Those Chinese LOVE ENGLISH FOOTBALL.

what do they think of wembley?

These are the football grounds and cities I would hope to get picked for a potential England 2018 World Cup. I have chosen them to give a wider geographical spread of England. They have their potential capacity and the rounds they would be used for. Only 1 city can have 2 stadiums, and its an English bid hence why Millennium Stadium, Hapeden Park etc on not on the list.

LONDON:
Wembley Stadium, 90,000. Group stages, Quarter Final, Final.

Emirates Stadium, 60,432. Group Stages, Round of 16, Semi Final.


SOUTHERN ENGLAND:
Bristol, New Stadium for Bristol City 40,000. Group stages, Round of 16.

Portsmouth, New Stadium 40,000. To be built by 2009 hopefully add 4,000 extra seats to meet minimum capacity. Group stages, Round of 16.


MIDLANDS:
Birmingham, Villa Park 51,000. To be expanded by 2012. Group stages, Round of 16, 3rd/4th place match.

Nottingham, New Nottingham Forest Stadium 50,000. To be built by 2014. Group stages, Round of 16.


EAST ANGLIA:
Norwich, New Stadium for Norwich City 40,000. Group Stages, Round of 16.


YORKSHIRE:
Sheffield, Re-developed Hillsborough 45,000. Group Stages, Round of 16.

Leeds, New Stadium for Leeds United 50,000. Plans have been announced in past for new stadium but Leeds would have to get back to Premiership. Group Stages, Quarter Final.

NORTH WEST:
Manchester, Old Trafford 96,000. There have been plans to expand to this capacity in the future but it would be hard. Group stages, Round of 16, Semi Final.

Liverpool, Stanley Park 78,000. To be built by 2009 can be expanded from the initial 68,000 capacity. Group Stages, Quarter Final.

NORTH EAST:
Newcastle, St James Park 60,000+ to be redeveloped in the near future. Group stages, Quarter Final.

I don't see Norwich, Portsmouth or even Bristol being on the final list.

Southampton is miles ahead of Pompey in terms of its abilities to host a major event.

Bristol needs a football team to be in the premiership for a new stadium, plus a lot of money to appear from somewhere to fund it.

I don't see the demand for a 40k stadium in Norwich and I question whether the town could host an event that of that International size.

I don't see Norwich, Portsmouth or even Bristol being on the final list.

Southampton is miles ahead of Pompey in terms of its abilities to host a major event.

Bristol needs a football team to be in the premiership for a new stadium, plus a lot of money to appear from somewhere to fund it.

I don't see the demand for a 40k stadium in Norwich and I question whether the town could host an event that of that International size.


Sparks I understand your point, however my list of cities was to allow the 2018 World Cup to be spread right across our wonderful country. By doing this, it allows us to show off the diverse culture of our country to the eyes of the world, and thus promote our tourism. Something that the 2012 London Olympics won't be able to do, due to it mainly being based in London.

I admit that there might be a few white elephants created with these proposed stadiums. However both Bristol City and Norwich City are in the Championship now, and both could be in the Premiership by 2018 World Cup. For Germany's 2006 World Cup, the cities of Cologne, Kaiserslautern and Leipzig were not in Germany's top division. Leipzig side was actually in Germany's 4th division! Yet these german cities were chosen to spread the World Cup throughout Germany.

I chose Portsmouth over Southampton as the city has more touristic benefits to offer than Southampton. Also its new planned Stadium is far more aestheticallly pleasing then that of St Mary's.

With Norwich, it has good tranportation links with an International Airport and trains to London in under 2 hours. Its in an area of outstanding natural beauty with the Norfolk broads, and is the most complete medieval city in Britain. So already has hotels to cope with the tourists. It would also be able to promote Cambridge which is near by with its colleges and famous punting.

Bristol would have to be chosen its Englands 6th largest city and has the infrastructure to cope with such an event. Bristol City have a wealthy chairman who wishes them to become the football giant of the South West. They also occasionally share their stadium with Bristol Rugby Club for local fixtures. City have the fan base to fill my proposed stadium capacity providing they start to achieve more. With Bristol's South West location it would promote its own attractions, along with neighbouring places: Bath (A world heritage city), Stonehenge, Glastonbury (Glastonbury festival would be taking place along side World Cup in June) and the coasts of Devon and Cornwall just down the M5.

England is on standby to host the 2010 World Cup if South Africa can't build their stadia in time.

Well then boys, its time to start preparing because from the evidence I've seen on the SA2010 thread we are definitely going to be hosting the tournament. Their stadiums are nothing more than mud at the moment & it doesn't look as if that is going to change anytime soon.

Send it to America, I don't want us to be hosting a World Cup where half the stadiums in use are sub standard. We won't be ready till 2014 at the earliest.

Send it to America, I don't want us to be hosting a World Cup where half the stadiums in use are sub standard. We won't be ready till 2014 at the earliest.

Believe me when I say that even our sub-standard venues would be better to play on than what they have at the moment.

It is a fear of mine that if we get it on short notice, so much of the investment and quality of building will be missed and it will be all sticking plaster and lick of paint stuff.

My vision is that we have large high quality stadiums across the country, but and this is crucial, an area will only get one if they show that they can support a 45,000 capacity stadium AFTER the world cup. (45,000 as a World Cup 40,000 seater stadium would have increased capacity afterwards, due to all the additional executive seats and media seats, that will be added).

It is a fear of mine that if we get it on short notice, so much of the investment and quality of building will be missed and it will be all sticking plaster and lick of paint stuff.

My vision is that we have large high quality stadiums across the country, but and this is crucial, an area will only get one if they show that they can support a 45,000 capacity stadium AFTER the world cup. (45,000 as a World Cup 40,000 seater stadium would have increased capacity afterwards, due to all the additional executive seats and media seats, that will be added).

I agree with you, quality might suffer as a result of the timescales but we already have world class stadiums & a few which just need minor upgrades to bring them in line.

As for capacity, I don't think we will have problems filling the stadiums after the cup especially the premiership stadiums. The championship stadiums could have a few temporary stands put in for extra seating for the cup & then removed later.

Well then boys, its time to start preparing because from the evidence I've seen on the SA2010 thread we are definitely going to be hosting the tournament. Their stadiums are nothing more than mud at the moment & it doesn't look as if that is going to change anytime soon.

http://picksandshovels.blogspot.com

Well then boys, its time to start preparing because from the evidence I've seen on the SA2010 thread we are definitely going to be hosting the tournament. Their stadiums are nothing more than mud at the moment & it doesn't look as if that is going to change anytime soon.

Their "stadiums".
Which ones? the four existing ones? Loftus?Free State?Soccer City?Ellis Park?Rustenburg? are they mud? the new ones being built that are on track and on schedule for october 2009?
I met with some of the construction team this weekend and the stadium designer earlier in the week for the cape town stadium. So who were you talking to?
I support an England 2018 bid and have supported the London 2012 bid since the very early stages, but to promote an England 2018 bid by pushing forward complete bullshit about construction for the 2010 FIFA WC is not the way to go.

Your credibility is on thin ice and has been since your first post.

No Way!!! I dont want England to host in 2010(not that we will cos SA will be hosting it:)).

I want England to be ready properly and that should be in 2018.

Their "stadiums".
Which ones? the four existing ones? Loftus?Free State?Soccer City?Ellis Park?Rustenburg? are they mud? the new ones being built that are on track and on schedule for october 2009?
I met with some of the construction team this weekend and the stadium designer earlier in the week for the cape town stadium. So who were you talking to?
I support an England 2018 bid and have supported the London 2012 bid since the very early stages, but to promote an England 2018 bid by pushing forward complete bullshit about construction for the 2010 FIFA WC is not the way to go.

