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: Which bid should host the FIFA World Cup 2018 / 2022?
Australia - 2018 255 12.32%
Belgium / Netherlands - 2018 247 11.94%
England - 2018 538 26.00%
Indonesia - 2018 68 3.29%
Japan - 2018 35 1.69%
Mexico - 2018 105 5.07%
Qatar - 2018 78 3.77%
Russia - 2018 279 13.48%
South Korea - 2018 16 0.77%
Spain / Portugal - 2018 267 12.90%
USA - 2018 116 5.61%
Australia - 2022 378 18.27%
Belgium / Netherlands - 2022 111 5.36%
England - 2022 114 5.51%
Indonesia - 2022 122 5.90%
Japan - 2022 37 1.79%
Mexico - 2022 149 7.20%
Qatar - 2022 153 7.39%
Russia - 2022 148 7.15%
South Korea - 2022 23 1.11%
Spain / Portugal - 2022 184 8.89%
USA - 2022 249 12.03%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 2069. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old November 28th, 2007, 03:04 PM   #2861
eomer
Bring Constantinople back
 
eomer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Val de Marne (Paris)
Posts: 13,816
Likes (Received): 4634

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB View Post
It's a new world. Asia is already a massive football market and it's getting bigger by the day.
You are right on this point. But how many Asian teams will have a chance to win a WC before 2018 ?
The best result of an Asian team (Korea: 4th place in 2002) will not be beaten before 2050 !
Europe won 9 / 18 WC since 1930.
__________________
Cordialement, Kind Regards
Eomer
Look to my coming, at first light, on the fifth day. At dawn, look to the East.
A l'aube du cinquième jour, regardez vers l'est
eomer no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old November 28th, 2007, 03:10 PM   #2862
Joop20
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 610
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjuk View Post
But this is the real world.

My point was that the vast majority of world cup viewers are inconvenienced by the world cup being staged in the 'Asian' timezone, whereas 'only' the Asian timezone is negatively affected by a European world cup - more specifically that the majority of competing nations are from time-zones more suited to watching world cups from a Euro time-zone.

I don't put forward the time-zone as the singular reason why Australia (or China) won't get the 2018 Finals - it's just another hurdle to be cleared, along with distance to the country, distance between the venues, stadium facilities, infrastructure, population, popularity of the game, etc.
In this line of reasoning, the American timezone is equally bad. When a game is played in the USA or Mexico at 9pm, most Europeans will be asleep, and Asians are just waking up. A timezone is always inconvenient for someone, it's not a reason for Australia or China not to get the WC in 2018.
Joop20 no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 03:36 PM   #2863
marrio415
Registered User
 
marrio415's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mansfield and Oxford UK
Posts: 835
Likes (Received): 22

Quote:
Originally Posted by mavn View Post
Our stadiums won't be able to compete with yours capacity wise. That will be fact. But our stadiums will probably be of similar size to the ones in Germany last year so we'll be able to give you a good battle.

When it comes to the worldwide acknowledgment of your teams and stadiums I think you're exagerating a bit. New Wembley shares nothing with the "real" Wembley other than the name and ground it's build on. But the name will probably be a big selling point in itself I guess.

And as to clubs, I don't think Arsenal for instance can compete with Ajax on being known worldwide. And let's not start about the prizes they've won. Even Feyenoord and PSV can compete with Manchester United when it comes to European trophies. England as a whole have obviously won more trophies than we have though and you're league has become way bigger. Money rules.

Emirates stadium is a nice new stadium but the Amsterdam Arena isn't some kind of old dump. And as to "the kuip" (feyenoord stadium) it has featured more european finals then any other stadium. Talking about iconic status...

Yes, like I said, you're stadiums will out power ours, but it's not like we are putting some old just big enough dumpsters in the race.

And you're national team isn't as big a selling point anymore. On the contrary, Your stadiums profit from the premier League but you're national team doesn't. You're league is buying so much foreigners that several names that come on the pitch are virtually unknown to the general population in the world. The players we do know from teams like Liverpool, Arsenal, Manchester and Chelsea are foreigners. Not much of our players play in Holland but they do play in the big leagues for big teams. They are recognized worldwide.

Blatter has stated on several occasions did he doesn't like the fact that the big leagues just buy all the players they can get and leave the smaller countries empty. If the Premier League keeps doing business as it is now, it could harm you're chances. That's the negative side to having a big league with big stadiums.
Dude you must have a big problem with the english game.

Last edited by marrio415; November 28th, 2007 at 03:46 PM.
marrio415 no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 03:59 PM   #2864
Ari Gold
Mr Superstar
 
Ari Gold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Perthzillia
Posts: 2,391
Likes (Received): 126

Seriously, this WC18 debate just goes around and around and around in circles.

Same thing, said over and over really.
__________________
Perth - Lawns n Yawns for All
Ari Gold no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 04:20 PM   #2865
mavn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 180
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by marrio415 View Post
Dude you must have a big problem with the english game.
No I haven't. Why do you take it personal? Am I not allowed to disagree on something?

I love watching PL football. I just think it's a shame that a team like Arsenal has a foreign coach, a foreign team and perhaps a foreign owner in the near future. This is killing the grass roots of football in England and seriously undermining the smaller leagues. I know this is the way the world works nowadays but that doesn't make it "right" for ME. Can I be allowed to have that opinion? And given Blatters en Platinis statements in recent history they don't like it either. Whether they'll "punish" the English bid for it is anyones guess. But I think it could have an influence. But then again, maybe not.

And although I totally agree on the fact that England will, stadium wise, have the upper hand on practically every other bid, do I have to agree that Emirates is an "iconic" stadium? Don't start about White hart lane, because that ground has a rich history. But Emirates? Teams will be heavily excited about playing Arsenal. Probably more than playing any dutch team apart from the name "Ajax" perhaps. But I think Emirates has less an impact on that excitement as Highbury had in the past. That's all I meant to say. You have all kinds of Iconic stadiums that are being replaced by new ones. Those stadiums will have to become iconic over the coming years (decades). A ground needs to have made history to become iconic. They are not iconic from day one just because Arsenal or Liverpool plays there. But hey, again, thats just my opinion...
mavn no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 04:41 PM   #2866
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,239
Likes (Received): 228

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joop20 View Post
Can't really agree with you on this point. Remember that the last world cup in Asia was in 2002, while the last world cup in Europe was in 2006. If Europe can't unite behind one bid, and Asia can, I don't see why China or Australia won't have a fair chance for the 2018 world cup.
Unless they change the way the voting happens though it will be by a process of elimination though which means votes are less likey to be spilt.
MoreOrLess no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 05:28 PM   #2867
high_flyer
Registered User
 
high_flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: England
Posts: 558
Likes (Received): 16

mavn I think you over estimate the recognition of Ajax around the world.
Mention that name and most people will probably think of this....
high_flyer no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 05:45 PM   #2868
eusebius
BANNED
 
eusebius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Trumpton-upon-Ravon
Posts: 7,710
Likes (Received): 12

Ajax is the only club to play in the European CL as well as the African CL. Go figure.
eusebius no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 06:23 PM   #2869
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,016
Likes (Received): 4782

Quote:
Originally Posted by mavn View Post
And although I totally agree on the fact that England will, stadium wise, have the upper hand on practically every other bid, do I have to agree that Emirates is an "iconic" stadium? Don't start about White hart lane, because that ground has a rich history. But Emirates? Teams will be heavily excited about playing Arsenal. Probably more than playing any dutch team apart from the name "Ajax" perhaps. But I think Emirates has less an impact on that excitement as Highbury had in the past. That's all I meant to say. You have all kinds of Iconic stadiums that are being replaced by new ones. Those stadiums will have to become iconic over the coming years (decades). A ground needs to have made history to become iconic. They are not iconic from day one just because Arsenal or Liverpool plays there. But hey, again, thats just my opinion...
I agree with you to an extent. The new Wembley, Anfield, Emirates etc. won't have the same sense of history about them.

My point was more to the effect that English stadiums (whether new or old) will be known around the world, because of the ubiquitous popularity of the Premiership.

Fans and players who have watched the Premiership from afar would love to watch or play for their national team at those stadiums.
JimB no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 06:46 PM   #2870
high_flyer
Registered User
 
high_flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: England
Posts: 558
Likes (Received): 16

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB View Post
I agree with you to an extent. The new Wembley, Anfield, Emirates etc. won't have the same sense of history about them.
But what should the clubs do, the old grounds were unfit for purpose and the needs of the modern game and fans.

There are only so many lash up jobs they can do, and what is this sense of history you talk about, its the fans and players that make the atmosphere, they could be playing anywhere, its not like you see the ghosts of past legends on the pitch at half time

Last edited by high_flyer; November 28th, 2007 at 06:53 PM.
high_flyer no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 08:04 PM   #2871
mavn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 180
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by high_flyer View Post
mavn I think you over estimate the recognition of Ajax around the world.
Mention that name and most people will probably think of this....
That has not been my experience. Ajax is known for their footballing style, their academy and their 4 European cups. Arsenal and Chelsea are known because they play in a big money league that is televised around the world... But I wish all English teams (apart from Liverpool obviously) the very best at equaling Ajax's record in Europe. I'll check back on it in a couple of decades...

Apart from that though, I don't think this is relevant to the discussion. I merely used it as an example to Arsenal. And even that was done in fairly modest way: ("apart from Ajax perhaps")
mavn no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 08:15 PM   #2872
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,239
Likes (Received): 228

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB View Post
I agree with you to an extent. The new Wembley, Anfield, Emirates etc. won't have the same sense of history about them.
By 2018 Arsenal will have been playing at the Emirates for over a decade so I'd say they would have devolped a bit of character by then. One of the disadvanatges of building everything for an event is IMHO that all the venues try to build in character, often with very mixed results.
MoreOrLess no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 08:32 PM   #2873
taboe
taboe
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: antwerp
Posts: 1,895
Likes (Received): 380

Quote:
Originally Posted by high_flyer View Post
mavn I think you over estimate the recognition of Ajax around the world.
if you wanna talk about overestimating, read post 1303... I quote:
"Tottenham has done hardly anything noteworthy in over twenty years. Yet to play against Spurs at White Hart Lane is still a dream come true for our opponents."


some guys are losing it here
taboe no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 08:39 PM   #2874
p2bsa
Registered User
 
p2bsa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sandton - Hometown Durban!
Posts: 695
Likes (Received): 2

Australia won't get the FIFA WC in 2018 because

...very simple...

England or some northern hemisphere country will...

It is highly unlikely that with 2010 in South Africa and 2014 in Brazil - FIFA will leave its powerhouse out in the cold for another 4 years... by having 3 consecutive WC's in the southern hemisphere...

2018 will more than likely go to Europe .... but don't be surprised if the US gets it cos some of the biggest WC sponsors are US conglomerates...
__________________
Durban - Future Olympic City
Sandton - SA's Financial and development hub...
p2bsa no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 08:46 PM   #2875
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjuk View Post
One comment re the time zone issue...

If a game kicks off in Sydney at 3pm, live broadcasts in Europe would be between 6-9am, in East Africa/Middle East 9am - in South America it would be between 1-3am, in North America between 11pm-1am. None of them particularly good for tv ratings/advertising revenue - especially as around 19 of the qualifying sides come from the "Euro" time slot, similarly 8 or 9 are from the Americas.

That's the chief reason FIFA likes to bring things back to Europe - keep the biggest audience happy, keep the cash rolling in. That said, I've no idea how much the tv rights are in far East Asia - but I suspect they don't rival those in Europe.
south africa is lucky to be in a pretty good timezone. matches will be played at 1pm 4pm and 8pm
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 08:52 PM   #2876
p2bsa
Registered User
 
p2bsa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sandton - Hometown Durban!
Posts: 695
Likes (Received): 2

BTW... have you guys seen Durban's 2010 Stadium

It will be arguably South Africa's best looking 2010 stadium... and will have a cable car that can take you to the top of the arches



__________________
Durban - Future Olympic City
Sandton - SA's Financial and development hub...
p2bsa no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 09:10 PM   #2877
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,016
Likes (Received): 4782

Quote:
Originally Posted by taboe View Post
if you wanna talk about overestimating, read post 1303... I quote:
"Tottenham has done hardly anything noteworthy in over twenty years. Yet to play against Spurs at White Hart Lane is still a dream come true for our opponents."


some guys are losing it here
Well, if you must post the above quote out of context, then of course it will seem rather silly.

But, if you read my post again, you will see that I am not expressing MY opinion. I am merely repeating what I have seen written on the message boards of almost every club that Tottenham has played in the UEFA Cup over the past season and a half.

You may not share their opinion but the point still stands. For a great many fans around the world, it is a dream to see their teams (either club or national team) play at the same Premiership stadiums that they see on their TV's every week. Whether you care to admit it or not, the same cannot be said for more than one or two stadiums in Holland and Belgium.
JimB no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 09:34 PM   #2878
Lars13
Registered User
 
Lars13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Antwerpen4
Posts: 79
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB View Post
Mexico had the Olympics in 1968 and the World Cup in 1970. West Germany had the Olympics in 1972 and the World Cup in 1974. USA had the World Cup in 1994 and the Olympics in 1996. A two year time gap in each instance. I hardly think that England would therefore be disqualified by a six year time gap. Besides, FIFA and the IOC are two entirely separate entities - one of which awards host status to a nation while the other awards host status to a city. They do not, and have never, coordinated over the issue of host nations / cities.

Main argument against Spain is that they have hosted the World Cup relatively recently, in 1982. By 2018, there will only have been three world cups held in Europe since Spain last hosted the tournament (Italy 90, France 98 and Germany 06). So however good Spain's bid might be technically, they ought not to get the World Cup again before the likes of Benelux, England or even Russia (should they bid).
I must admit those are very good points... So I can't do no other then to review my opinion. England has the best chance overall, although the argument about Spain is rather weak, that's a gap of 36 years you know! The thing is that a lot can happen in the years to come. The English might suffer a financial blow with the Olympics which can lead to rising criticism. They also will be betting on two horses, both with very high stakes, while other nations can put all their energy in one event. But we are still talking about football, and we all know what the Brits are like when it comes to football...
Anyway, chances are very high Europe will host the 2018 World Cup. And I'm behind them all the way, but at this point my favourite still is Belgium and Holland.
Lars13 no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 09:59 PM   #2879
taboe
taboe
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: antwerp
Posts: 1,895
Likes (Received): 380

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB View Post
Well, if you must post the above quote out of context, then of course it will seem rather silly.

But, if you read my post again, you will see that I am not expressing MY opinion. I am merely repeating what I have seen written on the message boards of almost every club that Tottenham has played in the UEFA Cup over the past season and a half.

You may not share their opinion but the point still stands. For a great many fans around the world, it is a dream to see their teams (either club or national team) play at the same Premiership stadiums that they see on their TV's every week. Whether you care to admit it or not, the same cannot be said for more than one or two stadiums in Holland and Belgium.
You're right, but I was just saying some guys seem to lose touch with reality when they're trying to proove their point. I can hardly imagine anyone to whom the name 'white hart lane' is the place of their dreams...On one hand there are some english blokes who seem to think everybody knows every english stadium/player/team, on the other hand there's mavn, trying to proove England's got a bad reputation and Holland has tons of world class stadiums. I just quoted you to point out that some arguments posted these last few pages are hardly valid, not to insult you in any way. I agree with your general view on things, btw...
taboe no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2007, 10:20 PM   #2880
mavn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 180
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by taboe View Post
on the other hand there's mavn, trying to proove England's got a bad reputation and Holland has tons of world class stadiums.
Where the hell did I say we have tons of world class stadiums?!?!?!? I've stated many, many times that based on stadiums, England will out power us and pretty much every other bid, All I claimed was that the Benelux bid will (capacity wise) be comparable to what Germany offered last year. Based on what are you making up this nonsense?
mavn no está en línea  


Closed Thread

Tags
australia, united states of america, world cup

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 04:58 AM.


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