A summary of the UK's largest (though not necessarily best!) stadia. Note - Have included those currently under construction, but not those still in the planning stages. Also please note that they are not in order of what I think is 'best', but purely in order of capacity... Enjoy!


Britain's Top 15 Stadiums in terms of size:

1) Wembley Stadium, London: English national football stadium.
Capacity - 90,000
(Under Construction - opens 2006)

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5133&img=Wembley_cgi.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5134&img=Wembley_new_aerial.jpg



2) Twickenham Stadium, London: English national rugby stadium.
Capacity – 83,000
(Currently being expanded from 75-83,000)

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5129&img=Twickenham.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5130&img=Twickenham_aerial.jpg



3) Old Trafford, Manchester: Home of Manchester United F.C.
Capacity – 75,000
(Currently being expanded from 68-75,000)

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5121&img=Old_Trafford_Inside.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5122&img=Old_Trafford_planned_aerial.jpg



4) Millennium Stadium, Cardiff: Welsh national football and rugby stadium.
Capacity – 73,000

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5115&img=Millennium_inside_2.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5116&img=Millennium_outside.jpg



5) Murrayfield, Edinburgh: Scottish national rugby stadium.
Capacity – 67,000

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5117&img=Murrayfield.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5118&img=Murrayfield_aerial.jpg



6) New Anfield, Liverpool: New home of Liverpool F.C.
Capacity – 61,000
(Groundwork just begun – Opens 2007/2008)

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5120&img=Liverpool_new_3.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5119&img=New_liverpool_outside_2.jpg



7) Celtic Park, Glasgow: Home of Celtic F.C.
Capacity – 61,000

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5105&img=celtic_park.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5106&img=Celtic_Park_aerial.jpg



8) Emirates Stadium, London: New home of Arsenal F.C.
Capacity – 60,000
(Under Construction – opens 2006)

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5110&img=Emirates_inside.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5109&img=Emirates_Aerial.jpg



9) Hampden Park, Glasgow: Scottish national football stadium.
Capacity - 53,000

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5111&img=Hampden.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5112&img=Hampden_aerial.jpg



10) St. James' Park, Newcastle: Home of Newcastle United F.C.
Capacity – 53,000

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5123&img=St_James.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5124&img=St_James_Aerial.jpg



11) Ibrox Stadium, Glasgow: Home of Rangers F.C.
Capacity – 51,000

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5113&img=Ibrox.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5114&img=ibrox_aerial.jpg



12) Stadium of Light, Sunderland: Home of Sunderland A.F.C.
Capacity – 49,000

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5125&img=Stadium_of_light_inside.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5126&img=Stadium_of_Light_outside.jpg



13) City of Manchester Stadium, Manchester: Home of Manchester City F.C.
Capacity – 48,000

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5108&img=City_of_manc_3.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5107&img=City_Manchester_Stadium_outside.jpg



14) Villa Park, Birmingham: Home of Aston Villa F.C.
Capacity – 44,000

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5131&img=Villa_Park.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5132&img=Villa_park_3.jpg



15) Stamford Bridge, London: Home of Chelsea F.C.
Capacity – 43,000

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5128&img=Stamford_Bridge.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5127&img=Stamford_aerial.jpg

The UK should definitely host a world cup! Dont bother with the olympics..this is what u d do best!!

We could host a world cup no bother - and it'd be a bloody spectacular one at that, especially when wembly stadium is finished. Scotland is jealous of that beast!!
Dont want to nit-pick, but Parkheads capacity is 60,832 to be precise.. lol. And what a stadium it is too! Just been voted the most atmospheric stadium in britain by the BBC, and with good reason.
Deserves its nick-name : "Paradise"

just a few more pics of Celtic Park, these do it slightly more justice, sorry if im being a bit too obsessive, but Celtic are my team, afterall...

http://tinypic.com/mn3mh

http://tinypic.com/mn3g7

I would love to see a British World Cup, it would be as good if not better than anywhere else, but it'll never happen - there would need to be three seperate home teams automatically qualifying (England, Wales, Scotland). Guess they could have a mini-tournament to decide who qualifies automatically - might be a bit of a foregone conclusion though... Also, even if those problems were sorted, two of the best stadiums (Twickenham and Murrayfield) couldn't be used because they are owned by rugby associations who don't generally allow football at their stadiums - ridiculous as that is. The English bid for the 2006 World Cup, for example, didn't include Twickenham.

The Boy David - no probs, second pic is definitely worth posting. Agreed that Parkhead is an awesome stadium, as good as Old Trafford. Will edit the Celtic Park capacity to 61,000 since I'm rounding up/down to nearest 1000.

Welcome any other additional pictures or suggestions... :)

I think if the UK was to host a WC, it should be either just England, or Scotland, Wales and NI host it, it would be too problematic for a UK wide competition

Some newer renderings of the Arsenal stadium.
http://img3.exs.cx/img3/8839/emirates_stadium_large.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/behindgoal1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/behind.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/behind2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/halfway.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/half2.jpg

360 dgree views
http://www.arsenal.com/clublevel/index.htm#

Yeah i think that Scotland wasted its chance ten years ago when they redeveloped murrayfield and Hampden.

We could have had a Millenium stadium or Wembley, if the West, East prejudices did not exist. Imagine a stadium half way between the two citeis on the M8, with a direct rail link and complete sports campus, that is what Scotland should be working to in 30 years or so when they need redeveloped agaion

Dont want to nit-pick, but Parkheads capacity is 60,832 to be precise.. lol. And what a stadium it is too! Just been voted the most atmospheric stadium in britain by the BBC, and with good reason.
Deserves its nick-name : "Paradise"

When are they going to finish it? :)

Rubbish point : The City Of Manchester Stadium was also used for the 2002 Commonwealth Games, albeit at a 38,000 capacity.

As football was invented in Britain, Britain should have the world cup at least every 30 years imo. We are the home of football after all.

[QUOTE=SouthBank]two of the best stadiums (Twickenham and Murrayfield) couldn't be used because they are owned by rugby associations who don't generally allow football at their stadiums - ridiculous as that is. The English bid for the 2006 World Cup, for example, didn't include Twickenham. QUOTE]

Murryfield is used for football aswell as rugby. Hearts play their European games there (and may move there) and it was part of the bid for the European Championship in 2008 by Scotland and Ireland. We could have done with Croke Park for that bid but we may try again. Even though Switzerland/Austria won it UEFA said that the Scot/Irish bid was a close runner up and that we should try again but I think Scotlnad may go it alone if we do put in another bid.

Murryfield is used for football aswell as rugby. Hearts play their European games there (and may move there) and it was part of the bid for the European Championship in 2008 by Scotland and Ireland. We could have done with Croke Park for that bid but we may try again. Even though Switzerland/Austria won it UEFA said that the Scot/Irish bid was a close runner up and that we should try again but I think Scotlnad may go it alone if we do put in another bid.

Given the current state of Scottish Rugby and the pathetic crowds at WC99 in Scotland I don't see why the SRU don't swallow their pride and allow big Edinburgh football games at Murrayfield.

By my reckoning the 4 Edinburgh derbies could attract 50,000+ each. Probably even sell outs if there were £10 tickets (268,000 fans) in addittion to Hearts V Celtic/Rangers (4 matches) and Hibs vs Celtic/Rangers (another 4 matches).

That'd give a potential 800,000 spectators rather than the current 215,000 for those 12 games. It doesn't take a genius to see that both scottish rugby, football and the paying public could all benefit.

The new Wembley is really nice.

Beautiful stadiums. Im Proud England is thehome of football, i'd be even prouder if we were given a chance to exhibit these fine stadiums in a world cup.

[QUOTE=carlspannard]Some newer renderings of the Arsenal stadium.


Interior looks like "da Luz" portuguese stadium and exterior a little bit like "do Dragão" portuguese stadium! emirates?? major sponsor isn`t it? probably the money guys!

Really impressive and huge stadiums. It's interesting to see that a lot of stadiums look to have been expanded over the years and although its not noticable on the inside, you can clearly see it on the outside, which gives a feeling of tradition and history to it, more so than a brand new stadium.

Just my observation ;)

Horrary! More of the City of Manchester Stadium... (it should have been much bigger, but as usual, London grabbed the money for itself).

http://www.sportsvenue-technology.com/projects/2002CWG/images/cityofManchesterstadium5.jpg

http://www.tuesdaynightclub.co.uk/T03_Imag/03.26.06/Dsc07284.jpg

http://www.panstadia.com/vol8/81-050a-big.jpg

[QUOTE=carlspannard]Some newer renderings of the Arsenal stadium.


Interior looks like "da Luz" portuguese stadium and exterior a little bit like "do Dragão" portuguese stadium! emirates?? major sponsor isn`t it? probably the money guys!

Yes it looks like Da Luz but thats not a bad thing.The roof looks quite different to Da Luz though. Emirates will be the sponsors for the stadium over the next 15 years and during this time it will be officially known as The Emirates Stadium.No offence Emirates but it makes me want to throw up. I would feel the same if it was called the Coca Cola or AXA Insurance stadium.I couldve possibly lived with the Rolls Royce stadium but it doesnt matter,to me its The Arsenal Stadium and fcuk sponsors. :)

whenever i see english stadiums, my harts starts beating faster and faster:)... but why is the new stadium name of arsenal so fucked up... emirates stadium:|

It may be called the Emirates stadium officially, but I'll wager five of the Queen's English pounds that every man and his dog calls it Ashburton Grove.

It may be called the Emirates stadium officially, but I'll wager five of the Queen's English pounds that every man and his dog calls it Ashburton Grove.

I, like you, will stick to Ashburton Grove, otherwise we'll only have to change every few years when someone else buys the rights.

PS I asked my dog and he says he'll be calling it the emirates stadium, as he doesn't want to jeopadise his lucrative 'collar sponsorship' deal with the same company. Sorry.

