ARGENTINA - 2011 COPA AMERICA

[skaP187]

Originally Posted by Evil78

If you take a look at the stadiums hosting the last 3-4 (and next) European Championships you can only be amazed of the difference between UEFA and the rest of the world.... If a country like Ukraine or Poland (with no real tradition in fooball, and not major economic powers) can build some extraordinary stadiums, why couldn't Argentina do it??? I think that the standards there are just too low...

I think you have never been at a standing area to watch a game. I think you are watching your games in the stadium, at the main stand with a cola for you and a beer for your dad, that is if you go and watch your games in a stadium at all.
I dont´t think you now what you are talking about when you think the economy of Argentina and specialy the footballclubs is near to strong.

Originally Posted by Evil78

What's original about it?? It's basically just a big hole dug in the ground (where the stands are placed on) and covered by a big ass tent, in the form of a circus...

I rest my case. Some things you just shouldn´t have to explain.

[Luli Pop]

Originally Posted by Evil78

If you take a look at the stadiums hosting the last 3-4 (and next) European Championships you can only be amazed of the difference between UEFA and the rest of the world.... If a country like Ukraine or Poland (with no real tradition in fooball, and not major economic powers) can build some extraordinary stadiums, why couldn't Argentina do it??? I think that the standards there are just too low...

the problem in Argentina is that every big city has several shity stadiums instead of having 1, 2 or 3 great stadiums.

stadiums are owned by the clubs and are certainly not consider as a "status level" in Argentina. the same thing happens with airports.
BA has 2 shity airports handling less than 10 million pax each, instead of having a big one. the same thing happens with Santa Fe and Parana (two attached cities) instead of sharing a big airport, each one owns a shity airport. the same with Corrientes and Resistencia.

for instance, La Platas stadium was built to be share by the two local clubs but even though each club (Gimnasia and Estudiantes) is renewing its stadium and don't want to use the "Estadio Unico".

another thing is in Argentina it's not like in Europe where every city has a big club. in Argentina every city has 2 or more clubs regardingless their size; in BA even each neighbourhood has 2 teams with its own "calssic".

it can never ever be compared with Europe.

these are the "classics" of BAs metropolitan area, each classic equals obviously two teams:

1. Ciudad de Buenos AiresSuperclásico: Boca Juniors vs. River Plate
2. Huracán vs. San Lorenzo de Almagro
3. Clásico del Oeste: Ferro Carril Oeste vs. Vélez Sarsfield
4. All Boys vs. Nueva Chicago
5. Clásico de Belgrano: Defensores de Belgrano vs. Excursionistas
6. Comunicaciones de Buenos Aires vs. General Lamadrid
7. Clásico de Villa Soldati: Riestra vs. Sacachispas
8. Ciudad de Buenos Aires/Provincia de Buenos AiresAtlanta vs. Chacarita Juniors (en Buenos Aires y San Martín)
9. Clásico de las Colectividades (en Buenos Aires y Ciudad Evita): Español vs. Italiano
10. Lugano vs. Yupanqui (en Tapiales y Buenos Aires)
11. Provincia de Buenos AiresClásico de Avellaneda (en Avellaneda): Independiente vs. Racing
12. Dock Sud vs. San Telmo (en Avellaneda)
13. Clásico Platense (en La Plata): Estudiantes de La Plata vs. Gimnasia y Esgrima La Plata
14. Lanús vs. Talleres de Remedios de Escalada (en Lanús y Remedios de Escalada)
15. Banfield vs. Los Andes (en Banfield y Lomas de Zamora)
16. Clásico de la Zona Norte (en Vicente Lóprez y Victoria): Platense vs. Tigre
17. Clásico de la Zona Oeste (en Isidro Casanova y Morón): Almirante Brown vs. Morón
18. Clásico Quilmeño (en Quilmes): Argentino de Quilmes vs. Quilmes
19. Arsenal de Sarandí vs. El Porvenir (en Sarandí y Gerli)
20. Clásico Tresfebrerense (en Ciudadela y Caseros): Almagro vs. Estudiantes
21. Ferrocarril Midland vs. Ituzaingó (en Libertad e Ituzaingó)
22. Brown de Adrogué vs. San Martín de Burzaco (en Adrogué y Burzaco)
23. Clásico Merlense (en Merlo): Argentino de Merlo vs. Merlo
24. Acassuso vs. Central Ballester (en Boulogne y San Martín)
25. Ferrocarril Urquiza vs. Justo José de Urquiza (en San Martín y Loma Hermosa)
26. Clásico de General Rodríguez (en General Rodríguez): Atlas vs. Leandro Nicéforo Alem
27. Juventud Unida de San Miguel vs. Muñiz (en San Miguel)

54 teams, only in BA metropolitan area.

