An over-discussed topic already, but here are the potential bids with the stadia that would be expected to be used in each bid.
I have only included stadia that meet the 40,000+ regulations and only a maximum of 2 from each city. These are only suggested venues, as there is nothing official yet.

This thread is also for news and pictures of venues etc with anything to do with the 2018 World Cup :)

England:

Wembley (London)
Cap. 90,000
Completition date 2007
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k265/Slayer2004/Image1.jpg

Old Trafford (Manchester)
Cap. 76,000
http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c224/jmw-2003/ground_manunited.jpg

Emirates Stadium (London)
Cap. 60,000
http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n118/crazythythy/Emirates%20Stadium%20-%20Brazil%20vs%20Argentina/P1010661.jpg

New Anfield (Liverpool)
Cap. 60,000
Completion date 2010
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/LFC.jpg


St. James Park (Newcastle)
Cap. 60,000
Completion Date: ?
http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/7842/sjp2004lum2.jpg


City of Birmingham Stadium
Cap. 55,000
Completion Date ?
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/BrumStadium2018.jpg


New Everton Stadium (Liverpool)
Cap. 50,000+
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/Evertron.jpg

City of Manchester Stadium (Manchester)
Cap. 48,500
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/cityofmanchesterstadium.jpg




Spain

Nou Camp (Barcelona)
Cap. 98,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/noucamp5.jpg

The Bernabeu (Madrid)
Cap. 80,400
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/bernabeu.jpg

New Valencia Stadium (Valencia)
Cap. 75,000
Completion date 2007
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/valencia.jpg

Estadio La Peineta (Madrid)
Cap. 66,000
Completion date (was scrapped after 2012 olympics went to London, but design could still be used for 2018)
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/estadio_la_peineta01.jpg

Estadio Manuel Ruiz de Lopera (Seville)
Cap. 55,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/seville-1.jpg

San Mames (Bilbao)
Cap: 56000
Completion Date: 2009+

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d95/borji_taz6/3.jpg


Nueva Romareda (Zaragoza)
Cap. 43,000
Completion date 2008
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/zaragoza_romareda1.jpg


Nou Sarria (Barcelona)
Cap. 41,000
Completion date n/a
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/saria.jpg



Australia

Melbourne Cricket Ground (Melbourne)
Cap. 100,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/mcg3.jpg

Telstra Stadium (Sydney)
Cap. 83,500
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/telstra3.jpg

Perth stadium (Perth)
cap: 60,000+
Completion Date: 2012
http://www.dsr.wa.gov.au/dsrwr/_assets/main/lib60084/KANGPAW.jpg


Telstra Dome (Melbourne)
Cap. 56,400
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y187/cybermatt_m/Melbourne/IMG_0610.jpg

Suncorp Stadium (Brisbane)
Cap. 52,500
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/suncorp.jpg

Queensland Centre (Brisbane)
Cap. 48,400
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/queensland.jpg

Aussie Stadium (Sydney)
Cap. 42,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/sydney_aussie1.jpg



China

Beijing Olympic Stadium (Beijing)
Cap. 91,000
Completion date 2008
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/beijing_2008_olympic_stadium.jpg

Guangdong Olympic Stadium (Guangzhou)
Cap. 80,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/guangdong_olympic1.jpg

Shanghai Stadium (Shanghai)
Cap. 80,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/Shanghai20Stadium-2.jpg

Workers Stadium (Beijing)
Cap. 72,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/workers.jpg

Wulihe Stadium (Shenyang)
Cap. 65,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/wulihe.jpg

Nanjing Olympic Sports Centre (Nanjing)
Cap. 60,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/nanjing.jpg

Wuhan Stadium (Wuhan)
Cap. 60,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/wuhan.jpg

Shenyang Olympic Sports Centre (Shenyang)
Cap. 60,000
Completion date 2008
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/shenyang.jpg

Tianhe Stadium (Guangzhou)
Cap. 60,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/Tianhe_A.jpg

Chonqing Olympic Sports Centre (Chonqing)
Cap. 55,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/chonqing_olympic1.jpg



Mexico

Estadio Azteca (Mexico City)
Cap. 115,000
http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n120/vhaldemar1/mexico/09_ciudad_de_mexico_estadio_azteca_.jpg

Olympic Stadium (Mexico City)
Cap. 72,500
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/olympmexico68ongl.jpg

Estadio Jalisco (Guadalajara)
Cap. 56,700
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/jalisco1.jpg

Estadio La Corregidora (Queretaro)
Cap. 50,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/queretaro_corregidora.jpg

Estadio Chivas (Guadalajara)
Cap. 45,000
Completion date 2006
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/templo-mayor.jpg

Estadio Universitario (Monterrey)
Cap. 45,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/w_0034.jpg

Estadio Luis Pirata Fuente (veracruz)
Cap. 43,200
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/veracruz_fuente1.jpg

Estadio Cuahutehmoc (Peubla)
Cap. 42,700
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/puebla_cuahutehmoc.jpg



USA (suggested venues)

Giants Stadium (New York)
Cap: 80,000
http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/blueknight74/3109.jpg

Reliant Stadium (Houston)
Cap: 72,000
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/PHO/AAGO104.jpg

University of Phoenix Stadium (Phoenix)
Cap: 63,400
http://dailyheadlines.uark.edu/images/Eisenman_stadium.jpg


Qwest Field (Seattle)
Cap: 67,000
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/art/sports/seahawks/stadium/cover04.jpg

Dallas Stadium (Dallas)
Cap: 80,000 (Completed 2009)
http://www.stadiumsofnfl.com/future/cowboys755.jpg


Lincoln Financial Field (Philadelphia)
Cap: 68,000
http://football.ballparks.com/NFL/PhiladelphiaEagles/newaerial.jpg

Soldier Field (Chicago)
Cap: 61,000
http://football.ballparks.com/NFL/ChicagoBears/newaerial.jpg

Fedex Field (Washington D.C)
Cap: 91,000
http://football.ballparks.com/NFL/WashingtonRedskins/aerial.jpg

Invesco Field (Denver)
Cap : 76,000
http://www.fussballtempel.net/concacaf/USA/Invesco_Field_A2.gif

L.A Memorial Coliseum
Cap: 92,000
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/los_angeles_memorial1.jpg

Bank of America Stadium (Charlotte)
Cap: 73,000
http://www.uncc.edu/admissions/tour/27.jpg


Pictures from www.worldstadiums.com, www.stadiumguide.com and www.photobucket.com

Feel free to correct mistakes :)

China has the best stadia in my opinion. England has the history and the love of football though. COMON EENGGERLAND!!!

But the Chinese are mad. If they get the World Cup the whole country will go football crazy for the year. The Chinese stadia are far superior to those of Spain and England, but I think the WC will go European. Mexico have no chance.

Where's 2014 again? Isn't 2018 a 'European' year?

It is expected to go to South America, so Brazil are the best bet for the 2014 World Cup.

All of China's stadiums have running tracks around them, which is simply not acceptable for a World Cup.

Some of the stadium completion dates are well off as well, in particular the Spanish grounds as they haven't even begun construction in San Sebastian, yet the finish date is listed as 2006. While Valencia's new ground is about as far forward as Liverpool's.

I think England and Spain have the best stadia for football. China and Spain are England's main rivals. I don't think Australia or Mexico have a serious chance.

Some of the stadium completion dates are well off as well, in particular the Spanish grounds as they haven't even begun construction in San Sebastian, yet the finish date is listed as 2006. While Valencia's new ground is about as far forward as Liverpool's.

I was relying on www.worldstadiums.com out-of-date data so had presumed it had begun construction. Is there anything else that needs changing whilst I'm at it?

Worth bearing in mind too that Old Trafford could potentially expand to seat over 90,000 by then

England 2018..and thats that ...any other host would be a loss to the game.

Worth bearing in mind too that Old Trafford could potentially expand to seat over 90,000 by then

Potentially, any club in the UK could expand to 90,000 given the financial input and club success by 2018. We may see at least 60,000 seater stadiums in Brum and Sheffield, perhaps even smaller cities like Bristol by then. Perhaps, even the New Meadow in Shrewsbury could be expanded to over 40,000 seats come 2018 :eek:

I have a feeling the new wembley might swing a vote or two, it was always a pull for international teams and now the facilities are second to none it will be like a temptation the international football world couldnt resist... I reckon

^^ the facilities at the Emirates stadium are pretty awesome too

All of China's stadiums have running tracks around them, which is simply not acceptable for a World Cup.

It didn't seem to be much of a problem in 1990...

It didn't seem to be much of a problem in 1990...

Look at the Italian clubs who staged the world cup with running tracks now. What crowds do they get?

Lol I'm sure if Anfield had a running track it could easily fill 40,000+ supporters every game...

Sitting like 30 yards from the pitch in these athletics staduiums is just crap, much less atmosphere during a football match, Englands stadiums all follow the same ideal of being right up close to the pitch, where the action is.
Besides - by 2018 there will be ample stadia accross the country. Birmingham, Sheffield, Nottingham, Leeds would probably all benefit from brand new stadia in order to compete seriously in a world cup bid. These would all be around the 60,000 seat mark. Sunderland may expand theirs to 60,000 also. Obviously London will have its 90,000 seat venue and Manchester Utd will probably have expanded Old Trafford to around 90,000 by then. St James Park would be expandable to 80,000+ if they ever manage to. They may use a second London ground - Emirates Stadium. Of course Stanley park in Liverpool will be another 60,000 seat venue. This would probably leave around 3-4 other cities accross the country to be considered. Possible cities could be Bristol, Southampton, Middlesborough, Blackburn, Bolton or Coventry - these would all probably be developed to around the 45,000-50,000 seat mark.

I believe we will probably end up having the 2014 world cup in England because either SA or (more likely) Brazil won't have built their stadiums on time.

This would probably leave around 3-4 other cities accross the country to be considered. Possible cities could be Bristol, Southampton, Middlesborough, Blackburn, Bolton or Coventry - these would all probably be developed to around the 45,000-50,000 seat mark.

Bristol City's Ashton Gate Stadium has planning permission to redevelop three sides of the ground to increase capacity to 30,000 but there is no time scale. 45 - 50K is dreamland and would only happen if we suddenly became a successful Premiership side.

Bristol Rovers Memorial stadium will be completely redeveloped to 18,000 all seater. Work could start early in 2007 with completion in time for the 2009 season.

It's lush to look at even now.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/WC2018/cityofmanchesterstadium.jpg

^^ I hope for a similar set of twin stadiums after the London 2012 Olympics if the main stadium is turned into a football stadium and the practice track is developed into a small athletics stadium like the one in Manc.

I think England is destined for the 2018 World Cup if it returns to Europe that year which it should. (In real terms UEFA is more powerful than FIFA and with will want to keep them on side). But them FIFA oftem want to promote the game as they did in the USA and Japan so they may see China as a fantastic opporunity. All the countries that are able to host the World Cup in Europe have done since England last hosted it.

Think the minimum capacity for World cup stadiums is 40,000 so no chance for Bristol I'm afraid.

We've got some truly fantastic stadiums in England with even more coming. Our main stumbling block will be transport infrastructure which the government seemingly has no desire to invest in or let anyone else do so. Unfortuantley I couldn't see us getting the 2018 World Cup with our backward thinking Government. By then our road and railway networks will be at a standstill.

But trying to remain positive I must point out that Manchester United are aiming to get Old Trafford to a capacity of 100,000+ in the future and with possible World Cup matches I dare say they'd ensure it was ready for then.

I just hope we can get our grassroots coaching/facilities up to European standards so we can have a team capable of representing us well.

Fingers crossed.

China has the best stadia by far, though. FIFA may consider China over England to promote the sport more to the country, like it did so successfully with USA, Japan/S. Korea etc. But I hope that England would win, ofcourse. In fact I'd prefer if Brazil 2014 was given to England, and China had 2018. Both countries would easily be ready for the tournament.

China has the best stadia by far, though. FIFA may consider China over England to promote the sport more to the country, like it did so successfully with USA, Japan/S. Korea etc. But I hope that England would win, ofcourse. In fact I'd prefer if Brazil 2014 was given to England, and China had 2018. Both countries would easily be ready for the tournament.

Couldn't see China getting it only 16 years after it's neighbours got it personally speaking.

Couldn't see China getting it only 16 years after it's neighbours got it personally speaking.

But you can see England getting it only 12 years after its neighbours?

But you can see England getting it only 12 years after its neighbours?

Ah touche

Eh??

What's this about China having the best stadiums?

They have a couple of Olympic Stadiums which have been built for athletics, but little else in the way of quality stadiums.

^^ If running tracks weren't a factor, that is ;)

The uk government has published a feasibility study into a possible bid for 2018. http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/A75/7F/world_cup_feasibility.pdf

City united in bid to host World Cup

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/2870/wembleynk8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Gordon Brown's kick-around
MANCHESTER has thrown its weight behind England's proposed bid to host the 2018 World Cup.

Bosses at the City of Manchester Stadium and Old Trafford have promised the grounds would be available for the competition.

If FIFA, the game's governing body, decides to play the 2018 World Cup in England, it would be worth millions to the Manchester economy.

Manchester United's 75,000 `theatre of dreams' is used to hosting high-profile matches and has already hosted the European Cup final and England's World Cup qualifying games.

The 47,000-plus capacity City of Manchester Stadium has been chosen to host the 2008 Uefa Cup final and has already staged international matches as well as hosting the 2002 Commonwealth Games. A spokesman for Manchester United said it was too soon to comment. But insiders have told the M.E.N. the club would be delighted to do its bit.

Bid

"FIFA has yet to decide which continent will get the 2018 World Cup and the FA has not decided whether it will bid, so there is no bid to talk about. But clearly we'd be delighted to be involved if a bid was launched," said a source.

Coun Val Stevens, deputy leader of Manchester city council, which owns the City of Manchester Stadium, said: "As a successful international city, Manchester would play its full part in supporting such a bid and we are sure that fans would welcome the chance to see world-class games on their doorstep. It would help reinforce Manchester's international standing as a premier sporting city."

Chancellor Gordon Brown claimed the tournament could help create `the greatest sporting nation in the world'. Accompanied by Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell and Sports Minister Richard Caborn, he toured the new Wembley stadium yesterday in a show of support.

Nice Gordon Brown endorsing the World Cup, going behind Blair and Jowell's back when he can't even bother to cough up the Olympics money...

Nice Gordon Brown endorsing the World Cup, going behind Blair and Jowell's back when he can't even bother to cough up the Olympics money...

I think the point about a World Cup is that it doesn't need anything like the capital expenditure that an Olympics demands. Particularly in England, which has already invested around £2 billion in stadia and elite training facillities in the last 5-10 years.

I think there might be an argument for a publicly funded stadium somewhere like Leeds or the South West, if they want to spread the reggional benefits of a World Cup. Elland Road is totally unfit to stage the tournament and Leeds are a basket case. Liverpool should have sorted out their stadium by then!

City united in bid to host World Cup

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/2870/wembleynk8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Gordon Brown's kick-around
MANCHESTER has thrown its weight behind England's proposed bid to host the 2018 World Cup.

Bosses at the City of Manchester Stadium and Old Trafford have promised the grounds would be available for the competition.

If FIFA, the game's governing body, decides to play the 2018 World Cup in England, it would be worth millions to the Manchester economy.

Manchester United's 75,000 `theatre of dreams' is used to hosting high-profile matches and has already hosted the European Cup final and England's World Cup qualifying games.

The 47,000-plus capacity City of Manchester Stadium has been chosen to host the 2008 Uefa Cup final and has already staged international matches as well as hosting the 2002 Commonwealth Games. A spokesman for Manchester United said it was too soon to comment. But insiders have told the M.E.N. the club would be delighted to do its bit.

Bid

"FIFA has yet to decide which continent will get the 2018 World Cup and the FA has not decided whether it will bid, so there is no bid to talk about. But clearly we'd be delighted to be involved if a bid was launched," said a source.

Coun Val Stevens, deputy leader of Manchester city council, which owns the City of Manchester Stadium, said: "As a successful international city, Manchester would play its full part in supporting such a bid and we are sure that fans would welcome the chance to see world-class games on their doorstep. It would help reinforce Manchester's international standing as a premier sporting city."

Chancellor Gordon Brown claimed the tournament could help create `the greatest sporting nation in the world'. Accompanied by Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell and Sports Minister Richard Caborn, he toured the new Wembley stadium yesterday in a show of support.

What a pointless article.

No city in england will have more than one stadium used. Accept for London.

What a pointless article.

No city in england will have more than one stadium used. Accept for London.

Why do you assume that?

There's no reason why not - nothing in the FIFA guidlines.

I agree it's unlikely, but unless the government is willing to invest public money in new stadia then the pattern of venues chosen will have to reflect the pattern of existing stadia - where the North West, North East and London dominate.

Hillsbrough and Elland Road are crap stadia.
Middlesbrough, Derby, Coventry and Blackburn are neither good enough as venues or cities to host a world cup.

Sunderland should probably be considered, but again, it's a bit bleak (no offence)

Why not have our two greatest cities provide two venues each? Besides, United is in Trafford.

I thought there was a rule that only one city could have 2 stadiums in a world cup bid and everywhere else is restricted to one.

Assuming London gets 2 stadiums (Wembley and Emirates) then it would be a shame if the City of Manchester stadium is left out just because they arent allowed.

Also about the funding compared to the Olympics. As most stadiums are already in place, very little money is needed. Football is a much richer and profitable sport than Athletics

I thought there was a rule that only one city could have 2 stadiums in a world cup bid and everywhere else is restricted to one.

Assuming London gets 2 stadiums (Wembley and Emirates) then it would be a shame if the City of Manchester stadium is left out just because they arent allowed.

Also about the funding compared to the Olympics. As most stadiums are already in place, very little money is needed. Football is a much richer and profitable sport than Athletics

Not aware that that's the case. I think it's just tradition and the fact that, most countries' stadia for these types of event are built with public money, so stadia tend to get spread around the country. Also, there's aren't many countries with cities that can support more than one major football stadium. England's stadia are privately owned (generally) and so they spring up where the fanbases are most concentrated.

On a different note, by 2012, London could probably offer six World Cup venues if it wanted(Wembley, Emirates, Twickenham, Spurs' (new or redeveloped) stadium, Chelsea's (new) stadium, Olympic stadium).

The silliest rule is that only one city is allowed to have two match venues. This will undoubtedly be London with Wembley and the Emirates. This of course means that Manchester can only offer one stadium, Old Trafford. Eastlands/C.O.M stadium is a great venue (hosting UEFA Cup final 2008) and is one of the biggest grounds in the country 48,000+ but simply cannot be used. Silly rule, FIFA, silly rule :(

How about our silly city boundaries? Surely Manchester could argue that only City are from within the city, and United are from Trafford? Similarly, Everton moving to Knowsley would technically make it a different city from liverpool.

The silliest rule is that only one city is allowed to have two match venues. This will undoubtedly be London with Wembley and the Emirates. This of course means that Manchester can only offer one stadium, Old Trafford. Eastlands/C.O.M stadium is a great venue (hosting UEFA Cup final 2008) and is one of the biggest grounds in the country 48,000+ but simply cannot be used. Silly rule, FIFA, silly rule :(

Exactly the point i was trying to make. i am very sure it is the rule, but i dont agree with it that much, the best stadiums should be chosen regardless of there location.

The FIFA minimum requirements is that there should atleast be 7 (or 8?) host cities with 1 city having 2 stadia, once the 7/8 city target is met you can have more than one stadia in other cities, so both Old Trafford and COM can be used if the requirements are met.

I think there might be an argument for a publicly funded stadium somewhere like Leeds or the South West

Public funding in Leeds? now there's a thought ;)

if it was 2 for london then twickenham might be used and emirates wont even get a look in, im sure fifa would want twickenham instead of emirates, especially with an extra 22 thousand seats to skank fans out of tickets for their precious sponsors!

plus its still not known what will happen to the new 80k seat olympic stadium, come 2018 we'll end up with 20 stadiums that could host a game.

Does anyone know how much money that the German government forked out to redevelope their stadia for last years world cup because if we do manage to get the 2018 tournament there is no way whatsoever that Leeds and Sheffield which at the moment do have the capacities but which are not of a good enough quality to stage matches and these 2 cities will have to hold matches as they will have the hotels and are 2 of the biggest cities in England. Bristol although not really known as a football city is the largest city in the south west which shouldn't miss out on the economic benefits that would be felt by other areas.

An interesting article in The Observer (link (http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2015555,00.html)):


Don't go there...

Shortly before the London Olympics take place, Fifa will announce the host of the 2018 World Cup - and England is hot favourite. That leaves only three years to sort out the bid, due in by 2010.Observer Sport kicks off the 'where we should play' debate by saying go west, go south, but above all else don't go to Sunderland

Sunday February 18, 2007
The Observer

Birmingham New Street station, 15 June 2018. Ireland have just scraped a draw against Ivory Coast in front of a sell-out 50,000 crowd at Villa Park. Now, you are seated comfortably on the 4.55pm bullet train to Bristol for its 60-minute journey. On the HD screen at the front of the carriage on this football special, the Holland and Mexico players are warming up for the 5pm kick-off at Old Trafford. The on-board bar buzzes with fans enjoying a drink as the train soon speeds through the English countryside at 180mph. When you arrive at Temple Meads station, there is time for a burger before a stroll through the Fanfest area and into Bristol's Cary Grant stadium with its retractable roof and pitch. As the sun begins to dip, the China-France group game provides a perfect end to a day watching football. Tomorrow, the beaches of Cornwall beckon for a well-earned break, followed by a game at Plymouth at the weekend. It's a long, long way from an overnight stay in Sunderland...

Welcome to the England 2018 World Cup experience, if the FA - or whoever runs the bid - decide to follow previous examples and use the biggest global sporting event not just as a football tournament, but as an opportunity to showcase the country and regenerate towns and cities that might have been overlooked. Montpellier at France 1998, Seogwipo in South Korea and Japan 2002, and Leipzig in Germany last summer were all World Cup venues that had no top-flight club or adequate stadium before Fifa sanctioned them as hosts.

'The status of a club is not important,' says Horst Schmidt, vice-chairman of the 2006 World Cup organising committee. 'It is to do with the tourist and cultural package of a venue.' Schmidt's message to the FA is: it makes sense to think beyond the obvious. Just because Manchester City, Sunderland and Everton have the facilities, they are not necessarily good choices.

The Chancellor's photocall at Wembley last week began what could well be a successful campaign to host the World Cup in 11 years' time. Gordon Brown announced that a feasibility study carried out over 15 months had concluded that England had a very good chance. By 2018 Europe will be in prime position again. Fifa, who make the decision, might like to try Asia - China and Australia, now members of the Asian Football Federation, would be keen to bid - but after successive tournaments in developing countries, South Africa 2010 and Brazil 2014, the safe hands of Europe would likely be favoured.

Since England were hosts in 1966, Germany (twice), France, Spain and Italy have all staged the tournament. The FA's last attempt was the hapless bid for 2006. David Davies, an FA mandarin for 12 years until his recent departure, and football's representative in the London 2012 Olympic campaign, told Observer Sport that lessons had been learnt from those bids. The 2006 effort was always doomed because Uefa, European football's governing body, backed Germany. This time the most important way to get the bid off the ground is to secure Uefa's support, a point emphasised by Mike Lee, one of the key executives in the 2012 team who also said the 2018 bid 'must go beyond saying "It's our turn" and have a symbolic theme. The international nature of football itself in this country makes it a tremendous global platform. Maybe we should play up that point.'

As for London 2012, Davies explained, 'It benefited from a campaign that was orchestrated by a stand-alone organisation. This was largely successful, although football must be properly represented and pivotal to any campaign for the World Cup.' In other words, the bid would be better led outside the FA, whose record on major projects is poor, as is clear from the shambles of Wembley Stadium, the on-off saga of the Burton-on-Trent national football centre, the failed 2006 bid, and the drawn-out process of restructuring the game's national governing body despite intense pressure from the government.

'Yes, the 2006 bid failed, but it did allow us to build relations throughout the world, where once in the early 1990s we were seen as aloof,' said Davies. 'The FA now must know the politics and alliances within the global game. In 2006, these building blocks were not in place. Think of a fortnight ago when four friendly internationals featuring teams from Europe, Africa, Asia and South America were played on one evening in London. Just eight years ago the FA were against this because of concerns that it would affect attendances.'

Fifa announce their decision six years before the first ball is kicked - 'It will be in the June before the 2012 Olympics begins, is my guess,' Davies said. Five years away but, according to Schmidt, the clock is already ticking for England. 'They will have to submit their bid a year-and-a-half before the decision so the Fifa executive can fully consider the campaign,' he said.

That means there are about three-and-a-half years to complete what will be a complex process before handing in the bid documents at the end of 2010. The key decision on whether to take the campaign out of house must be taken this year, thus allowing 24 months to decide on the biggest issue for fans in this country - where the tournament should be played - and to plan for the infrastructure.

'The English must have everything in place,' said Schmidt, who is troubleshooting for the 2010 South African organising committee. 'Fifa have to inspect and investigate everything, including proposed venues. There is a minimum number - it is usually eight.' The maximum would probably be 12, though England could submit more and leave Fifa to make the cull. Germany considered 15, but Dresden, Dusseldorf and Bremen were dropped.

England has five 'gold star' locations that will provide at least six stadiums: London (two, or even three), Birmingham, Manchester (maybe two), Liverpool and Newcastle. The FA have a list of stadiums that are highly rated by Fifa under their licensing regulations and Gordon Brown said last week 'England has 11 world-class stadiums across all different regions'. But none of the 11 - Wembley, Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester United and City, Liverpool and Everton, Newcastle, Sunderland, Leeds and Aston Villa - is in the west or, London apart, the south of England.

There are alternatives in five different regions of the country that with vision and affordable investment - Leipzig's stadium cost £50million - would allow some of England's less fashionable football areas a chance. All of them have their attractions.

In the North-West, Preston could edge out Blackpool out as a possible candidate. The Football League was founded there, it is the home of the National Football Museum and Preston North End, the first winners of the Double, play at a Deepdale that would be able to expand temporarily to 40,000 if chosen.

Bryan Gray, chairman of Preston from 1994 to 2001 and a key figure in establishing the football museum, is also head of the North-West Development Agency. 'We are close to Blackpool, which would provide accommodation and tourist attractions, and near to the Lake District, which is one of the country's beauty spots. Of course there is mileage in the World Cup being played here.'

Down in the South West Bristol and Plymouth are preparing the case for an area that, if denied any football in 2018, would be the largest region unrepresented. 'Plymouth is a city of a quarter of a million,' said Malcom Bell, chief executive of South West Tourism, which also covers Bristol. 'Imagine a big screen on the Hoe, where Francis Drake played bowls, watched by 50,000 people. It's surely our sporting entitlement to finally have a big stadium. And it would allow us to put big concerts on there.'

What of Bristol's challenge? 'It is still two hours away from most of the region. This area is disenfranchised so it has to be Plymouth. And think of the summer down here - Devon and Cornwall are the country's most popular tourist destinations.'

The mayor of Bristol, Peter Abraham, disagrees. 'A new 26,000-seat stadium shared by the rugby club and Bristol Rovers has just won planning permission.' That could be enlarged. 'If England is chosen to hold the World Cup and it's the same old clubs selected then how can we show the world our country?'

John Holmes, director of regeneration and tourism in the north-east, has a different view. 'Gordon Brown has said this will cost a lot less than London 2012 through using existing facilities. I would question whether we would need any new international stadiums.' St James' Park is a definite, but would Holmes be disappointed if the Stadium of Light was not chosen? 'We also have the Riverside at Middlesbrough. Why not all three? Our policy is reach for the sky. In Sunderland the Empire Theatre takes shows like Chitty Chitty Bang Bang and in the Tees Valley overall we will be investing £1.5billion over the next five years.'

Another region for consideration is the South Coast. 'We would be disappointed not to attract a venue for tourism and sporting reasons. There are football fans everywhere down here,' said David Rose of South East Tourism. Brighton has the beach location and would provide dramatic scenery when VIPs arrive by helicopter - one of Fifa's prerequisites for a venue is a helipad nearby - and although an enormous effort would be needed, a stadium could be built at Shoreham Harbour, the largest brownfield development site in south-east England. Southampton's St Mary's Stadium has hosted international football and could be expanded to the required capacity, probably 40,000. And Portsmouth, whose club won consecutive championships at the close of the 1940s and is famous for its raucous support, might be favourite for football reasons.

Let the debate begin...


[B]The contenders

From Yorkshire to Devon, best of the rest


Yorkshire

Leeds - Elland Road

The city is going through a boom, offers plenty of nightlife and culture - including world-famous fish and chips - the beer's decent, and Leeds is well placed if you fancy the James Herriot heritage trail and a cup of tea in Harrogate, or a bracing walk over the moors. The club are heading down, though, and Elland Road is looking a bit tired.

Or Sheffield - Hillsbrough

Home to the current sports minister, the chairman of the FA and the world's oldest club (Sheffield FC), so it has a head start. Great for walking in the nearby Pennines and Peak District, but the city itself, although sporty, is seen as a bit of a khazi by many visiting fans. Hillsborough would need tarting up.


The Midlands

Wolverhampton - Molineux

You wouldn't want to spend much time in the town itself unless you're holed up in a Banks's pub, or you love dog racing or horse racing, which seem to be on every day. Depending which road you take, 15 minutes out of town and you're looking at filthy canals and factories, or beautiful rolling countryside. Steeped in football history and Wolves were arguably the world's most famous team before the European Cup kicked off in the mid-1950s. Accessible from all points.

Or Nottingham - City Ground

The stadium down by the river hosted Euro 96 games. If the densely populated East Midlands is to have a venue, this is it. Airport nearby, but the city has a big crime problem.


South Coast

Southampton - St Mary's

Smart stadium would need more seats, but that should be easy enough. A good spot for tourists with the New Forest and Isle of Wight nearby. Smart, clean but a bit dull.

Or Portsmouth - New venue

A proper, earthy football city, one of whose MPs is leading the campaign to bring back small areas of safe standing in our top stadiums. More tourist attractions than most, but not exactly a beauty spot and it's hard to say how the locals would take to being invaded by foreigners. Fratton Park, the stadium that time forgot, would have to be trashed and a new one built. It's just talk at the moment.

Or Brighton - New venue

No chance on paper, because of protracted problems over the new stadium, but what a host city this would be. The most famous seaside resort in the world (so they say) and you can walk to the South Downs from the beach. Gay capital of Britain, great nightclubs, loads of hotels, only an hour from London. Shame about the football...

Bristol New venue

A no-brainer. Regional capital of the West, which must have a host city. Bristol is huge, tourists enjoy it and English-speaking football fans will love the local accent. The football clubs might have moved up by 2018 but who cares? Surely they can rustle up a 40,000-capacity stadium; they simply have to.

Or Plymouth - Home Park

Needs regeneration money but it would be a good investment for a part of the country that's often overlooked. Its tourist attractions are obvious; has an airport.


Lancashire

Preston - Deepdale/New venue

The traditionalist's choice. Home of the Football League, the national football museum, and the first 'giants' of the English game in Victorian days. A day out to the Lake District or Blackpool is easy, and Manchester and Liverpool are close, too. A new stadium or a rebuild of Deepdale would be needed

Or Blackpool - New venue

They should have got the Supercasino but didn't; so what better way to regenerate than a new World Cup stadium with a casino in the main stand? The new ground could be used all year round for shows, conferences and exhibitions. The Italians ploughed money into Palermo (then in the third division) in 1990, so why not? Sophisticated Japanese fans would love it.