British have one of the best stadiums in the world, conglatulations!!!!

If you're including proposed stadia , then Cardiff City FC's proposed 60,000 seater at Leckwith,Cardiff,Wales should presumably be included in the list.
And yes that is in additition to the Wales Millennium Stadium which is also in Cardiff !!!

WorldCup 2018 in UK !!!

WOW that stadium looks wild! was football really invented in uk?

WOW that stadium looks wild! was football really invented in uk?

No.

lol does ne1 no wereit was invented? ancient greece? lol

lol does ne1 no wereit was invented? ancient greece? lol

The game as we know it was invented in the England, UK.
The first club team was in england.
The first league was in england.

If you include peasents kicking inflated bladders around the streets with the occasional punch where there were no teams, then I think that was northern europe. Hard to say.

Kicking something around with your feet is nothing knew, it probably started with Neanderthals, but the rules and regulations that brought the modern game into being happened in England. So yes, I think I'd go along with that statement.

The worlds first football club was Sheffield FC and the worlds oldest football ground is Sandygate, home to Hallam FC, also in Sheffield

The UK certainly has the best football stadiums in Europe, even though most of the new stadias seem to have the same, rather boring lego-design. Anyway, FIFA should give the next available World Cup to the Brits.

Because the United Arab Emirates are chock full of money (and thus their Airline)...just visit their forum on this website...

No.

Football as a game and sport was invented in the UK. As was most of the worlds most popular sports. Cricket, Tennis, Rugby, Snooker...

Football as a game and sport was invented in the UK. As was most of the worlds most popular sports. Cricket, Tennis, Rugby, Snooker...


Baseball too surprisingly enough.

The worlds first football club was Sheffield FC and the worlds oldest football ground is Sandygate, home to Hallam FC, also in Sheffield

The oldest football club is Notts County.

^^ Oldest existing professional club is Notts County, but they weren't the world's first football club.

Wizard - Cardiff's proposed new stadium isn't on the list (as well as a few others such as Birmingham's Dome stadium) because a) It hasn't been fully approved yet, b) I can't see it ever becoming a 60,000 seater - it's planned to open at half that capacity if it does ever go ahead (therefore it wouldn't be on this list of largest stadiums). Cardiff struggle to fill their existing ground all the time, let alone a 60,000 one.

As for the world cup coming to the UK - it won't ever happen as such, although I fully expect England (not with Scotland or Wales involved) to host the competition at the next opportunity - probably 2018. Although this may depend on the outcome of London's 2012 Olympic bid...

Charlie p, not too sharp on the history of football? Of course the game was invented in the UK, along with the laws of the game as we know it.

What you refer to as "the game as we know it" was established in England in the 19th Century as an attempt to come up with a common set of rules for a game of football, as at the time most public schools had their own rules (most of which allowed handling of the ball) for their own particular form of football. Earlier still, football (or foot ball, or foote balle) was played across the country, usually once a year on Saints' days either between two neighbouring towns or villages or the top and bottom half of a larger town, although there is evidence that similar games were played centuries ago in Italy and China.

Of course not everybody wanted to follow the lead taken by the Football Association (although a compromise was nearly reached that allowed handling the ball, but not hacking, i.e. kicking opponents' shins!), and clubs that preferred the handling game as played at Rugby School formed the Rugby Football Union. Other variants were developed in other countries, namely American football, Canadian football and Australian Rules football (the earliest game of Aussie Rules was played in 1858, five years before the FA was founded), and Gaelic football has been played for centuries in Ireland, though was only formally arranged into an organised playing code by the Gaelic Athletic Association in the late nineteenth century. Rugby football had an internal rift leading to a breakaway in 1895 that saw the founding of the Rugby Football League and the two codes of rugby we have now.

In other words, the question "was football really invented in uk?" isn't as simple as most people think - though a lot of people on this forum seem to think that association football ("soccer") was invented out of nothing in the 19th Century and that other forms of football came later and are just "hijacking" the name - but when I read it I didn't have all that much time on my hands so just answered "No." :D

And I don't know why I just went to the effort of writing all that when I could have just given you a link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football :)

Southbank, the Birmingham Dome is 50,000 and they will be able to fill it easily aslong as there in the Premiership.

You guys forgot Molineux home of Wolverhampton Wanders AKA Wolves with expansion plans up to 44,500 ... possibly the nicest stadium ive ever visited, and ive been to a few lol ... unfortunately.

Albion, Villa, Wolves and Birmingham have all expansion etc plans great for Midlands football and thats excluding the likes of Stoke, Derby, Leicester, Nottingham Forest, Notts County, Walsall, Bristol City, Bristol Rovers, Kidderminster Harriers etc

Football as a game and sport was invented in the UK. As was most of the worlds most popular sports. Cricket, Tennis, Rugby, Snooker...


Actually cricket was invented in France of all places.

birminghamculture - not quite sure why you mentioned my name in your post? If you mean I should have included the planned Birmingham Dome; I didn't because it isn't confirmed yet. It hasn't even been designed properly, let alone approved (which we all know can take some time).

Your right to say that the Midlands has got some decent stadiums (having lived in Brum for three years I've experienced a few of them). However, Molineux seems unlikely to be expanded in the immediate future, unless Wolves can establish themselves as a permanent resident of the Premiership - far from definite given their history over the past 20 years. To expand speculatively in the present financial climate of football seems a bit risky - even for big spenders like Wolves. I think it's more likely we'll see expansion at Villa than anywhere else (except for Birmingham City) - and even that isn't for certain without further success on the pitch. I do hope some of the Midlands stadiums do get bigger and better though, particularly in the Birmingham/Black Country area - needs to catch up with Greater Manchester.

Btw last time I checked, Bristol wasn't part of the Midlands. But maybe I've missed something... ;)

I would just like to say that MANCHESTER UNITED OLD TRAFFORD.
is actually 'old'
thats the same pitch that the Germans dropped a bomb on during the war.
we were forced to share with Man City at the old Maine Rd Moss side.
what makes Old trafford even more amazing is thats its been expanded (continues) so many times its unreal. the big problem is that there is a train track behing the south stand whiich is holting that side.

Gives stadiums more character, just look at St James park, its almost comical.

Great to here that OT is goin to be bigger than Cardiff mill, welsh sheep shagers LOL.
MUFC is the biggest tourist attraction in Manchester. LOL (true)

Great to here that OT is goin to be bigger than Cardiff mill, welsh sheep shagers LOL.

yah cheeky manc

and don't diss it till you try it mate

Old Trafford is without doubt the finest ground in Britain.
The stands designed by a certain Scot are simply perfect.
Not too steep, and not too low. as said, OT will be expanded
to 75,000. plans are ongoin to add two extra tiers just like the
north stand, to the south stand, that would mean a capacity
of 92,000... that's the best and the largest ground in the UK!

The oldest football club is Notts County.

When the oldest football club was founded, who did they play against?

The mouthy shits who challenged them in the first place

When the oldest football club was founded, who did they play against?

By "oldest" its ment that they are the oldest club(pro anyway) still around, others of a similar age having since disbanded.

Although I equally dislike wolves I have to admit that Molineux is an amazing stadium, maybe not in terms of capacity but certainly in facilities and atmosphere. Probabley the best atmosphere I'v ever experienced at a match with the Wolves/Palace playoff semi from a few years ago.

Manchester united rules the football world

Not anymore, only made half the profits as they did last year

Manchester united rules the football world

Not anymore. Unless they start winning big again they are a dead brand.

I've worked at both old trafford and the man city, and from my experience, I reckon the City stadium is better aesthetically speaking.

But then old trafford has a big disadvantage in that it was a stadium that was slowly extended over time, whereas the man city stadium was custom built.

Old trafford is miles ahead of any stadium in the country and probably the world in being a tourist resort..We'd get thousands of Americans, europeans and orientals coming over just to take pictures of it, I doubt any other stadium in the world can claim the same.

:eek2: :eek2: :eek2: :eek2: :eek2:

These are recent Stadium of Light photographs taken at the weekend when we beat Coventry to go top of the league!! :cheers:

1 hour before kick-off.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/n.e.bullock/Stadium%20of%20Light%201.jpg

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/n.e.bullock/Stadium%20of%20Light%202.jpg

Are there still plans to extend the Stadium of Light up to 62,000?

I doubt it. Do they still have to give tickets away?

I doubt it. Do they still have to give tickets away?

Lol

Well they are 12,000 seats short most weeks, selling out so I think an expansion upto 62,000 is a tad far fetched.

Lol

Well they are 12,000 seats short most weeks, selling out so I think an expansion upto 62,000 is a tad far fetched.

The extension was certainly planned when they were last in the prem and it looks like there going to be back in the prem next season.Iif they can stablise there for a couple of years I wouldnt be supprized to see it happen.

Albion, Villa, Wolves and Birmingham have all expansion etc plans great for Midlands football and thats excluding the likes of Stoke, Derby, Leicester, Nottingham Forest, Notts County, Walsall, Bristol City, Bristol Rovers, Kidderminster Harriers etc

:weirdo:

We managed 30000 on Saturday, but then the power of the Premiership will mean sell out crowds each week, if and when we go up. We were even drawing in well over 40000 each week when we were relegated a few seasons back. When we were doing really well in the Premiership it was extremely hard to get a ticket, out lowest crowd of the season was over 43,000... and that was in the FA Cup.

Out biggest crowd this season was 43,350 which is far higher than any other Championship club.

We managed 30000 on Saturday, but then the power of the Premiership will mean sell out crowds each week, if and when we go up. We were even drawing in well over 40000 each week when we were relegated a few seasons back. When we were doing really well in the Premiership it was extremely hard to get a ticket, out lowest crowd of the season was over 43,000... and that was in the FA Cup.

