daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Stadiums and Sport Arenas

Stadiums and Sport Arenas » Completed | Under Construction | Proposed | Demolished



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


View Poll Results: -
- 0 0%
- 0 0%
Voters: 0. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old February 19th, 2009, 08:20 AM   #441
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrLess View Post
If Villa are a "northern" club then the majority of the country is in the north. As far as the southern third of the country goes I'd say the lack of large cities, the draw of London in the east and the popularity of Rugby Union in the west are big factors. Historically I'd guess the south has tended to have fewer rich benefactors outside London aswell.
i think most southerners lump you as northern, anything north of the watford gap... yes i know it's in northamptonshire not Hertfordshire!

The rugby union comment is a bit of a myth. union is no bigger in Bristol than south wales or League is in Leeds or Bradford.

Football is far, far bigger throughout the country with the exception of a few big towns/cities i can think of... Gloucester and St helens.

Yeah middlesbrough and Blackburn would be nowhere without there "local boys made good" owners
bigbossman no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old February 19th, 2009, 11:42 AM   #442
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Let's put this to bed.

I've got no problem accepting all of your stats - I accept that they prove that big clubs are well supported, small clubs less so, I accept that historically football success was weighted toward the North, and I also accept that the clubs I've listed come from large cities (but that's the point when it comes to the world cup, isn't it?)

Just to clarify that I'm not some foreigner shooting my mouth off based on what I've seen on tv... All of my comments are based on living in England for the first 29 years of my life, spending more than half of that travelling up and down the country for games in all four divisions of the English league.

My point all along, probably poorly made, is that the various cities discussed - whether because of historical sporting bias, economics, poor planning, poor management, etc. - aren't threatening to be a part of the big time, certainly not in time to affect a bid for 2018, and that there's little point in factoring in the possibility of a stadium in any of these towns/cities when there are venues already in place and other clubs already in a position to take advantage of new/expanded venues.

And for the record, if you check those poor attendance figures for Sunderland you'll note that they coincided with hideous economic times - particularly the 80/81 attendances during a very poor season, during the course of which half the shipyards, a number of local coal mines, and numerous other staples of heavy industry in the area were shut down, as well as quite a bit of strike action taking place. In short - no money, no football.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old February 19th, 2009, 11:49 AM   #443
ArchieTheGreat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 95
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post

It's easy to quote stats, you gotta read into them first though!

Huddersfield who play at a modern stadium with modern facilites, swindon who play in a dump!

Huddersfield pushing for promotion out of the division and swindon struggling to survice with in it???

Swindons crowds are the 7th highest in the division

Huddersfield drew 9K last season, swindon drew 7k last season. Huddersfields crowds have gone up because they are pushing for promotion. Swindon's have stayed around the same despite them fighting to stave off relegation
Yes it is easy to quote stats and you have nicely picked the lowest Town average attendance since 1993/94 season. I follow Town, that means Huddersfield not the team from Wiltshire. Talking of Town's attendances going up this season is misleading, you should have mentioned they fell last season. This was due to people being fed up with the chairman who was asset striped us.

A good comparison would be using the 2002/2003 season average for Town. This is when we were relegated to the 4th division and going into administration the average attendance 9506.


Although a nice new stadium does help our attendance figures went up over 80% from the old ground to the new ground.
ArchieTheGreat no está en línea  
Old February 19th, 2009, 12:07 PM   #444
bumdingo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 143
Likes (Received): 0

[QUOTE=bigbossman;32522546]No offence but white hart lane is NO better than Highbury used to be, The “Highbury the library” stuff is bull, yes it could be eerily quiet at times but at the big games it buzzed!! The emirates well, that’s

So if Liverpool, Utd, Chelsea, Spurs came calling and the odd high profile European game Highbury came alive? I reckon that makes 10-15% of games the decibel level was cranked all the way up to 3! That said I never believed in the Highbury the library nonsense, in a library the tell you to be quiet, at Arsenal's ground(s) they don't need to. Having been to the Emirates I can confidently say the loudest thing there is Bendtners boots.
bumdingo no está en línea  
Old February 19th, 2009, 02:10 PM   #445
carlspannoosh
Registered User
 
carlspannoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Islington
Posts: 2,215
Likes (Received): 749

I still am not convinced that any clubs on the south coast or in the west country are able to sustain a 40k stadium. I dont see much scope for temporary additions for current stadiums neither. In Yorkshire I think I would go for Elland Road but only if it has a huge amount invested in it, because as it is, it is miles off being good enough. This would be so much easier if there wasn't so much pressure for maximum geographical spread. I wish England could somehow persuade FIFA of the benefits of allowing more than one stadium per city.Even then I would suggest both St James' and SOL should be used.
All a bit frustrating really because with these rules the bid as it is just isn't going to be anywhere near as good as it could be.

Oh and could any of you fans of teams that have stadiums with atmosphere that puts the Emirates to shame stick some youtube clips onto the Football Fans Emotions thread because so far only Liverpool seem to have a decent representation on it. Cheers.

Last edited by carlspannoosh; February 19th, 2009 at 02:21 PM.
carlspannoosh no está en línea  
Old February 19th, 2009, 04:52 PM   #446
bumdingo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 143
Likes (Received): 0

Is it true that at the Emirates they sing lullaby's instead of terrace chants?
bumdingo no está en línea  
Old February 19th, 2009, 04:56 PM   #447
carlspannoosh
Registered User
 
carlspannoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Islington
Posts: 2,215
Likes (Received): 749

No need when they are in the process of taking the piss yet again, against some shit team in the FA Cup.
You got to laugh really when crappy little teams moan about Arsenal not joining in with the party atmosphere when they come to The Emirates..

Last edited by carlspannoosh; February 19th, 2009 at 05:10 PM.
carlspannoosh no está en línea  
Old February 19th, 2009, 06:48 PM   #448
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,240
Likes (Received): 228

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
The rugby union comment is a bit of a myth. union is no bigger in Bristol than south wales or League is in Leeds or Bradford.
Well South Wales and Bradford arent exactly massive centers of football either are they?

Quote:
Football is far, far bigger throughout the country with the exception of a few big towns/cities i can think of... Gloucester and St helens.
I wouldnt say Rugby was "bigger" but its big enough that there clearly is a drain on football. Whats more I'd say the drain was larger 50-100 years ago which ment there werent the big clubs for new fans to follow so they migrated to estalished teams further north or in London.

Quote:
Yeah middlesbrough and Blackburn would be nowhere without there "local boys made good" owners
It goes back further than that, pretty much every "big" club has had a rich backer at some point and the whole idea of giving back to the community though football was much stronger in the north.

As far as the bid goes remember that the FA don't have to look THAT far ahead yet. They don't need to come up with a dozen hosts but rather 16+ shortlisted potential hosts to be narrowed down if they win 2018/22.

Wembley
Emirates
Old Trafford
City of Manchester
New Anfield
New Everton
Villa Park
Sheffield
Leeds
New Notts Forrest
Expanded Pride Park
St James Park
Stadium of Light
New Portsmouth
New Bristol
New Hull

All of those could fit into any bid.
MoreOrLess no está en línea  
Old February 19th, 2009, 11:41 PM   #449
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrLess View Post
Wembley
Emirates
Old Trafford
City of Manchester
New Anfield
New Everton
Villa Park
Sheffield
Leeds
New Notts Forrest
Expanded Pride Park
St James Park
Stadium of Light
New Portsmouth
New Bristol
New Hull

All of those could fit into any bid.
Two in London, two in Liverpool, two in Manchester?

And 'new' Hull... They've only just built the current one.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old February 20th, 2009, 12:36 AM   #450
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjuk View Post
Let's put this to bed.

I've got no problem accepting all of your stats - I accept that they prove that big clubs are well supported, small clubs less so, I accept that historically football success was weighted toward the North, and I also accept that the clubs I've listed come from large cities (but that's the point when it comes to the world cup, isn't it?)