Your credibility is on thin ice and has been since your first post.

Listen Mo, I think there should be more hush & less rush from you. I have respected your wishes & have stayed off your forum. I understand that you & your kind can't take criticism & that you are all perfectly happy living in lala land but you can't stop me expressing my opinions here. :cheers:

Listen Mo, I think there should be more hush & less rush from you. I have respected your wishes & have stayed off your forum. I understand that you & your kind can't take criticism & that you are all perfectly happy living in lala land but you can't stop me expressing my opinions here. :cheers:

thats exactly my point. I do not live in la la land. In October I travel on a nationwide tour of the world cup stadium sites. I see the progress, I speak to the contractors and I have spoken the stadium designer for the cape town, durban and PE stadia. I speak from the ground not from some weird place in my brain. My aim is to inform and provide the most up to date and correct information wrt to the progress being made. I see no reason to argue with you but again as I've said before If you have superior information then please let me know.

Blurting out "mud sites ," will never be ready" does not move any discussion forward. I have probably frequented the cultural and sporting venues section more than you ever have so thank you for telling me to go away. Do not stay away from the South African forums, discuss, debate but dont blurt.

Listen Mo, I think there should be more hush & less rush from you. I have respected your wishes & have stayed off your forum. I understand that you & your kind can't take criticism & that you are all perfectly happy living in lala land but you can't stop me expressing my opinions here. :cheers:

To be fair if someone makes comments about South Africa's World Cup hosting capabilities he is perfectly entitled to respond to it.

Caborn eyes 'formidable' 2018 bid (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/6258448.stm)

A few new stadia added to the first page. Suggestions welcome :)

I'm going to post up a mini report on our bid in the next couple of days, with my full interpretation of which way we need to go forward.

I'm going to post up a mini report on our bid in the next couple of days, with my full interpretation of which way we need to go forward.

Nice I look forward to it.

It won't be anything groundbreaking, just emphasising our advantages over other bids and the likelihood of which stadiums will be built.

Just want to discuss with the rest of you on here if there is anything I can add to improve it, and then launch it into the world section.

It won't be anything groundbreaking, just emphasising our advantages over other bids and the likelihood of which stadiums will be built.

Just want to discuss with the rest of you on here if there is anything I can add to improve it, and then launch it into the world section.

Well from what I have read over previous months on this issue, it does all depend on if Fifa want to continue with this rotation policy. They are going to decide this in December when they put it for a vote to the 24 member Fifa executive commitee. They need 13 votes to change the policy and there are 8 members on the commitee from Europe.

If it doesn't come to Europe then its most likely a fight between China and U.S.A and possibly Australia. If it comes to Europe then it will be between England and Spain. Netherlands and Belgium have also said they would want to bid, however Fifa don't want there to be any joint W.C bids. However Spain might be tempted to bid for Euro 2016. Only because that Euro is most likely to come to Western Europe, and they came a surprised 2nd when they bid for Euro 2004. This is only my opinion I have not read anything on this.

With regards to our bid I think its just getting stronger with anouncements such as Liverpool's and Everton's new stadiums. However it is a shame a lot of new big stadiums wont be used due to the only 2 stadiums in 1 city policy, e.g Manchester could only use 1 between Old Trafford and City of Manchester Stadium, with obviously London being the city that has the 2 stadiums. However I would prefer the world cup to be spread around the country going to cities like Bristol, Norwich and Brighton.

With regards to London's 2nd stadium. At the moment the 2nd choice would be Arsenals 60,432 Emirates stadium. But they could have competition from other London clubs. West Ham have announced a plan for a new 60,000 stadium built by 2012. Chelsea want to expand Stamford Bridge to a max of 55,000 or move to a new 60,000+ stadium maybe at Earls Court. Tottenham would also like to expand White Hart Lane to a possible 45,000-55,000 or maybe move to a new 60,000+ ground. So thats quite exciting as all these grounds would be more modern then the Emirates. Just have to wait and see.