Out biggest crowd this season was 43,350 which is far higher than any other Championship club.

It was certainly full for your playoff semi agenst us(Palace) last season. ;)

If it were not for the all seating policey in the UK the prem would definately beat the budasliga for average attenandance. I'd guess that 2/3's of the clubs could fill 50,000 grounds pretty much every week, heck Man Utd and maybe Arsenal and Chelsea could fill 90,000 every week.

Has groundwork for New Anfield really begun? Pictures?

Everyone knows Highbury is actually the best!

Not anymore, only made half the profits as they did last year
Profits are down because glazer is tring to take to over so no one is buying shirts or other items but ticket sales are still through the roof. Also the stands are being built(thats costing £40 million) and with spending silly amounts of money on players, the profits will have gone down. You won't see United profits go up untill Glazer pulls out and the ground has been expanded.

Its a shame they didn't make City of Manchester Statium a little bigger. Then again only MU could pull off a 100,000 plus statium and fill it every time. It like the design of Man City's home though.

wow~~the new wembley really rocks

Profits are down because glazer is tring to take to over so no one is buying shirts or other items but ticket sales are still through the roof. Also the stands are being built(thats costing £40 million) and with spending silly amounts of money on players, the profits will have gone down. You won't see United profits go up untill Glazer pulls out and the ground has been expanded.


Half of Rooney's transfer's included.

The turnover's the same. It's just that we've spent big in trasnfer market; the wages have also gone up and we're about to expand the ground.

No surprise really.

If the WC was to be hosted in one of the countries that I'd guess would be interested(Brazil, Spain, US, England, Austrialia etc) which stadia would you use?

Making guesses at possible extensions/new stadiums that could be built by then in England I'd guess...

New Wembley London - 90,000-100,000

Fully extended Old Trafford Manchester- 90,000-100,000

Extended Twickenham London - 82,000

Fully extended St James Park Newcastle- 70,000

Stadium of Light Sunderland with/without extension - 65,000 or 48,000

New Anfield Liverpool - 61,000

Emirates Stadium London - 60,000

Birmingham Dome - 60,000

City of Manchester Stadium Manchester - 48,000

Villa Park Birmingham - 45,000

New Bristol Rovers/City stadium - 30,000-40,000

Thats assuming that the RFU would allow Twickenham to be used(Croke park has just opened up so I'd say its not impossible) and that the Millenium Stadium will not be allowed to be used(if it was then you could strap the Bristol stadium and still have games in the south west). I'd geuss that Chelsea will have extended Stamford Bridge more by 2014 so if Twickenham wasnt used they could be instead.

Interesting thread!
Birmingham Dome?

Though i do think when the time comes England will have the best stadiums....cant see Brazil not getting it!

But every one of their stadiums needs alot of work...and a few new ones need to be built!

P.S
Villa Park are expanding to 52,000

P.P.S
Birmingham Dome

Its been in the media recently that a 60,000 seater sports dome is to be built in birmingham!

P.P.P.S
Chelsea have already said they are thinking of increasing to 60,000....and people have also saud they are actually thinking 80,000!

They said the Hotel will go to help expansion....im guessing quite a few surrounding buildings will have to go if they want 80,000

Though i do think when the time comes England will have the best stadiums....cant see Brazil not getting it!

But every one of their stadiums needs alot of work...and a few new ones need to be built!I'd guess alot of it will depend on whether Sepp Blatter gets another term as Fifa president or not. Really though I didnt intend for this to be bashing one possible bid under another just suggestions of what each bid would entail, they could esqually be for 2018 I spose.

P.S
Villa Park are expanding to 52,000 What exactly are they planning to do, build a new stand or fill in the corners?
P.P.S
Birmingham Dome

Its been in the media recently that a 60,000 seater sports dome is to be built in birmingham!I'm starting to think that a world cup bid is the only way it will be built.
P.P.P.S
Chelsea have already said they are thinking of increasing to 60,000....and people have also saud they are actually thinking 80,000!

They said the Hotel will go to help expansion....im guessing quite a few surrounding buildings will have to go if they want 80,000

If they did the entire ground in the same style as the newest stand I'd guess it would be around 60-70,000 although I can't see more than 3 london venues being used for a WC.

How many stadiums has to be used for a World Cup tournament? South Korea/Japan used 20, too many in my opinion. Germany will use 12, sounds much more reasonable to me.

How many stadiums has to be used for a World Cup tournament? South Korea/Japan used 20, too many in my opinion. Germany will use 12, sounds much more reasonable to me.

France only used 10 if I remmber correctly so I'd guess thats the minium for a 32 team WC.

Villa Park Capacity Increase...

The Club have received planning permission to extend the North Stand. This will involve the 'filling in' of the corners to either side of the North Stand. However there are currently no firm timescales as to when this will take place. When completed the capacity of Villa Park will be increased to 51,000.

what is the largest geographic distribution that has been given? Would the US need to keep things in one region of the country, or as spread out as last time? I thought last time was far too spread out.

If the whole country is used, I'd say"

Cowboys Park(retractable roof, walls and pitch) - 100,000 for final

Jets Stadium(retractable roof) - 75,000

Colts Stadium(retractable roof and walls) - 75,000

Reliant Stadium(retractable roof and field trays) - 75,000

New Arizona Cardinals stadium(retractable field and roof) - 65,000

Soldier Field(Simply awesome outdoors) - 65,000

Dolphins Stadium(being renovated with retractable roof and larger club areas) - 75,000

Qwest Field(roof for gradstand) - 70,000

New Vikings Stadium(retractable roof) - 65,000

New Giants Stadium - No details other than a deal has been struck

Whatever stadium a new Los Angeles team ends up at.

Not knowing these FIFA rules of configuration, capacity, covered seats or whatever, others I'd pick are:

Browns Stadium - 73,000
Invesco Field - 73,000
M&T Bank Stadium - 69,000
FedEx Field - 91,000
Daryl K Royal - Texas Memorial - ~114,000 in 2014
Lincoln Financial - 69,000
Bank of America - 73,000
Sanford Stadium(beautiful and continues to expand) - probably ~100,000 in 2014
Lambeau Field


There are many more in this size range or bigger that could be used. These are just my personal pics. There would be no larger collection of nice stadiums for any host unless they plan on spending tens of billions to catch up.

don't think there is a rule about where in the country games need to be played. Problem with USA 94 was the country is so damn big and they were trying to get games so everyone accross the country could go and see. Am i right in saying each city is limited to two grounds for a WC? So London could only use two stadiums (Wembley and Emirates i suspect)

^That was my question. In '94 they took a regional approach. Starting teams out in a regional bracket. This cut down travel some. Each region would be perfectly capable I think if they wanted to make a smaller geographic area.

IMHO, for climate reasons, wouldn't it be best to arrange a U.S World Cup in the northeast part of the U.S? Remember the swedish team play in +50C against Saudi Arabia at the Cotton Bowl in Texas. Playing on the east coast makes it also easier to have decent TV times in Europe too.

I guess there will be no problem to find 14 decent stadiums in northeastern U.S :)

^That was my question. In '94 they took a regional approach. Starting teams out in a regional bracket. This cut down travel some. Each region would be perfectly capable I think if they wanted to make a smaller geographic area.

I'd guess that the pressure to spread things out came less from Fifa and more from the US goverment, maybe if funding came from a state level that wouldnt be the case though?

I agree the temprature in the southern states was a problem in 94 although the spread of roofed stadia since then could help with that I guess.

All great points. The northeast or say the east coast would be great. Just hated to leave out some of the great venues in the rest of the country. One could just do the NE states.

New Giants Stadium
New Jets Stadium
possibly Giants Stadium if they don't tear it down
Gillete Stadium
Lincoln Financial
Heinz
M&T Bank
FedEx Field
New Colts Stadium
Paul Brown
Cleveland Browns
Ford Field
Ohio Stadium
Pontiac Silverdome
Rich Stadium
Soldier Field(if you wanna stretch it all the way to Illinois)

I'd still rather do the whole country. By then, the warmer cities like Miami, Dallas and Phoenix will join Houston with new retractable roof stadiums. I'd imagine that Cowboys Park's 100,000 capacity would be attractive as well for a Finals site.

I thought FIFA officials were quoted as saying Brazil is pretty much a "lock" for the 2014 World Cup?

I thought FIFA officials were quoted as saying Brazil is pretty much a "lock" for the 2014 World Cup?

Me too, but I guess Brazil has to build a couple of new stadiums then, I don't believe many of these (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=151289) are up to FIFA standards.

England could hold a 12stadium WC. But using Scotland and Wales's best stadiums would help.

You need zones to cut travel times.

1.S.E. - Wembley, Arsenal, Chelski
2 N.W. United, City, Liverpool
3. N.E - Newcastle, Sunderland, Hampden
4 Midlands - Birmingham Done, Villa, Millenium

I bloody hope the US don't get the World Cup in 2014, that wouldn't make any sense what so ever.

why wouldn't it make sense? FIFA wants to line pockets just like any other organization.

England could hold a 12stadium WC. But using Scotland and Wales's best stadiums would help.

You need zones to cut travel times.

1.S.E. - Wembley, Arsenal, Chelski
2 N.W. United, City, Liverpool
3. N.E - Newcastle, Sunderland, Hampden
4 Midlands - Birmingham Done, Villa, Millenium

Not sure if that would really be needed considering the comparatively small size of the country compaired to say the US(I don't think germany is doing so for example), plus I'd guess that the FA would be pushed into playing at least 1 of the England group games in the north.

England could hold a 12stadium WC. But using Scotland and Wales's best stadiums would help.

You need zones to cut travel times.