Just to clarify that I'm not some foreigner shooting my mouth off based on what I've seen on tv... All of my comments are based on living in England for the first 29 years of my life, spending more than half of that travelling up and down the country for games in all four divisions of the English league.
Fair enough, it was probably the over use of the term EPL that did it

Quote:
My point all along, probably poorly made, is that the various cities discussed - whether because of historical sporting bias, economics, poor planning, poor management, etc. - aren't threatening to be a part of the big time, certainly not in time to affect a bid for 2018, and that there's little point in factoring in the possibility of a stadium in any of these towns/cities when there are venues already in place and other clubs already in a position to take advantage of new/expanded venues.
I agree, i think it just got sidetracked, i just mentioned the possibility of Brighton and it went on from there.

Quote:
And for the record, if you check those poor attendance figures for Sunderland you'll note that they coincided with hideous economic times - particularly the 80/81 attendances during a very poor season, during the course of which half the shipyards, a number of local coal mines, and numerous other staples of heavy industry in the area were shut down, as well as quite a bit of strike action taking place. In short - no money, no football.
Erm the hardest hit places economically were Liverpool and east London. Liverpool, everton and west ham the clubs of these areas didn't suffer massive crowd loss despite massive job losses!
bigbossman no está en línea  
Old February 20th, 2009, 12:37 AM   #451
Schmeek
Registered User
 
Schmeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,568
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjuk View Post
Hull have proved this season that they can fill their stadium (average is only 1k off capacity). Bristol may well do the same if given a chance. They always used to appear better supported than most southern clubs to be fair, I'm not sure they could support a 40k venue though. Taking large numbers of supporters to Wembley is no indicator of real support - many clubs have done the same down the years. No point in having fans who will travel to London to say "I was there" if the buggers don't turn up at Ashton Gate on Saturday.



Hull are there by virtue of (a) already being in the EPL (sorry), which is the biggest element in the equation of who needs/can support a larger venue, and (b) being geographically separated from the other cities listed, thus being an attractive option if the FA wanted to spread the bid around the country.

As I said before, if Bristol get up they may prove that they could regularly fill a 30-40k stadium - hopefully they do because a large venue in Bristol would be a massive boost for an English world cup bid.
Benjuk, I think it fair to say you underestimate Bristol's catchment area. Believe me when I say that the area surrounding Bristol (which is huge TBF) would go into a Premiership frenzy should City (or Rovers for that matter, to a lesser extent) get promoted. We were ready for it last May, and it was the flip of a coin between Hull and us really. I suppose us Bristolians can feel harder done by having been in the top four all season(and top itself on a number of occasions during the season), whereas Hull came from no-where late on to sneak into the play-offs.
Anyway, my point is that Bristol City would definately fill a 40k stadium, but that would depend on them being in the top flight. They could probably sustain a 30k now in second tier, which is why we are building a 30k stadium now. But it would no doubt be extended to the designated 42k for an English WC in 2018.

With regards to Wembley last year: yes there were plenty of 'plastic' fans and hangers on that made the trip. Probably a large number in fact. But this happens even with the biggest clubs - just look at Man Utd every week! It is also true that some of these glory hunters will become 'proper followers of the club as a result. The seeds are sometimes sewn at games like these, and they can only grow the fan base...
Schmeek no está en línea  
Old February 20th, 2009, 12:41 AM   #452
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by carlspannoosh View Post
I still am not convinced that any clubs on the south coast or in the west country are able to sustain a 40k stadium. I dont see much scope for temporary additions for current stadiums neither.
As i have previously said if you discount these regions you discount a lot of the non super cities in this country. And it would be ludicrous to discount them!