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:L...e_Buenos_Aires

even towns under 70.000 pop usually have two teams.

that's why stadiums are shity, instead of building 5 mega stadiums, 10 super stadiums, 20 very good stadiums and 50 practice stadiums, in Argentina there are a couple good stadiums and 300 shity stadiums.

it's always like this. transporte is the same.
BA has the same km of urban rail transport (metro+tram+train) that Sao Paulo, Mexico, Santiago, Rio and Caracas all of them combined. but rolling stock is shity, it's not efficient, it's dirty. instead of having 100 or 200km in excellent condition like most big cities, we have almost 900km in poor disgusting condition.

[Gadiri]

Originally Posted by lpioe

What about Independiente and Boca stadium? Why are they not selected as hosts?

A 2nd stadium in Ba will have be perfect :
- Boca
- Indepediente
- Racing
- or Velez

Originally Posted by Mojeda101

They did not choose the great massive beautiful stadiums becuase they all reside in Buenos Aires, they wanted to spread them out, Although even then, they could have choose great stadiums! Where was Rosario?

0 stadium in Rosario ! What a shame. The last Argentina-Brazil was played in Rosario Central stadium.

[japanese001]

Unfortunately you can not participate
Thanks for inviting me to South America.

[Evil78]

Originally Posted by skaP187

I think you have never been at a standing area to watch a game. I think you are watching your games in the stadium, at the main stand with a cola for you and a beer for your dad, that is if you go and watch your games in a stadium at all.
I dont´t think you now what you are talking about when you think the economy of Argentina and specialy the footballclubs is near to strong.

WTF are you talking about? Why are you talking about me and where i sit in a stadium. What does that have to do with the quality of the stadiums, and my previous post? I was just saying that compared with competitions organized by UEFA, the Copa America this year has some really bad stadiums. Do you want to debate this, and say that i'm wrong?
Even the African Cup of Nations started to have higher standards regarding the quality of the stadiums....

And regarding your nonsens comment about me sitting at the main stand ...in case you haven't noticed, i'm from Romania, so belive me, i know what it is like, watching a game in a shity stadium. We have plenty of those... (Except the 3 new stadiums which are being opened this year)

[IngMarco]

The stadium selection has touristic porpuses.

[samantha89]

They might not look the best, but somehow those stadiums make me want to go and watch at least one match. Preferably Argentina vs Brazil

I can only picture the atmosphere on such games .... mmm!

[dacrio]

very bad organization. slovenliness!

[kerouac1848]

@Luli Pop

Cheers for that info.

It seems to me that the situation in Argentina is a bit like Italy during the 90s. Grounds are not major money earners (the economic model is based on something else) and crowds fit in with their current size. Of course, over time Serie A got left behind to an extent as their advantage in TV income evaporated and the lack of large modern stadia was a major handicap against the English clubs and Big 2 in Spain, hence this decade we're likely to see a move towards newer grounds in Italy (owned by the clubs rather than the council).

In Argentina there doesn't appear to be that incentive yet because the situation is the same across South America: the economic model is geared, primarily it seems, around exporting players. There also isn't a WC which would force the renovation of new grounds.

another thing is in Argentina it's not like in Europe where every city has a big club. in Argentina every city has 2 or more clubs regardingless their size; in BA even each neighbourhood has 2 teams with its own "calssic".

Tbf, it's like that in England to a significant extent. Places like Leeds or Newcastle are an exception mostly. Look at how many clubs are in urban areas like Greater Manchester or the West Midlands. There are 14 League (fully professional, although technically there are pro-sides below this level) clubs in London alone, that's the city of 8 million not the metro area/region, nor does it include full and semi-pro clubs below the 4th tier. That being said England is the exception in Europe mostly due to historical and geographical reasons.

[schmidt]

Originally Posted by kerouac1848

It's all about competition and rewards (stick and carrot ) - also known as incentive - and hence the different dynamics of the two regions.