1.S.E. - Wembley, Arsenal, Chelski
2 N.W. United, City, Liverpool
3. N.E - Newcastle, Sunderland, Hampden
4 Midlands - Birmingham Done, Villa, Millenium

There's no chance that, after Germany 2006, Europe will get the World Cup before 2018. Possibly not until 2022.

And if England is Europe's choice, then in 13 or 17 years' time, there will be many more big stadia from which to choose. Everton and Tottenham, in particular, will almost certainly have 50,000+ capacity stadia by then. And if Leeds have recovered sufficiently from their current plight, you can bank on Ken Bates (or the old bugger's successor) redeveloping Elland Road

And there's no way that England would share a World Cup with Scotland and / or Wales. Only smaller footballing nations need to do that.

If the WC was to be hosted in one of the countries that I'd guess would be interested(Brazil, Spain, US, England, Austrialia etc) which stadia would you use?

In my Opinion England, Spain or US would not host the WC if they won the bid for the 2012 Olympics ( Remember that New York, Madrid and London could be a Olympc city in 2012).
Also, US hold the WC in 1994, so maybe it's too soon (only 20 years! I amb getting old! :()

Maybe a southafrican or southamerican country?

In my Opinion England, Spain or US would not host the WC if they won the bid for the 2012 Olympics ( Remember that New York, Madrid and London could be a Olympc city in 2012).
Also, US hold the WC in 1994, so maybe it's too soon (only 20 years! I amb getting old! :()
If you mean that FIFA are unlikely to award it to a country thats hosted the olympics I don't think thats the case, if anything prooving you can host one big event helps your bid for another as with Paris right now.

I doubt the cost of hosting both would be a factor either as unlike say Japan or Portigal England, Spain and the US would not need to build a lot of stadia espeically for the event.

Maybe a southafrican country?
...and rename it the Nelson Mandela cup? ;)

Brasil is actually waiting for a World Cup as an excuse to finally update our stadiums and build new ones. Most brazilian stadiums were built between 1950 and 1970... some of the newest ones are from second division teams and thus are not that great either.


The only really modern stadium in Brasil is Arena da Baixada, in Curitiba, home to Atlético Paranaense club. Its capacity is 32.000, but as you can notice, they havent still built one of its sides. I guess that when they build the other side, the capacity will rise to at least 45.000.

My thought about future world cup hosts would be this.
2006 Germany
2010 South Africa
2014 Brazil
2018 USA
2022 China

My thought about future world cup hosts would be this.
2006 Germany
2010 South Africa
2014 Brazil
2018 USA
2022 China

20 years without a european world cup?

In my Opinion England, Spain or US would not host the WC if they won the bid for the 2012 Olympics ( Remember that New York, Madrid and London could be a Olympc city in 2012).

I don't think it would make any difference. Remember:

1968 - Mexico City Olympics
1970 - Mexico World Cup

1972 - Munich Olympics
1974 - West Germany World Cup

20 years without a european world cup?
Yep and i dont see any problem even if i am from Europe.

15) Stamford Bridge, London: Home of Chelsea F.C.
Capacity – 43,000

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5128&img=Stamford_Bridge.jpg

http://www.photojunkyard.com/is.php?i=5127&img=Stamford_aerial.jpg

Will the new champions need to add to their stadium or will they have to find a new site?Will 43000 be enough?If they ever do find a new site will they be able to take the Chelsea name with them? Interesting times ahead for Chelsea.

Yep and i dont see any problem even if i am from Europe.

Because France have already hosted it recently? ;)

A 5 or 6 continant rotation policey is grossly unfair if you ask me as the number of countries actually able to host it in Asia, North America, Oceania and maybe even Africa is so small.

15,000 is enough for everyday Chelsea. if they expand they'll be playing in athe biggest white elephant in league football in 5years.

Will the new champions need to add to their stadium or will they have to find a new site?Will 43000 be enough?If they ever do find a new site will they be able to take the Chelsea name with them? Interesting times ahead for Chelsea.

Its been rumoured here that the Bates motel out back is going to be demolished to makeway for an expansion. The whole thing done in the style of the newest stand would look great if you ask me.

We could host a world cup no bother - and it'd be a bloody spectacular one at that, especially when wembly stadium is finished. Scotland is jealous of that beast!!
"

Tell me about it....you dont know how many welshmen, scottish and irishmen has said its a waste of money...its a crap design and all of that!

Never seen such green faces!

My thought about future world cup hosts would be this.
2006 Germany
2010 South Africa
2014 Brazil
2018 USA
2022 China

No way will the Americas be given the cup in consecutive tournaments.

I know that FIFA have committed to a continental rotation policy but the reality is that, even including central America, north America still has less than a quarter the number of countries of Europe. Likewise South America.

Furthermore, north and south America combined have only half as many countries as Europe with the infrastructure and stadia capable of hosting the World cup. So for the purposes of world cup rotation, I'm as certain as can be that north and south America will be considered as one entity.

Otherwise, we will have the ridiculous situation where great footballing countries like England, Italy and Spain will have to wait something like 200 years between hosting World Cups while the US would be hosts every fifty years or so.

South Africa will probably win the vote for 2010, Brazil for 2014, China or Australia for 2018 and England should be Europe's next host country in 2022.

I'v never actually seen this rotation policey layed down in black and white, some claim its going rotate by continent(hope peguins catch onto football before they get to the antartic ;)) where as others claim it merely stops one continent from hosting a WC twice in a row(which has been the case since the 50's anyway).

There are some rumours that the netherlands and belgium will be hosting the WC in 2018.

My thought about future world cup hosts would be this.
2006 Germany
2010 South Africa
2014 Brazil
2018 USA
2022 China

my thought

2014 Brazil
2018 England
2022 USA, Australia or China (what is the continent rotation rule?)

There are some rumours that the netherlands and belgium will be hosting the WC in 2018

This will probably not become reality

1. After the WC in Japan and Korea Fifa said, that there never will be a wc with two hosts again.

2. i can't image that Nederlands an Belgium can compete with England.

For this reason i'm quite sure that the next european world cup will be in england. but it's another question when this will be.

you moron! it is as much a British stadium as an English one... GB rugby league, athletics to be held there plus concerts... i have come to the conclusion you are the most irritating poster since Josh! old school!!! remember him?

^
You speaking to me?

Just a quick point, FIFA will only two stadiums per city for a World Cup, and only two cities can use two stadia. So there'd be no chance of, say, London using Wembley, the Emirates Stadium and White Hart Lane, and you could only choose two out of London, Manchester, Liverpool and Birmingham to use two stadiums.

I know that Australia is mentioned as hosting the World Cup but I really don't see it happeneing. We don't have enough football stadiums. Many of our big stadiums are cricket grounds and after some of the problems with the Olympic football tournment I doubt FIFA would give us the tournment.

I know that Australia is mentioned as hosting the World Cup but I really don't see it happeneing. We don't have enough football stadiums. Many of our big stadiums are cricket grounds and after some of the problems with the Olympic football tournment I doubt FIFA would give us the tournment.

Espeically if the 2 stadia in 2 cities rule stated above was struck to. Although England could pretty easily get round it the rule seems like a recipe for white elephant stadia if you ask me. I could see it working when the world cup was a smaller event but what if for example Argentina with seven 40,000+ stadia in Buenos Aires were to host it again?

I thought Stamford Bridge couldn't be exended!! The whole area is too crowded. I think we should start thinking of moving somewhere with enough room to build a proper stadium worthy of our club, seeing as Chelsea will most probably become one of the biggest football clubs in the world in the near future!

with enough room to build a proper stadium worthy of our club,!


:rofl:


Good job, I don't come across Chelsea fans.

If you mean that FIFA are unlikely to award it to a country thats hosted the olympics I don't think thats the case, if anything prooving you can host one big event helps your bid for another as with Paris right now.

I doubt the cost of hosting both would be a factor either as unlike say Japan or Portigal England, Spain and the US would not need to build a lot of stadia espeically for the event.


...and rename it the Nelson Mandela cup? ;)
I confused, I meant a southamerican country! :tonge2:

I also confused the winter games with world cup!!!! XD XD XD It was not my day I think.

:rofl:
Good job, I don't come across Chelsea fans.
You live in Manchester so odds are you'll only see Man City fans in ur life! Did you know we've recently got the largest ever sponsorship deal with Samsung, I wonder why that is...

You live in Manchester so odds are you'll only see Man City fans in ur life! Did you know we've recently got the largest ever sponsorship deal with Samsung, I wonder why that is...


You were pulling in crowds of 8,000 a decade ago.

Once the Russian fucks off, you'll have a huge white elephant of a stadium left.

and Manchester's red thankyou. That's from a local to a Chelsea fan from Southampton and Lisbon.(they've already started recruiting it would seem)

A proper stadium worthy of our club indeed. A no mark club that's what you are.

Oh I see, you're just a spanner trying to stir up trouble!! Or perhaps a bitter loser who begrudges us for our success, or even perhaps your fear that we'll become the biggest club in England and will dominate the Premiership for the next few decades is blinding you from the obvious truth- Chelsea have got an ingenious plan being put into place which create the solid foundations necessary for a healthy profit making club and consequently give rise to that vicious spiral, that your so affraid of, of success - more fans/sales - revenues - top notch players - success!!!
Your downfall is in sight, cope with it.

Not really.

Supported my club through thick and thin during the 70's/80's. It's not about trophies, for most proper fans. So I don't give a monkeys what Chelsea go onto achieve. In fact, I'd argue that the 80's were more fun than the 90's, regardless of what we achieved in 90's/00's.

I simply found this quote hilarious - 'a proper stadium worthy of our club'. Thing is, you're a no mark club, don't let the Russian's zillions delude you of that fact.

No tradition, no history, shite attendances, terrible fans a kin to the likes of Millwall and West Ham - that's your club.

You found the quote hilarious but I don't think anything can beat ur 2-0 defeat to Norwich, I was pissing my pants laughing!! I mean I understand what it must feel like being consistently completely outplayed by teams which hav spent on their whole squad what u coffed up for Rooney alone in every competition you enter. But you need get over it and start lowering you expectations otherwise your gonna become gutted bitter gits.

Cutting stuff. . .

We need a stadium worthy of our club indeed.

I think that was a little uncalled for

To the people who posted a few months ago and said that football was invented in England...wrong! Football was born in a little town called Calander in perthshire (Scotland).

Anyway...

All those stadiums are impressive but how many of those stadiums can boast at the fact that their main entrance/main stand is still the same on the outside than it was 100 years ago? Only one stadium can and that's Ibrox (Glasgow Rangers). The only difference being they added the new part to the top of the main stand which is known as the club deck.

http://img122.echo.cx/img122/7575/br4ja1cu.jpg
http://img164.echo.cx/img164/2746/aussen070ab.jpg
http://img122.echo.cx/img122/8656/ibrox1ou.jpg
http://www.broxibears.com/images/photos/ibrox/ibrox09.jpg

The traditional Ibrox red brick makes it one of the most historical and amazing stadia in world football. Sure we have all these impressive, brand spanking new, expensive stadia but keeping to a clubs history and heritage is much more important if you ask me. Look at the old Wembley, the traditional towers are now gone and that was a sad day for English football. It would be a sad day for Rangers fans if we lost the main stand.

Also how many football stadiums can boast about their interior? Well Rangers and Ibrox can have a look at this.

http://img192.echo.cx/img192/6855/ibroxc3179fq.jpg
http://img192.echo.cx/img192/6610/ibroxc3166kk.jpg http://img138.echo.cx/img138/6388/ibroxc3149gg.jpg http://img117.echo.cx/img117/7379/ibroxc3152yy.jpg
http://img231.echo.cx/img231/6658/untitl546ed93vy.jpg http://img18.echo.cx/img18/6554/untitl546ed108tz.jpg http://img144.echo.cx/img144/6148/untitl546ed115jl.jpg http://img18.echo.cx/img18/7296/untitl546ed127qb.jpg
http://img175.echo.cx/img175/3255/ibroxc3131lg.jpg
http://img18.echo.cx/img18/3973/untitl546ed136yv.jpg
http://img259.echo.cx/img259/1961/ibroxc3016ao.jpg
http://img252.echo.cx/img252/5315/ibroxc3061ck.jpg

This is the world famous 'blue room' which is probably most Rangers fan's favourite room in the whole of Ibrox. As you can see it has painting's of every single manager in Rangers history on the wall. There have only been 11 managers in the 133 years of Rangers history. During which we have won 106 major trophies, so that's not even including trophies such as the glasgow cup, the coronation cup and other trophies which don't exist any more.

http://www.broxibears.com/images/photos/ibrox/ibrox08.jpg

All this makes Ibrox one of the most traditional football stadiums on this planet. Ibrox is a proper football stadium, a proper arena.

But Ibrox also shows it's modern side with it's wonderful interior.

http://img31.echo.cx/img31/7917/sp0263480px9xn.jpg
http://img153.echo.cx/img153/2395/ibroxd015my.jpg http://img192.echo.cx/img192/9600/ibroxc014yz.jpg http://img153.echo.cx/img153/2443/ibroxpan010ld.jpg

What stadium can boast such a packed trophy room as this? Rangers are the worlds most sucessful football team and also hold the world record for the most league championships won when they won their 50th league title in 2003. Not bad eh? :)

http://img212.echo.cx/img212/1084/untitl546ed83pf.jpg
http://img45.echo.cx/img45/2007/trophyroom5ot.jpg



Ibrox is a stadium which keeps it's history but also adds a bit of moderness (if thats a word?) that, to me, is what makes Ibrox a special stadium, more special than any other stadium in the world. But hey I'm biased, aren't I?

What stadium can boast such a packed trophy room as this? Rangers are the worlds most sucessful football team and also hold the world record for the most league championships won when they won their 50th league title in 2003. Not bad eh?

Still....scotland :D

As far as I can remember its always been Celric and Rangers!

My have alot of trophys......but youve won nothing outside of Scotland...European cup winners cup doesnt cound

To the people who posted a few months ago and said that football was invented in England...wrong! Football was born in a little town called Calander in perthshire (Scotland).
Its terrible isn't it. Its almost as if they think British and English is the same thing. ;)

What stadium can boast such a packed trophy room as this? Rangers are the worlds most sucessful football team and also hold the world record for the most league championships won when they won their 50th league title in 2003. Not bad eh? :)

Comparing a Scottish League or FA Cup Trophy with say an English or Spanish league or cup trophy is like comparing a peseta with a pound or a Euro. Rangers are far from the worlds most succesful team.

Ibrox is a stadium which keeps it's history but also adds a bit of moderness (if thats a word?) that, to me, is what makes Ibrox a special stadium, more special than any other stadium in the world. But hey I'm biased, aren't I?
The word is modernity,yes you are biased but I do agree that Ibrox is an excellent stadium.

What stadium can boast such a packed trophy room as this? Rangers are the worlds most sucessful football team and also hold the world record for the most league championships won when they won their 50th league title in 2003. Not bad eh?

Still....scotland :D

As far as I can remember its always been Celric and Rangers!

My have alot of trophys......but youve won nothing outside of Scotland...European cup winners cup doesnt cound

Always been Celtic and Rangers? No it's always been Celtic or Rangers in recent times. Just the same as it has always been Man Utd or Arsenal in recent times in England.

It might be Scottish football but don't you DARE write off our achievements. We used to beat your clubs left, right and centre when we met in Europe up until the last 10 years.

Maybe some people can't face the fact that Rangers and Celtic two of the biggest clubs in the world, with biggers supports than Liverpool!

Rangers have more supporters than Liverpool? :-S

Yes we do....Rangers have the most supporters clubs in this country outside Manyooo did you know that? :)

In Britain....understandable seeing as there are many class clubs in England to choose from but in scotland :( :D


But overall...

http://img123.echo.cx/img123/7775/bestfansintheworld23up.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

You're having a laugh and you know you are. Most of your glory hunters ran off when Man Yoo started winning things!

Still those glory supporters bring this club millions of £s every year!

And I love them!

Still those glory supporters bring this club millions of £s every year!

And I love them!

Millions every year and what's to show for it? One FA cup, one Champions League final (oh and btw thanks for knocking those cockney gloryhunters out!).

Not good enough mate. Give us your tv money and we'll show you how to win things.

"Not good enough mate."

What you on about...Liverpool are the most succesful club in England!

I sure most footballers out there would rather win the FA cup than the Scottish League!

You weren't making Millions every year when you were winning things...Good to know you are Englands most sucessful team because we all know who is BRITAINS most sucessful team don't we? :)

Or does it hurt so much to know that a Scottish club has a higher trophy count than Liverpool?

Not really....If you was to suddenly win 5 European cups I would be miffed!

http://www.liverpool.com/lfctour/eurocups.jpg

Maybe have to make this Cabinet a bit bigger in a few weeks time ;)

Not really....If you was to suddenly win 5 European cups I would be miffed!

http://www.liverpool.com/lfctour/eurocups.jpg

Maybe have to make this Cabinet a bit bigger in a few weeks time ;)

Hey congratulations, well done...you can borrow Celtic's trophy cabinet for the next one as they aren't going to be using theirs for a while yet.

Like I said...give us your TV money and we will show you how to win things.

Without doubt the most successful UK club in Europe has been Liverpool. But do remember, the Scottish league used to be very strong with superb teams in the 60's (Rangers, Celtic, Hibs, even Dunfermline) and more recently great Dundee United and Aberdeen teams who beat the best In Europe (Aberdeen 2 - Real Madrid 1 - cup winners cup final). Only recently has the Scottish league become quite a poor league. Scotland used to produce some of the best players in the world, sadly not anymore. Rangers are by far the most successful club in Scotland with a huge Scottish fanbase, but Liverpool in the 70's & 80's were an outstanding European team. If Rangers and celtic got the TV money that English teams get (not going to happen though), then they would be up there with the best in Europe.

Bayern Munich also doens't by far get the TV money english clubs get. Nevertheless they are among the Top 5 in Europe...

This is true, but Bayern still get far far more TV money than Rangers. Bayern can also rely on good German players, whereas Rangers have to buy lots of foreigners as Scotland no longer produces good players. As Rangers play in a poor league, there is a limit to the quality of player Rangers can attract. Put Rangers in the English or German league, then they would be able to attract the type of players that Liverpool and Bayern sign.

we all know who is BRITAINS most sucessful team don't we? :)

There's probably some village team that's won their league 52 times but as they play against shite then it doesn't really count, same for Rangers I'm afraid ;)

I'd like to see the Scottish and English leagues merge into a British league, with Rangers and Celtic (and maybe occassionally someone else) we'd have a really strong league. Rangers and Celtic would also get their TV money then.

You seem to forget that Scotland used to have a very strong league with very good teams, who would get to european finals, semis, quaters etc. Only in the last 15 years has the Scottish league become poor. Your best German and English clubs would have struggled against the Scottish teams of the 60's. I also remember Aberdeen and Dundee United pumping the best Europe could offer in the early 80's (Dundee United 5-0 Borussia Munchengladbach)

It used to be on a par with Portugal or the Netherlands maybe but it's never been as strong as England, Spain, Germany or Italy.

How many times has a Scottish team won the European cup/champions league or even the UEFA cup/cup winners cup, now compare this to the records of the other leagues, in the 60s and 70s you were in the second division of euroleagues but you're in the third or fourth.

Actually, having just looked at the records, you are also way behind Portugal and the Netherlands.

