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 February 15th, 2008, 10:47 AM   #3001
Avens
Registered User
 
Avens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 263
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by soy chiva y que..... View Post
maybe because :

2006-corea-japan
2010-south africa
2014-brazil
2018-CONCACAF (MEXICO,USA,CANADA)
2022-EUROPA (ENGLAND,BELGIUM AND HOLLAND,SPAIN AND PORTUGAL)
No, 2002 was South Korea/Japan, 2006 was Germany.

Besides the 'rotation' system is being dropped.
__________________
You'll Never Walk Alone

Liverpool FC
Avens no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old February 15th, 2008, 10:57 AM   #3002
lpioe
Registered User
 
lpioe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,141
Likes (Received): 18

The rotation policy was only active for the WC 2010 and 2014.
In 2006 the bidding nations were Germany, South Africa, England and Morocco.
__________________




3ds Max Script to create stadium stands for given c-values


my stadium designs (all WIP / unfinished...)

1 - 2 - 3 - 4

lpioe no está en línea  
Old February 15th, 2008, 11:27 AM   #3003
Vilak
Let's dance in style!
 
Vilak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Nimes
Posts: 569
Likes (Received): 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by eomer View Post
Some football players at Twickenham !
Why not Wimbledon ?

There's no more sacred cows, look at Croke Park and there's money to make.
A 82.000 stadium is more efficient that a 60.000 one, especially when you know they are in the same town...

The rugby union should comprehensive, after all, it's for the prestige of the country.
Vilak no está en línea  
Old February 15th, 2008, 12:12 PM   #3004
BeestonLad
PQS
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Abu Dhabi
Posts: 3,216
Likes (Received): 550

Exactly, play at Twickenham its such a waste that that stadium only get used a handful of times each year
BeestonLad no está en línea  
Old February 15th, 2008, 02:03 PM   #3005
Axelferis
Registered User
 
Axelferis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: A space between two worlds
Posts: 11,149
Likes (Received): 2208

Quote:
Originally Posted by ottooo View Post

ok thanx

FIFA is so stupid! Uefa too

Just money money and... money! Shame on them because they know Europe creates more cash than other continenets when organizing World cup here!!

TV rights you say??
__________________
W.A.O blog
Axelferis no está en línea  
Old February 15th, 2008, 07:50 PM   #3006
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobo View Post
Newcastle announced in April last year that they are going to expand St James Park to 60,000+ in order to compete with Arsenal & Man U. I expect it will be the smaller stand behind the goal that will be enlarged, as the other smaller stand has a listed building behind it.
That is what was announced last fall. Here's one mock-up I found on another board. This would be very nice from the inside, I think. I've always enjoyed watching games from St. James on TV.


Quote:
Aston Villa shall be expanding Villa park for the 2012 Olympic games as it will be a host stadium for its football tournament, the capacity has been said to be pushed up to either 51,000 or 52,000.
I had not heard about this. Any formalized schemes or proposed renderings?

Quote:
Yeah I expect Sunderland's would be used, thats interesting that they won't be considered in the same city area, if so that will really work in their favour.
My only guess to why is that Newcastle and Sunderland are two distinct communities that have grown into one another, rather than a single urbanized area growing outward. But this is all speculation on our part for now and we'll see what the English bid formally proposes.

Quote:
Yes it is such a shame that it can't be used and also that it can't be a GB bid as there are great stadiums in Scotland too.
I'd be nice but at the same time I can understand why the English would prefer to keep it "in-house," as well. Especially if they can improve several stadia as a result.

Quote:
I read on Portsmouths website that they have chosen 36,000 as the new capacity as they want the stadium to be full for every game...

I agree with you that they are doing better than Southampton, and their new stadium is miles & miles better than St Mary's. But St Mary's has been built so that it can have a full expansion to 48,000 (But would be bloody expensive). Where as Pompey just have the 36k proposed and want to stick with it for the moment, and for that reason I put St Mary's in.
My thoughts are that a new Portsmouth ground could be built with space at one end for temporary expanded capacity that would be (relatively speaking) easily removed after the event. Since Portsmouth are groundshopping anyway this would be the easier and cheaper solution compared to expanding St. Mary's, and then Southampton wouldn't have to worry about their stadium being too big, either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vilak View Post
A 82.000 stadium is more efficient that a 60.000 one, especially when you know they are in the same town...

The rugby union should (concede), after all, it's for the prestige of the country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeestonLad View Post
Exactly, play at Twickenham its such a waste that that stadium only get used a handful of times each year
The converse to this is that the bid will be heavily supported by the Premier League, the clubs, the FA, etc. They'll be focused on preserving their own, as well. Having games @ Emirates as opposed to Twickenham will provide extra promotion for the Premier League and one of it's bigger clubs, something the league will want to do as part of this event. I've no objection to using Twickenham, especially after its renovations, but sometimes there's more to this than simply finding the largest facilities.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea  
Old February 15th, 2008, 08:58 PM   #3007
Kobo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 420
Likes (Received): 16

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunnerJacket View Post
That is what was announced last fall. Here's one mock-up I found on another board. This would be very nice from the inside, I think. I've always enjoyed watching games from St. James on TV.
Yeah I expect it would look like that. But hopefullly they could do something with the then smaller stand and raise it to the same height as the others, maybe add executive boxes like this:


Quote:
Originally Posted by GunnerJacket View Post
I had not heard about this. Any formalized schemes or proposed renderings?
I have only seen one model of the proposed villa park expansion.
Here is villa park now:


And this is the model made with the expansion (Note its one stand that has changed):


Quote:
Originally Posted by GunnerJacket View Post
I'd be nice but at the same time I can understand why the English would prefer to keep it "in-house," as well. Especially if they can improve several stadia as a result.
Yeah I can understand too, plus it would be a massive headache as probably all 3 countries would want an automatic place, and maybe a 4th if Northern Ireland was involved. I hope there would be improvements to many stadiums. Do you have any idea if there were for Euro 96?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunnerJacket View Post
My thoughts are that a new Portsmouth ground could be built with space at one end for temporary expanded capacity that would be (relatively speaking) easily removed after the event. Since Portsmouth are groundshopping anyway this would be the easier and cheaper solution compared to expanding St. Mary's, and then Southampton wouldn't have to worry about their stadium being too big, either.
I am sure you could be right, as most stadiums these days incorporate some way for expansion.
Kobo no está en línea  
Old February 15th, 2008, 09:35 PM   #3008
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobo View Post
Yeah I expect it would look like that. But hopefullly they could do something with the then smaller stand and raise it to the same height as the others, maybe add executive boxes like this:
Agreed. From what I've heard the idea is possible but, a) the club doesn't want to limit future capacity right now, in vain hopes of assuming more land behind that side, and b) their market for suites is not as strong as other larger metro areas. One fan I know speculated that adding a full side of suites and such would yield a max capacity just under 70k. Doable, but there's long term ambition for at least a bit more. At least enough that our idea hasn't been adopted yet!

Quote:
I have only seen one model of the proposed villa park expansion... this is the model made with the expansion (Note its one stand that has changed):
Doesn't appear to be the type of expansion that would yield an additional 5-7k seats. Let alone foster the volume of redevelopment to bring the concourses and rest of the structure up to the latest standards. Curious.

Quote:
Yeah I can understand too, plus it would be a massive headache as probably all 3 countries would want an automatic place, and maybe a 4th if Northern Ireland was involved. I hope there would be improvements to many stadiums. Do you have any idea if there were for Euro 96?
We know FIFA has confirmed a "preference" to avoid shared bids in the future, though largely that has to do with managing the logistics of travel and cultural adaptation over the course of the event in addition to limiting the number of host teams involved. Everyone knows traveling from London to Cardiff or Glascow wouldn't be as arduous as traveling from Tokyo to Seoul! I'd wager that if England were to get Wales and/or Scotland to waive their rights to automatically have their teams featured then a shared bid would be viewed quite highly. Alas, I don't know that either nation would agree to such terms.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea  
Old February 16th, 2008, 04:11 AM   #3009
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunnerJacket View Post
Agreed. From what I've heard the idea is possible but, a) the club doesn't want to limit future capacity right now, in vain hopes of assuming more land behind that side, and b) their market for suites is not as strong as other larger metro areas. One fan I know speculated that adding a full side of suites and such would yield a max capacity just under 70k. Doable, but there's long term ambition for at least a bit more. At least enough that our idea hasn't been adopted yet!
They'll never get the land behind that stand as all the buildings are listed. That said, there could always be a mysterious inferno resulting in the demolition of said buildings...

As for the executive box idea - they'd have to reduce capacity to put them in because they can't go any further back to put down foundations for a tower of blocks... Also, I understand there's a daylight issue for the accomodation behind the stand, if it goes up further they would be in permanent shadow.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old February 16th, 2008, 04:29 AM   #3010
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunnerJacket View Post
I think we're all comfortable with this as the given first allotment. Even if the 'Castle continues to struggle they'd be foolish not to expand the stadium before the event so as to get the renovations they want and maximizing this event as a resource to help pay for it. the club wouldn't be able to make enough from 4 or 5 (max) world cup games (most of the gate money goes to FIFA) to justify extending the stadium. Government is only likely to finance upgrades to stadiums if NOT financing them would prove to be a deal-breaker.

Barring a surprising move by the city council to build the dreamt of new stadium for Birmingham City, I concur with this list. Villa may not need an expansion right now, but if the expansion also did a nice job at sprucing up Villa Park they'd be foolish to miss this opportunity to help pay for some enhancements. Ditto for Leeds, and while they're wallowing right now due to poor ownership it's not unreasonable to suspect they could make it back to the PL by this time and thus sustain a crowd of 38-42k per match. Adding a modest expansion around the 3 sides without upper tiers would do the trick. Though in both of these cases I'd refrain from building anything too big. Design for further expansion but build for sustainable quality in the near term.

For me Sunderland is also an automatic. The stadium is nice, meets capacity standards and I'm told they won't be considered in the same city area as Newcastle probably due to the fact that they are two distinct cities, with a clear gap (and the town of Gateshead) between them, separate councils, separate facilities, etc., per FIFA's fussiness. Assuming that is the case, and given the stretch to find more clubs that could maximize a 45k stadium I'd be hard pressed to see the Stadium of Light left out of the Cup.

Now we get into the more daydream scenarios (and one reason I wish England would contract out the right to use Millennium Stadium)...

You've done a fair job of dispersing the locations and picking clubs that would use the digs, if not completely fill them up.

- I tend to think Portsmouth gets the nod over Southampton. They could more easily upgrade their proposals from 36k or provide space for temporary seating, and may have a better chance at filling the grounds then do the Saints. I deeply suspect that Pompey announced at 36k in the hope that a world cup bid for push government into putting in the extra cash to up the capacity to 40k - which would probably be the most expensive 4k seats in the stadium due to the tolerances of building materials etc as they go up and out from the pitch to add them.

- Technically only one more is needed. Either Sheffield club could do an expansion and offer history to the equation, but we're starting to reach the limit of clubs that could regularly fill 45k. I'd love for everyone to throw weight behind a Sheff Utd/Bramall Lane extension - it's the oldest football stadium location in the world and has had continuous football use since it opened, it always helps to have history like that in a bid

Norwich or Ipswich would be nice for providing something east of London. I tend to think Ipswich might be the one most able to utilize the bigger facility, but Norwich might make the better overall destination. agreed, I've been astounded by the media/forum obsessions with a South East ground, but nothing about an East Anglian ground - Norwich might not need a 40k, but they could certainly handle something bigger than they already have.

Anything at this point becomes which club wants it and thinks the larger facility won't be too big for their purposes.Bristol City, if they get into the Prem and stay there for a couple of years - you'd think they could handle a 40k
Hopefully this 'international round' business hasn't killed the bid!
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old February 16th, 2008, 06:21 AM   #3011
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjuk View Post
the club wouldn't be able to make enough from 4 or 5 (max) world cup games (most of the gate money goes to FIFA) to justify extending the stadium.
No, but the revenue and publicity from 4 sold-out matches that otherwise wouldn't be available likely means an additional $10-15M. It's usually best to make this kind of an expansion a) when the publicity will be high and b) when there will be an extra bump in revenues to off-set costs. It won't pay for it all, but it would certainly help.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea  
Old February 16th, 2008, 12:18 PM   #3012
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunnerJacket View Post
No, but the revenue and publicity from 4 sold-out matches that otherwise wouldn't be available likely means an additional $10-15M. It's usually best to make this kind of an expansion a) when the publicity will be high and b) when there will be an extra bump in revenues to off-set costs. It won't pay for it all, but it would certainly help.
Not sure if increased publicity is something that Newcastle need... I don't think there will be too many people who will see games at St James' during the world cup and go, "jeez, they have a football ground in Newcastle? - let's go"

There's no doubt that if they regain any level of competitiveness in the EPL over the next few years, perhaps even manage to win something, they would be likely to expand.

By the way, the announcement of the plans to expand the Sir John Hall Stand were made the weekend Sunderland went top of the Championship table - they were made without any plans, renders or models, and nothing has been said about them since. It's not the first time a club has made a 'major' announcement to steel it's neighbour's thunder.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old February 16th, 2008, 12:37 PM   #3013
Joop20
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 610
Likes (Received): 4

Yep, another reason to give the 2018 world cup to Australia! This one in Perth will be finished by 2016, capacity 60k, expandable to 70k. Though it's not a rectangular stadium, it will have some form of retractable seating to accomodate football and rugby.

Joop20 no está en línea  
Old February 16th, 2008, 02:01 PM   #3014
Witkowski
Registered User
 
Witkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lodz..Currently Melbourne
Posts: 24
Likes (Received): 0

I think Australia will definitely host the World Cup. The stadiums we already have are great, and Australia definitely has enough money to make more (as we have seen with the new Perth stadium).

As for deciding who hosts the final between Melbourne and Sydney, i think it show go something like:

One city hosts the Opening Match and also has 2 stadiums in use (Sydney: Telstra Stadium, SFS, Melbourne: MCG, Rectangular Stadium which will hopefully be 50,000 by then)

Personally i want the opening match in Telstra Stadium, and the final at MCG...thats if they get the rights to host it in the first place
Witkowski no está en línea  
Old February 16th, 2008, 04:50 PM   #3015
Vilak
Let's dance in style!
 
Vilak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Nimes
Posts: 569
Likes (Received): 6

2018 will be in Europe, probably England (who will bid for 2022 if they're not picked).
2022? If China don't get it and USA don't bid, the WC will stay in Europe IMO.
Vilak no está en línea  
Old February 16th, 2008, 05:02 PM   #3016
Olympiaki-Agones
Registered User
 
Olympiaki-Agones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 219
Likes (Received): 0

I definitely hope that Australia formalises its bid, then the real World Cup rotation would be accomplished without being under that policy.
Olympiaki-Agones no está en línea  
Old February 16th, 2008, 05:05 PM   #3017
Joop20
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 610
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vilak View Post
2018 will be in Europe, probably England (who will bid for 2022 if they're not picked).
2022? If China don't get it and USA don't bid, the WC will stay in Europe IMO.
Well yeah, if no non-European country bids for the 2022 WC, it will certainly stay in Europe lol. I think there's so much competition for events like the WC and the Olympics these days, that there's a very slim chance both 2018 and 2022 will be held in Europe.
There's a fair chance 2018 will be held in Europe, which opens up 2022 for Asia. This wouldn't be such a bad thing for Australia actually; it will have the experience of bidding for 2018, and it will have more time to complete its infrastructure. Biggest threat to an Australian bid is China; apperantly, the Asian federation only wants to have one bidder from its federation, which basically means Australia and China will have to compete to get the nomination.
Joop20 no está en línea  
Old February 16th, 2008, 05:18 PM   #3018
Olympiaki-Agones
Registered User
 
Olympiaki-Agones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 219
Likes (Received): 0

I hope Australia hosts the World Cup in 2018. I think that pretext about the hemisphere thing has no sense when the real purpose of FIFA is to promote this sport across the globe, and Australia 2018 is a good chance for Oceania to host and that side of the world where Rugby is more popular. After all, USA'94 and Japan 2002 (without forgetting its co-host South Korea) were good chances to stimulate soccer culture in those countries where base-ball is the hit.

In the other hand, FIFA will not worry about oragnization problems that many fear about South Africa or security issues to be concerned in Brazil. A very expereinced country in big event and high security guarantee that Australia is the best choice for 2018.

Last edited by Olympiaki-Agones; February 16th, 2008 at 05:23 PM.
Olympiaki-Agones no está en línea  
Old February 16th, 2008, 09:36 PM   #3019
TooFar
moonage daydream
 
TooFar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Either here or there.
Posts: 612
Likes (Received): 377

New rectangular city stadium proposed for Adelaide.
ADELAIDE United has become the state's first major sporting club to back plans for a new city-based sporting stadium – and has signalled its intention to build a $270 million, 45,000 seat soccer stadium on the fringe of Bonython Park.



http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=583520
__________________
Remember you are just an extra in everyone else's play.
TooFar no está en línea  
Old February 17th, 2008, 12:22 AM   #3020
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by TooFar View Post
New rectangular city stadium proposed for Adelaide.
ADELAIDE United has become the state's first major sporting club to back plans for a new city-based sporting stadium – and has signalled its intention to build a $270 million, 45,000 seat soccer stadium on the fringe of Bonython Park.



http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=583520
No roof? - and regarding that linky, he says it's based on Frankfurt's World Cup stadium, but it looks a lot more like Nurenburg's to me.

2018 - as has been said so many times, it's too soon. Aussie will possibly have the stadia to put in a minimum 8 site bid - minimum - whilst England, the USA, China, etc., will be able to put in bids with 12 stadiums.

2022 - competition will still be there from the losers of 2018, PLUS any African nation that feels capable of a bid (if South Africa pull it off, the odds of another African World Cup would go up).

Let's not forget that Australia is a small country (population) spread over a huge area, making it a logistical nightmare - and that as much as FIFA wants to 'spread the game', the joy of knocking rugby out of top place in a small country is way down the list of priorities when compared to cracking the Chinese market, or getting a larger share of the US market, etc.

Again, I HOPE Aussie can get it, but I don't BELIEVE Aussie can.

Last edited by Benjuk; February 17th, 2008 at 12:30 AM.
Benjuk 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 05:00 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