Quote:
In Yorkshire I think I would go for Elland Road but only if it has a huge amount invested in it, because as it is, it is miles off being good enough. This would be so much easier if there wasn't so much pressure for maximum geographical spread. I wish England could somehow persuade FIFA of the benefits of allowing more than one stadium per city.Even then I would suggest both St James' and SOL should be used.
All a bit frustrating really because with these rules the bid as it is just isn't going to be anywhere near as good as it could be.
Since i last checked Newcastle and sunderland aren't the same city, infact they aren't even really part of the same urban area

Quote:
Oh and could any of you fans of teams that have stadiums with atmosphere that puts the Emirates to shame stick some youtube clips onto the Football Fans Emotions thread because so far only Liverpool seem to have a decent representation on it. Cheers.
Erm most honest Liverpool fans will tell you that the atmosphere is shite outside of the big games! You can even hear it on the telly!
bigbossman no está en línea  
Old February 20th, 2009, 12:44 AM   #453
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmeek View Post
Benjuk, I think it fair to say you underestimate Bristol's catchment area. Believe me when I say that the area surrounding Bristol (which is huge TBF) would go into a Premiership frenzy should City (or Rovers for that matter, to a lesser extent) get promoted. We were ready for it last May, and it was the flip of a coin between Hull and us really. I suppose us Bristolians can feel harder done by having been in the top four all season(and top itself on a number of occasions during the season), whereas Hull came from no-where late on to sneak into the play-offs.
Anyway, my point is that Bristol City would definately fill a 40k stadium, but that would depend on them being in the top flight. They could probably sustain a 30k now in second tier, which is why we are building a 30k stadium now. But it would no doubt be extended to the designated 42k for an English WC in 2018.

With regards to Wembley last year: yes there were plenty of 'plastic' fans and hangers on that made the trip. Probably a large number in fact. But this happens even with the biggest clubs - just look at Man Utd every week! It is also true that some of these glory hunters will become 'proper followers of the club as a result. The seeds are sometimes sewn at games like these, and they can only grow the fan base...
well said sir, hope you guys come up this season!
bigbossman no está en línea  
Old February 20th, 2009, 12:55 AM   #454
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrLess View Post
Well South Wales and Bradford arent exactly massive centers of football either are they?
that's your opinion, but i totally disagree

Quote:
I wouldnt say Rugby was "bigger" but its big enough that there clearly is a drain on football. Whats more I'd say the drain was larger 50-100 years ago which ment there werent the big clubs for new fans to follow so they migrated to estalished teams further north or in London.
i'd disagree football and rugby can co exist in most areas, look at Leeds!!!

Quote:
It goes back further than that, pretty much every "big" club has had a rich backer at some point and the whole idea of giving back to the community though football was much stronger in the north.
Some clubs are more deserving of Rich backers than others

Quote:
As far as the bid goes remember that the FA don't have to look THAT far ahead yet. They don't need to come up with a dozen hosts but rather 16+ shortlisted potential hosts to be narrowed down if they win 2018/22.

Wembley
Emirates
Old Trafford
City of Manchester
New Anfield
New Everton
Villa Park
Sheffield
Leeds
New Notts Forrest
Expanded Pride Park
St James Park
Stadium of Light
New Portsmouth
New Bristol
New Hull
Hull should definately not be on that list, Yorkshire should have 2 at the most, and there is no way Hull would be chose above Sheffield or Leeds. So shortlisting that city would be a waste of a place!

All of those could fit into any bid.[/QUOTE]
bigbossman no está en línea  
Old February 20th, 2009, 12:59 AM   #455
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchieTheGreat View Post
Yes it is easy to quote stats and you have nicely picked the lowest Town average attendance since 1993/94 season. I follow Town, that means Huddersfield not the team from Wiltshire. Talking of Town's attendances going up this season is misleading, you should have mentioned they fell last season. This was due to people being fed up with the chairman who was asset striped us.
Exactly, but it is what the "southern haters" have been doing with regard to Swindon and Plymouths crowds

Quote:
A good comparison would be using the 2002/2003 season average for Town. This is when we were relegated to the 4th division and going into administration the average attendance 9506.
sometimes solidarity is shown in hard times, sometimes we divide and fall. i'm sure their are cases of huddersfield leaking fans when relegation looms. But as you said we have to factor everything in first. Although we can take trends from stats!