The other thing is that Blatter has said the minimum stadium capacity for 2018 would be 45,000 and not the current 40,000. This is what was written in a interview in Observer:
"Blatter also indicated that if smaller English cities such as Hull, Norwich, Plymouth or Southampton wanted to host games if England did stage 2018, they would have to build grounds big enough. All stadiums must have a minimum capacity of 45,000, he said, adding that, without a big stadium, the most those cities could hope for would be a large outdoor public viewing screen." Read full article here http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2026012,00.html

Anyway hope this info comes of help Sparks.

That 45k bit is interesting.

Thanks.

That 45k is very interesting. Does anyone think the minimum capacity will keep rising until only the USA is capable of hosting a World Cup? (eg a fixed scenario to ensure the hosting of the tournament by the USA)? I remember in 1998 France was using 35,000 seater stadiums, but it was increased the capacity to 40,000 for Japan and South Korea because they could easily build such stadiums. Unfortunately the seats were all permanent so many of the stadiums are now pointless. I hope the English bids include stadiums in small footballing cities like Nottingham or Bristol where the stadia can be built with temporary seating for the matches, but be reduced to the 30,000 margin after the tournament.

The World Cup feasibility study which I will link to later, stated that the minimum capacity needed was 40,000 excluding media and VIPs.

Does anyone think the minimum capacity will keep rising until only the USA is capable of hosting a World Cup? (eg a fixed scenario to ensure the hosting of the tournament by the USA)?

I hope the English bids include stadiums in small footballing cities like Nottingham or Bristol where the stadia can be built with temporary seating for the matches, but be reduced to the 30,000 margin after the tournament.

If they made the minimum capacity so high that only USA would be capable of hosting then there wouldn't be any other countries who could host a world cup.... who would they use the following years...the states again? I don't think this capacity stuff is the main issue.

I also thought i'd post this article from BBC... a couple of weeks ago...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6291220.stm

According to FIFA, "England are the only country with the infrastructure to host a World Cup at short notice"....

Also...as you know... Nottingham Forest have plans to redevelop in the future so that should be another strong point for out Bid. Theres lots of redevelopments of stadiums going off...

http://www.building.co.uk/Pictures/web/i/q/o/notts_forest_1.jpg

Capacity 50,000. The plans will change a lot... they not due to even start construction for another 4 or 5 years.

It's very much at the drawing board stage at the moment, far from certain of going ahead.

I'd guess the a major reason for going up to 45k is the negative coverage that VIP's and the media taking up seating has generated.

deleted.

---

i think england should get it......it is perfect that they have over 10 entirely rectangle stadiums in different cities all with 40k+. Australia has 2........

send us over 3 or 4 old trafford's plz, that is the best stadium in the world!

Twickenham looks stunning in this pic (from flickr). Such a shame it would never be included in an English bid, as an further 22,000 more seats than the Emirates would really go a long way:

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/twickenham.jpg

You sure that aint a render? It looks blurry in the new stand.

^^^ It was taken by a photographer on flickr. They may have photoshopped it but I'm sure it's a genuine picture. I agree it does look a bit surreal, as we are used to seeing fairly boring pictures of stadiums taken with Argos cameras. It's nice to see better pictures :)

Twickenham looks stunning in this pic (from flickr). Such a shame it would never be included in an English bid, as an further 22,000 more seats than the Emirates would really go a long way:

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/twickenham.jpg

The aptmosphere in that stadium looks amazing...i think they should use it in the world cup

They should! But they can't :( The RFU would never allow it.

They should! But they can't :( The RFU would never allow it.

That would mean London would have 3 host stadia(thats if u still keep the Emirates;))

remember that while a specific stadium might not be used in a bid, there is still a chance it will be used in the actual world cup. which IMO is more imporant.