^ Interesting article, leaving out the obvious. I disagree with Wolverhampton hosting a game because Birmingham is so close by and Nottingham wouldn't need to be used as it isn't too far away from Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds etc.

I'm not sure what to make of the Lancashire bid potentials, Blackpool or Preston, so think this venue should move to Bristol. I was in the city last week and there is plenty for tourists to do, and a great variety of restaurants and pubs. The two Bristol clubs could share a stadium after the 2018 World Cup, whatever their league positions, or the stadium could have temporary stands to take the capacity to 40,000+ .

I'd like to see Sheffield and Leeds host WC games, although this would mean Elland Road in Leeds would need a serious makeover, and Sheffield would need a new stadium that perhaps both Sheffield clubs could share after the games.

The South coast is the trickier of the choices, with Southampton already having an international standard stadium that could be easily redeveloped to 40,000+ (it could look just like the stadium of light in Sunderland, therefore eliminate any chance Sunderland has to attract tourists in 2018). The city itself though loses out to Portsmouth and Brighton in terms of just about everything else. I think Portsmouth's Spinnaker Tower and fans could swing the bid in their favour, but Brighton could easily accomodate all the tourists. Plymouth, like Bristol, is also a great city and FIFA may choose Plymouth because it is the furthest away from London of the South coast category.

Remember 2018 is a long way away so club league position isn't at all a factor. Even Plymouth Argyle's 20,000 seater Home Park could have another 20,000 temporary seats installed for the WC and then removed shortly afterwards, and a similar idea could be implemented for Brighton and Bristol. It's pretty safe to say St. James's Park will be the only stadium in the North West used in 2018... and with Manchester's supercasino and regeneration the city could easily accomodate tourists and spectators for the two match venues.

Here are my thoughts at the moment, completely regardless of stadium size or football league position - more to do with geographical location and regeneration:

London: Wembley (90,000)
Emirates (60,000)

Manchester: Old Trafford (75,000)
C.O.M.S (48,000)

Liverpool: New Anfield (61,000)

Birmingham: New Stadium (55,000)

Bristol: New Stadium (40,000)

Sheffield: New Stadium (40,000)

Leeds: Re-developed Elland Road (50,000)

Newcastle: St. James's Park (52,000)

Portsmouth or Brighton: New Stadium (40,000)

Southampton or Plymouth: Redeveloped stadium (40,000)

Blackpool or Preston: New stadium (40,000)

Blackpool or Preston, and not Liverpool? :?

Really good article, one thing that scares me is that if England bid we would be one of the favourites and then suddenly another country may sneak up and pip us to the post. e.g London beat paris for 2012

Blackpool or Preston, and not Liverpool? :?

Beg your pardon Sir! All has been corrected :)

Southampton would have to be place on the south coast to get the WC stadium, it has a good international aiport, is a fair bit bigger than Portsmouth and certainly more attractive (cough cough) and it has the stadium in place which is able to expand easily.

There is no chance of Preston or Blackpool getting a stadium though, it would be a bit silly to leave out Everton's new ground.

Here is something I put together about 6 months ago in regards to the bid.

ENGLAND'S 2018 WORLD CUP BID, THE STADIUMS.

Main Considerations:

Stadiums in England only.
No more than two stadiums in any one city. (London potentially might have three.)
Twickenham will not be used.
Stadiums need to be geographically spread.
Minimum capacity of 40,000 per stadium.
New stadiums / expansions will only occur if they can be filled after the World Cup.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v237/Sparkynufc/UKSTAD.jpg

There are twelve venues in the above list, potentially the list could be reduced to ten if it is deemed that twelve stadiums are not needed. The Walkers Stadium and St Mary's would likely be knocked of the list if this was the case.

Notes:
(1) If Everton’s planned new ground is built by 2018, it would likely compete with the City Of Manchester Stadium for a place on the final list. Both are highly unlikely to be used due to the large number of grounds in the North West.
(2) In 2000 Leeds members overwhelmingly voted for a new stadium, however recent relegation and major financial problems have put the plans on indefinite hold. A move to a new stadium will be dependent on future on field success, increased attendances and an improvement in the clubs finances. If the club doesn't move, Elland Road would require a major upgrade to be considered.
(3) Southern England stadium choice between Southampton, Reading, or potential new grounds in Portsmouth or Bristol. Southampton is currently the most realistic, due to it's size and transport links.
(4) Choice between Coventry, Derby and Leicester with all having a stadium of similar capacity. Coventry chosen for it’s superior transport links, with Leicester chosen over Derby for it’s town centre location as well as direct links to East Midlands airport.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v237/Sparkynufc/UKWORLDCUP.jpg

Stadiums that missed out:
Twickenham: 82,000, Owned by RFU, football has never been traditionally played there, London already has two venues
Anfield: 45,362, Should be demolished by 2012.
Stamford Bridge: 42,449, Currently unable to host major internationals due to a lack of space and access problems around the ground.
Goodison Park: 40,569, Poor outdated facilities, and likely to be closed before 2018.
Hillsborough: 39,859, Facilities largely outdated, no plans to expand due to finance and lack of fan demand.
White Hart Lane: 36,240, Poor transport links and no confirmed plans to upgrade.
Upton Park: 35,647, Average transport links, poor location, potential closure after 2013.
Riverside Stadium: 35,049, Already two venues in the North East, no real demand for expansion after the World Cup.
Pride Park: 33,597, Ricoh and Walkers chosen over Pride Park, due to it’s out of town location, little to choose between the three though and it could be picked over The Walkers.

Potential future stadiums to be used:
New Chelsea Stadium: 55,000 - 70,000. Could be used to replace one of the midlands or southern stadiums if built.
New Everton Stadium: 55,000. Would likely compete with the City Of Manchester Stadium for a place in the final list, unlikely both Manchester and Liverpool will have two stadiums.
London Olympic Stadium: 40,000 - 60,000. Currently unknown future after 2012, might not even be a football stadium.
New Bristol / Plymouth Stadium: 40,000. With currently no West Country stadium in the plans and the pressure to include as many regions as possible in the bid, a new stadium could be constructed in one of the two biggest cities. Funding will be a problem however, as well as the ability to fill a large stadium after the World Cup.

The USA joins the race for 2018 (link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/6380295.stm)):

US hopes to stage 2018 World Cup

The United States has emerged as a serious rival to England's bid to host the 2018 World Cup.

US Soccer Federation president Sunil Gulati said his group is preparing a bid for the 2018 World Cup - and is also ready as a backup for 2014.

He said: "We showed in 1994 that the US is capable of hosting a terrific event.

"We would be in position to put on a spectacular event. We are much more a part of the sport internationally than we were in 1994."

The Football Association is unlikely to welcome the move, although it will hope the USSF makes a pitch for the 2014 World Cup rather than four years later.

It is thought Fifa favours awarding the 2018 World Cup to a European country, but the 1994 tournament in the States was regarded as a huge success by Fifa.

The FA has yet to officially confirm it will bid for 2018, but the Government has already offered its support, with the Treasury commissioning a report which concluded that England is "well placed" to host the tournament.

And the FA will hope the fact that England has not staged the showpiece since 1966 will work in its favour.

Gulati added: "We've got some history and a track record.

He added that Fifa was "very open" to a US bid while CONCACAF, the governing body for North and Central America and the Caribbean were "very positive" about the idea.

Brazil are the current favourites to host the 2014 event, with Colombia the only other country in the running.

A decision is expected from Fifa later this year, but with concerns over whether Brazil would be ready in time, president Sepp Blatter has hinted it might go elsewhere.

"We have said that the 2014 World Cup will be staged in South America," he said recently. "But if there is no candidate strong enough, then we would go north instead as the logical thing."

Gulati said the USSF is focused on 2018, not 2014, but "obviously Fifa knows what we're capable of and, if something else changed, we would be open to any other possibilities".

I'd give them 2014, it makes more sense.

Does anyone know how much money that the German government forked out to redevelope their stadia for last years world cup because if we do manage to get the 2018 tournament there is no way whatsoever that Leeds and Sheffield which at the moment do have the capacities but which are not of a good enough quality to stage matches and these 2 cities will have to hold matches as they will have the hotels and are 2 of the biggest cities in England. Bristol although not really known as a football city is the largest city in the south west which shouldn't miss out on the economic benefits that would be felt by other areas.

I read last year the total amount spent was less than the cost of Wembley II, something in the region of 750,000,000 euro. This figure may of course not be the true cost. Could be depending on how the rebuilding was financed, funded etc. But many new stadiums were completly rebuilt. As far as I can remember, I got the figure from a german football stadium website and unfortunatelly they no longer allow you access their site without paying, so I cant check the figures.

The USA better not get another world cup so soon after their last one. As for your list of stadiums sparks, I think it's pretty good, you've put a lot of thought into it. The only problem I have with the stadiums you've listed is the lack of variety in styles and colours. There's far too many with plain red seats.

As for your list Gherkin, I'll have to express my disappointment with your decision to include just 1 Midlands stadium and 6 Northern stadiums (excluding Saint James' Park). That seems quite peculiar seeing as your from the Midlands region yourself.

An unrelated question about Leeds that I'd love someone to answer is why they have bright yellow seats in the one corner. It looks so bad.

To Sparks: Leicester is an interesting choice, as it has scarcely been mentioned as a possible bid city yet the stadium could so easily be redeveloped to hold 40,000+ spectators.
I really disagree with Sunderland though, as the city itself is a long way short of other bid cities, and the 48,000 seater stadium could easily be matched by Leicester or Southampton with a few spare £million. Why choose Sunderland over such similar stadiums in either of these two cities? :ohno:

To van heckler: I expect that at least 2 Midlands stadiums will be used, but couldn't see a strong enough contender out of Wolverhampton, Leicester or Coventry. On the map Sparks posted the 3 Midlands stadiums looked good geographically, so I expect my list to be somewhat altered in the near future. :)

As for USA, I agree with Sparks that USA should bid against Brazil for 2014, as there is no chance it could steal the European year for the World Cup.

i like the way fifa let the rest of the world put in a bid when its europes turn, its bad enough they're letting australia and china bid, we should just forget the bid and say to fifa just pick england when it suits you so we can save another few million quid.
its all down to that corrupt fat bastard sepp blatter, soon as he dies the better it is for football, fifa fair play? pull the other one!
its not just europes turn its englands turn, we shouldn't even need to bid since it will be 52 years, they should ask if we want it and if we say yes then give it.

come 2018 most people in this country wouldn't of even been born when it was last here, i was born in the 70s and i'll be getting on a bit come 2018, its time to do whats right for football and bring it home or we'll be here again in 2030 bidding against europe and rest of the world again.

FIFA is one of the most corrupt organisations in the world. Money, money, money! thats all there about

Can somebody remind me how the world cup voting works as I can't quite remember.

Doe each FIFA member have a vote or do the different organisations have a certain number of votes with UEFA the most.

As far as Englands competitors for 2018 they would possibly seem to be so far

USA
China
Australia
Spain
Italy


If you go along with the slightly skewered rotation system that has been used for the next 2 WC then surely China & Oz (who are both in the Asian confederation) shouldn't get 2018 as Asia had the WC in 2002. On the other hand the USA had it in 1994 & Europe has had it since but its pretty much accepted the rotation policy has been dropped (& it was only really introduced so Africa was guarantied the WC in 2010) so they shouldn't take precedence ahead of Europe now.

Spain could be a dark horse but I would imagine they would go for one of the next couple of EURO's. Also it would seem fairer that England should get it as Spain had 82- depends im sure on UEFA politics. Italy have next to no chance what with their internal problems & they had Italia90 & by 2018 a lot of there stadiums will be showing there age.

Going back to the voting. I doubt the USA would get the necessry votes. I would imagine the UEFA block would vote for a European country & I im guessing South America, after having the WC in 2014 would prefer Europe to the USA. The African nationals would probably go for Europe as well over the USA so I don't know where they would get their votes from. Come to think of it how did USA get WC94 - Was that given to them by FIFA or was their a vote.

At the end of the day England looks like the fairest & best bid at the moment but its never that simple when FIFA's involved. Theres a lot of behind the scenes trading going on.

Two more questions. When is the decision for WC2014 made? & when do the bids for WC2018 have to be submitted & when is the final vote taken?? I have read its 2010.

Two more questions. When is the decision for WC2014 made? & when do the bids for WC2018 have to be submitted & when is the final vote taken?? I have read its 2010.

It's usually 6 years before. I keep hearing that England must submit an official bid in 2010 and the final decision will be made by FIFA officials in 2012. I can't remember if this is before or after the Olympics, but I'm sure we'd all prefer it to be after the Games if London is a good host. FIFA will of course take this into consideration. :banana:

As for 2014, Brazil are the outright favourites (aka England 2018) but there are official bids by Argentina and Colombia also. An Argentina/Chile bid was also on the cards, but FIFA aren't too keen on joint bids at the moment so Argentina will have to go it alone. Venezuela don't currently have a stadium that meets the 40,000 requirements but it is a potential candidate as there are due to be major stadia redevelopments by 2014.

"Brazil's FA president admitted that his country was not ready to host the 2014 World Cup".

If this is true then Argentina are the most likely team at the moment to host in 2014. However I feel such a rash statement by the Brazilian FA leaves a bit to be desired, as 2014 is a long way off so anything "not ready" can quite easily be made ready. :)

P.S

Can somebody remind me how the world cup voting works as I can't quite remember.

From www.2018england.co.uk

Six years before the tournament, there is a secret ballot under a single transferable vote system, by FIFA’s 24-member executive committee.

Before then each candidate country has to submit a bid document, which includes a hosting agreement and government guarantees.

There are details on security and transportation and stadiums and other related facilities. A visit is then made by an inspection group who look at the stadiums and communications and there are talked between all interested parties. Finally the host has to make a presentation to the FIFA’s Executive Committee.

Preston would be a good choice, seeing as we have the history and are host to the national football museum! However, I don't quite see the stadium, deepdale has just got planning permission for the final side to the stadium which will be finished in a few years time and to a pretty good standard. However i can't see where 40'000 comes from. The stadium is designed in such a way that the corners can't be infilled, so no space there, the only would be to add tiers and i'm not sure thats really doable either. PNE certainly couldn't afford to build a new one nor would they need to as, when complete, deepdale will be a fine ground build to a good standard. That said, Preston is a very convienient and accessible location too.

Can't help but think, sadly, that Blackburn would be better given Rovers' probable need for a revamp in a few years. Blackpool, don't know what the hell would happen to it after, perhaps they can lend them the olympic stadium (if thats still movable).

That said, I think Preston with the museum and history could still form an important part of any Lancashire bid and we shouldn't be overlooked just because Manchester and Liverpool are close by. Its only a little over 2hrs to London on the fastest train service today.

P.S



From www.2018england.co.uk

Six years before the tournament, there is a secret ballot under a single transferable vote system, by FIFA’s 24-member executive committee.

Before then each candidate country has to submit a bid document, which includes a hosting agreement and government guarantees.

There are details on security and transportation and stadiums and other related facilities. A visit is then made by an inspection group who look at the stadiums and communications and there are talked between all interested parties. Finally the host has to make a presentation to the FIFA’s Executive Committee.

That's true, although the continental regions tend to vote as a block (as England found to their cost last time around, when UEFA voted en mass in favour of Germany). They feel it gives them greater influence than if they vote individually.

I have just been on Wikipedia reading all about the history of football in Sheffield and the stadiums. Sheffield FC are the worlds oldest known club still in existence as they were formed in 1857 by the cricket team of the same name to keep the players fit during winter, Hallam FC still play at Sandygate as they have done since 1860 and Bramall Lane is the worlds oldest major stadium that is still in use as Cricket was first played there in the 1850s. We cannot forget that the first ever football rules were drawn up in the city and that the first ever cup competitons were played in Sheffield. I know that at the moment Hillsborough isn't good enough to be included as a bid stadium but with 2 new roofs and some better spectator facilities it would easily be good enough and as it already holds near as damn it 40,000 and it wouldn't cost nowhere near as much as it would to make some of the identical 30,000 seater stadiums that have been mentioned by many others. To exclude Sheffield from a bid just cannot be done because of its history regarding the early years of football in the city.

i've always fancied the idea of having a one group/one city world cup in England, or even the UK utililising 2 stadiums in each place. Would be amazing if we teamed up with the Scots to do it.
Imagine WC 2018

Group A
London
Wembley/Emirates

Group B
Glasgow
2 from ibrox/celtic park/hamden

Group C

Manchester
Old Trafford/COM

Group D

Edinburgh
Murrayfield/redeveloped tynecastle

Group E

Birmingham
Villa Park and 1 from St Andrews/Molineux or even city of brum stadium if it ever gets built

Group F

Tyne and Wear
St James'/Stadium of Light

Group G

Liverpool
Kirkby/New Anfield

Group H

Yorkshire
Elland Road/Hillsborough
or
Solent
St Mary's/Fratton Park.


couple this with fanfests in each area and it would be the best world cup ever.

That's a great idea Cooperman. :) If you ditch the Scots, and pick some English backwaters instead, you'd be on to a winner. :)

Maybe swap the Glasgow stadia with Preston/Blackburn, and the Edinburgh ones with the East Anglian clubs, or possibly Leicester/Derby/Forest.

Not good news for England:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/6403761.stm

Sepp Blatter strikes again, I believe he was instrumental in ensuring the 2006 World Cup didn't come to England. Deja vu

Great pictures Gherkin007, thank you :)

Really nice structures, cant wait to see some of them built...

Not good news for England:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/6403761.stm

Sepp Blatter strikes again, I believe he was instrumental in ensuring the 2006 World Cup didn't come to England. Deja vu

China are the only country I can see in Asia with the ability to host the World Cup. The Aussies no doubt will cliam they are from Asia in an attempt to get the WC though! Bad news for the English and Spanish :(

Bloody Blatter & his politics-

Does he seriously expect of the 50 odd UEFA members to only hold a WC every 20 yrs (or 24 if hes giving Oceania a chance) whilst a federation like N.America which is bascially USA,Canada & Mexico the same chance every 20 yrs.

Thac Fact that UEFA is the powerhouse of the World game & provides almost always every QF team with the exception of Arg & Brazil seems to be missd whilst some country the US or Canada has more chance of holding the WC. Ridiculous.

Our stadia don't have the space around them for the corporate marquees and stalls. We would struggle with a bid.

The Emirates for example is a beautiful structure but it's slap bang in a residential area with no room for the sponsors to erect anything outside the stadium.

Sepp Blatter is an idiot(or an ass, choose whicheva u like), he just wants to get votes to stay as President. The Asians memebers would ofcourse vote for him if they thought they had a chance, also he would be treated like a king from those countires with gifts and free trips etc. He is so clueless about football!!!

UEFA should put their footdown and bring it back to europe, they do afterall make up half the damn teams in the tournament.

Blatter a big fan of England 2018 bid (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/sport/story/0,,2026264,00.html)
Fifa president will back Europe bid and is a fan of the Premier League, he tells Denis Campbell

Sunday March 4, 2007
The Observer


Sepp Blatter will support efforts to stage the 2018 World Cup in Europe, a move that will greatly enhance England's chances of hosting the tournament. Football's most powerful man wants the event to be held in Europe rather than North America, China or Australia, senior Fifa sources have told Observer Sport. The Fifa president is ready to support an alliance of key powerbrokers in the game's governing body from outside Europe who will lobby for it to host 2018.

Influential figures such as Mohamed bin Hammam, head of the Asian Football Confederation, and Fifa executive committee members from Africa and South America are also likely to back Europe as the venue, which would probably mean England competing with Russia as the leading contenders.
Blatter triggered a wave of pessimism about England's chances of getting 2018 during his visit to London last week to meet Gordon Brown, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and enthusiastic advocate of a Football Association bid for 2018, when he warned that the event might well be held in the United States, Canada or Mexico if Fifa readopted its policy of moving the tournament around the continents.

Fifa will decide in November whether to continue rotating the World Cup through their six continental confederations. If they voted to do so, England could not bid until 2022 or even 2026. If they vote for a new approach - the existing rotation policy expires in 2014, when the World Cup is due to be staged in South America - England would be hot favourites for 2018.

As Europeans already fill eight of the 24 places on Fifa's ruling executive committee, they would need only five supporters from other quarters to win the November vote. 'Blatter would vote for Europe to get 2018,' said a senior Fifa official. 'He knows that it would be good commercially to hold it in Europe and he has no favours to give America.

'There's a good chance the executive committee will go for restarting rotation in Europe in 2018,' he added. 'If 2018 comes, it'll be England versus Russia. It would be silly not to give it to England because it is ready to host a World Cup now, because of its stadiums and because it's been so long since 1966.'

In an exclusive interview with Observer Sport, Blatter lavished praise on English football and said that England 'could stage a World Cup tomorrow' because of its excellent stadiums and impressive security procedures.

'The technical infrastructure of England is perfect,' Blatter said. 'The best, absolutely the best. Because it is so good the league is so attractive. People are happy to go to the game because you are seated, there are no fences, you can touch the players.' He also praised security arrangements and policing in England.

Mike Lee, a key member of London's successful bid for the 2012 Olympics, said: 'This week has shown that mounting a successful World Cup bid is a complex matter and issues about rotation and securing European support are vital for an England bid to move forward.

'Nothing that has been said [during Fifa's visit] should be interpreted as a blow to England's chances,' Lee added. 'This is a chess game and it's important to play it the right way. An England bid clearly has the potential to succeed.'

Blatter also lauded Scotland's stock of excellent grounds. 'There are big stadia, especially in Glasgow. They have exactly the same organisational skills [as in England]. From a catastrophe [at Ibrox in 1971, when 66 fans died] they have learned something and they now have stadia that are absolutely an example for the whole world,' he said. Ibrox, Celtic Park and Hampden Park are all highly rated by Uefa, and the latter will host the Uefa Cup final on 16 May.

Despite that, though, Blatter made clear that if England were awarded the 2018 finals, they could not stage any games in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. Blatter said that for as long as he remained Fifa president - he is expected to be re-elected, probably unopposed, for a third term this summer - he would insist on one country hosting all the 32 teams and 64 games in the World Cup.

And 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. The World Cup's popularity and the need to provide seats for media and security personnel, as well as the fans, compelled Fifa to insist that the biggest available venues were used, he said. This will be good news for Arsenal, Newcastle and Sunderland in particular - and for Birmingham City, if they go ahead with plans to build a new 55,000-seat stadium.

Blatter welcomed the growing number of Premier League clubs who are deciding to use the forthcoming 60 per cent increase in the league's television revenue either to cut or freeze the price of tickets from next season. But he urged clubs to spend more money on developing young players and on humanitarian projects both in their own cities and in Africa and Asia.

This possible 55,000 seater Birmingham stadium could eliminate the need for Villa Park

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/BrumStadium2018.jpg

Unlikely given that all Villa Park needs is a new North Stand and it would be a 5* venue.

Yeah, they seem keen for it to happen and it probably will well before 2018, taking capacity upto around 52,000 or more. Villa Park is surely a must given its current status and history. There have been mentions of Home Park in the debate about other possible stadiums, and I'd be chuffed to bits if that were to happen. The location is unmatched anywhere else in the country and I can just imagine it now, with a fan-fest of 100,000 people on the Hoe. I'm glad that atleast Blatter is on side with us bidding for 2018, I'm amazed he'd back something which would be great for football.

Unlikely given that all Villa Park needs is a new North Stand and it would be a 5* venue.

My apologies Sir - I've just edited that post :)

I remember a Geography lesson on redevelopment when I was in year 7 (7 years ago) where my case study was Villa Park. Even then there were renders, cost estimates etc. The project then looked quite likely to happen, and had been looking likely to happen for some time. Those expansion plans have now been around for years!

Well, if Mr Parkinson is anything to go by. Birmingham could see a 75,000 seater.

However. Molineux is another option. They have plans to increase to well over 45,000.

I am glad that Dave_PAFC mentioned the idea of Fan parks, these will be a massive part of the World Cup infrastructure, whilst the more areas that can be represented in the World Cup as actual venues the better. I do not like the idea of a 45,000+ stadium that could not justify the development either pre or post 2018, they could have redevelopment based around fan parks, simplistically like Liverpool redevelopment based around a Garden Festival.

It could also force enhancements in the long term to there transport links whilst they may not have a shiny new stadium to admire from the open sections there day to day journey to work could be improved and the memory of watching, all be it on a big screen, with far more than 40,000 of many more nationalities may be far superior.

I want us to have the best ever world cup stadiums, but I want a legacy which allows those stadiums to continued to be viewed to there best, not like Leipzig in Germany which now regularly have crowds of 2,000 (to watch 4th tier football) and Aveiro in Portugal which now has a capacity of 30,000 and an average crowd of 1,000.

Also a lot of teams will want to play warm up games in England and the rest of the UK in the years leading up and most importantly in the build up to the tournament, if these are coordinated this could allow teams with smaller grounds to receive World Cup teams, with less importance admittedly but International games all the same.

USA is going to win the bid. England is also hosting the olympics in 2012 it might hurt their chances.

USA Host cities
Possible cities to host world cup games in 2018

http://www.photohouston.com/houston-sports-stadiums/reliant-stadium-B13-07.jpg
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/PHO/AAGO104.jpg
^Reliant Stadium, Houston Texas: Capacity: 72,000


http://dailyheadlines.uark.edu/images/Eisenman_stadium.jpg
http://blog.pentagram.com/archives/AC_Interior_Sm.jpg
^University of Phoenix Stadium: Capacity 63,400 Loc: Phoenix Arizona

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/art/sports/seahawks/stadium/cover04.jpg
http://www.pacificmetropolis.com/images/qwest_field_ii_1.jpg
^ Qwest Field: Capacity 67,000 Loc: Seattle Washington

http://www.stadiumsofnfl.com/future/cowboys755.jpg
http://www.stadiumguide.com/nfl/cowboysnew1.jpg
^ Dallas Stadium to be completed by 2009 : cap- 80,000 loc: Dallas Texas

http://football.ballparks.com/NFL/PhiladelphiaEagles/newaerial.jpg
http://i1.trekearth.com/photos/17164/101_0102a.jpg
^ Lincoln Financial Field, Cap: 68,000 , Loc: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

http://www.prosoundweb.com/install/applications/nfl/Perspect.jpg
http://www.teamops.com/images/content/Image/gillette_stadium.jpg
^Gillette Stadium, Cap: 68,000, Loc: Boston, MA (New England)

http://www.fussballtempel.net/concacaf/USA/Soldier_Field2.jpeg
http://football.ballparks.com/NFL/ChicagoBears/newaerial.jpg
^ Soldier Field, Cap: 61,000, Loc: Chicago, Illionios

http://www.ftballiance.org/global_images/stadium.jpg
http://sohosandiego.org/reflections/2006-2/images/17-stadium.jpg
^ Qualcomm Stadium, Cap: 71,000, Loc : San Diego, California

http://football.ballparks.com/NFL/WashingtonRedskins/aerial.jpg
http://www.fussballtempel.net/concacaf/USA/FedEx_Field_A.jpg
^Fedex Field, Cap: 91,000, Loc: Washington D.C

http://www.fussballtempel.net/concacaf/USA/Invesco_Field_A2.gif
http://football.ballparks.com/NFL/DenverBroncos/newinterior.jpg
^ Invesco FIeld, Cap : 76,000, Loc: Denver, Colorado

http://www.stadiumsofnfl.com/nfc/ford503.jpg
http://www.aerialpics.com/G/fordfieldlink.jpg
^Ford Field, Cap : 64,000, Loc: Detroit Michigan (Motown)

http://www.uncc.edu/admissions/tour/27.jpg
http://www.clariant-northamerica.com/852569B400695B1C/vwLookupImagesforLoad/CharlotteSky.jpg/$FILE/CharlotteSky.jpg
http://www.seatdata.com/images/venue_bank_of_america_stadium/samples/sample.jpg
^ Bank of America Stadium, Cap: 73,000, Loc: Charlotte North Carolina.

Why the U.S will win the 2018 world cup bid? USA has 90 stadiums of 50,000 or more, most than anyother country in the world. If fifa wants to make alot of money come to USA. GO USA.

Are you on drugs? Make money use England. A world cup in England would generate more money then any other location bar China.

Great stadiums though.

^^^ haha fifa made more money during usa 94 than any other world cups. America has more large stadiums than china and england combine...so dont even talk about that.....3million plus fan showed up at the stadiums during the 94 world cup more than any other world cups. nuff said

Hey Snoop Dog I managed to succesfully un-bias your stadium choices and update the first page :)

Thanks Gherkin007........u forgot about the u.s there lol...fo shizzle

un-biased? what u mean? my stadiums were bias? what about u being bias towards the u.s and not adding pics of america's stadium. I didnt add newyork and L.A becuz they are getting new stadiums...and it hasnt been finalized yet. But NY and LA definately going to be part of 2018.

Usa just had a world cup a few years ago and in world cup standards no time has past at all, i think there would be an uproar if you got it again, England hasn't had one since 66, it wouldn't be fair and it would put FIFA in a bad light as money hungry bastards, football means much more to England.

^^^ its about continental...not country. Europe has hosted 3 of the last 5 world cup...so north america should get it again. I know england hasnt got it in years but they will have to wait till 2022 :). Blatter has said he wants to rotate continental.

^^^ haha fifa made more money during usa 94 than any other world cups. America has more large stadiums than china and england combine...so dont even talk about that.....3million plus fan showed up at the stadiums during the 94 world cup more than any other world cups. nuff said


Englands the biggest footballing country. It has'nt hosted one since 1966. Maybe compare the profits etc when we actually host one in modern times.

Good. You have more large stadiums then England. You also have a country 30 times larger then us. Travelling distance etc is pretty long and pretty shite for teams and fans.

3m fans showed up? And? 1m fans alone stood in Berlin to watch a quarter final. This is where football is home. Europe.

Fans are the most important thing about the beautiful game. Thats the one and only reason why England HAVE TO HOST the 2018 world cup.

Those stadiums are ugly and not football stadiums.
They all seem to be too far from the pitch and have walls to the front of the stands that will take away any atmosphere trying to be fakely created by a load of non soccer supporting Americans.

England is the home of football and with us having the greatest football stadium (Wembley) and the most tradition we should and will host the WC in 2018.

Soccer stadiums are supposed to have 4 complete sides not 3 and a little quirky thing behind 1 goal for hospitality bollocks.

problem with america is they only want it to make money, notice the only thing americans ever point out about the world cup is how much cash they made, but hey atleast they got something in common with sepp blatter.

and the next time you boast about the size of your stadiums try to atleast put 1 soccer stadium up instead of nfl crap where you need a telescope to see what players are playing.

a usa bid would be far worse off this time you got to take into account all the silly security at airports and your perverted xray machines would put a lot of people off going there.

^^^ Nfl stadiums are also football(soccer) stadiums...they are all multipurpose stadiums....Soccer is growing in the U.S and the world cup boost more fans to the game its not only to make money. Haha look at these guys England has not won anything since 1966 so you guys want it home so you can win it at home. Europe just hosted the world cup last year how did u guys do? Atleast i know U.S dont have the talent that england has but we are still growing with grassroots. Haha home of football....Internationally England won only 1 title ....0 european cups.

*Securities are tight just to prevent terrorist attacks.