Quote:
Although a nice new stadium does help our attendance figures went up over 80% from the old ground to the new ground.
Exactly, look at schalke in Germany, they never got full houses each week till the veltins!
bigbossman no está en línea  
Old February 20th, 2009, 01:28 AM   #456
carlspannoosh
Registered User
 
carlspannoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Islington
Posts: 2,215
Likes (Received): 749

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
As i have previously said if you discount these regions you discount a lot of the non super cities in this country. And it would be ludicrous to discount them!
Not if the result is a white elephant. There could well be some convincing evidence that this would not be the case. I am not saying there isn't. I am just saying that I have not seen it yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
Since i last checked Newcastle and sunderland aren't the same city, infact they aren't even really part of the same urban area
Indeed, but I have seen comments that suggested that they shouldn't both be used because they are in the same region.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
Erm most honest Liverpool fans will tell you that the atmosphere is shite outside of the big games! You can even hear it on the telly!
And...
I wasn't bigging up Liverpool I was genuinely asking a question.

Last edited by carlspannoosh; February 20th, 2009 at 01:48 AM.
carlspannoosh no está en línea  
Old February 20th, 2009, 01:32 AM   #457
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

so as I've been saying all along:

Quote:

Football at Twickers! World Cup 2018 bid team want to stage matches at rugby HQ



England's bid team for the 2018 World Cup have identified Twickenham, the home of rugby union, as a possible venue for the tournament.

Andy Anson, the bid chief executive, and his staff plan to hold what could prove complicated discussions with the Rugby Football Union in the belief that Twickenham could be one of the three London stadiums they present to FIFA's executive committee.

Holding a major football event at Twickenham would be unprecedented in English rugby, but the 2018 team are, understandably, reluctant to ignore the second biggest stadium in the country.

Only Wembley boasts more than Twickenham's 82,000 seats and by next month a stadium that has an international history dating back the best part of a century - England met Wales there in January 1910 - will house the added attraction of a new £100million Marriott-run hotel in the South Stand.


Such a move could meet resistance from traditionalists on both sides, as well as from a powerful local residents' association. But the bid team have been encouraged by the RFU's apparent desire to raise revenue from their five-star venue and their more recent success in hosting pop concerts.

Music fans have been treated to concerts by The Rolling Stones, U2, Iron Maiden and a host of other major rock and pop bands. Most recently R.E.M. performed there.

One concern would be the poor transport links to the stadium, but in its favour is the space and parking facilities that visitors to Twickenham enjoy.

FIFA president Sepp Blatter demands enough room to erect the tented villages that are used to entertain corporate guests, as well as host much of the media activity that takes place at the match venues. In that respect, Twickenham has an advantage over many of the football stadiums in this country.

Football's world governing body are expected to demand the use of at least 10 stadiums. Germany used 12 in 2006 but South Africa, hosts of the finals next year, will use 10.

There could still be a limit on how many grounds are identified for each city but, as things stand, Twickenham would be used in addition to Wembley and Arsenal's Emirates Stadium. Indeed, the Emirates, for all its success, has concerns over a lack of space around the actual stadium.

Identifying all the venues could prove a long and complicated process and much could change between now and 2018. The final, fully detailed bid has to be made in May next year - FIFA will then make their decision in December 2010 - but by 2018 there could be a new stadium at Tottenham as well as Chelsea, while Liverpool, Everton and even Leeds also hope to have new homes by then.

If Tottenham and Chelsea have new grounds built in time, there could be serious opposition from them - and from the wider football community - to Twickenham.

As things stand, Old Trafford would be used and so, in all probability, would Manchester City's home at Eastlands. Having been built for the 2002 Commonwealth Games, Eastlands has a vast amount of open space around its perimeter.

Villa Park would be another obvious choice, as would Newcastle United's St James' Park and Sunderland's Stadium of Light. That said, there are slight concerns with the fact that Newcastle's ground has been so spectacularly squeezed into the city centre.