UEFA can set high standards because a) the competition is intense between nations, which is further complemented by a significant number of very wealthy states; b) the rewards are high (large influx of visitors to boost local economy). Much of the former is also related to the fact that the clubs in a number of countries have their own motivation to build bigger and better stadia, again due to competition and rewards.

(Even then, this has only really been the case recently, since the 90s at the earliest.)

The Copa America only had 10 potential hosts none of which are massively wealthy (expect maybe Brazil and Venezuela, although they're not at, say, German levels) and all of whom have a badly organised club game were the majority of grounds are rented from local government bodies. Also, the timing and and organisation of the tournament massively devalued it until recently compared to the Euros, meaning potential rewards were much lower; if you devalue a sporting competition you reduce its potential audience.

Now, at least, they've fixed the latter problem by making a 4 year tournament held at just the right time - a year after the world cup and some time before qualification takes place.

The competition between potential hosts though is still too low though (and rewards not quite high enough, although improving). If it is true that from 2016 onwards it becomes a 16-team Copa Americas with 6 sides from CONCACAF that could help, not least because Mexico, the US and Canada would hugely intensify the competition for a hosting perspective and the possibility of an influx of people from those countries would improve the reward side.

I'm all for having the CONCACAF to participate in the Copa América. It's our continent's tourney, they have to be there too. Besides, Mexico and the US have really good teams nowadays, it's a shame to leave them aside. We'd have then Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, US, Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay giving the tournament some competitiveness.

[ChilenoFutbol]

Stadiums are ok, but complaints are only related to scheduling?

- When Argentina plays, why is that the only match of the day?

- Why does Group C play it's 2nd and 3rd game before Group B. Between their first and second games Group B has 6 days rest, compared to Group C's four days.

[adeaide]

San Salvador de Jujuy





Santa Fe

[Gadiri]

Originally Posted by Gadiri

A 2nd stadium in Ba will have be perfect :
- Boca
- Indepediente
- Racing
- or Velez


0 stadium in Rosario ! What a shame. The last Argentina-Brazil was played in Rosario Central stadium.

In pictures :
- Boca 57 000 places



- Racing 51 000 places



- Indepediente 44 000



- Velez Sarsfield 49 000



http://www.worldstadiums.com/south_a...rgentina.shtml

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

Rosario Central, 42 000

[aguantlat]

BRASIL VS PARAGUAY - Cordoba City

[Gadiri]

Chile v/s Uruguay 1 -1, in Mendoza

[Gadiri]

Colombia vs Bolivia 2-0 in Santa Fe

[Gadiri]

Originally Posted by aguantlat

BRASIL VS PARAGUAY - Cordoba City

Bresil vs Paraguay 2-2, à Cordoba

[LADEN]

copa sucks compared to last tournament.

[Voltico]

Originally Posted by Luli Pop

another thing is in Argentina it's not like in Europe where every city has a big club. in Argentina every city has 2 or more clubs regardingless their size; in BA even each neighbourhood has 2 teams with its own "calssic".

You mean "Derby"

Originally Posted by Luli Pop

it's always like this. transporte is the same.
BA has the same km of urban rail transport (metro+tram+train) that Sao Paulo, Mexico, Santiago, Rio and Caracas all of them combined. but rolling stock is shity, it's not efficient, it's dirty. instead of having 100 or 200km in excellent condition like most big cities, we have almost 900km in poor disgusting condition.

Are you insane? not even London or Tokio have the total rail network of those 5 cities put together....how many km of rail Buenos Aires has? 300? 350?...Stgo has 105 km of metro and at least another 100 in metrotren....Mexico 200 km of metro...Rio's network is huge and Sao Paulo probably gets very close to Buenos Aires (if not bigger)

[jfsargento]

Originally Posted by Gadiri

In pictures :
- Boca 57 000 places



- Racing 51 000 places



- Indepediente 44 000



- Velez Sarsfield 49 000



http://www.worldstadiums.com/south_a...rgentina.shtml

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

Rosario Central, 42 000

Bombonera its a very small stadium (for all seater) and not compliance the requerimient for international venues,

"El cilindro" Racing`s stadium is destroyed and without manteinance.

"Libertadores de America" is not finish yet (i`m independiente fan and i am very angry with the club management)

Velez is a wonderfull stadium but already it had a WC(1978) & U-20 WC (2001) venues.

Rosario:still do not know why it was not a venue........


for the CA11 venues. I disagree only to the work presented by San Juan (incomplete ) and Salta (nothing ). The rest did a good job.