Home of football: BRAZIL

^^^ Nfl stadiums are also football(soccer) stadiums...they are all multipurpose stadiums....Soccer is growing in the U.S and the world cup boost more fans to the game its not only to make money. Haha look at these guys England has not won anything since 1966 so you guys want it home so you can win it at home. Europe just hosted the world cup last year how did u guys do? Atleast i know U.S dont have the talent that england has but we are still growing with grassroots. Haha home of football....Internationally England won only 1 title ....0 european cups.

*Securities are tight just to prevent terrorist attacks.

i think your in a dreamland well you are american! even if it didn't come to europe it wouldn't go to usa, it would go to australia or china, any of them 3 would be bad for football and i'd prefer england not to qualify if it did go that way then i wouldn't have to stay up all night. fo shizzle off!

USA is going to win the bid. England is also hosting the olympics in 2012 it might hurt their chances.

Are you totally clueless?? countless countries have hosted Olympics and world cups in a short period.

^^^ haha fifa made more money during usa 94 than any other world cups. America has more large stadiums than china and england combine...so dont even talk about that.....3million plus fan showed up at the stadiums during the 94 world cup more than any other world cups. nuff said

Americans just talk about MONEY but football is a Passionate sport especially in England. FIFA and the US deserve each other: corrupt, money grabbing, politically motivated, clueless organisation. :)

Its Funny how so many americans on these forum mainly talk about the Money and rarely talk about the sport itself, says it all really.

Are you totally clueless?? countless countries have hosted Olympics and world cups in a short period.

Who hosted these events in '94 and '96? :?

Haha home of football....Internationally England won only 1 title ....0 european cups.


Home of football: BRAZIL

We invented the damn game moron :bash:

if anything the 2012 olympics will show exactly why football should come home and fifa will see what they've been missing out on for all these years, all i remember about the usa world cup is absolutely nothing, i never watched a single game cos all i heard about was money and having sponsors rammed down your neck which was just wrong, and thats why it shouldn't return there for atleast 20 years.

surely the money thing is more about stadiums income than actual economy, i cant see how germany didn't make more when they made over a billion euros from just traveling english fans alone in 2 weeks just from the beer! atleast the whole of germany benefited and used the money to make it even better with public viewing areas and so on.

the only money makers in usa 94 was whoever blatter chose to get money.

Due to popular demand, I've added USA to the possible host countries - with suitable stadia :)

Haha the world cup is also about making money come on even a dumb person will know this. USA has the pedigree of hosting international competitions. This not about the home of football, tho england invented the game....they are only good in club competition, they suck at international competitions haha. FIFA will make more money coming to U.S we can use 12 70,000 + capicity stadium which england has only 2 haha. FIFA is not stupid dont u think they want to make money, all i know is that england will get the next world cup hosted on european soil. good enough? The only reason England is calling for the world cup is so they can win it on home soil again. USA 2018 get ready for it.

USA should host the world cup just to boost soccer and replace baseball in the states.:cheers:
Go America!

http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/osu/trads/images/ohio-stadium2.jpg
http://z.about.com/d/columbusoh/1/0/K/2/shoe04.jpg
^^^The Shoe (Ohio Stadium) Cap: 101,568 . Loc: Columbus Ohio.

http://football.ballparks.com/NFL/JacksonvilleJaguars/aerial.jpg
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/050127/050127_jacksonville_hmed_12p.h2.jpg
^^^ ALLTEL stadium Cap: 76,000. Loc: Jacksonville Florida.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fd/Lucasoilplanned.jpg
http://www.theindychannel.com/2006/0425/8994428_240X180.jpg
^^^ Lucas Oil Stadium. To be Completed in 2008. Cap: 63,000. Loc: Indianapolis, Indiana.

http://www.stadiumguide.com/nfl/vikingsnew3.jpg
http://football.ballparks.com/NFL/MinnesotaVikings/newaerial.jpg
^ Vikings Stadium. To be Completed by 2009. Cap: 68,000. Loc: Minneapolis, Minnesota.

USA is england's worst nightmare when it comes to hosting the 2018 world cup. USA is the only name England dont want to see, they not so much afraid of australia or China. The only hope of england hosting the 2018 world cup is if brazil is not capable of hosting the 2014 world cup which will be relocated to the states.

Blimey, look at all those souless American rugby stadiums, and what is up with that one which looks like a warehouse...

FIFA seems keen on a European host for 2018, and it sounds like Russia are our most likely opponents.

So England has only won one world cup- Ummm im sure thats one more than the mighty USA.

The only reason USA will get 2018 if Blatter & his corrupt cronies persist with the rotation policy of giving it to mickey mouse federations like Concaff which is basically USA & Mexico at the expense of UEFA with its 50 odd members including most of the worlds biggest leagues & teams.

If FIFA wanted to spread the game it would make more sense to give it to China than USA as most of Asia is in to soccer & with a domestic audience of 1 billion in china it would make far more sense to host it there rather than chase the $$$ in the USA. China would more than likely build some top notch stadiums (they have some good ones already). BUT I would prefer China to get it in 2022 ;)

One plus if it was in the USA would be potential of seeing Iran or N Korea play the USA- Now that would be entertaining.

I am in favour of the rotation system. But I think it is unfair that one footballing nation should host the event twice in a short space of time just because there is not another nation within that confederation able to host the event which in real terms (number of visitors) is the biggest sporting event in the world.
I'd love to see the World Cup come back to England and it will come UEFA has too much influence, it will be either 2018 or 2022.

England my azz.....Blah Blah Blah....europe already hosted 2 of the last 3 world cups....why go to europe again if this is a "world cup". China will not get the bid since japan/korea already hosted it....the olympics is enough for england to host as we enter the 2010's....The world cup is coming back to the USA....MONEY MONEY MONEY TALKS!!!!!!!!.....thats what its all about...come to the richest country on the planet and make that money fifa if ur smart. Sponsorship alone hehehehe.

So England has only won one world cup- Ummm im sure thats one more than the mighty USA.

The only reason USA will get 2018 if Blatter & his corrupt cronies persist with the rotation policy of giving it to mickey mouse federations like Concaff which is basically USA & Mexico at the expense of UEFA with its 50 odd members including most of the worlds biggest leagues & teams.

If FIFA wanted to spread the game it would make more sense to give it to China than USA as most of Asia is in to soccer & with a domestic audience of 1 billion in china it would make far more sense to host it there rather than chase the $$$ in the USA. China would more than likely build some top notch stadiums (they have some good ones already). BUT I would prefer China to get it in 2022 ;)

One plus if it was in the USA would be potential of seeing Iran or N Korea play the USA- Now that would be entertaining.

Atleast we not as talented as the English...If soccer was big as it is england ...we would be killing the world.....look at the sport we invented...basketball....look at how we are doing. If england invented the game atleast they should have won atleast 2-3 world cups....italy has 4...germany 3......argentina 2.....Mighty Brazil got a record 5.

http://football.ballparks.com/NFL/MinnesotaVikings/newaerial.jpg

That's the ugliest stadium proposal I think I've ever seen :bash:


Does that stadium in Ohio have benches instead of seats? My stadium list was based on how many individual seats each stadiums has, not simply how many people can squeeze into benches or terraces, lol. I bet most English grounds could accomodate about 50% more people if they all stood up to watch the game, or just squeezed onto benches.

FIFA regulations state individual seats. I don't think benches are included in 'all-seater'. :ohno:

Atleast we not as talented as the English...If soccer was big as it is england ...we would be killing the world.....

Lets look at the major international sports which are big in America then
Golf - Europe wiped the floor with you at the Ryder cup...again.
Tennis - All 4 grand slams have been won by Europeans the last couple of years.
Athletics - more olympic medals won by Europeans than the USA in Athens.
Boxing - All the top heavyweight boxers now come from Eastern Europe.

So I see little evidence of Americas sporting supremacy in top international sports.

look at the sport we invented...basketball....

Basketball was invented by a Canadian. And compared to football its barely on the international rader.

If england invented the game atleast they should have won atleast 2-3 world cups....italy has 4...germany 3......argentina 2.....Mighty Brazil got a record 5.

If success is so important why the hell are you supporting a USA bid.

Lets look at the major international sports which are big in America then
Golf - Europe wiped the floor with you at the Ryder cup...again.
Tennis - All 4 grand slams have been won by Europeans the last couple of years.
Athletics - more olympic medals won by Europeans than the USA in Athens.
Boxing - All the top heavyweight boxers now come from Eastern Europe.

So I see little evidence of Americas sporting supremacy in top international sports.



Basketball was invented by a Canadian. And compared to football its barely on the international rader.



If success is so important why the hell are you supporting a USA bid.

Haha Basketball was invented by a canadian in america.....ya and canadians really play basketball haha....it was invented in america....and american dominated the game ever since its invention and its america's game.
Who is the best golfer in the world? American.
Who won the 07 australian open on the women side? american
Dont even go to the olympics side...cuz who won the most medals at athens? USA 103 medals to UK 30 medals lol...
Boxing is dead to me...when are there no Top tier american boxer in the heavyweight division u know boxing is dead....so europeans are dominating haha....look at the history of boxing and look at the top heavyweights of all time...they all americans....joe louis, mike tyson, ALI, frazier, Jackson johnson, jack dempsey, Rocky Marciano.
When was the last time an English person even won Wimbledon haha...
Im supporting America's bid because fifa will be too dumb not to choose america because of the financial gain....not in england not in china not in australia....more bigger stadiums than those 3 countries combine.

That's the ugliest stadium proposal I think I've ever seen :bash:


Does that stadium in Ohio have benches instead of seats? My stadium list was based on how many individual seats each stadiums has, not simply how many people can squeeze into benches or terraces, lol. I bet most English grounds could accomodate about 50% more people if they all stood up to watch the game, or just squeezed onto benches.

FIFA regulations state individual seats. I don't think benches are included in 'all-seater'. :ohno:


Stop hating on the stadiums....that is just one of the stadiums to choose from to host world cup matches in 2018 when it comes back to america. America got 20+ ..70,000 stadiums and england only has 2...or 3 with the olympic stadia....so u know there is alot of stadiums to choose from. Dont hate on the stadia...

The U.S.A will probably not get it in 2018, maybe 2026, the odds are that F.I.F.A will want it in Europe (England or Spain) or Asia (China).
Money wise, F.I.F.A want China for 2018 or 2022.

Boxing is dead to me...when are there no Top tier american boxer in the heavyweight division u know boxing is dead....

Hehe, its like infant school. 'I'm not playing any more because you won't let me win'. :lol:

America got 20+ ..70,000 stadiums and england only has 2...or 3 with the olympic stadia....so u know there is alot of stadiums to choose from. Dont hate on the stadia...

Actually, it already has 3 stadiums over 70000.

More propose stadiums for the 2018 world to be hosted in the USA lol....


http://www.pitt.edu/AFShome/s/o/sorc/public/html/thepitt/heinz1.jpg
http://www.fussballtempel.net/concacaf/USA/Heinz_Field2.jpg
^^ Heinz Field, Cap: 64,000..........Loc: Pittsburg PA.

http://www.seatdata.com/images/venue_edward_jones_dome/samples/sample.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Edward_Jones_Dome_KM.jpg/800px-Edward_Jones_Dome_KM.jpg
^^ Edward Jones Dome, Cap: 66,000........Loc: St louis, Missouri

The U.S.A will probably not get it in 2018, maybe 2026, the odds are that F.I.F.A will want it in Europe (England or Spain) or Asia (China).
Money wise, F.I.F.A want China for 2018 or 2022.

Money wise ? ??? china???...Do u know how much fifa will make alone just from the sponsorship if it comes to america....America is the financial capital of the world...and fifa will capitalize on it....oh ya fifa really made alot of money in japan/korea haha...usa 94 is the most financially sucessfull world cup ever and fifa still remembers that.

Hehe, its like infant school. 'I'm not playing any more because you won't let me win'. :lol:
Boxing is dead!!!!!! now europeans can fight hahaha...where were they in the 90s? 80s? 70s? 60s? 50s? 40s? 30s? 20s? 1900s-1920s except for lennox lewis.

Money wise ? ??? china???...Do u know how much fifa will make alone just from the sponsorship if it comes to america....America is the financial capital of the world...and fifa will capitalize on it....oh ya fifa really made alot of money in japan/korea haha...usa 94 is the most financially sucessfull world cup ever and fifa still remembers that.

Actually thats not true.
In 1994 the sponsorship totals for the world cup reached $550m and the marketing income reached $1.2bn.
The 2006 world cup in Germany had figures of $700m and $1.96bn respectively.

Boxing is dead!!!!!! now europeans can fight hahaha...where were they in the 90s? 80s? 70s? 60s? 50s? 40s? 30s? 20s? 1900s-1920s except for lennox lewis.

American boxing is dead.
Boxing is not dead.
There is a difference.

Actually thats not true.
In 1994 the sponsorship totals for the world cup reached $550m and the marketing income reached $1.2bn.
The 2006 world cup in Germany had figures of $700m and $1.96bn respectively.

haha and that was in 1994....now compare that to 2018....germany was barely over those figures....12 years ago.

American boxing is dead.
Boxing is not dead.
There is a difference.

Naw Boxing is weak....heavyweight division is weak.....Vitaly kliwhatever...only dominiting against no name boxers...its weak and its dead in general not only america.

haha and that was in 1994....now compare that to 2018....germany was barely over those figures....12 years ago.

Its a 52% increase - not barely over the figures. That more than covers inflation over the period. And it still shatters your initial claims.

Naw Boxing is weak....heavyweight division is weak.....Vitaly kliwhatever...only dominiting against no name boxers...its weak and its dead in general not only america.

No, its just we don't get the massive hyping up of boxers not from America.
America always hypes up its fighters to be greater than they are.
Jeff Lacy anyone.

Its a 52% increase - not barely over the figures. That more than covers inflation over the period. And it still shatters your initial claims.

I dont know the figures but if what your saying is true...then u know the world cup 2018 is gonna be a massive figure for fifa to gain...coming to the financial hub of the world. But those figures were 12 years ago..u know times are even gonna be better in 2018. How can it be a 52% increase bullshyt.

No, its just we don't get the massive hyping up of boxers not from America.
America always hypes up its fighters to be greater than they are.
Jeff Lacy anyone.

Its not hype its cuz american boxer can actually fight...how many europeans have won the heavyweight title compared to american boxers in the history of boxing. Boxing is dominated by americans since forever until now...we gonna let u guys have it for now....we need to get back to square one and we got some work to do to get back to dominating again.

I dont know the figures but if what your saying is true...then u know the world cup 2018 is gonna be a massive figure for fifa to gain...coming to the financial hub of the world. But those figures were 12 years ago..u know times are even gonna be better in 2018. How can it be a 52% increase bullshyt.

The German 2006 marketing+sponsorship figures were 52% higher than USA 1994. Thats not bullshit, its fact.
Yes the 2018 figures will be higher again. But i'd place a bet on them being higher for an English world cup than an American world cup.

America got 20+ ..70,000 stadiums and england only has 2...or 3

England doesn't need 20+ 70,000 seater stadiums, and neither does any host country to stage the World Cup...

...but England currently has 3, and will be building another 70,000+ seater in time for the 2012 Olympics.


Don't be suprised that many UK and European forumers don't like the stereotypical look of USA's American Football stadiums, as we love curvey designs with roofs :)

Its not hype its cuz american boxer can actually fight...how many europeans have won the heavyweight title compared to american boxers in the history of boxing. Boxing is dominated by americans since forever until now...we gonna let u guys have it for now....we need to get back to square one and we got some work to do to get back to dominating again.

We're not talking about through history. We're talking about recent times. All the endless stories about how Tyson will reserect himself for the next fight. If Lennox was American he'd be seen as the best thing since sliced bread. If Vitali was American he would be seen as a decent champion. It all about hyping up your boxers so that you can sell the fights and make money. But you dont have decent fighters any more bar a couple of exceptions. So you have to flog your dead horses to make a quick buck - look at Holyfields umpteen comback fights. If Tyson so much as farts its headline news. Course its hype.

The German 2006 marketing+sponsorship figures were 52% higher than USA 1994. Thats not bullshit, its fact.
Yes the 2018 figures will be higher again. But i'd place a bet on them being higher for an English world cup than an American world cup.

Fifa will make money if the world cup comes to america than england...England wants it cuz they actually do well when they host things...1966 world cup...England only gets hype up than they prove to be. Atleast when brazil gets hype up they actually do well in world cups...been in the final 3 of the last 4 world cups. FIFA is smart and they will choose america...cuz money talks....america will use 12 stadiums of 70,000 plus...do u know how much they will make from that alone..this is business not about home of football.

Snoop Dogg, have you ever thought about going to school? Your vocabulary might expand a bit further then just ...

*America
*He He
*Ha Ha
*Cuz
*bullshyt
*Naw
*Hating

How do you expect any of us to take you seriously? You sound like a 3 year old kid who's nothing but a waste of space.

With the way you talk im suprised you even have a computer. Education system must be pretty "whack" over in the great US of A for you to speak such shit on a daily basis with spelling no better then a monkey with its head chopped off.

The sooner you disappear the better.

We're not talking about through history. We're talking about recent times. All the endless stories about how Tyson will reserect himself for the next fight. If Lennox was American he'd be seen as the best thing since sliced bread. If Vitali was American he would be seen as a decent champion. It all about hyping up your boxers so that you can sell the fights and make money. But you dont have decent fighters any more bar a couple of exceptions. So you have to flog your dead horses to make a quick buck - look at Holyfields umpteen comback fights. If Tyson so much as farts its headline news. Course its hype.


Boxing is all about hype....lol...wow if you dont know that...its all about hype and money making...thats the way its been....Lennox Lewis was hyped in america cuz he is a great fighter...money they make from Payperview alone and tickets sold...thats how these boxers get paid. Yes boxing need another mike tyson (not the crazy type) but the mike tyson that dominated boxing in the 80s....when there is no hype and no family household name boxer.. boxing is a bore...thats the way the sports has been...thats what makes it popular....vitalie just won a match last week...but who cares lol nobody.

Fifa will make money if the world cup comes to america than england...England wants it cuz they actually do well when they host things...1966 world cup...England only gets hype up than they prove to be. Atleast when brazil gets hype up they actually do well in world cups...been in the final 3 of the last 4 world cups. FIFA is smart and they will choose america...cuz money talks....america will use 12 stadiums of 70,000 plus...do u know how much they will make from that alone..this is business not about home of football.

Believe me. If its about buisness. England would wipe the floor with any nation. The premiership, players, national teams will be sponsored immensly more then any other host in world cup history. If you are to thick to realise this then poor you.

You could argue the only reason US wants the World Cup is to actually prevent the tough task of qualifying against teams like Gutamala, Grenada or Haiti.

Snoop Dogg, have you ever thought about going to school? Your vocabulary might expand a bit further then just ...

*America
*He He
*Ha Ha
*Cuz
*bullshyt
*Naw
*Hating

How do you expect any of us to take you seriously? You sound like a 3 year old kid who's nothing but a waste of space.

With the way you talk im suprised you even have a computer. Education system must be pretty "whack" over in the great US of A for you to speak such shit on a daily basis with spelling no better then a monkey with its head chopped off.

The sooner you disappear the better.

Ok the inventor of the english language. This is the computer not english class....i am not here to take a test...so why do worry about the way i talk. I just love the trash talking going on here....why are you so sensitive about my vocabulary. Im very well educated so dont even try to judge my words and base your judgement on that.

Fifa will make money if the world cup comes to america than england...England wants it cuz they actually do well when they host things...1966 world cup...England only gets hype up than they prove to be. Atleast when brazil gets hype up they actually do well in world cups...been in the final 3 of the last 4 world cups. FIFA is smart and they will choose america...cuz money talks....america will use 12 stadiums of 70,000 plus...do u know how much they will make from that alone..this is business not about home of football.

I've already given you figures which show a European world cup is better commercially than a US one.
Having an average stadium capacity 5000 higher than the English grounds is not a good enough reason on its own to host it in a country that held it only a few years earlier.

Believe me. If its about buisness. England would wipe the floor with any nation. The premiership, players, national teams will be sponsored immensly more then any other host in world cup history. If you are to thick to realise this then poor you.

You could argue the only reason US wants the World Cup is to actually prevent the tough task of qualifying against teams like Gutamala, Grenada or Haiti.

lol tough task of qualifying against Guatamala lmao...wow...
I love the premiership but when it comes to the world cup..USA is more of a financial gain for FIFA than england im sorry.

Ok the inventor of the english language. This is the computer not english class....i am not here to take a test...so why do worry about the way i talk. I just love the trash talking going on here....why are you so sensitive about my vocabulary. Im very well educated so dont even try to judge my words and base your judgement on that.

Capital 'e' in English thankyou.

I've already given you figures which show a European world cup is better commercially than a US one.
Having an average stadium capacity 5000 higher than the English grounds is not a good enough reason on its own to host it in a country that held it only a few years earlier.

Those are facts about a world cup that was held recently and your comparing to a world cup held 12 years ago. You can't even compare it because of the years apart. USA 94 was more sucessful than france 98 and korea/japan 2002...

Capital 'e' in English thankyou.

Put space in your thankyou, it's Thank you. HAHA

People coming to America in 2018 will enjoy the different variety of food in America. English people can't cook to save their life.

Those are facts about a world cup that was held recently and your comparing to a world cup held 12 years ago. You can't even compare it because of the years apart. USA 94 was more sucessful than france 98 and korea/japan 2002...

You said USA 94 was the most successful financially. And I proved you otherwise. So yes you can compare. Do you have the figures for France and Japan?

Money wise ? ??? china???...Do u know how much fifa will make alone just from the sponsorship if it comes to america....America is the financial capital of the world...and fifa will capitalize on it....oh ya fifa really made alot of money in japan/korea haha...usa 94 is the most financially sucessfull world cup ever and fifa still remembers that.

1.3 billion, a growing middle class with a disposable income, do the math.
I would not employ you in the financial industry:lol: .

Snoop, what better way can we put this.

You're a R-E-T-A-R-D

Snoop, what better way can we put this.

You're a R-E-T-A-R-D

Haha look at you....this not about calling names...this is a simple arguement...and turning it into calling names..

http://www.soccerhall.org/history/World%20Cup%20History/WC1994_emblem.jpg

Haha look at you....this not about calling names...this is a simple arguement...and turning it into calling names..

People coming to America in 2018 will enjoy the different variety of food in America. English people can't cook to save their life.

Talk about double standards.

I would'nt worry. This has explained it all.

Snoop Dogg held by Swedish police

US rap star Snoop Dogg has been held overnight by police in Sweden on suspicion of using drugs.

The rapper, real name Calvin Broadus, and a female companion were stopped in by police in Stockholm, who believed they had taken illegal narcotics.

Snoop Dogg quit while your ahead, you already seem like a twat. No need to dig your own grave further, ever wondered why rest of the world thinks americans are dumb? Thanks for proving those people right.

Loser..

^^^ Nfl stadiums are also football(soccer) stadiums...they are all multipurpose stadiums....Soccer is growing in the U.S and the world cup boost more fans to the game its not only to make money. Haha look at these guys England has not won anything since 1966 so you guys want it home so you can win it at home. Europe just hosted the world cup last year how did u guys do? Atleast i know U.S dont have the talent that england has but we are still growing with grassroots. Haha home of football....Internationally England won only 1 title ....0 european cups.

*Securities are tight just to prevent terrorist attacks.

What the fuck is soccer?

Given the USA's immense unpopularity does anyone really think they'll get enough votes from Europe, South American and Asia to host the World Cup again?

They only really got the 1994 world cup to try and make football more popular in the USA. None of the stadiums fucknuts there ^^^lists can be justified purely for football. Ours can, our stadiums don't need gridiron or major global events to fill them. That's the important factor rather then mass-capacity.

We could if we wanted give all of our premiership clubs the money to build twenty 80,000 capacity stadiums and have them filled for world cup and other international matches. But like other European countries we are more intelligent then that.

Anyway onto our own bid, seems like we're going to have quite a list of world class stadiums to choose from. So much so some are going to have to be left out. I don't understand people saying Sheffield can't be left out bcause of it's history. This is about the future, we pick our best stadiums as part of our bid.

And it looks like we get to choose from:

(current and proposed stadiums)

London

current:

Wembley Stadium.....90,000
Emirates Stadium.....60,000
Stamford Bridge.......42,500

proposed:

Chelsea (new stadium or expansion)......55,000
Tottenham Hot Spurs......plans for a new stadium, details unknown
West Ham Utd...............plans for a new stadium, details unknown

Birmingham

current:

Villa Park.......43,300

proposed:

City of Birmingham Stadium.......55,000

Liverpool

current:

Anfield...............about 45,000
Goodison Park.....about 41,000

proposed:

New Anfield.........61,000
Everton..............plans for a new stadium, details unknown

Manchester

current & proposed:

Old Trafford.......76,312 with ambitions to push that beyond 100,000!
City of Manchester Stadium.......48,500

Tyne & Wear

current & proposed:

St James Park.......52,500
Stadium of Light....48,300..........please note this stadium is capable of being extended further to accomodate about 68,000 iirc. It had planning permission in 2002 to build an extension to hold 55,000 presumably by building another tier behind the other goal.

Middlesbrough

Riverside Stadium.......35,100 (planning permission was granted sometime ago to bring it up to 42,000).

Leeds

Elland Road......40,296

Sheffield

Hillsborough.......39,859

Obviously some listed would require relatively minor extensions to reach the 45,000 capacity minimum listed. And I'm sure places such as Kingston (Hull), Coventry, Southampton, Portsmouth, Nottingham, Derby, Leicester, Stoke, Plymouth, Bristol, Wolverhampton, West Brom, Blackburn, Preston, Reading and Norwich would be falling over each other to extend their stadiums to the minimum capacity if we got the 2018 World Cup.

Regarding competitors, if we got chosen as the European candidate I'd say our main competitors would be China and Australia. China's mass population and no doubt enthusiasm makes it a worthy candidate. Building the necessary stadia wouldn't be a problem for them.

Australia have recent experience in hosting large sports events in world class stadia.

If we got the World Cup we really should set about making sure every stadium is well connected by a tram link at the very least.

Snoop Dogg, have you ever thought about going to school? Your vocabulary might expand a bit further then just ...

*America
*He He
*Ha Ha
*Cuz
*bullshyt
*Naw
*Hating

How do you expect any of us to take you seriously? You sound like a 3 year old kid who's nothing but a waste of space.

sadly most americans are like this, i play a lot of poker online and its full of these retarded yanks, 95% of their country thinks they won the Vietnam war lol and they all voted bush cos they thought they were getting something else :banana:

This is turning into hating. This is all trash talking now u guys are bashing my name...just cuz it says snoop dogg...and bashing my vocabulary...wow English guys....shows u why America is you guys worst nightmare. You know when America announced their bid for the 2018 world cup....you guys were going oh lord no not them. Because you know you can beat countries like australia and china to host it. Fuck England ..go get me some tea motherfuckers

Wow...lol, just looked in on this thread for the first time in a while, to find it has gone to crap! All it takes is one idiot (aka Snoop) that doesn't know when to stop posting, and suddenly a thread gets derailed. Can sum1 please ban that cretin?

In response to this USA bid, I'll just copy and paste the comment I posted in the main 'Stadiums and Arenas' section about 2018:

There's no doubt that the USA could provide an unrivaled aray of high capacity stadiums in big cities with lots of space around them for advertising (as it's obviously a bid and rich country witha large popultion), which is what FIFA drool over, but I'd be so angry if they got the WC in 2018, it would show a clear money-grabbing bias by £I£A.

When it's countries like Germany or England that host it, everyone in the country gets excited about it, there is no bigger competition anywhere, and to host it is like the ultimate honour. Football in those kinds of countries is steeped in history and passion, with big leagues being played each year, with clubs building up stadiums as they get more prosperous, and fans filling those stadiums each year becasue they love the sport.

But in the USA, it's treated by most as just another sporting event, hosted in stadiums that are meant for American football, in cities that couldn't really give a crap about football, and in many cases object to having it forced on them. You will of course get full capacity attendances because of the scale of the WC, but it is still just about the corporate advertisers wet dreams as always when it comes to sports in the USA. Sports team over there arn't clubs that hav proud and loyal histories, they're just 'franchises' for fat-cat American businessmen to trade with.

England may not have a line-up of consistantly high capacity stadiums like the USA and obviosuly won't have the number of big cities suitable for the event, but the desire, passion and history is there, and not having hosted it for 62 years by 2018, the wait is long overdue (unlike in the USA who hosted it in '94).

If you think about it, England is smallest nation (don't correct me about whether it is a nation or not) that can host a modern day WC on it's own. Remeber, we're not talking about Britain here, we're talking about England, and for such a small arae of land to have the cities and stadiums for a Wc these days is pretty impressive!

:cheers:

^^^ Nfl stadiums are also football(soccer) stadiums...they are all multipurpose stadiums....Soccer is growing in the U.S and the world cup boost more fans to the game its not only to make money. Haha look at these guys England has not won anything since 1966 so you guys want it home so you can win it at home. Europe just hosted the world cup last year how did u guys do? Atleast i know U.S dont have the talent that england has but we are still growing with grassroots. Haha home of football....Internationally England won only 1 title ....0 european cups.



We might not of won the World Cup more than once but at least other Countries take part unlike your World??? Sreies where only American teams can enter.
Stick to playing games you invent so youre the best at them,that way you can kid yourselves even more and keep patting yourselves on the back.

Sports youve invented along the years:

Basketball
American Football
Baseball.
Drive by shootings.

So much hatred in here!!! You guys are talking as if England has already won the bid to host the 2018 world cup. Its going to be competetive with the likes of Americans, Aussies and chinese. Snoop is only making a point for USA to host the event so dont hate on him for making a point for the states/

This is turning into hating. This is all trash talking now u guys are bashing my name...just cuz it says snoop dogg...and bashing my vocabulary...wow English guys....shows u why America is you guys worst nightmare. You know when America announced their bid for the 2018 world cup....you guys were going oh lord no not them. Because you know you can beat countries like australia and china to host it. Fuck England ..go get me some tea motherfuckers

Why would 'america' be our worst nightmare and why do you presume to tell us what you think we're saying you arrogant little fuckwit?

I hope for your sake you're not as stupid as you come across.

If size of stadia is the only thing the USA can offer it's a bid that's not really going anywhere. As I said before they aren't stadiums which can be justified hosting football alone - everyboy elses can.

So much hatred in here!!! You guys are talking as if England has already won the bid to host the 2018 world cup. Its going to be competetive with the likes of Americans, Aussies and chinese. Snoop is only making a point for USA to host the event so dont hate on him for making a point for the states/

Snoop is making it sound like the USA has already won the bid to host the 2018 World Cup.

Would never make the mistake of being over-confident/arrogant unlike your friend there. Very much appreciate the merits of bids from Australia, China, etc.

So much hatred in here!!! You guys are talking as if England has already won the bid to host the 2018 world cup. Its going to be competetive with the likes of Americans, Aussies and chinese. Snoop is only making a point for USA to host the event so dont hate on him for making a point for the states/

LOL are you clueless too?? Look at your own backyard dude, Snoop is the only one talking as if the USA has won the bid, and people aren't hating on him because of that, people are hating on him because he is an IDIOTIC TWAT:nuts:

You do yourself no favours in trying to defend him.

Good luck to you guys in the bidding war. If FIFA makes it a continental world cup, I think it may come to the U.S or go to Australia. Since Brazil is hosting in 2014 and if Fifa want to make it the Americas world cup instead of South America...then i will say England might win the bid for the 2018 WC. Its going to be a competitive Bidding war.

Good luck to you guys in the bidding war. If FIFA makes it a continental world cup, I think it may come to the U.S or go to Australia. Since Brazil is hosting in 2014 and if Fifa want to make it the Americas world cup instead of South America...then i will say England might win the bid for the 2018 WC. Its going to be a competitive Bidding war.

Kool response:okay:

So much hatred in here!!! You guys are talking as if England has already won the bid to host the 2018 world cup. Its going to be competetive with the likes of Americans, Aussies and chinese. Snoop is only making a point for USA to host the event so dont hate on him for making a point for the states/

didn't take snoop long to make a new name lol:lol: :nuts:

I know! Troll. :lol:

I know! Troll. :lol:

I hate on-line schizo's.

new sn ??? what are you talking about....

He's saying your a bit weird, mate.

To be honest it'd be a bit daft if they get to host anytime soon, seeing as they did in 1994, and neither should Mexico, having had it twice in the last thirty years. 2010: South Africa, 2014: Brazil, 2018: England, 2022: Australia. That would be ideal I expect.

He's saying your a bit weird, mate.

To be honest it'd be a bit daft if they get to host anytime soon, seeing as they did in 1994, and neither should Mexico, having had it twice in the last thirty years. 2010: South Africa, 2014: Brazil, 2018: England, 2022: Australia. That would be ideal I expect.

2010: South Africa
2014: Brazil or USA if Brazil cant host it
2018: USA if Brazil was able to host...
2022: England
2026: Australia
2030: China

2010: South Africa
2014: Brazil
2018: England
2022: Australia
2026: China
2030: Spain
2034: Canada :lol: or USA if they aint all dead from the pollution they create!, and have made enough pairs of binoculars so the fans in the cheap seats can see who is playing :cheers:

USA will be controlled by monkeys by 2034 if Bush gets his way.

2010: South Africa
2014: Brazil
2018: England
2022: Australia
2026: China
2030: Spain
2034: Canada :lol: or USA if they aint all dead from the pollution they create!, and have made enough pairs of binoculars so the fans in the cheap seats can see who is playing :cheers:

You English people need to learn how to cook..what will people eat when you guys even host the world cup? Drink tea lmao.

World Cup is all about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

we learnt how to cook 2 thousand years before you yanks were shipped to dreamland, ironic how you yanks go on about good food considering you think a big mac with fries is a 5 star meal :lol:

by the way, what is the American dream these days, and when are you all gonna join the rest of the world and wake the fuck up!

by the way, what is the American dream these days, and when are you all gonna join the rest of the world and wake the fuck up!

Join the World to do what?

we learnt how to cook 2 thousand years before you yanks were shipped to dreamland, ironic how you yanks go on about good food considering you think a big mac with fries is a 5 star meal :lol:

Who cares what happened score years ago...Im talking about now...England is not a country u want to go and have a nice meal in. You guys cant cook to save your own lives. Try some american made cornbread with fried chicken and baked beans. Fuck Burgers and Fries.

Can we just ban the knob & stop wasting pages on him & get back to the 2018 adult discussion.

Can we just ban the knob & stop wasting pages on him & get back to the 2018 adult discussion.


I dont know why they hating on me....all i stated was U.S bid to host the world cup and they all got mad and started attacking me and attacking my country...thats fucked up. I thought U.S and England are allies...why people hate on america so much.

Most NFL and NCAA stadia are too narrow for football.

The people of the USA should remember that in 16 yrs between 1980 and 1996 they were awarded the winter olympics ,two summer olympics that were only 12 yrs apart and a football world cup so they have no grounds to say it is their time once again but then again they do all have the attitude that we are america and therefore we must get it. I know that americans are totally unaware that the rest of world exists unless it is somewhere that the can show off their military might

Who cares what happened score years ago...Im talking about now...England is not a country u want to go and have a nice meal in. You guys cant cook to save your own lives. Try some american made cornbread with fried chicken and baked beans. Fuck Burgers and Fries.

Actually the UK/England is considered to be a world leader in cuisine and rightly so.

World Cup is all about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Actually the world cup is all about the supporters, the atmosphere and the glory. Money does play a big part but it's not the deciding factor - I feel sorry for you if money is the only thing your country can offer. Kind of sums it all up really.

Europe has been holding the World Cup once every 8 yrs since 1966. This we know is going to change as it become more global away from its traditional heartlands in europe and south america but when they talk about rotation throughout the continents would this then become every 16 to 20 yrs. I personally think it should now be every 12 yrs.

Europe has been holding the World Cup once every 8 yrs since 1966. This we know is going to change as it become more global away from its traditional heartlands in europe and south america but when they talk about rotation throughout the continents would this then become every 16 to 20 yrs. I personally think it should now be every 12 yrs.

This is my point exactly....I am just stating a bid by the USA....These guys just think because England is the home of Football they should get it. Since the 1994 World Cup... Europe has held it twice (1998,2006), then Asia (2002), Africa will in 2010, then South America in 2014, the next rotation should go to either Oceania or North America.

The people of the USA should remember that in 16 yrs between 1980 and 1996 they were awarded the winter olympics ,two summer olympics that were only 12 yrs apart and a football world cup so they have no grounds to say it is their time once again but then again they do all have the attitude that we are america and therefore we must get it. I know that americans are totally unaware that the rest of world exists unless it is somewhere that the can show off their military might

SO?

I don't believe that the Central and North American areas should get it so often as it is made up of only 3 nations capable of hosting a tournament and this area has hosted the 1970/1986 and 1994 world cups and Canada can't even qualify ahead of Trinidad and South America has only 2. Yes the USA does have some awesome stadia coupled with the infrastructure needed but it would be too soon in 2018.There should be some criteria laid down regarding how many years must pass before a country can bid to host the tournament again.

Platini wants 2018 World Cup in Europe

By RAF CASERT, AP Sports Writer
March 14, 2007

LONDON (AP) -- The new head of soccer's European governing body thinks the 2018 World Cup should be in his region and would back a bid by England to host the tournament.

The United States plans to bid for the 2018 tournament, and FIFA president Sepp Blatter has said that under the rotation policy adopted seven years ago, the North and Central American and Caribbean region would be in line to host.


"As the president of UEFA, I will do my best" to bring the World Cup back to Europe, Michel Platini, the president of the Union of European Football Associations, said Wednesday.

Platini, the former star French player elected UEFA head last month, acknowledged that it was "not so democratic" to jump ahead of other regions.

"I would like it in Europe every four years," he quipped. "If it is not possible, then as soon as possible."

The 2002 World Cup was played in Japan and South Korea and last year's tournament in Germany. The 2010 World Cup will be in South Africa, and the 2014 tournament is assigned to South America, with Brazil the favorite to win the vote of the FIFA executive committee in November.

Britain's government has said it would back a bid by England for the 2018 World Cup.

Platini also said UEFA is examining plans to have the third- and fourth-place teams from Europe's top leagues play each other in qualifying for the Champions League. Currently, they enter in the third round of qualifying and meet teams from smaller nations.

Up to four teams from a country can wind up in the 32-team first round.

Platini also said a special "strategic body" would be created later this year with representatives from federations, leagues, clubs and players to assess the pressing issues, including the possibility of a salary cap.

LOOK AT THIS MORON

World Cup 2018: U.S.-Bound?
Leave a Comment
Send to Friend
Print This Story
By Will Tidey

Chancellor Gordon Brown, the UK's Prime Minister in waiting with a general election on the horizon, announced last week that England would bid to host the 2018 World Cup. Forgive our cynicism, but even the most ardent soccer fans in this country didn't need the CSI: Miami team to deduce that this might, in some way ... just perhaps ... be a thinly-veiled piece of political propaganda.

They say the way to a man's heart is through his stomach, but here in England, soccer comes a long way before soufflé. No matter how strongly Brown's timing of the announcement reeked of sports playing whore to the political monster, if he could make it happen we could probably forgive Labour for everything bar Iraq and put them back into office with a failing health service and a Scot at the helm. After all, it's already been over 50 years since England welcomed Pele, Eusebio, and Beckenbauer in 1966.

To the Chancellor's embarrassment, however, Sepp Blatter, head of FIFA, flew into London last week to crush English hopes as swiftly as they had been raised.

"If the FIFA executive committee decides later this year that the rotation policy is maintained in strict procedure, it should be in North America in 2018 and there are three countries who could host it there — the United States, Mexico, and Canada," said Blatter.

Blatter's rotation policy, which was designed to ensure African nations had the opportunity to host the event (and to garner the international votes that put him in office), is officially set to end in 2014, but it now seems likely to continue. In 2010, the World Cup will be in South Africa and 2014 will visit South America, in the form of Brazil or Columbia.

With Canada an unfashionable and unproven soccer nation, it seems unlikely they would be chosen to host the 21st World Cup in 2018 unless some kind of sporting revolution takes place. Mexico, who hosted the 1986 tournament, will face obvious economic difficulties funding a bid, let alone updating their stadia and infrastructure if it were successful.

All of this points towards to the U.S., who hosted the 1994 event and earned global praise. Sunil Gulati, President of the U.S. Soccer Federation said, "We would be in position to put on a spectacular event. We are much more a part of the sport internationally than we were in 1994."

U.S. soccer fans may not even have to wait until then. As doubts have been cast over both Brazil and Columbia, Blatter has indicated that the U.S. would be the obvious choice as a backup venue in seven years time.

"We have said that the 2014 World Cup will be staged in South America, but if there is no candidate strong enough, then we would go north instead as the logical thing," he said.

FIFA officials will make the decision for 2014, along with the future of the rotation policy, this November in Durban, South Africa. If the U.S. is chosen to host the tournament, it is thought the 2018 World Cup could become open to nations from Asia and Europe — opening the door once more to England.

Other nations interested in 2018 include Australia, deemed part of Asia on planet football, and China, for whom money is unlikely to be an object.

From an American perspective, the future looks bright. FIFA is keen to grow the sport in the U.S. and its infrastructure and stadia are already equipped to host the event. With David Beckham rumored to be at the marketing forefront of any potential campaign, U.S. soccer fans seem destined to have the world's greatest sporting event on their doorstep sooner rather than later.

From an Englishmans point of view I sense that we English are just plain desparate to have our game hosted by us as soon as possible as it is that Mexico, Germany and possible even the USA will have hosted 2 tournaments since we last had them in '66 before we get them again.

^^ England will get the world cup after the U.S host it .,,,,England 2022 ;)

stick to pasting other people articles snoop, that way you'll appear more inteligent, you think because you got the stadia you'll get it, england has had the stadia for 100 years and it hasn't had it since 66, don't be surprised if you have to wait aslong as we have, i expect you was as confident the new york 2012 olympic bid would beat londons but we all know what happened there dont we.

all you seem to say is england think they deserve it because its the home of football, just because we invented the game does not mean thats why we want it, and neither would anyone think we'd have a better chance of winning it at home when the pressure is 100 times worse, if you have ever watched england in a world cup you would see that we make any country our home with so many traveling fans, i hope one year you do get the world cup and england gets put in your group and when its usa v england you'll see more english in your stadium than americans and get a lesson in passion like gillette and hicks got at liverpool last week.

LOOK AT THIS MORON

Are you actually calling Michel Platini a moron?

A vote for rotation and for CONCACAF will hand the USA their second world cup on a platter, everyone knows that and therefore this vote is effectively a referendum on whether the USA should host 2018.

A vote against rotation is in effect a vote against the USA hosting in 2018.

When you look at it that way, it's not just the European members that may vote against rotation but also any member that:

a. Really doesn't want the World Cup in the US again so soon
OR
b. Wants their nation or confederation to host 2018.
OR
c. Simply wants to see a contest for 2018, not a coronation.

Now, I don't know anything about the personal agendas of the members, but:
10 European members (who may favour England or Spain) +
6 members from Asia and the middle East (who may favour China or Australia) = 16 out of 26 who could vote against rotation.

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

A vote for rotation would kill an England bid whereas a vote against rotation would still allow the USA to bid, granted. However, given that the vote later this year can be seen partly as a referendum on the USA's chances, if rotation is not continued, the US hopes will have sustained a big knock.

And the numbers suggest to me that the US should be just as worried about the upcoming vote.

stick to pasting other people articles snoop, that way you'll appear more inteligent, you think because you got the stadia you'll get it, england has had the stadia for 100 years and it hasn't had it since 66, don't be surprised if you have to wait aslong as we have, i expect you was as confident the new york 2012 olympic bid would beat londons but we all know what happened there dont we.

all you seem to say is england think they deserve it because its the home of football, just because we invented the game does not mean thats why we want it, and neither would anyone think we'd have a better chance of winning it at home when the pressure is 100 times worse, if you have ever watched england in a world cup you would see that we make any country our home with so many traveling fans, i hope one year you do get the world cup and england gets put in your group and when its usa v england you'll see more english in your stadium than americans and get a lesson in passion like gillette and hicks got at liverpool last week.

I am copying and pasting them from websites on articles about the 2018 world cup. New york wasnt really ready to host the 2012 olympics...the plan stadia wasnt ready...so England got away with it....but who will win more medals in 2012? England ? lmao lmao lol....u can host it..but u wont win more than 30 medals just like u did at athens...

What has that got to do with the 2018 World Cup?

I dont know why they hating on me....all i stated was U.S bid to host the world cup and they all got mad and started attacking me and attacking my country...thats fucked up. I thought U.S and England are allies...why people hate on america so much.

because your a PRAT:dunno:

What has that got to do with the 2018 World Cup?

he brought it up...

Regardless, it's still not that relevent until we know whether there'll even be a proper contest for 2018. What's relevent at the moment is the FIFA executive comittee vote, a vote which could easily go either way (in favour or not in favour of rotation).

^^ Haha....Uk suck at the olympics thats why u want to avoid it ....

Avoid what? Yeh, you'll win more medals than us in 2012, is that what you want me to say? You're right, of course you will, you always do. But what the hell does that have to do with who should get the 2018 WC? Nothing.

What is relevent, as I've pointed out, is the FIFA vote which, as I've also pointed out, could seriosly damage America's hopes if it goes against rotation.

GO ENGLAND! ;-)

I seem to have given up reading this thread because it seems to be littered with inane drivel.

I'll say one more thing though. As an Englishman, I would love to see us host the 2018 World Cup because it would be tremendous for the country and the sport. It has nothing to do with the fact we invented it. We're passionate about football, the facilities on offer are second to none and the infrastructure is there. Stadiums steeped in tradition and history, with an enclosed atmosphere which makes it so special. Give me that over soulless, quickly constructed pieces of concrete which will never be used to its full potential again after the World Cup is over in a footballing back-water any day of the week.

i dont think Blatter will even be in a job by the time the bids are put in, i think Franz will get his job.

^^ Haha....Uk suck at the olympics thats why u want to avoid it ....

Ha ha....you suck at being even midly intelligent....that's why you keep trying to change the subject because you're clearly too stupid and moronic to be able to debate a single subject with any degree of accuracy and well thought out arguments.

Is there a chance you will make a post that doesn't make you sound like a brain dead retard?

So, do you reckon FIFA will vote for rotation or not?

Ha ha....you suck at being even midly intelligent....that's why you keep trying to change the subject because you're clearly too stupid and moronic to be able to debate a single subject with any degree of accuracy and well thought out arguments.

Is there a chance you will make a post that doesn't make you sound like a brain dead retard?

Look at you....Ive talked about everything from Boxing, football, Cuisine and olympics....this is an argument....Its funny what u can say behind a computer screen...I love England...God...without the UK....This world will not be what it is today....A small island nation that explored the world and spread their culture and language to the whole world God bless them. I have alot of respect for england...im just trying to make a point for the world cup to come back to the states...I am not here to insult anybody...Im just here to make an argument...and its been fun so far...so dont try to insult me over this...its too childish to be insulting people over this kind of argument...its funny when they started this thread they didnt even made a mention of the usa as a bidder to host this event....they named england, aussie, spain, china, and mexico. Its all good tho...USA 2018 be ready for it....England should be more worried about actually winning a world cup with the talent they have instead of trying to host it.

Look at you....Ive talked about everything from Boxing, football, Cuisine and olympics....this is an argument....Its funny what u can say behind a computer screen...I love England...God...without the UK....This world will not be what it is today....A small island nation that explored the world and spread their culture and language to the whole world God bless them. I have alot of respect for england...im just trying to make a point for the world cup to come back to the states...I am not here to insult anybody...Im just here to make an argument...and its been fun so far...so dont try to insult me over this...its too childish to be insulting people over this kind of argument...its funny when they started this thread they didnt even made a mention of the usa as a bidder to host this event....they named england, aussie, spain, china, and mexico. Its all good tho...USA 2018 be ready for it....England should be more worried about actually winning a world cup with the talent they have instead of trying to host it.

Sorry I didn't catch a fucking word of that marra.

England should be more worried about actually winning a world cup with the talent they have instead of trying to host it.


Why, too big a threat? Anyway, what a stupid thing to say! In that case, the USA should be more worried about actually getting their top league to the standard of the English Championship than even think about hosting a world cup.

:ohno:

^^ Haha....Uk suck at the olympics thats why u want to avoid it ....

uhm no. south africa sucks at olympics.

uhm no. south africa sucks at olympics.

LOL......

Look at you....Ive talked about everything from Boxing, football, Cuisine and olympics....this is an argument....Its funny what u can say behind a computer screen...I love England...God...without the UK....This world will not be what it is today....A small island nation that explored the world and spread their culture and language to the whole world God bless them. I have alot of respect for england...im just trying to make a point for the world cup to come back to the states...I am not here to insult anybody...Im just here to make an argument...and its been fun so far...so dont try to insult me over this...its too childish to be insulting people over this kind of argument...its funny when they started this thread they didnt even made a mention of the usa as a bidder to host this event....they named england, aussie, spain, china, and mexico. Its all good tho...USA 2018 be ready for it....England should be more worried about actually winning a world cup with the talent they have instead of trying to host it.



why are you still on the UK forum?? its all guud that you want the US to host in 2018 although they are the least deserving to host it imho, but your the one who came on here and started throwing insults around dont make it out as if it was someone else, just go back to the North American forums, your destroying this thread.

troll

Why, too big a threat? Anyway, what a stupid thing to say! In that case, the USA should be more worried about actually getting their top league to the standard of the English Championship than even think about hosting a world cup.

:ohno:

USA will never be good in football.......England is the most overrated team is football ...all hype but nothing.....atleast when brazil gets hype they actually win world cups.
Squad:
GK: Robinson
Gary neville
john terry (c)
Rio Ferdinand
Ashley Cole
Steven Gerald
Frank Lampard
Joe Cole
Aaron Lennon
Wayne Rooney
Peter Crouch
^^
That Squad is very talented but overrated...

watch brazil win the world cup in 2010 when they retool.

why are you still on the UK forum?? its all guud that you want the US to host in 2018 although they are the least deserving to host it imho, but your the one who came on here and started throwing insults around dont make it out as if it was someone else, just go back to the North American forums, your destroying this thread.

troll

Make me Hehe

Make me Hehe

i so could easily:nuts:

i so could easily:nuts:

its all good homie like ur name says lol

Look at you....Ive talked about everything from Boxing, football, Cuisine and olympics....this is an argument....Its funny what u can say behind a computer screen...I love England...God...without the UK....This world will not be what it is today....A small island nation that explored the world and spread their culture and language to the whole world God bless them. I have alot of respect for england...im just trying to make a point for the world cup to come back to the states...I am not here to insult anybody...Im just here to make an argument...and its been fun so far...so dont try to insult me over this...its too childish to be insulting people over this kind of argument...its funny when they started this thread they didnt even made a mention of the usa as a bidder to host this event....they named england, aussie, spain, china, and mexico. Its all good tho...USA 2018 be ready for it....England should be more worried about actually winning a world cup with the talent they have instead of trying to host it.

Hey Snoop - do you know the difference between the UK and England? You seem to use them so interchangeably.
Great Britain is an island - neither the UK nor England is an island.

^^ Haha....Uk suck at the olympics thats why u want to avoid it ....

Dogg, this is the All Time Olympic Medal Tally:

Gold Silver Bronze Total

1. United States USA 898 693 612 2.203
2. Soviet Union (1952-1992) URS 440 357 325 1.122
3. Great Britain GBR 191 244 242 677
4. France FRA 186 199 218 603
5. Italy ITA 182 148 164 494
6. Germany ( -1964 & 1992- ) GER 176 207 222 605
7. Hungary HUN 156 135 157 448
8. East Germany (1968-1988) GDR 153 129 127 409
9. Sweden SWE 142 155 172 469
10. Australia AUS 121 126 154 401


As for food, well...

London has the best restaurants of any city in the world, according to a prestigious American food magazine.

"We came to London because we had been hearing about great chefs and great products," he said.

"We were hoping to find good food, but we didn't expect to find so much of it. We were blown away.

"What London has that other cities don't right now is high-quality food at all levels. In every category, from comfort food to gastronomic experiments, we loved what we ate.

"When people ask me where to go I tell them 'London'. The glory days are back."

lol even the French rate us the best...

The British palate is now more sophisticated than the French as Britons have more readily embraced different cuisines from around the world, according to the editor of the Michelin Guide.

Although Brits still love fish and chips and rosbif (roast beef) they have overtaken the French as connoisseurs of world food. Having absorbed many other cuisines, including Thai, Brazilian and Japanese, the British are now more adventurous than their cousins across the Channel, says Derek Bulmer, the Great Britain and Ireland editor of the restaurant bible.

"There is so much diversity in Great Britain, more variety here than in France and more variety of better chefs. Britons are also more adventurous eaters than the French, we have always been willing to try new things but their food has dominated their food culture for so long they are not so adventurous in eating other cuisines.

Oh, and the WC in England in 2018 is a certainty.

USA will never be good in football.......England is the most overrated team is football ...all hype but nothing.....atleast when brazil gets hype they actually win world cups.
Squad:
GK: Robinson
Gary neville
john terry (c)
Rio Ferdinand
Ashley Cole
Steven Gerald
Frank Lampard
Joe Cole
Aaron Lennon
Wayne Rooney
Peter Crouch
^^
That Squad is very talented but overrated...

watch brazil win the world cup in 2010 when they retool.

Of course our national side is over-rated, don't think you'll hear any of us argue otherwise. And no doubt before the next major tournament the gutter press will be after rent-a-quote football pundits who will boldly predict "it's our time".

But what does this have to do with our bid?

Of course our national side is over-rated, don't think you'll hear any of us argue otherwise. And no doubt before the next major tournament the gutter press will be after rent-a-quote football pundits who will boldly predict "it's our time".

But what does this have to do with our bid?

I only responded to a comment made by a member of this board.

Dogg, this is the All Time Olympic Medal Tally:

Gold Silver Bronze Total

1. United States USA 898 693 612 2.203
2. Soviet Union (1952-1992) URS 440 357 325 1.122
3. Great Britain GBR 191 244 242 677
4. France FRA 186 199 218 603
5. Italy ITA 182 148 164 494
6. Germany ( -1964 & 1992- ) GER 176 207 222 605
7. Hungary HUN 156 135 157 448
8. East Germany (1968-1988) GDR 153 129 127 409
9. Sweden SWE 142 155 172 469
10. Australia AUS 121 126 154 401


As for food, well...

London has the best restaurants of any city in the world, according to a prestigious American food magazine.

"We came to London because we had been hearing about great chefs and great products," he said.

"We were hoping to find good food, but we didn't expect to find so much of it. We were blown away.

"What London has that other cities don't right now is high-quality food at all levels. In every category, from comfort food to gastronomic experiments, we loved what we ate.

"When people ask me where to go I tell them 'London'. The glory days are back."

lol even the French rate us the best...

The British palate is now more sophisticated than the French as Britons have more readily embraced different cuisines from around the world, according to the editor of the Michelin Guide.

Although Brits still love fish and chips and rosbif (roast beef) they have overtaken the French as connoisseurs of world food. Having absorbed many other cuisines, including Thai, Brazilian and Japanese, the British are now more adventurous than their cousins across the Channel, says Derek Bulmer, the Great Britain and Ireland editor of the restaurant bible.

"There is so much diversity in Great Britain, more variety here than in France and more variety of better chefs. Britons are also more adventurous eaters than the French, we have always been willing to try new things but their food has dominated their food culture for so long they are not so adventurous in eating other cuisines.

Oh, and the WC in England in 2018 is a certainty.

Look at the medal counts....UK is not even half of the U.S tally

Hey Snoop - do you know the difference between the UK and England? You seem to use them so interchangeably.
Great Britain is an island - neither the UK nor England is an island.

I know the differences tyvm...England is a country in the U.K....its the largest and most populous country in the U.K....so thats why i said Thank God for England and also added the Uk for spreading their culture and language world wide.

I only responded to a comment made by a member of this board.

Who was responding to a comment you made.

Look at the medal counts....UK is not even half of the U.S tally

But the US population is about five times more then that of the UK.

Whilst the US medal count is only about 3.25 times more then the UK medal count.

So we compare pretty favourably - going back to my original point you really do struggle to stay on topic. I hope the US world cup bid team is as shit as you.

But the US population is about five times more then that of the UK.

Whilst the US medal count is only about 3.25 times more then the UK medal count.

So we compare pretty favourably - going back to my original point you really do struggle to stay on topic. I hope the US world cup bid team is as shit as you.

what does population have to do with winning medals...haha china and india are more populated than the u.s what's their tally?......Uk is not that good in the olympics...haha face it...:D

what does population have to do with winning medals...haha china and india are more populated than the u.s what's their tally?......Uk is not that good in the olympics...haha face it...:D

I believe I've just answered that question or are you really to thick too understand?

That table proves that we are very good in the Olympics. Infact we do much better then the US when comparing population and medal count.

Anyway I'll ask again, what has this got to do with the world cup bid?

You continue to prove my point that you keep trying to change the subject because you're clearly too stupid and moronic to be able to debate a single subject with any degree of accuracy and well thought out arguments.

I believe I've just answered that question or are you really to thick too understand?

That table proves that we are very good in the Olympics. Infact we do much better then the US when comparing population and medal count.

Anyway I'll ask again, what has this got to do with the world cup bid?

You continue to prove my point that you keep trying to change the subject because you're clearly too stupid and moronic to be able to debate a single subject with any degree of accuracy and well thought out arguments.

shut the fuk u son of bitch...ur the stupid ass moronic idiotic dumbazz bitch ....want a cookie?
Uk suck @ the olympics...and u wanna blame it on population hahahahahahahahhahah
ahahahah
ahahahaha
hahahahahah
:::lites my cigar::::

shut the fuk u son of bitch...ur the stupid ass moronic idiotic dumbazz bitch ....want a cookie?
Uk suck @ the olympics...and u wanna blame it on population hahahahahahahahhahah
ahahahah
ahahahaha
hahahahahah
:::lites my cigar::::

What's that in English?

What's that in English?

:::FARTS:::

Seriously Snoop if you carry on like you've been doing over the last few pages you're gonna get banned. Stop derailing the thread.

I suggest everyone justs ignores him, don't respond to his comments, as it will only encourage him!

ok i will stop guys.....Im sorry..

ok i will stop guys.....Im sorry..

good, but i doubt the US will host a world cup any time soon, i mean, whats the point?? football-or "soccer" isn't that big in the states, not to mention their squad brings shame to their country, its quite embarassing really (no offence intended to anyone) but i think the world cup should be hosted in a country who's national sport may be soccer (or one of their national sports)

good, but i doubt the US will host a world cup any time soon, i mean, whats the point?? football-or "soccer" isn't that big in the states, not to mention their squad brings shame to their country, its quite embarassing really (no offence intended to anyone) but i think the world cup should be hosted in a country who's national sport may be soccer (or one of their national sports)

China's national sport is the martial art of Wushu, but I'm sure FIFA would love to promote the football there :). Football is hardly the glamerous sport in the USA that it is in Europe, infact I don't really want the USA to get that fond of football, because they will have to Americanise it :bash:

I thought their national sport was table tennis? :?

Back guys promise to be cool ....where is my main man salif...lol

Back guys promise to be cool ....where is my main man salif...lol

You sausage! You at least could have pretended to be a new forumer! :bash: lol

You sausage! You at least could have pretended to be a new forumer! :bash: lol

naw I aint hiding....I will just be me....being real ;:nuts:

naw I aint hiding....I will just be me....being real ;:nuts:

well as long as u act like a normal human being u shud be fine

where is salif.....lol ..

Salif is probably elsewhere with more important things to do then talk to a person with very little un-biased oppinion on an event they clearly have very little knowledge about.

:banana:

hahahahaha

On an interview for 'Inside Sport' last night (BBC1), FIFA president announced he wanted to continue the rotation policy for continents, so pretty much confirmed that the 2018 World Cup would go to Asia... So China looks the best bet at the moment.

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

England isn't ready to host a World Cup in 3 years. There simply aren't enough big, modern stadiums. FIFA would never use ugly stadiums like Villa Park or Goodison Park etc. New venues would have to be built. I have no doubt in South Africa being ready, though :)

Villa Park only needs one new stand and will almost certainly be on the 2018 list, it is also a UEFA 4* venue having hosted a Cup Final a decade ago.

I agree though that England isn't ready to host a WC in 3 years, when we do get the WC we want to host it to our best abilities, as we won't be getting it for another 50 years.

Villa Park not only has character, luxury and 'looks' but is one of the finest stadiums in Europe (plus does not look like a goldfish bowl but a traditional shed stadium although will be a small venue with 51,000 seats). It’s an old stadium and the first in England to host internationals spanning three centuries.

A World Cup in England should also reflect the heritage and home of football! Most of our old large stadiums like Highbury and Anfield are disappearing, we need to keep at least one of the most finest examples. Also Villa Park has probably still the largest behind the goals stand 13.5k in England outside of Wembley and has always been one of the easiest stadiums to travel to in England for the majority of the UK. What probably makes it special is the atmosphere, the only other large place that I've been to in my life that had something similar is the old Cardiff Arms Park.

Yes, it’s always hosting FA cup semi-finals (55 so far) but it’s also hosted the last European Cup Winners Cup (b4 champions league), plus games in Euro 96 and its hosted three of the original 1966 World Cup games! Villa Park (unless they redevelop it) should definitely be included!

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

Ironic, considering South Africa will essentially build 6 new stadia within 3 years, and upgrade 4 stadia, of which the combined construction cost is still below the conservative construction cost estimate of wembley stadium, which certainly didnt make the three year construction deadline.

This excludes the training venues being upgraded and the other existing top notch stadia which already exist in South Africa.

stop giving me evils.

I think 2018 will be in China (although I want it to be in England, UK).

I think the powers that be can't resist the Chinese market.

Although... English football is HUGE in China. For example in the city I live in (Guangzhou) I find it impossible to find the local team FC top but every shop stocks the England, Arsenal, Man U, Chelsea, Liverpool tops etc.

Those Chinese LOVE ENGLISH FOOTBALL.

Hope England gets the World Cup in 2018 -- its time football came home.

^^ After seeing an interview with the FIFA president on Inside Sport, I expect the World Cup to go to China too. I have no doubt that, someday, Wembley will host a World Cup Final :)

^^ someday, Wembley will host a World Cup Final :)

we just wont be alive to see it