Other clubs have also expressed their intention to build a new stadium and that could attract the interest of the 2018 bid team. Portsmouth has been discussed, as have Bristol City and Nottingham Forest. The bid team are conscious that the tournament should be taken to all corners of the country, from the south west to the north east.

In Euro 96 only eight venues were used but the World Cup finals are, of course, a significantly bigger event and for that reason Twickenham could yet feature in the bid team's final presentation.

The use of Twickenham is unlikely to meet with opposition from FIFA on sporting grounds because the world governing body have been quite happy to see South Africa identify Ellis Park in Johannesburg and the Free State stadium in Bloemfontein as two of their main venues.

Like Twickenham, Ellis Park has hosted a Rugby World Cup final - in 1995 when South Africa beat Jonah Lomu and his All Blacks colleagues - but it does also have a history of hosting football matches.

The 61,000-seater ground is now the home of the Orlando Pirates and in 1995 the South Africa football team - Bafana Bafana - memorably held Argentina to a 1-1 draw.

During periods of extensive rebuilding at Twickenham, the old Wembley hosted an England rugby Test against Canada in 1992 and then, in the late Nineties, Wales played a whole season of home games at the venue while the Millennium Stadium was under construction.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...-rugby-HQ.html
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old February 20th, 2009, 02:17 AM   #458
Blue Lou
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 567
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrLess View Post
New Everton
Note likely to happen because it and the enabling retail park is against several planning policies.
Blue Lou no está en línea  
Old February 20th, 2009, 05:02 AM   #459
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
Since i last checked Newcastle and sunderland aren't the same city, infact they aren't even really part of the same urban area
As someone who comes from that area - the key problem with including both venues in a single world cup bid would be that they are both serviced by the same international airport, and I'm not too sure that there would be enough hotel accomodation/facilities in the area to cover the requirements for two stadiums.

On the positive side, unlike a lot of venues around England (north and south), there's plenty of land near both venues for the various FIFA requirements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
Exactly, but it is what the "southern haters" have been doing with regard to Swindon and Plymouths crowds
The only stats I gave for Swindon and Plymouth were this seasons. I didn't go back looking for older numbers that better suited my needs. As for 'Southern haters' - behave, lad... I don't hate the south, I just don't believe any of the southern clubs can currently support a 40k venue (although I'll accept that Bristol City definately could IF they got into the EPL).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mo Rush View Post
(re: Twickenham) so as I've been saying all along:
I think a lot of us have been hoping for this - partly because it's a huge boost in terms of quality and capacity, and partly because it'll put an end to the Arsenal/Spurs arguments about who should be the 2nd venue in London

Quote:
Originally Posted by carlspannoosh View Post
Not if the result is a white elephant. There could well be some convincing evidence that this would not be the case. I am not saying there isn't. I am just saying that I have not seen it yet.
Ditto.

Quote:
Originally Posted by carlspannoosh View Post
Indeed, but I have seen comments that suggested that they shouldn't both be used because they are in the same region.
I think there's an element to do with population here as well. Both Newcastle and Sunderland have support which is in many ways disproportionate to the local population. The entire North-East, from the Scottish border in the north to south of the Tees, has a population of around a million, yet we've got 40-50k regularly at Newcastle, 30-40k regularly at Sunderland and 25-30k at Boro. Thus, it's a bit of a hard sell to justify that million people having two venues, whilst the million in the south west have one (or none).

Last edited by Benjuk; February 20th, 2009 at 05:24 AM.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old February 20th, 2009, 03:06 PM   #460
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,862
Likes (Received): 10573

Quote:
Football at Twickers! World Cup 2018 bid team want to stage matches at rugby HQ

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...-rugby-HQ.html
I don't know quite how seriously to take this article (not just because it's in the Daily Bumwipe) as it suggests:

"Twickenham would be used in addition to Wembley and Arsenal's Emirates Stadium."

and

"As things stand, Old Trafford would be used and so, in all probability, would Manchester City's home at Eastlands."


Really? So five stadiums in two cities?
RobH está en línea ahora  


Closed Thread

Tags
world cup 2018

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium