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.


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old October 25th, 2010, 03:11 PM   #341
Mr.Underground
BANNED
 
Mr.Underground's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,998
Likes (Received): 47

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB View Post
Err.......what on earth is wrong with that?

People absolutely love seeing in the flesh what they have long seen only on TV or in photographs. You see it at tourist sites around the world.....the Taj Mahal, the Pyramids and Sphynx, the Eiffel Tower, the Houses of Parliament, the Grand Canyon.....it's an amazing feeling actually to be there.

Along with some 15,000 other Spurs fans, I travelled to Milano last week for our game against Inter. We were all thrilled to watch our team playing at such an iconic stadium as the San Siro.

It wouldn't have been nearly so special an occasion if we had been playing in a new stadium that we had never seen and that we knew (and cared) nothing about.
Different points of view. I prefer the novelty effect than the traditional effect. You have, then, the possiblity to go to the historic Anfield or Old Trafford and to breath the feeling always.

And Russia gives me that novelty effect, gives me the sensation to discover something of new, a new product, not the usual product like english one.
Mr.Underground no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old October 25th, 2010, 03:23 PM   #342
Mr.Underground
BANNED
 
Mr.Underground's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,998
Likes (Received): 47

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wezza View Post
Hang on a minute, weren't you the same guy who was arguing that Qatar should get the 2022 WC in the Australia thread? And you're saying England has no novelty factor, do you think Qatar has? What are the tourists going to see? Some sand?

Anyways as far as 2018 goes, it doesn't worry me too much who gets it. I know England or Russia would put on an outstanding tournament.
In 2022 Qatar will have theme parks and venues incredible. They want to astonish the world and visitors, so Qatar will give the novelty factor that England doesn't garantee.

This my opinion, I don't ask you to share it, we have different opionion. No problem.
Mr.Underground no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 03:47 PM   #343
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

England may be something you may be accustomed to but its certainly a mind blowing thought to visit a WC in England for many others including those in England and surrounds.

London, Manchester and others are great cities each with their own fan experience, cultures etc.

Trying to compare Qatar to England is craziness. Whippee another shopping centre...?
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 03:48 PM   #344
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,019
Likes (Received): 4801

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Underground View Post
Different points of view. I prefer the novelty effect than the traditional effect. You have, then, the possiblity to go to the historic Anfield or Old Trafford and to breath the feeling always.

And Russia gives me that novelty effect, gives me the sensation to discover something of new, a new product, not the usual product like english one.
But you still haven't addressed the inherent flaw in your "new is good, old is bad" argument.

Which is that, if FIFA were to adopt such an attitude, the only countries that would ever get to host the World Cup would be countries that didn't have, didn't need and, in most cases, couldn't afford the necessary stadium infrastructure that a World Cup demands.
JimB no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 04:12 PM   #345
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

England is traditional for some, and remains a novelty for millions of others around the world. I've been following EPL since the age of 5 so I'd much rather go to Old Trafford or Wembley than a random Russian venue built a few years before the WC.
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 04:34 PM   #346
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,019
Likes (Received): 4801

Quote:
Originally Posted by dacrio View Post
you made a mistake!

our lovely premier SILVIO BERLUSCONI (that represents the majority of italians) is the best friend of vladimir putin.

so we can say that italians support Russia for 2018!
I just looked in on the Italian forums and, on your FIFA 2018 poll, England have by far the highest percentage of support.

England - 42.25%
Russia - 19.72%
Holland / Belgium 8.5%
Spain / Portugal 8.5%

The remaining percentage was votes for the non European countries.

Since you and Mr Underground both post on that page, you must have seen the poll results thus far. You would also have read the majority of posts from fellow Italians that are fully in support of the England bid. It seems, therefore, that you haven't been entirely honest with us when you said that all of Italy supports the Russia bid ahead of the England bid.

Nice try, fellas, and better luck next time!

Last edited by JimB; October 25th, 2010 at 04:39 PM.
JimB no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 04:59 PM   #347
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,771
Likes (Received): 10326

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB View Post
But you still haven't addressed the inherent flaw in your "new is good, old is bad" argument.
To be fair I think he was speaking for himself, not for FIFA, which is fair enough.
RobH está en línea ahora  
Old October 25th, 2010, 05:14 PM   #348
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,019
Likes (Received): 4801

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
To be fair I think he was speaking for himself, not for FIFA, which is fair enough.
Oh, yes, I understand that. I have no problem with Mr Underground preferring the Russian bid.

But that doesn't alter the fact that the reasoning is fundamentally flawed. It's the emphasis on new being better than old that is wrong.
JimB no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 05:32 PM   #349
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,771
Likes (Received): 10326

Well, some FIFA execs may think that whilst others mightn't. And those who do may think it in Russia's case and not Qatar's or visa versa.