I think if you compare Scotlands European records in the 60's to that of other leagues, then it will be very close to Englands (if not better), way way ahead of Portugal/France and close to some other big leagues. For a country of 5 million, Scotlands European records in the 60's/early 70's and early 80's were outstding. As for England, who many English clubs have won European trophies in the last 20 years? 3 is the answer. Compare that to Spain and Italy, and you will see who has the very poor European record. 3 finals in over 20 years, for a country of 60 million, is terrible. In fact, come to think of it, Scotland has had 3 teams in European finals in the last 20 years, so we aren't that far behind England (England population 60 million, Scotland population 5 million)

I think if you compare Scotlands European records in the 60's to that of other leagues, then it will be very close to Englands (if not better), way way ahead of Portugal/France and close to some other big leagues. For a country of 5 million, Scotlands European records in the 60's/early 70's and early 80's were outstding. As for England, who many English clubs have won European trophies in the last 20 years? 3 is the answer. Compare that to Spain and Italy, and you will see who has the very poor European record. 3 finals in over 20 years, for a country of 60 million, is terrible. In fact, come to think of it, Scotland has had 3 teams in European finals in the last 20 years, so we aren't that far behind England (England population 60 million, Scotland population 5 million)

Englands population is 50m not 60m, the UK is 60m in total.

For several of those 20 years we were banned from all competitions and that weakened us for a few years afterwards too. I agree that our recent record in getting to Champions league finals isn't too great, only two finals in the past six years but if you look at how many get to the semis and quarter finals we are consistently strong, our clubs also tend to do quite well in the UEFA cup too.

Even during Scotland's supposed 'Golden age' of the 1960s you only won one Euro cup, no other finalists and no wins in the other tournaments either.

If you look at the overall record since the competitions began in the 50s Scotland is probably 8th or 9th while England is definetlely in the top 3 whichever way you look at it.

scotland had lots of clubs in European finals, semis, quaters in the 60's, check your stats. as for your ban, who's fault was that?

England has some of the best stadia. It's really funny to see huge stadia in the middle of neighboorhoods.

Oh shut up the lot of you...

The Scottish league is shit: always was, probably always will be. Rangers and Celtic might as well form a seperate league as they are the only two teams that ever win anything.

The English league is without a doubt the best league in the world. To say the Scottish leaque was ever on par with the English is ridiculous.

This is also refelected in the quality of the respective national teams: Scotland are shitter than shit, England are on of the better teams. People go to watch Scotland games for a laugh.

I definately agree with the idea of a British league, although this is apparantly already the case with teams such as Cardiff FC playing in the English league.

"always was"


simply not true

scotland had lots of clubs in European finals, semis, quaters in the 60's, check your stats. as for your ban, who's fault was that?

I accept that you weren't bad in the 60s but you weren't exactly world-beaters either, as for the ban i'm not saying English clubs didn't deserve it (although other countries have been punished much more lightly since for hooligan incidents) but it is a valid reason as to why we didn't get to any finals in that time.

I know that Scotland is only a small country with a declining population and a dearth of footballing talent so it's true you haven't done badly considering, but now you are about where you should expect to be.

I definately agree with the idea of a British league, although this is apparantly already the case with teams such as Cardiff FC playing in the English league.

I would like to see a British league, it would give Rangers and Celtic the resources and competition they need while strengthening the competition for the big English clubs too.

You could also have a new team from Belfast or even Dublin if they wanted to join too.

@ Bubomb

Well, maybe not when it was formed, but for the past 50 years or so it's been either Celtic or Rangers that has won the league. Infact, the Scottish league is so bad and void of competition that BOTH Ranger and Celtic have managed to win the Scottish league 9 times in a row!

For a population of 5 million, our achievements in the 60's/early 70's/early 80's were superb. but now we are on the level you would expect for a very small country.

The ban was Thatchers fault....she was the one who decided 5 years...probably cost Liverpool alot...IMO the ban was unfair....especialy seeing as Juventus got away scot free!

"but for the past 50 years or so it's been either Celtic or Rangers that has won the league"


erm, no it's not

yes that's right, it was all Thatchers fault, Liverpool fans were nothing to do with it, totally blameless.........again.


perfect example of the 'victim' culture you find everyday in Liverpool. absolutely pathetic. Try and take responsibility for your own actions, instead of blaming everybody else. In Liverpool, it's always somebody else's fault.

Since 1981, Celtic have won 39 times. Rangers have won 48 times. The third most succeful team, Hibernian, have won 4 times.

http://worldsoccer.about.com/library/weekly/bl_scotleagwinz.htm

Im not saying we shouldnt of got banned....but Juventus should of gotten banned aswell....and IMO 5 years was too much!

P.S
Im not from Liverpool, Ive never been to Liverpool!

Since 1981, Celtic have won 39 times. Rangers have won 48 times. The third most succeful team, Hibernian, have won 4 times.

I know you do things differently up there but I didn't know you had about 3 or 4 seasons per year! ;)

haha, i meant 1891 :) [I think]

Anyway: thos figures just prove that the Scottish league is useless: there is absolutely no competition at all.

Since 1981, Celtic have won 39 times. Rangers have won 48 times. The third most succeful team, Hibernian, have won 4 times.

http://worldsoccer.about.com/library/weekly/bl_scotleagwinz.htm

Erm...Rangers have won the Scottish league 50 times...

Also Aberdeen are Scotlands third most sucessful team and have won the league the same amount of times than Hibernian.

"but for the past 50 years or so it's been either Celtic or Rangers that has won the league"


erm, no it's not

I was simply providing bubomb with evidence to support my view that the Scottish league is void of competition and for that reason is crap. The fact that I miscounted how many times Rangers won the league by 2 is a barely worth mentioning.

The point still stands that Scotland's third most succesful teams have won the league 4 times, compared with Rangers who have won it 50 times and Celtic 39 times since 1891.

The Scottish league is crap, crap, crap.

Did Third Lanark ever win the championship before they went bust in the 60s?

Yes, in 1904

I was simply providing bubomb with evidence to support my view that the Scottish league is void of competition and for that reason is crap. The fact that I miscounted how many times Rangers won the league by 2 is a barely worth mentioning.

The point still stands that Scotland's third most succesful teams have won the league 4 times, compared with Rangers who have won it 50 times and Celtic 39 times since 1891.

The Scottish league is crap, crap, crap.

Your opinion and lack of knowledge on the subject to me is CRAP, CRAP, CRAP!

Your opinion and lack of knowledge on the subject to me is CRAP, CRAP, CRAP!

It seems quite reasonable to me and most football fans would agree.

It seems quite reasonable to me and most football fans would agree.

You watched a lot of Scottish football then did you?

You watched a lot of Scottish football then did you?

You don't need to watch it, the dominance of Rangers and Celtic in the domestic league and their results against teams from other nations in European competition speaks for itself.

You don't need to watch it, the dominance of Rangers and Celtic in the domestic league and their results against teams from other nations in European competition speaks for itself.

So since you have just admitted to me that you don't watch it, how can you possibly comment?

Rangers and Celtic (mainly Rangers) have dominated Scottish football in the last 15 years...correct. But before that, we had Aberdeen, Dundee Utd, Dundee, Hearts and Hibs all challenging. We even had Motherwell taking Rangers close to the league 10 years ago.

I seem to remember Celtic beating Hearts on the last day of the season to steal the league from the Edinburgh side in the late 80's. I remember all Aberdeen had to do in the early 90's was to draw at Ibrox and they would be crowned champions but Rangers beat them 2-0 to clinch the league.

During the 60's Rangers and Celtic may have won the league but since I was born at the time I will tell you that we did not run riot with the leagues infact a lot of teams challenged us the whole way. Kilmarnock even won the league in the 60's. Celtic should have been relegated years ago as well but because the SFA changed the league structure they were allowed to remain in Scotlands top league.

Scottish football was very competitive between 1890-1980's. Then Rangers took control and now Celtic are starting to take control. It's the same in England as well with Man Utd/Arsenal and most recently Chelsea.

So stop showing your ignorance and lack of knowledge to Scottish league. People like Waddel, Baxter e.t.c must be rolling around in their graves knowing their hard work was for nothing because ignorant people like you downsize their efforts.

Disgrace!

TheRangers, no one is saying that Rangers and Celtic are crap teams; what I am saying is the Scottish league is crap. And it is. Sport is about competition. There is no competition in the Scottish league.

Scottish football was very competitive between 1890-1980's. Then Rangers took control and now Celtic are starting to take control. It's the same in England as well with Man Utd/Arsenal and most recently Chelsea.

So stop showing your ignorance and lack of knowledge to Scottish league. People like Waddel, Baxter e.t.c must be rolling around in their graves knowing their hard work was for nothing because ignorant people like you downsize their efforts.

Disgrace!

I don't give a toss about Widdel, Boxter etc, the fact is that the Scottish league is crap and uncompetitive not only because of the total dominance in terms of championships by the old firm which isn't new but because of the margins of victory which is a more recent development. Kilmarnock winning the championship in 1965 doesn't change anything.

Add to this the lack of success in Europe and a neutral observer can only come to one conclusion, of course a Rangers fan would think differently.

I have watched some old firm games on TV and by the looks of it both Rangers and Celtic would do fairly well in The Premiership but after that the other Scottish teams would be in The Championship at best, maybe even League 1. The most amazing thing about the old firm games though is the bigotry on both sides, I didn't realise things were still so neanderthal in Scotland but having heard about the Hearts fans booing the minutes silence for the Pope it's clear that many football fans north of the border are still in the dark ages.

I don't give a toss about Widdel, Boxter etc, the fact is that the Scottish league is crap and uncompetitive not only because of the total dominance in terms of championships by the old firm which isn't new but because of the margins of victory which is a more recent development. Kilmarnock winning the championship in 1965 doesn't change anything.

Add to this the lack of success in Europe and a neutral observer can only come to one conclusion, of course a Rangers fan would think differently.

I have watched some old firm games on TV and by the looks of it both Rangers and Celtic would do fairly well in The Premiership but after that the other Scottish teams would be in The Championship at best, maybe even League 1. The most amazing thing about the old firm games though is the bigotry on both sides, I didn't realise things were still so neanderthal in Scotland but having heard about the Hearts fans booing the minutes silence for the Pope it's clear that many football fans north of the border are still in the dark ages.


Are we forgetting the fact that quite a few English teams support booed during the minutes silence for the pope? Maybe it was Scot's in the English terraces, eh?

I can't really be arsed having a debate with you because you are just talking shite.

I didn't realise things were still so neanderthal in Scotland but having heard about the Hearts fans booing the minutes silence for the Pope it's clear that many football fans north of the border are still in the dark ages.

Keep in mind though, Jonesy, that it's a small minority who cause all the trouble. Similar to how it's a small minority who cause the problems abroad and give the average England fan a bad name. You can't lump us all together.

Are we forgetting the fact that quite a few English teams support booed during the minutes silence for the pope?

Really, who was that then?

Keep in mind though, Jonesy, that it's a small minority who cause all the trouble. Similar to how it's a small minority who cause the problems abroad and give the average England fan a bad name. You can't lump us all together.

I know, I'm only winding him up, seems fairly easy with this one :laugh:

Really, who was that then?


West Brom for one... :)

West Brom for one... :)

I've just looked that up on google and the only reference I can find is on a Scottish football forum where somebody has claimed that a guy 'with a clear West midlands accent' said "Hello hello" during the silence. Hardly the same I would suggest.

I've just looked that up on google and the only reference I can find is on a Scottish football forum where somebody has claimed that a guy 'with a clear West midlands accent' said "Hello hello" during the silence. Hardly the same I would suggest.

It was probably TheRangers.

Shut up you fucking idiot.

"small minority who cause the problems abroad and give the average England fan a bad name. You can't lump us all together."


Having witnessed England fans abroad, it's quite a big minority who cause trouble. Not 5 or 6 fans, but hundreds sometimes thousands. Even the ones who don't cause trouble, still tend to come across as offensive working class lager louts. As for the Scottish league debate, the fact that most posters don't realise that Aberdeen dominated scottish football in the early 80's, shows that they don't know what they are talking about. Rangers and Celtic have dominated Scottish fdootball in the last 20 years, but what about Liverpool, Arsenal and Man United? Haven't they dominated English football in the last 20 years?

"Having witnessed England fans abroad, it's quite a big minority who cause trouble. Not 5 or 6 fans, but hundreds sometimes thousands."


Bullox

what about Liverpool, Arsenal and Man United? Haven't they dominated English football in the last 20 years?

Blackburn, Everton and Leeds have also won the league in the past 20 years.

As for the Scottish league debate, the fact that most posters don't realise that Aberdeen dominated scottish football in the early 80's

So Aberdeen had one good team once. Rangers and Celtic have still won 80%+ of the Scottish league titles.

as have psv, feyenoord and ajax

as have barcelona and madrid

as have bayern and ????

as have sporting, porto and benfica

as have milan, juventus and inter

as have man united, liverpool and arsenal




It's the same everywhere

"Blackburn, Everton and Leeds have also won the league in the past 20 years"


one off's, just like Kilmarnock and Dundee United (although Dundee United did come 2nd the previous year, and got to a Uefa cup final)



P.S - who's the only British team to beat Barcelona in the Nou Camp? Answer - Dundee United (when the got to the uefa cup final)

Dundee United average 7500 fans. I can't see many English clubs who average 7500 getting to a European final.

2005 Chelsea
2004 -Arsenal
2003 -Manchester United
2002 -Arsenal
2001 Manchester United
2000 Manchester United
1999 Manchester United
1998 Arsenal
1997 Manchester United
1996 Manchester United
1995 -Blackburn Rovers
1994 Manchester United
1993 Manchester United
1992 -Leeds United
1991 Arsenal
1990 -Liverpool
1989 Arsenal
1988 Liverpool
1987 -Everton
1986 Liverpool
1985 Everton

So you can see 7 different winners in the last 20 years, with a further three since 1975 (Aston Villa, Notts Forest and Derby County)

I see 2 teams completely dominating the English league on that list.

I predict either chelsea, man united or arsenal will win the English league next year, just like either celtic or rangers will win the Scottish league. Not much difference i'm afraid. The only slight difference in Scotland is that Rangers/celtic will have a big points gap between them and 3rd, but that has only come about in the last 15 years. It wasn't like that before.

To the people who posted a few months ago and said that football was invented in England...wrong! Football was born in a little town called Calander in perthshire (Scotland).


You're joking right? Football has been around for hundreds and hundreds of years and was probably brought to the UK by the Romans. Or are you talking about soccer rather than the more generic "football"...?

The football most of the world plays i.e 10 men and a goalkeeper, was invented at Cambridge University as a means of compromising between all the different rules the students brought with them from their public schools.

"You're joking right? Football has been around for hundreds and hundreds of years and was probably brought to the UK by the Romans. Or are you talking about soccer rather than the more generic "football"...?"

Noboddy knows who invented kicking a round thing...but we did invent football!

I don't think something like football is invented. It's something that evolves and changes over time...

Anyway, bubomb and TheRangers. Go and annoy the hell out of some other forum.

The football most of the world plays i.e 10 men and a goalkeeper, was invented at Cambridge University as a means of compromising between all the different rules the students brought with them from their public schools.

Yes, but not everybody agreed to go along with this particular form of football - Harlequin Football Club, Blackheath Football Club, Leicester Football Club and others preferred to keep on playing the type of football played at Rugby School, and it was this form of football that formed the basis of the American and Australian football codes. I'm not entirely sure where the Irish got their version of football from.

I'm not getting into this!

I've had enough trouble in the "Sacred Sport" thread.

I've worked at both old trafford and the man city, and from my experience, I reckon the City stadium is better aesthetically speaking.

But then old trafford has a big disadvantage in that it was a stadium that was slowly extended over time, whereas the man city stadium was custom built.

Old trafford is miles ahead of any stadium in the country and probably the world in being a tourist resort..We'd get thousands of Americans, europeans and orientals coming over just to take pictures of it, I doubt any other stadium in the world can claim the same.

the tour queues at the Nou Camp are much bigger

I'm not getting into this!

I've had enough trouble in the "Sacred Sport" thread.

Oh go on, you're the only ally I have! :)

"You're joking right? Football has been around for hundreds and hundreds of years and was probably brought to the UK by the Romans. Or are you talking about soccer rather than the more generic "football"...?"

Noboddy knows who invented kicking a round thing...but we did invent football!
As long as humans have had legs, we've gone around kicking things... the Chinese had a kicking sport thousands of years ago, as did the Japanese - the Vikings particularly enjoyed kicking around people's heads that they'd cut off. But those 'sports' had as much influence on modern-day football as the Penny Farthing did on the Ferrari F355. The Italians had a very similar sport to modern day football, but that had no influence on Association Football.

Football (round ball, 120x70-ish yard pitch, two goals, equal sized teams of about 11) was first codified, and therefore 'invented', in England in the mid 19th century. That's all there is to it.

Football (round ball, 120x70-ish yard pitch, two goals, equal sized teams of about 11) was first codified, and therefore 'invented', in England in the mid 19th century. That's all there is to it.

That's not all there is to it! A game called football was around long before then - ball any shape, pitch rather larger, teams consisting one end of the town against the other, neighbouring villages, school Houses etc. Rules varied from location to location (though most allowed handling the ball). A formal set of rules was drawn up at Cambridge in the mid-19th Century, so you can say that association football was 'invented' then, but not football...

I'm not claiming that soccer isn't football - it is! But so is rugby... and gridiron... and Aussie Rules...

Wembley Stadium - The Rolling Stones are gonna be the first music act to play the new stadium...I bet they fill it!

British Stadiums rock...ours look like trash.

If your going to push back beyond the avent of association football then it was probabley invented by Mr Ugh in the year 75,000 BC somewhere in sub saharan Africa.

I agree. I think the definition of a game being started is when a definate set of rules and an organised competition is setup. Those who would trace a games earlier beginnings miss the point, some person hitting a ball with their foot is not football, or if it is, then its beginning are long obscured in prehistory.

Actually the real birth place of football corisponds exactly with the country that Sepp Blatter happens to be visiting. ;)

Big Jock Knew

The English league is without a doubt the best league in the world.

errrrrrrr no it really isnt, spanish or italian leagues are far superioir imo.
mid table spanish teams wud batter ours.

ha aha ha. chelsea? big club? joke. theres a bigger club 2 divisions below (as of next season).

btw, our disgraceful relegation to league one is not something im too proud of....

Big game tonight for Norwich.

^^ And thats why their top league teams get battered by our top league teams ;)

Thats why no spanish teams got past the 2nd round in the CL and 2 English teams did!

Italy V England in the CL final

Italy is a 2 team country....la Liga is alot like the prem IMO!


And you never know...Maybe Be_Happy was on about in excitement....which IMO it is the best in the world!

Another large British stadium lost division one...St Marys!

http://www.eurostadiums.com/images/stadium/prStMarys_1.jpg

Stadium of light went first....whos next...Old Trafford?

btw, our disgraceful relegation to league one is not something im too proud of....
So howcome ur bragging about it!!?? Forest r dead and buried!!

So howcome ur bragging about it!!?? Forest r dead and buried!!
If you supported your local club you wouldnt be to happy about religation today either.

If you supported your local club you wouldnt be to happy about religation today either.
It was all a bit messy, chamging managers as they did and all. But I think Southampton hav got the experience and above all the firepower to come straight back up next season.

boing boing xx

So howcome ur bragging about it!!?? Forest r dead and buried!!

im not bragging. im horrified.

Manchester united, Manchester city, Newcastle United, Sunderland, Liverpool (new anfield), Aston villa, Middlesborough, Southampton, Coventry new stadium-maybe, Derby county, Arsenal ( Emirates stadium) New wembley. All the stadia from these places could form a world cup in a couple of years allowing for the 2 stadia per city rule. Obviously, there will probably be bigger stadiums by 2018 that would replace some of these smaller ones. All of the above are over 30 000 with many well over that. I think these stadiums would provide for a great England world cup without having to use any from wales or scotland. They shouldn't use stadia from these two countries as it wouldn't be a true England world cup. All the stadiums i've mentioned are modern or have had recent rennovations. It's a shame we didn't win the 2006 world cup mainly due to political reasons rather than the sporting and technical ability.

I'm supprized we havent had any Spainish posters as by 2014 they wont have hosted it in 32 years, the same lenght of time between germanys last WC and 2006. Would be interesting to see who'd get to host the final anyway, Madrid in the Bernabeu or Barcalona in the Camp Nou.

But now spain is biding every competitions???????
That`s nice!! :) it is going to be good for my country!! The only better situation was to be hosted in Portugal!
Go spain!

I think Portugal and Spain could host it together, that way all stadiums would probably be bigger than 40.000!!

who is bidding?

I think a co-host Portugal/Spain, can be great!

1 - Camp Nou (Barcelona)
2 - Santiago Bernabeu (Madrid)
3 - Estádio da Luz (Lisbon)
4 - Estádio do Dragão (Porto)
5 - Olimpico la Cartuja (Sevilla)
6 - Mestalla (Valencia)
7 - Vicente Calderón (Madrid)
8 - Olimpico Montjuic (Barcelona)
9 - Jose Alvalade (Lisbon)
10 - Ruiz de Lopera (Sevilla)
11 - Estádio Municipal (Aveiro)
12 - San Mamés (Bilbao)
13 - Estádio D. Alfonso Henriques (Guimarães)
14 - Anoeta (San Sebastian)

BRAZIL FOR SURE

Portugal and Spain? Excelent!!!!!!!!!

Apenas se esqueceu de um estádio Edson: o Municipal de Braga! Conhece?

I'm supprized we havent had any Spainish posters as by 2014 they wont have hosted it in 32 years, the same lenght of time between germanys last WC and 2006. Would be interesting to see who'd get to host the final anyway, Madrid in the Bernabeu or Barcalona in the Camp Nou.

well, Brasil has not hosted it in 55 years. Also, after Europe and Africa, will be South America´s time.

When is it going to be decided? 2007? Does there exist any official bid web sites yet?

When is it going to be decided? 2007? Does there exist any official bid web sites yet?

Well SA were desided on last may so I'd guess we'll have to wait until 2008.

I think Portugal and Spain could host it together, that way all stadiums would probably be bigger than 40.000!!

I don't think so. In the bid for Euro 2004 the two "finalists" were Portugal and Spain. And I really don't understand why Spain hasn't bid again.

to allow myself to see all the proposals in a thread where there is no slanging matches going on can we all post every 2012 image we have in here. no discussion just piccies

xx many thanks

chris

England is a serious contender for the 2018 world cup. By then the stadiums will all have renovated. Spain deserves something though, it has some excellent stadiums. England for me though, it has PASSION

FIFA has said no to joint bids, so no Portugal/Spain World Cup.

Regents park - Baseball Softball and Track Cycling

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/52122979.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E995011B277579AD57757C85AE85A779B

Excel Arena - Boxing, Judo, Taekwondo, Table Tennis, Weightlifting and Wrestling.

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/52122973.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1EA240B99EF0E2BF187757C85AE85A779B

Lords - Archery

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/52123001.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E9EE02FDA29B3F1097757C85AE85A779B

Volleyball Arena, Olympic Park

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/52122992.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E6E1606D1509FD31F7757C85AE85A779B

Marathon, Streets of London

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/52123005.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1EA95A29F5D92379577757C85AE85A779B

Beach Volleyball, Downing Street

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/52122968.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E7B0FCDB7C41279BD7757C85AE85A779B

Tennis, Wimbledon - First time olympic tennis to be played on grass since 1920

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/52122925.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E7B885AFB45D0A0F37757C85AE85A779B

Aquatic Centre, Swimming, Olympic Park

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/52122880.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E3B0318A7DFBF8B007757C85AE85A779B

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/52122875.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E2E8E688F376D54EA7757C85AE85A779B

Equestrian, Greenwich

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/51696336.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E26C738718378EB887757C85AE85A779B

Track and Field, Olympic Stadium - Olympic Park

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/51696199.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E3A036AD60C115AF37757C85AE85A779B

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/51696198.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E3174BB62BBAE844A7757C85AE85A779B

Hockey, Olympic Park

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/51696195.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E842A753C8D0859D27757C85AE85A779B

Olympic Park

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/51696196.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1EAE18F30AE9F0546F7757C85AE85A779B

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/51696193.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E81EFCE68579E98F87757C85AE85A779B

The site as it is now

http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/52300421.jpg?x=x&dasite=MS_GINS&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=E2399169AC85D6DE9A21091711E5AD1E0461C67CFCD884307757C85AE85A779B

Wembley, Football

http://www.sportsvenue-technology.com/projects/wembley/images/wembley01.jpg

Millenium Dome, Basketball Gymnastic

http://p.vtourist.com/2013369-Millenium_Dome-London.jpg

:rant:NOOOOO! Paris should have won it!!!:rant:

Forgot a few...ill add them later..

Don't forget the dome.

:rant:NOOOOO! Paris should have won it!!!:rant:

Dont cry for me Effer, the truth is Paris wasnt good enough, all through its dull days, its sad existance, It'll never win ... the damn olympics

:hahaha:

Dont cry for me Effer, the truth is Paris wasnt good enough, all through its dull days, its sad existance, It'll never win ... the damn olympics

:hahaha:

it will. one day, not for a while though as a developing country will probably get it next.

Dont cry for me Effer, the truth is Paris wasnt good enough, all through its dull days, its sad existance, It'll never win ... the damn olympics

:hahaha:
That sounds like a song by Madonna in Evita.

Wembley is so damn sexy.

Congratulations London! Congratulations UK !!

Wonderful settings for the various venues, especially the Olympic Park.

I think that in almost all cases as far as the olympics, soccer championships, world expositions etc. is concerned, there are basically two factors that play an important role on the final decision: first, major importance is given to a host city that intends to renovate degradated areas and secondly they like to see new architectural atate-of-the-art sports arenas, as is the case of London.

British food tastes like crap. :jk:

British food tastes like crap. :jk:

I'm sure you're only being funny (in a Jacques Chirac kind of way) but, to be serious for a moment, London is now home to some of the best (and most expensive!) restaurants on the planet. Almost as many great places to choose from as Paris now, probably. Over the past twenty years, there has been a staggering improvement in the overall quality of food in London - at all price levels.

Any visitors for the Olympics won't find trouble getting a good meal.

The footballs also going to be at a few other stadiums around the country isnt it? Old Trafford, The Millenium Stadium, Hampden Park etc

I'm sure you're only being funny (in a Jacques Chirac kind of way) but, to be serious for a moment, London is now home to some of the best (and most expensive!) restaurants on the planet. Almost as many great places to choose from as Paris now, probably. Over the past twenty years, there has been a staggering improvement in the overall quality of food in London - at all price levels.

Any visitors for the Olympics won't find trouble getting a good meal.

Yes I know. I was just kidding. I will get a chance to experiance the food for myself when I visit London next March. :)

No doubt one of the best facilities in the World.

Wembley for football and Wimbledon for tennis... Crazy!

Hoever, if the concept of "human muscle" is actually true, I must say I find the track and field stadium a little "gross". Still, it looks pretty cool.

The footballs also going to be at a few other stadiums around the country isnt it? Old Trafford, The Millenium Stadium, Hampden Park etc

They have enough nice stadia in London alone to have the tournament dont they?

Highbury
Wembley
Stamford Bridge
White Hart Lane
Boleyn Ground
Twickenham Stadium

Some of these may need some minor re-furbushing but overall they are all capable of hosting the Olympic football tournamnet. :)

GO LONDON 2012!!!!
:cheers: :cheers:

olympic tennis at wimbledon...wowowowowowowow.

as for the footy, the brummies welcome you all...should be fun!!

Highbury - Too small - Being replaced by a better stadium called Ashburton Grove
Wembley
Stamford Bridge - Too Small (not a 5* UEFA)
White Hart Lane - Way too small (not a 5* UEFA)
Boleyn Ground - :lol:
Twickenham Stadium - It's a rugby stadium

They are trying to give the rest of the country a piece of the action, and as football is our national game, this sport makes the most sense. Also, apart from Wembley and Ashburton Grove, the capital does not have football stadia the quality and size of Old Trafford, St James's Park, Millenium Stadium, etc.

The London stadia were not too small. All the stadia mentioned are bigger and are of a higher quality than Windsor Park which is going to be used. Also the Olympics do not require UEFA 5 star stadia. Old Trafford isnt a higher quality stadium than Stamford Bridge its simply bigger.
As far as I am aware the reason why the stadia that have been mentioned are being used is simply to share the football games around Britain and Northern Ireland so that everyone gets a bit of the action.

Part of me could not imagine the olympicbeing hosted anywhere else, and now that london has won it still seems surreal,

Windows Media Player: http://www.webcast.ukcouncil.net/ho...sterplan_80.asx
Real Player: http://www.webcast.ukcouncil.net/ho...terplan_80.smil

Venues look great esp swinmming centre is impressive. I dont lke olympic stadium though.

The best venues are virtuals, Madrid has the 80% made of his venues.