imagen-9.png?w=468&h=296
http://www.trendhunter.com/images/phpthumbnails/30960_1_468.jpeg
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/8493/eimelevacionescoloressi7.jpg
ESTADIO CLUB MONTERREY
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/8493/eimelevacionescoloressi7.jpg
http://www.irishnews.com/webimages/20080624/news6.jpg
http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/3702/estadiointeriorrp0.jpg
ESTADIO TIGRES
http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/6195/volkan3ul.jpg
ESTADIO CUATHEMOC PUEBLA
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2320/2267953494_b4c220d173.jpg
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/7336/pueblacruzazul005by9.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/80/264643156_098a47bb0f.jpg
http://www.foroswebgratis.com/imagenes_foros/9/5/0/0/9/429194estadio.jpg
ESTADIO UNIVERSITARIO DF
http://www.plataformaurbana.cl/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/412cu.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/57/162722301_5252e305d8.jpg?v=0
http://www.andresdominguez.com/images/estadio.jpg
ESTADIO INDIOS ARENA
http://mediotiempo.com/images/galerias/1048_10.jpg
http://mediotiempo.com/images/galerias/1048_1.jpg
TELL ME WAT U THINK
ALL OF THESE ARE GOING TO BE ROMODELED
AND NEWS ONES ARE BEING MADE
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^:nuts:^^

Most of them are nice but Estadio Azteca is so ugly :S

well azteca is a good stadium just needs a little of remodeling..and paint..
its huge..
the second biggest in da worl
estadio jalisco is nice..!!
chivas de guadalajara..a strong mexican team plays there
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2359/2331547922_c8ccb03b85.jpg
http://www.fussballtempel.net/concacaf/MEX/Jalisco.jpg
http://www.mediotiempo.com/images/noticias/55875.jpg

2018 in USA

yea usa can be too
nice USA OR MEX

2018 in USA

Not a chance.

FIFA will not stage two consecutive World Cups in the Americas.

2022 is possible for USA or Mexico. But I think it more likely that 2018 and 2022 will feature one World Cup staged in Europe and one in Asia.

South America is another continent, but i think the US will get it in 2022.

so what do you think about the stadiums in mexxicoooo..

Not a chance.

FIFA will not stage two consecutive World Cups in the Americas.

2022 is possible for USA or Mexico. But I think it more likely that 2018 and 2022 will feature one World Cup staged in Europe and one in Asia.

North America, not South America.

The sooner the rest of the world realizes the difference the better.

yea usa can be too
nice USA OR MEX

No, Mexico doesnt have a shot. Not in the least. You cant host three when others havent even hosted two.

well azteca is a good stadium just needs a little of remodeling..and paint..
its huge..
the second biggest in da worl
estadio jalisco is nice..!!
chivas de guadalajara..a strong mexican team plays there
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2359/2331547922_c8ccb03b85.jpg
http://www.fussballtempel.net/concacaf/MEX/Jalisco.jpg
http://www.mediotiempo.com/images/noticias/55875.jpg

Jalisco won't even be part of the bid and will probably be demolished by 2018. Estadio Chivas will be part of the bid.

Yea, FIFA doesn't care about the "Americas" thing. They see them as CONCACAF and COMNEBOL.

Yea, FIFA doesn't care about the "Americas" thing. They see them as CONCACAF and COMNEBOL.

Yup. I agree that USA won't get 2018, but that's because FIFA won't let Europe go a third WC without hosting, not because of the Americas.

so what do you think about the stadiums in mexxicoooo..


Which Cruz Azul upgrade is actually happening? The new roof or the new stadium design?

Also, is the Indios Arena going to have grass? I'm assuming the heat is a big problem if they've building an indoor stadium?

no ..jalisco isnt gonna get demolished...
indios arena is going to have the grass dat its fake or something..
idk wats it called.
idk wich azull stadium might be upgraded..but it will

no ..jalisco isnt gonna get demolished...
indios arena is going to have the grass dat its fake or something..
idk wats it called.
idk wich azull stadium might be upgraded..but it will

Jalisco will likely be demolished in a decade. Chivas is moving out and Atlas will likely make a move to a new stadium by 2022. Even if it isn't demolished, it won't play a part in the bid. Estadio Chivas will be Guadalajara's stadium in the bid.

There is no way Mexico can host a WC in the near future.

It currently has only 2 stadiums that meet FIFA requirements, Hidalgo and Victoria (30k and 20K) but not enough capacity for a WC

The only stadium that is currently under construction in Mexico that meets FIFA reqs and capacity is estadio Chivas. TSModelo will be only 26k

Therefore we would need to build at least 8 new stadiums, and increase capacity in Hidalgo, Victoria and TSM... piece of cake!!!!

Please, before arguing read the FIFA reqs

And NO, Azteca Stadium does not need paint only. For instance, current exits and allowance between seats does not comply. Seats could be not a big problem, but building new exits will be a nightmare.

North America, not South America.

The sooner the rest of the world realizes the difference the better.

Bloody hell! Being given a lecture in geography by a yank!

Does it get any lower than that? ;)

Yes, I know that there is a difference between North and South America, thanks. However, I'll repeat......there is no way that FIFA will follow the 2014 World Cup in Brazil with a World Cup in Mexico or USA in 2018.

FIFA has already conceded that it cannot and will not persist with the idea of strict rotation of continents. The reason for this is simply that there are not enough countries in some continents that are capable of hosting a modern World Cup - with all its stadium and infrastructure requirements.

Strict rotation would mean returning every sixty years to certain countries (USA and Mexico, for instance), while other countries (especially in Europe) would only get to host the World Cup once every hundred and sixty years. And that would be wrong.

Therefore, in terms of bids to host the World Cup, FIFA will almost certainly henceforward couple CONMEBOL together with CONCACAF. They cover the same time zones more or less (relevant for TV and advertising) and, combined, they can muster about as many potential hosts as Europe.

FIFA doesn't care.

FIFA cares about money. FIFA is a for-profit corporation, not a teddy bear.

The ones who vote are the 24 members of the FIFA Executive Committee, each one of them with personal interests.

FIFA doesn't care.

FIFA cares about money. FIFA is a for-profit corporation, not a teddy bear.

Yet another reason why USA won't get the 2018 World Cup.

USA is a fantastically rich country but wealth counts for nothing if the majority of the public aren't interested in watching the games. FIFA makes far more money from TV / advertising when the World Cup is held in Europe because, in terms of viewing figures, the US lags far behind.

Europe is the cash cow. FIFA will consequently not stage three consecutive World Cups outside of Europe.

Yet another reason why USA won't get the 2018 World Cup.

USA is a fantastically rich country but wealth counts for nothing if the majority of the public aren't interested in watching the games. FIFA makes far more money from TV / advertising when the World Cup is held in Europe because, in terms of viewing figures, the US lags far behind.

Europe is the cash cow. FIFA will consequently not stage three consecutive World Cups outside of Europe.

The USA pays FIFA the most money of any country for the TV rights to the WC. 2018 is going to Europe, but money is not the reason why. 1994 was one of, if not the most profitable WC's ever and when it comes back here, it will be the most profitable ever. They're going back to Europe in 2018 because there's a wealthy country with a strong bid in England and there are far more countries and voters in Europe than any other continent. England 2018, USA 2022.

^^

It wouldn't suprise me if the USA pays the most money of any country concerning TV rights for a WC. However the EUFA has 53 'nations' as members where most are paying separately for the WC rights. Europe in total pays far more than the USA for these rights.

Also worth mentioning is that Europe has a lot of strong football nations very close together, what makes it more interesting. At the Euro 2008 there were approximetaly150.000 Dutch supporters in Switzerland during the quarter final in the host city.

^^

It wouldn't suprise me if the USA pays the most money of any country concerning TV rights for a WC. However the EUFA has 53 'nations' as members where most are paying separately for the WC rights. Europe in total pays far more than the USA for these rights.

Also worth mentioning is that Europe has a lot of strong football nations very close together, what makes it more interesting. At the Euro 2008 there were approximetaly150.000 Dutch supporters in Switzerland during the quarter final in the host city.

Precisely. USA is a hugely wealthy country of 300 million people - far bigger than any single European country. So it's quite likely that, seen in isolation, USA's TV rights will be more valuable than any one nation in Europe. But the combined TV rights for Europe are far more valuable - for the simple reason that the combined European market for World Cup matches on TV is far larger than the US. Remember, the combined population for UEFA countries is in the region of 850 million - nearly three times bigger than the US - and it is far more football obsessed than the US.

Europe doesn't just pay more in total. Broadcasting rights in individual countries are more worth than in the USA.
According to this source (http://www.soccertimes.com/worldcup/2005/nov02.htm) Disney pays $425m for every FIFA tournament in 8 years including the 2010 and 214 World Cups.
In Germany alone the TV rights for 2010 World Cup have been sold apparently in excess of €180m [source] (http://www.wiwo.de/unternehmer-maerkte/ard-und-zdf-stechen-private-bei-wm-uebertragung-2010-aus-105774/).
It's not particular difficult to figure out that the interest in football in the USA is lukewarm at best.

Today FIFA officially accepted Portugal and Spain bid. I don't know about Belgium and the Netherlands.

The USA pays FIFA the most money of any country for the TV rights to the WC. 2018 is going to Europe, but money is not the reason why. 1994 was one of, if not the most profitable WC's ever and when it comes back here, it will be the most profitable ever. They're going back to Europe in 2018 because there's a wealthy country with a strong bid in England and there are far more countries and voters in Europe than any other continent. England 2018, USA 2022.

I read somewhere it was the most profitable.
But I think that means most profitable for the host nation, not FIFA. The host nation keeps all revenue from ticket sales, FIFA keeps the revenue from tv rights. Considering 94 had by far the highest attendance, it wouldn't surprise me it was most profitable, but that wouldn't sway FIFA as most of the TV money comes from Europe.

Today FIFA officially accepted Portugal and Spain bid. I don't know about Belgium and the Netherlands.

WTF? :ohno::ohno: FIFA :ohno::ohno:

Im happy about the bid, just dismayed at FIFA's constant backflipping.

just because its the most 'profitable' doesnt mean its the best world cup. its about the football, not the money. itll be remembered for the FOOTBALL.

gosh, you ..... it comes to prioritising in the worlds most beautiful game. to you idiots, its all about money money money isnt it. prats.

"Inappropriate Language"

just because its the most 'profitable' doesnt mean its the best world cup. its about the football, not the money. itll be remembered for the FOOTBALL.

gosh, you ..... it comes to prioritising in the worlds most beautiful game. to you idiots, its all about money money money isnt it. prats.

"Inappropriate Language"

Calm down. No need to work yourself into a tizzy, Jizzy.

We're only discussing money because money will inevitably play a significant part in deciding which countries are chosen by FIFA to host the 2018 and 2022 World Cups.

just because its the most 'profitable' doesnt mean its the best world cup. its about the football, not the money. itll be remembered for the FOOTBALL.

gosh, you ..... it comes to prioritising in the worlds most beautiful game. to you idiots, its all about money money money isnt it. prats.



:okay: :okay: :okay:

How many people celebrated the world cup in the streets of the host cities 1994? I guess none, the modern world cup with thousnds of celebrating football fans in the streets of the host cities started in 2006 and will be continued in REAL football nations in the future!

Sebastian Coe has been appointed as a non-executive board member of England's 2018 World Cup bid team.

Lord Coe will continue to chair the London Organising Committee for the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

But he has agreed a leave of absence from his position as chairman of Fifa's ethics committee.

just because its the most 'profitable' doesnt mean its the best world cup. its about the football, not the money. itll be remembered for the FOOTBALL.

gosh, you ..... it comes to prioritising in the worlds most beautiful game. to you idiots, its all about money money money isnt it. prats.

"Inappropriate Language"

Well, based on your logic, they should just play the Cup in my backyard. If it should only be remembered for the play of the game instead of other factors then it really doesnt matter where you play it right? No, it doesnt work that way.

BIG 3 Polling Results @ SSC for 2022 ;)

Australia - 54
Indonesia 37
USA - 32

:)

I hope 2018 goes to Russia. Then it would be nice to see the WC return to America. Mexico would be my preferred choice in America followed by Canada.

Is it December 2010 yet? I want to know what's going to happen!

I hope 2018 goes to Russia.May I ask "why?" Sure appears an uphill battle in regards to facilities and the volume of attractive host communities.

You should give world cup to countries where the peoples interest and countries achievements in football is streemly growing!(like Euro 2008 & UFA cup) . I am For Russia !
And that will solve the problems with stadiums too :)

May I ask "why?" Sure appears an uphill battle in regards to facilities and the volume of attractive host communities.

Sure, if it's the 'World's Game', as often gets bandied about, it should be shared with the world. Give it to a country that hasn't had it before. Not only has Russia never hosted, but it's a major sporting nation of the world.

Attractive? That's all a point of view. I'm sure a big powerful nation like Russia is more than capable of meeting the challenge of a World Cup. Russia may not be popular in certain parts of the world, but that can be said for almost any nation.

Western Europe seems to have this notion of entitlement when it comes to soccer. The list of reasons why Western European locales are the best choices is never ending. The word 'share' seems to be a new concept with many in that region.

I don't mind if it goes to Australia or Indonesia either, but I think Russia has fielded many good teams over the years. Let Russia have it.

so you'd give it to indonesia over england?

You lump western europe together like it is one place. England hasn't hosted the world cup since 1966. 52 years by then. Hosting in France is as good as hosting it in Timbuktoo, England fans travel anywhere. So saying we've had it close means nothing, we haven't had it though have we!!

I just get the feeling these bids are a bit too early for Russia. Maybe I'm wrong but they just don't seem like a nation thats going to spend billions of public money on stadiums(I'd guess we'd be taking more western prices than chinese/african ones) these days. The leagues been growing largely on private funding and in 5-10 years it may have have alot of the stadiums that would be needed but will everything be planned and worked out in a couple of years?

geographical spread would be a nightmare, away games to vladvostock and tomsk must've been a nightmare last season

Sure, if it's the 'World's Game', as often gets bandied about, it should be shared with the world. Give it to a country that hasn't had it before. Not only has Russia never hosted, but it's a major sporting nation of the world.

Attractive? That's all a point of view. I'm sure a big powerful nation like Russia is more than capable of meeting the challenge of a World Cup. Russia may not be popular in certain parts of the world, but that can be said for almost any nation.

Western Europe seems to have this notion of entitlement when it comes to soccer. The list of reasons why Western European locales are the best choices is never ending. The word 'share' seems to be a new concept with many in that region.

I don't mind if it goes to Australia or Indonesia either, but I think Russia has fielded many good teams over the years. Let Russia have it.

Such a big show of championing fairness and sharing.............yet you are backing a World Cup in Mexico in 2022???

Hardly a choice consistent with your stated principles! Mexico has already hosted the World Cup twice and you want it to host the World Cup a third time before the vast majority of countries have even hosted it twice?

Such a big show of championing fairness and sharing.............yet you are backing a World Cup in Mexico in 2022???

Hardly a choice consistent with your stated principles! Mexico has already hosted the World Cup twice and you want it to host the World Cup a third time before the vast majority of countries have even hosted it twice?

I was thinking the exact same thing

I haven't looked at all of these, but the US page lists a stadium that will be torn down in a year as well as three that aren't wide enough for a FIFA sized field so I wouldn't trust this too much.

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c321/fahrianhs/utk%20indo/Indonesia2022WorldCupAlt.jpg
GO INDONESIA!!

no chance^^

I haven't looked at all of these, but the US page lists a stadium that will be torn down in a year as well as three that aren't wide enough for a FIFA sized field so I wouldn't trust this too much.

very true

Please dont go to those sites, because it has a virus :S

THE "No Worries" World Cup — that is the simple idea driving Australia's pursuit of the largest prize in world sport. After a tender process involving submissions from 50 companies, a handful have been selected to drive Australia's proposal — bankrolled to the tune of $46 million by the Federal Government.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/sport/soccer/no-worries-world-cup/2009/03/11/1236447306023.html

And from that same article...

http://www.theage.com.au/news/sport/soccer/no-worries-world-cup/2009/03/11/1236447306023.html?page=2

STADIUMS

A consortium will carry out detailed work around infrastructure planning, architectural design and stadium modifications required for a successful bid. It will assess what changes are needed to existing stadiums and what new facilities would have to be built to meet FIFA bid criteria. This group includes HOK Sport Architecture and Cox Architects & Planning — already responsible for the redevelopment of Suncorp Stadium and design of the new Wembley and Swan Street stadiums.

For Melbourne, the new Swan Street stadium, which is under construction, would need to be expanded from its current capacity of 32,000 to seat 40,000. Small changes, mostly improvements to corporate facilities, also would be needed at the MCG, which would expect to host larger-drawing matches, including a semi-final and, possibly, final.

Planning is also required for the event "precinct" around match venues. Located between the two stadiums, Melbourne Park would be the preferred location for a massive media and broadcasting centre to host the world's press.

FIFA will not release its stadium criteria for the 2018 and 2022 bids until next month. Only then will nations bidding for the event know how many venues are needed. The current criteria requires at least 10 compliant venues. These would most likely be drawn from a possible pool, including Brisbane's Suncorp Stadium, the Gold Coast's Skilled Park or Carrara, the redeveloped Energy Australia Stadium in Newcastle, the Sydney Football Stadium, ANZ Stadium, Canberra Stadium, MCG, Swan Street Stadium and new venues in Adelaide and Perth. Launceston's Aurora Stadium is also under consideration.

State governments would be required to foot the bill for new facilities or stadium refurbishments. Buckley is meeting with all state premiers to inform them of the changes likely to be needed.

I think England have it sawn up already, weather or not it will be 2018 or 2022 is open for debate.

I'm sure Canada made a bid, didn't they?, if they did I would love for them to get it.

England don't have it sewn up at all - the bid team cannot afford to take the foot off the gas. Just look at the 2012 Olympic bid, Paris was overwhelming favourites yet London pipped it at the finish line.

I think England have it sawn up already, weather or not it will be 2018 or 2022 is open for debate.

I'm sure Canada made a bid, didn't they?, if they did I would love for them to get it.

Canada would require South Africa-esque building.

Right now one stadium, Edmonton, meets requirements...barely. I guess SkyDome and the Olympic Stadium would with grass installled.

Edmonton, Commonwealth Stadium - 60,081 (Grass)
Vancover, BC Place - 60,000 (Art. turf) - being renovated
Montreal, Olympic Stadium - 66,038 (Art. turf)
Toronto, SkyDome - 45,000 (Art. turf)

Another possibility is if Hamilton gets their PanAmerican Games stadium.

I guess Quebec City and Ottawa would also be included, I'm not sure who else though.

The other stadiums leave a lot to be desired.

It's time to ASIAN!!!! :banana:

Canada would require South Africa-esque building.


???

South Africa in some cases chose to build new venues rather than use existing venues.

We bid with 7 existing venues.

???

South Africa in some cases chose to build new venues rather than use existing venues.

We bid with 7 existing venues.

Canada could do that as well, but they're going to require at least 4 from scratch. Unlike England, the US, or Japan.

Indonesia submits bid to host World Cup :cheers:
1 day ago-March 14

JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) — Indonesia has submitted its bid to host the 2018 or 2022 World Cup, a bid official said Saturday.

The deadline for submissions of final bids is March 16, and Nugraha Besoes, secretary general of the All Indonesia Football Association, confirmed the nation's bid was sent on Tuesday to FIFA, soccer's governing body.

Indonesia is among nine countries that signaled their intention to bid in February, and is considered an outsider among that group.

The other countries that announced intentions to bid were: South Korea, Australia, Japan, England, Russia, Qatar, Mexico and the United States. South Africa will host in 2010 and Brazil in 2014.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

2018 will go to England, this gets more obvious each passing day.

2022 - i would LOVE for this to go to Australia, its an interesting thought to see football go down under in a new country. its like another step into the unknown. and Oz has some good stadiums there. fingers crossed Ozzy gets 2022

im going for either Russia or Indonesia for the 2022 world cup.

Australia stadiums that could host the world cup games

MCG - capacity 100,000

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/MCG_stadium.jpg

ANZ Stadium - capacity 83,500

http://www.foxsports.com.au/common/imagedata/0,5001,6055701,00.jpg

Telstra dome - capacity 56, 500

http://www.davidwallphoto.com/images/%7B89505AD2-F875-4D63-A205-B96CD11E8B5B%7D.jpg

Suncorp Stadium - capacity 52,500

http://www.wildcatrugby.org/images/uploads/update4.2.jpg

Aussie Stadium - capacity 45,500

http://www.fussballtempel.net/ofc/AUS/Sydney_Football_A.jpg

These Stadium's could be easily upgraded to 40k-50k

Skilled Park - current capacity 27,400

http://www.msfa.qld.gov.au/graphics/images/TvC14.3.jpg

Energy Australia Satdium - current capacity 26,100

http://images.teamtalk.com/08/10/800x600/Energy-Australia-Stadium-Rugby-League-World-C_1347159.jpg

Dairy Farmers Stadium - Current capacity 25,000

http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii263/alaffont/dairyfarmers2.jpg

these are just a few that can be upgraded

the joint bid? sp/po and benelux
are accepted?

Those joint bids have been accepted yes, but FIFA retains the right to reject them, whatever that means.

Fifa won't accept a joint bid of the Benelux. However the Euro2000 Benelux was verry succesfull. Benelux don't make a chance for hosting the WC'18, the Netherlands has 20 modern stadiums but they are to small for hosting a World Cup. Yeah and Belgium has even no stadiums at all. But the Dutch were succesfull for hosting the Fifa U19 '05 and Uefa U21 '07.

Engeland and Australia make a good chance to host the WC'18

Those joint bids have been accepted yes, but FIFA retains the right to reject them, whatever that means.

if there are countries able to host by themselves then FIFA would feel more inclined to reject Joint bids, its always a hinderence having to give away two automatic qualification spots to host when you can just give away one.

Sandy Pramuji-Jakarta Globe

With Bid for 2022 World Cup Submitted, It’s Now Time for PSSI to Walk the Talk
With its bid for the 2022 World Cup officially submitted, Indonesia now faces the hard part.

The deadline for submitting official bids to FIFA was on Sunday, and Indonesian Football Association, or PSSI, secretary general Nugraha Besoes said Indonesia’s proposal was in the world governing body’s hands.

“We’ve sent all the documents that are required by FIFA, and now we’ll wait for FIFA’s response to our intention,” Nugraha said on Monday. “This will be a long journey. We have to start the hard work and prove to the world we have the capabilities to stage the greatest event on earth.”

Australia, Russia and South Korea also submitted their proposals before Sunday.

The Asian Football Confederation initially said it wanted one strong bid from the region that would draw full backing from AFC members. It did not discourage multiple bids, though, and the Asian vote could be split among as many as five candidates.

One crucial part to a successful Indonesian bid will be improving its stadiums and infrastructure, including accommodation, transportation and training facilities. Indonesia co-hosted the 2007 Asian Cup, but it would need much more work to outdo its rivals as roads and sports venues have been neglected during years of tough economic times.

The PSSI has proposed renovating three stadiums and building 10 new venues before 2015, which will require between Rp 8 trillion to Rp 10 trillion ($674 million to $842.5 million).

With government backing, the PSSI believes the country has a fair chance of hosting the 2022 World Cup. “I don’t know how big our chance is,” Nugraha said. “What we need to do now is roll up our sleeves and believe in our dreams.”

Judging by the frequently shifting schedules in local competitions, one perceived weakness in the country’s ability to host is in its organizational skills.

But Nugraha rejected the notion, saying it has nothing to do with the country’s bid.

2018 will go to England, this gets more obvious each passing day.

2022 - i would LOVE for this to go to Australia, its an interesting thought to see football go down under in a new country. its like another step into the unknown. and Oz has some good stadiums there. fingers crossed Ozzy gets 2022

Here's hoping mate! :cheers:

I want England 2018 and either Australia or Indonesia for 2022.

as soon as england and russia show they are capable of showing they can host it on their own i expect the joint bids will be removed, harsh on holland but i think they should work on their stadiums and host something like 2030 on their own.
spain is only using portugal because they hosted it in the 80s and you can bet your house on it that spain will bid on their own the next time it comes around.

Confirmation of bids received

The race to host the 2018 and the 2022 FIFA World Cups™ is still wide open following confirmation that all 13 member associations that had expressed their interest in February to bid for either one or both competitions have sent to FIFA their Bid Registration forms by the established deadline of 16 March.

The member associations that have sent the Bid Registration forms for both competitions are, in alphabetical order: Australia, Belgium and the Netherlands, England, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Spain and Portugal, and the USA. Meanwhile, Korea Republic and Qatar have sent a Bid Registration form for the 2022 FIFA World Cup only.

"We are very pleased about the fantastic level of interest in our flagship competition, with all initial bidders confirming their candidature. The diversity and quality of the contenders will make this a very interesting selection process. This shows the importance of the FIFA World Cup as a truly universal event and the global power of this competition to help achieve positive change, in line with our claim: For the Game. For the World," said FIFA President Joseph S. Blatter.

The next step of the process will come in the month of April, when FIFA will send the Bidding Agreement to these associations. The Bidding Agreement will set forth in detail the agreements and information that must be included in the Bid Book. The deadline for the associations to submit the signed Bidding Agreement to FIFA is 11 December 2009.

Source: fifa.com

. . .

I hope and believe that Belgium/The Netherlands will be the host in 2018. I can’t see any problems for these two rich countries to construct stadiums at the same size and the same quality as England, Australia and other bidders. The Netherlands is one of the greatest football countries in the world, far better than England, and co-hosting is the only way they can become a host.

Discussing the stadiums they have to day is completely nonsense. Wait until they official bid is presented. Then we can discuss the stadiums they are planning to build.

The Netherlands is one of the greatest football countries in the world, far better than England

I assume you're basing that analysis on our national teams rather than our League systems (which do not compare, England wins hands down).

In terms of national teams, I'd say that historically England and Holland, along with Spain actually, can all consider themselves just below the very top group of national football teams which, for me, only includes Germany, Italy and Brazil.

In fact, the two nations' records in international competition are very similar. Often quarter and semi-finalists with a few DNQs. Both only have one trophy to their name; in England's case a World Cup, in Hollands a European Championship.

To say that the Netherlands is "far better than England" as a footballing nation is stretching it, even if you limit it to only talking about our national teams. Throw the Premiership and the Football League and the FA Cup etc. etc. into the equation and your statement falls apart. Holland is not far better than England when all is taken into account. I wouldn't even say it's better.

Fifa won't accept a joint bid of the Benelux. However the Euro2000 Benelux was verry succesfull. Benelux don't make a chance for hosting the WC'18, the Netherlands has 20 modern stadiums but they are to small for hosting a World Cup. Yeah and Belgium has even no stadiums at all. But the Dutch were succesfull for hosting the Fifa U19 '05 and Uefa U21 '07.

Engeland and Australia make a good chance to host the WC'18

If you're gonna write such nonsense you might as well not react at all...

I assume you're basing that analysis on our national teams rather than our League systems (which do not compare, England wins hands down).

In terms of national teams, I'd say that historically England and Holland, along with Spain actually, can all consider themselves just below the very top group of national football teams which, for me, only includes Germany, Italy and Brazil.

In fact, the two nations' records in international competition are very similar. Often quarter and semi-finalists with a few DNQs. Both only have one trophy to their name; in England's case a World Cup, in Hollands a European Championship.

To say that the Netherlands is "far better than England" as a footballing nation is stretching it, even if you limit it to only talking about our national teams. Throw the Premiership and the Football League and the FA Cup etc. etc. into the equation and your statement falls apart. Holland is not far better than England when all is taken into account. I wouldn't even say it's better.

First 16 million vs 50 millon

the netherlands have made 2 WC finals and 1 semi. More than England and in less world cups. England hasn't even made the finals of the euros.

No brainer if Holland was a 50 million country it would dominate, because as a 16 million country it is ahead, and it's done it all since 1974. compare the records from then.

ON the World cup it's annoying that there are so many good European Bids, i would like to rule spain out because i don't like the co hosting with portugal, of course however i want England to win it, but a Benelux bid wouldn't be displeasing