There's nothing fundamentally true about new being good and old being bad of course. We're starting to get into the realms of Platonic philsophy if we are going to discuss the fundemental properties of "newness" and "goodness". Maybe it'll make a refreshing change from talking about the British press but perhaps that's not the best road to go down!!

The question is, I suppose, how many FIFA execs will think like this, and what impact would it have on the future of the world cup if they do? They need to keep the powerbases happy; they can't afford to ignore England, Spain, Germany, Brazil etc, but equally they have to grow the game and Russia, perhaps apart from China and India (though they're both a long way off hosting right now), is the last big untapped country.

Last edited by RobH; October 25th, 2010 at 06:17 PM.
RobH está en línea ahora  
Old October 25th, 2010, 07:21 PM   #350
AlekseyVT
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Moscow City
Posts: 8,283
Likes (Received): 7063

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mo Rush View Post
England is traditional for some, and remains a novelty for millions of others around the world. I've been following EPL since the age of 5 so I'd much rather go to Old Trafford or Wembley than a random Russian venue built a few years before the WC.
Well, as we can see:
Euro2000 - first championship which was held in two states;
WC2002 - first WC which was held in two states; first WC in Asia;
SOG2008 - not first Olympic Games in Asia, but almost all sport infrastructure in Bejing was constructed in 21st century;
WC2010 - first WC in Africa;
Euro2012 - first championship in Eastern Europe;
WOG2014 - first Winter Olympics in Russia and in tropical zone;
SOG2016 - first Olympic Games in South America.

As you can see, we see a tendency that in the battle between the new 21st century and the traditional 20th century officials choose the first option. Not only officials from IOC, FIFA or UEFA, but also officials of the some other international sport federations.
AlekseyVT no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 07:43 PM   #351
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,771
Likes (Received): 10326

Quote:
As you can see, we see a tendency that in the battle between the new 21st century and the traditional 20th century officials choose the first option.
Conveniently (!) missing out the 2000 and 2012 Olympics, 2002, 2006 and 2010 Winter Olympics, 2006 World Cup and 2016 Euros. All of these went to repeat hosts over new frontiers.

FIFA have chosen Germany ahead of South Africa, UEFA have chosen France ahead of Turkey, and the IOC have chosen Britain (3 times host London), Canada (twice previous Olympic hosts), the USA (many, many Olympics), Australia (instead of Beijing!) and Italy in the last decade.

The balance is pretty much a 50/50 split between "traditional" hosts and new ones between 2000 and 2016. There's no tendency towards one or the other, unless you choose to only present half the story.

Last edited by RobH; October 25th, 2010 at 07:55 PM.
RobH está en línea ahora  
Old October 25th, 2010, 07:48 PM   #352
AlekseyVT
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Moscow City
Posts: 8,283
Likes (Received): 7063

Of course, Qatar is dynamically developing country with great potential and standart of life. But if we're talking about football, the difference between the traditions of Russia and Qatar is very big. Any investment program should have some basis, some roots. I do not see the football basis in Qatar.
AlekseyVT no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 08:08 PM   #353
AlekseyVT
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Moscow City
Posts: 8,283
Likes (Received): 7063

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
Conveniently missing out the 2000 and 2012 Olympics, 2002, 2006 and 2010 Winter Olympics, 2006 World Cup AND 2016 Euros all of which went to repeat hosts over new frontiers.

FIFA have chosen Germany, UEFA have chosen France, and the IOC have chosen Britain, Canada, the USA and Italy in the last decade. The balance is pretty much a 50/50 split actually. But don't let the truth get in the way of a good story.
OG2000 was battle between Sydney and Bejing. I''m think Sydney also can be classificated as non-traditional bid.

WOG2002 was battle between Salt Lake City, Ostersund, Sion and Quebec. Traditional bids.

WorldCup 2006 - yes, Germany beat South Africa. But you must remember about scandal with New Zealand member, which voted for SA in 1st round, but don't want to support SA in final round. And finally, SA got WC2010 as compensation.

WOG2006 was battle between Torino, Sion, Zakopane, Helsinki, Lillehammer. Traditional bids.

WOG2010 was battle between Vancouver, Pyeongchang and Salzburg. Here I'm agree with you.

OG2012 was battle between London, Paris, Madrid, New York and Moscow. Therefore it was choise between traditional bids.

Euro2016 was battle between France, Turkey and Italy. Agreed.

Comment: when I speak about "traditional bids", I mean experience of state or city in the holding of major international events (like Winter World Cups and championships for WOG, world championship in the different kinds of sport for SOG or major football matches for Euro and WC bids.
AlekseyVT no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 08:23 PM   #354
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,771
Likes (Received): 10326

Regardless of the circumstances FIFA chose Germany ahead of South Africa, Sydney is a traditional bid as it's from Australia, a country that had hosted before and it beat Beijing so don't try to twist that one, the IOC chose London when it could have chosen one of two cities which had never hosted before. In all these cases the federations went with the traditional, tried-and-tested option over virgin territory. And then of course, as you say, we have France beating Turkey and Vancouver beating Pyeongchang also.

The argument is nowhere near as clear cut as you're trying to make it. Certainly Russia has the new territory appeal, and certainly FIFA have chosen to spread the game around in some recent tournaments. But FIFA have also chosen France and Germany recently; you don't hear me saying sports federations have a tendency towards traditional hosts to boost England's bid though because, like your claim, it'd be ignoring half the statistics!

Last edited by RobH; October 25th, 2010 at 08:55 PM.
RobH está en línea ahora  
Old October 25th, 2010, 08:50 PM   #355
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

South Africa has lost 3 consecutive Rugby WC bids, 1 FIFA WC bid
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 08:59 PM   #356
Mr.Underground
BANNED
 
Mr.Underground's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,998
Likes (Received): 47

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB View Post
But you still haven't addressed the inherent flaw in your "new is good, old is bad" argument.

Which is that, if FIFA were to adopt such an attitude, the only countries that would ever get to host the World Cup would be countries that didn't have, didn't need and, in most cases, couldn't afford the necessary stadium infrastructure that a World Cup demands.
I am not saying to give a WC to a country, e.g. Botswana or Paraguay that has not the possibility to host a WC for stadia and infrastructure but this is not the case of Russia and Qatar, althought is a little country (600,000 inhabitans) don't know what means the expression "luck of money".

So if one bidder is EAU or Qatar that have not economic limit and a big desire to astonish the world, why don't give them the possibility.

Qatar has the potece to garantee a WC, have the possibility to garantee necessary stadia and infrastructures.
Mr.Underground no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 09:31 PM   #357
AlekseyVT
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Moscow City
Posts: 8,283
Likes (Received): 7063

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
Regardless of the circumstances FIFA chose Germany ahead of South Africa,
Yes, but factually after this SA become organizer of WC2010 without any real alternative. FIFA changed the rules, and factually SA got WC2010 as result of voting for WC2006.

Quote:
Sydney is a traditional bid as it's from Australia, a country that had hosted before and it beat Beijing so don't try to twist that one, the IOC chose London when it could have chosen one of two cities which had never hosted before. In all these cases the federations went with the traditional, tried-and-tested option over virgin territory.
Australia and Asia hosted Olympic Games before voting for 2010, but it was 44 and 36 years ago. Therefore, Sydney and Bejing were new candidates because there were not so many sport events which were spent in these cities before.

And, yes, NY and Madrid were never spent Olympic Games. But it's difficult to speak that Madrid and especially NY haven't any infrastructure for spending OG2012. Both cities are world capitals, and there are a lot of major international events of any level which are host at these cities. Therefore, if IOC has given the Olympic Games to Madrid or New York, here there would be nothing revolutionary.
AlekseyVT no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 09:42 PM   #358
AlekseyVT
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Moscow City
Posts: 8,283
Likes (Received): 7063

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
But FIFA have also chosen France and Germany recently;
Not FIFA, but UEFA. There are two separate organisations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
you don't hear me saying sports federations have a tendency towards traditional hosts to boost England's bid though because, like your claim, it'd be ignoring half the statistics!
Even with you opinion I count only 4 examples when there was real choice between "traditional bid" (which was based on old infrastructure) and "perspective bid" (which was based on future infrastructure) - OG2010, WC2006, WOG2010 and Euro2016. It's not a half of statistic.
AlekseyVT no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 09:48 PM   #359
AlekseyVT
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Moscow City
Posts: 8,283
Likes (Received): 7063

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mo Rush View Post
South Africa has lost 3 consecutive Rugby WC bids
Rugby is really developed only in the few countries (GB, Ireland, France, SA, Australia, New Zealand and, may be, Argentina). Therefore the choice of organizer of Rugby WC is a choice between the "traditional" states which are organize all major competitions.
AlekseyVT no está en línea  
Old October 25th, 2010, 09:49 PM   #360
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,771
Likes (Received): 10326

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlekseyVT View Post
Not FIFA, but UEFA. There are two separate organisations.
I was quite obviously referring to 1998, I'm perfectly aware FIFA and UEFA aren't the same organisation
RobH está en línea ahora  


Closed Thread

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 07:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

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

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu