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 July 24th, 2008, 12:40 AM   #3901
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by rover3 View Post
I know. So much copy for an Oz 2018 /2022 that is NOT going to happen.

I mean, surely you guys have better things to do?
Not really.

It's an interesting enough debate for those of us who live in Oz and would like a World Cup here. It's good to discuss WHY something will or will not happen. It's good to read and listen to the opinion of others (unlike some on this board I take in what others have to say, and as a result of the recent back and forth with my learned colleague I'm now less sure of China's chances for 2022 - although no more confident of Australias, but that's just my inbuilt negativity coming through).
Benjuk no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old July 24th, 2008, 04:03 AM   #3902
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Quote:
I know. So much copy for an Oz 2018 /2022 that is NOT going to happen.

I mean, surely you guys have better things to do?
Nope. I'm on holidays from uni and have a cold, so I divide my daytime hours between this forum and FIFA 08 pretty much.

I'm sorry I don't respond to comments with stupid simplistic one liners like yourself.

As for Benjuks response, I know this thread name is about 2018, but it has grown to be about world cup bids in general. What you have written in this thread and others indicates you don't believe the world cup will be coming to Australia anytime soon, and I wanted to discuss this with you.
Basically Australia is competing against other Asian countries, agreed? I just can't imagine the cup going to Japan in 2022/2026. The only reason the cup went to Mexico a second time after 16 years is because it had to be played in the Western hemisphere, and Brazil or Argentina didn't put their hands up. Mexico was light years ahead of any other CONCACAF team in terms of football quality. Basically, as well as getting the cup by default, there was no real competition for Mexico in 1986. Japan has strong contenders.

So I see the competition is between China and Australia

As far as I see it, China has three advantages:
*Slightly closer to Europe (but not any closer to South America). However for a month long tournament, a few more hours on the plane won't make that much of a difference. I'm guessing the players would rather spend a few more hours on a plane than breath in smog for a month.
*More "Asian" than Australia, but I doubt countries like Vietnam, Korea or Japan would rather have the cup in China, a long time adversary, than in Australia (there were riots after the 2004 AFC final when Japan bet China in Beijing).
*The big one, much more potential for growth.

Thats all it has over Australia.
I have written the negatives I see about China previously. The biggest ones I see are trouble getting Visa's, and over the top rules for fans which would put a major downer for the millions of fans which would go to the cup. FIFA still wants its cups to be joyous festivals, which so far all of them have been.

We are in agreement that Australia would do a good job in hosting the cup. As far as the stadium thing goes, Perth and Adelaide are planning to build oval grounds with movable tiers, so they will be packed each week for AFL. A second rectangular stadium in Perth is a dream, but would at least get use by the Rugby team there. If that stadium didn't go ahead, one of Melbourne or Sydney's other stadiums could be used. 40K stadiums in Gold Coast, Canberra and Newcastle would allow international games in both Rugby codes and soccer to be played, as well as the occasional state of origin match.
Those grounds could host at least 2 or 3 of those games a year each, pretty much guaranteeing a full house.
I find it poor that the nations capital is void of any international games in the 3 sports.
When not hosting big matches, the grounds would be used by at least two teams from different codes, guaranteeing regular use throughout the year.

Either way Australian stadiums would get more use than Chinese ones. While the Chinese government can force its people to go to World Cup games, I fail to see the point of forcing people to league soccer games when they don't want to go.

China has only been in one world cup, lost all its games, and scored no goals.
Japan has never progressed beyond the group stage.

As far as the one stadium per city rule, every other country which has hosted the cup has a wider spread of its population amongst different regions and cities than Australia. Australia is truly in a very rare situation where almost all of the population lives in a handful of cities. It is extremely rare for a country to have so few metropolitan areas with a population over 500,000. Despite having 19 interested cities, Brazil isn't going to play any games deep within the amazon because no one lives there.
But we would only be guessing that FIFA would relax this rule, so I don't like playing around with this idea too much.

Basically, I just think you haven't been giving Australia's bid enough credit, overall. The country would do a fantastic job. You talk about white elephant stadiums as if they are a problem in Australia, but then dismiss the problem when talking about Japan and China. Comparing Australia's facilities to European countries is pointless, because it is only competing against Asian nations. Japan to host Asia's first and second world cup? I highly doubt it. Only if there were no other bids, and still it would be more than 20 years in between. As for China vs Australia, it basically comes down to how much FIFA is willing to have a crap world cup in China, in return for the promotional value of hosting it there.
woozoo no está en línea  
Old July 24th, 2008, 04:39 AM   #3903
theespecialone
Top
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 309
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
Several hours by plane.

It has demand for a rectangular stadium.
Mostly for the rugby union team there, but also for the proposed Rugby league team.

Perth Glory crowds are too small at present for such a ground.

A rectangular ground also means Perth could host:
Rugby Union internationals.
Rugby league internationals.
Soccer internationals, which so far are absent from Western Australia due to no suitable ground.
would the distance between Perth and Adelaide be too much further than between townsville and brisbane? On a map, they look very similar
theespecialone no está en línea  
Old July 24th, 2008, 06:28 AM   #3904
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by theespecialone View Post
would the distance between Perth and Adelaide be too much further than between townsville and brisbane? On a map, they look very similar
you need to get a better map

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
Basically Australia is competing against other Asian countries, agreed? I just can't imagine the cup going to Japan in 2022/2026. The only reason the cup went to Mexico a second time after 16 years is because it had to be played in the Western hemisphere, and Brazil or Argentina didn't put their hands up. Mexico was light years ahead of any other CONCACAF team in terms of football quality. Basically, as well as getting the cup by default, there was no real competition for Mexico in 1986.
One could argue that USA could have stepped in, as they still could today, and hosted at the drop of a hat. Argentina had hosted in '78 so even if they had puit up their hands Mexico would have had the inside track. Brazil, no idea why they didn't put their hands up - possibly a financial decision as (at the time) the world cup didn't generate as much money and Brazil's finances weren't so good (if I remember correctly).

With regard to travelling distances... Many supporters only come out for 2 weeks, if you take a fortnight off work in Europe to travel to Oz, the return trip alone eats up 3 days. It's not just the time on the plane, it's also the additional cost involved... That said, FIFA doesn't really care about the supporters, just the VIPs who'll be travelling 1st class anyway.

With regard to new stadiums - the general argument in (for) Australia seems to be that 40k rectangular stadiums in Gold Coast, Canberra, Townsville and Newcastle, etc., would be filled 2 or 3 times a year for internationals... My question would have to be "how many rugby/'soccer' internationals can Australia play each year?" If we've got stadiums on the Gold Coast, and in Canberra, Townsville and Newcastle, AS WELL AS those in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane, AND the multipurpose venues in Perth and Adelaide not wanting to be left out - that means we'd need 18-27 fixtures per season to give each venue 2-3 games. That's a lot of 'big' internationals, you run the real risk of supporter fatigue.

As for the regular use throughout the season - whilst it's not as depressing as seeing a 40k stadium sitting empty, there's not many sights (and sounds) as dissapointing as a 10-15k crowd in a 40k venue - which realistically is what we can expect for most football/rugby fixtures played at league level over here.

With regard to Brazil - Manaus is way out in the Amazon region...

With regard to white elephants - I only mention them because the subject was raised when talking of China. That and the fact that, unlike China, MY taxes will be used to build the white elephants here (and at the end of the day I'm a selfish c**t).

As for me giving Australia's bid enough credit... My point, on all threads, is that Australia would do a great job, but that it will struggle to put together a MORE ATTRACTIVE bid than everyone else. We still talk in terms of minimum bids, of whether stadiums could be filled more than once or twice a year (I accept that the latter is true for China, Japan, and any number of other countries as well) - and we still pin our hopes on FIFA having an unofficial rotation policy that will bring the finals back to Asia, despite them scrapping the rotation in favour of miss-two-finals-then-bid-again scenario.

Morocco bid for 2010 remember, being beaten 14-10 by South Africa in the bidding - they'll be able to bid again for 2022, and the location would be very popular with Europeans - close enough to fly over for a couple of days, etc. And before anyone says that FIFA won't go back to Africa just 12 years after South Africa, if they don't want to do it, why did they amend the rules to make it possible?

Here's hoping, crossing fingers, etc., that Australia CAN put a superb bid together. I certainly want them to, and I look forward to seeing what Lowy and the boys come up with... But I'm not going to fall into the trap of thinking that we are the favourites in a two horse race.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old July 24th, 2008, 07:01 AM   #3905
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,239
Likes (Received): 228

White Elephant wise I don't think its unreasonible to think China has more potential for quick growth in attendances since there really isnt an existing sport/s football would be in competision agenst. When I don't think you can underestimate the effect that can have on the growth iof a sport, a fan who doesnt already regularly watch another sport is far more likey to stick around long term IMHO.
MoreOrLess no está en línea  
Old July 24th, 2008, 08:56 AM   #3906
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Trip to China/USA eats up 2 days return.

Currently there are about 10 rugby Union internationals each year in Australia. Instead of playing 3 games in Brisbane and Sydney each as happens now, 2 games could be played in Newcastle/Gold Coast/Canberra. The team that misses out gets the State of Origin game thats not played in Sydney or Brisbane.
One or two Rugby League internationals could be spared per year for one of the smaller cities.
7 Socceroos matches per year allowing 2 to be played in regional centers.

Newcastle knights average 20,000.
ACT Brumbies average 17,000 (down from 22,000 a couple of years ago when form was good).
Titans average 17,000.

Either way, it seems white Elephants aren't a problem for FIFA. As far as your tax dollar, the world cup will pretty much pay for the stadiums. Look up economics of world cup on wikipedia. There is so much money to be made, a country could build 5 new stadiums from scratch and still make money.

Manaus has a population of 1.6 million, bigger than Adelaide or Perth. Apart from here, the millions of square kilometers of Amazon either side of the city will be void of any world cup matches.

Australia's bid is Miiiiiiiiiiiiiiles ahead of Morrocco's in every way apart from distance to Europe (They have 3 stadiums over 40K, all with running tracks around them, 1 fifty years old. And very little money to invest in new stadiums/infrastructure/hospitals etc.) Either way I'm guessing most Europeans would rather have the safety and reliability of Australia than the closeness of Morocco. Poland Ukraine EURO 2012 seems doomed to failure, and they are more advanced than Morocco.

We are going to start going round in circles, so lets agree to disagree.

I would be very very surprised if 2022/2026 didn't go to Asia and USA. Europe prevented from bidding. Too much growth potential, money and people in Asia. No real candidates in Africa (come on, lets be realistic). Asia's bids are better than anything South America can come up with. Australia's and China's bids are too good to justify Japan having a crack two times in a row.
woozoo no está en línea  
Old July 24th, 2008, 03:46 PM   #3907
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
We are going to start going round in circles, so lets agree to disagree.
The thing is mate, I don't disagree. I'm merely exploring every alternative I can think of - making sure I keep a realistic level of expectation.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old July 24th, 2008, 07:44 PM   #3908
C.M.
C.M.
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 22
Likes (Received): 0

[QUOTE=woozoo;23060148]

While the Chinese government can force its people to go to World Cup games, I fail to see the point of forcing people to league soccer games when they don't want to go.

China has only been in one world cup, lost all its games, and scored no goals.
Japan has never progressed beyond the group stage.

QUOTE]

Firstly what an ugly troll you are, do you know for a fact that football will not grow in China to be the number one sport? Do you know for a fact that people will be "forced" to attend matches at gun point as you presume?

Secondly get your facts right before posting rubbish here, where did Japan finish in the FIFA 2002 WC? As far as I know they did progress past the group stages and as a matter of fact they topped their group.

Thirdly I cannot see why any FIFA confederation (read the African, Asian, South American) will vote for Australia ahead of China - go read up on the voting FIFA process if you do not know what I mean.

And finally as far as I know China will only bid to host the FIFA 2022 WC not 2018 which strangely is the title of this thread.
C.M. no está en línea  
Old July 25th, 2008, 06:01 AM   #3909
theespecialone
Top
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 309
Likes (Received): 0

don't see why the likes of townsville and canberra can't build temporary stands that fit in aesthetically.
Places like newcastle could probably accomodate a 40 000 seat stadium, even though they wont be full all the time. The capital cities can definately accomodate expanded stadiums.
theespecialone no está en línea  
Old July 25th, 2008, 08:58 AM   #3910
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by theespecialone View Post
don't see why the likes of townsville and canberra can't build temporary stands that fit in aesthetically.
Places like newcastle could probably accomodate a 40 000 seat stadium, even though they wont be full all the time. The capital cities can definately accomodate expanded stadiums.
I held out hopes for this - however, I've been informed (on this forum) that FIFA frowns on temporary stands. I have no reason to doubt that information as it appears to fit in with FIFA's reasoning... Otherwise I'd advocate London Olympic style 70-80k (in terms of size) venues for 4 or 5 cities around Oz, to be reduced London style to 25k after the finals.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old July 25th, 2008, 09:05 AM   #3911
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Quote:
woozoo....don't worry about rover3-he's just an insecure troll. He threatened to bash me (over the internet lol) after i suggested that america won't get the 2022 World Cup.
Believe me, I'm not. What a tool.
Quote:
Firstly what an ugly troll you are, do you know for a fact that football will not grow in China to be the number one sport? Do you know for a fact that people will be "forced" to attend matches at gun point as you presume?

I didn't presume people will be force to attend games. I said it won't happen.
I'm sure football will grow in China, but for now its league is dismal, crowds are very poor and the national team is extremely weak. From what I have read on wikipedia the league is very corrupt and suffers from a lot of fixed matches.

Quote:
Secondly get your facts right before posting rubbish here, where did Japan finish in the FIFA 2002 WC? As far as I know they did progress past the group stages and as a matter of fact they topped their group.
My bad. Crucify me.

Quote:
Thirdly I cannot see why any FIFA confederation (read the African, Asian, South American) will vote for Australia ahead of China - go read up on the voting FIFA process if you do not know what I mean.
Thats what we're discussing here. Who would be likely to get more votes. I already wrote many times what I believe is wrong with Chinas bid, and hence why countries would vote for Australia instead of China.

I would love to read up about the FIFA voting process. Please post a link so I can relieve myself of my ignorance.
Seriously.
Quote:
And finally as far as I know China will only bid to host the FIFA 2022 WC not 2018 which strangely is the title of this thread.
China has expressed interest in placing a bid. Either way this thread has expanded from just the 2018 bid to other future world cup bids in general.

Quote:
The thing is mate, I don't disagree. I'm merely exploring every alternative I can think of - making sure I keep a realistic level of expectation.
But you do disagree, on many issues.

I'm exploring every alternative also, and trying to be realistic.
Realistically theres no country in Africa that could host the cup anytime soon. Why? Unlike South Africa, theres no infrastructure. No stadiums. No money to invest in stadiums. No history in staging such events. FIFA gave Africa a cup, and it won't coming back for a while. Agree or disagree?
Realistically it would be very odd for FIFA to give a country hosting privileges twice in a row in a particular confederation, when there are strong bids from other countries.

Last edited by woozoo; July 25th, 2008 at 09:24 AM.
woozoo no está en línea  
Old July 25th, 2008, 09:16 AM   #3912
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Quote:
I held out hopes for this - however, I've been informed (on this forum) that FIFA frowns on temporary stands. I have no reason to doubt that information as it appears to fit in with FIFA's reasoning... Otherwise I'd advocate London Olympic style 70-80k (in terms of size) venues for 4 or 5 cities around Oz, to be reduced London style to 25k after the finals.
In the past I was concerned about Australia needed white elephant stadiums to get the cup. But now, the white elephant issue doesn't seem to be that important.

Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Melbourne/Sydney/Perth, Sydney, Brisbane wouldn't be white elephants.
All the stadiums already exist apart from Perth where the decision to build a new movable tier stadium has already been made, and Adelaide where discussion has been brewing for several years and a new stadium is inevitable.

Newcastle And Gold Coast are large enough to support a 40K stadium.

So really, if any the only white elephant stadiums will be Canberra and Townsville.

It doesn't seem FIFA would care all too much about two white elephants, which will still get regular use after the tournament (ACT Brumbies, Canberra Raiders, New Aleague club/Cowboys, NCFC).
woozoo no está en línea  
Old July 25th, 2008, 06:54 PM   #3913
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
In the past I was concerned about Australia needed white elephant stadiums to get the cup. But now, the white elephant issue doesn't seem to be that important.

Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Melbourne/Sydney/Perth, Sydney, Brisbane wouldn't be white elephants.
All the stadiums already exist apart from Perth where the decision to build a new movable tier stadium has already been made, and Adelaide where discussion has been brewing for several years and a new stadium is inevitable.

Newcastle And Gold Coast are large enough to support a 40K stadium.

So really, if any the only white elephant stadiums will be Canberra and Townsville.

It doesn't seem FIFA would care all too much about two white elephants, which will still get regular use after the tournament (ACT Brumbies, Canberra Raiders, New Aleague club/Cowboys, NCFC).
Now this is just me being me, not totally serious - understanding where you are coming from, etc... BUT... If Gold Coast can support a 40k stadium, why didn't they build one, rather than capping their new venue at 27k (IIRC)?
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old July 25th, 2008, 07:05 PM   #3914
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
Thats what we're discussing here. Who would be likely to get more votes. I already wrote many times what I believe is wrong with Chinas bid, and hence why countries would vote for Australia instead of China.

I would love to read up about the FIFA voting process. Please post a link so I can relieve myself of my ignorance.
Seriously.
Go out and get a copy of FOUL! by Andrew Jennings. A top class read that reveals all too much about FIFA's selection process and corruption. I guarentee it will change the way you feel about whether logic will interfere with World Cup venue selection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
But you do disagree, on many issues.

I'm exploring every alternative also, and trying to be realistic.
Realistically theres no country in Africa that could host the cup anytime soon. Why? Unlike South Africa, theres no infrastructure. No stadiums. No money to invest in stadiums. No history in staging such events. FIFA gave Africa a cup, and it won't coming back for a while. Agree or disagree?
Realistically it would be very odd for FIFA to give a country hosting privileges twice in a row in a particular confederation, when there are strong bids from other countries.
I see the alternative and I state it - that doesn't automatically mean that I 'believe' it.

With regard to the 'realistic' hopes of other countries in Africa - as I said before, Morocco got 10 of the 24 votes for 2010, which would indicate that a large portion of the voters believed that they could get everything in order within a decade... I don't imagine that things have got particularly worse in Morocco since then - so who's to say they couldn't still do all the things they were planning on back then?

FIFA won't give hosting privileges to any federation twice in a row - 2010 to 2022 isn't twice in a row, it's twice in 12 years. 2018 will, quite simply, be the best bid not involving South America or Africa (probably a European one, England or Spain), and 2022 will be the best bid not including Europe or South America (meaning that Africa having had it in 2010 will have no relevence at all - if an African country puts in a better bid than the rest, they'll win it).
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old July 25th, 2008, 07:40 PM   #3915
CharlieP
Tax avoider
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 23,752
Likes (Received): 1973

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
Currently there are about 10 rugby Union internationals each year in Australia.
More like 6 - three in the Tri-Nations and two or three against touring international sides.
__________________
This signature is socialist and un-American.
CharlieP no está en línea  
Old July 26th, 2008, 10:54 AM   #3916
theespecialone
Top
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 309
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjuk View Post
Go out and get a copy of FOUL! by Andrew Jennings. A top class read that reveals all too much about FIFA's selection process and corruption. I guarentee it will change the way you feel about whether logic will interfere with World Cup venue selection.



I see the alternative and I state it - that doesn't automatically mean that I 'believe' it.

With regard to the 'realistic' hopes of other countries in Africa - as I said before, Morocco got 10 of the 24 votes for 2010, which would indicate that a large portion of the voters believed that they could get everything in order within a decade... I don't imagine that things have got particularly worse in Morocco since then - so who's to say they couldn't still do all the things they were planning on back then?

FIFA won't give hosting privileges to any federation twice in a row - 2010 to 2022 isn't twice in a row, it's twice in 12 years. 2018 will, quite simply, be the best bid not involving South America or Africa (probably a European one, England or Spain), and 2022 will be the best bid not including Europe or South America (meaning that Africa having had it in 2010 will have no relevence at all - if an African country puts in a better bid than the rest, they'll win it).

africa won't bid in 2022 nor in 2026..if they do they have no chance because 16 years is not a very long time between tournaments unless its europe where the game is virtually based
theespecialone no está en línea  
Old July 26th, 2008, 02:52 PM   #3917
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by theespecialone View Post
africa won't bid in 2022 nor in 2026..if they do they have no chance because 16 years is not a very long time between tournaments unless its europe where the game is virtually based
Whether they have a chance of not depends on what deals they can make with the rest of the footballing world.
If the African Confederation can make deals to back a US finals in 2026, and a European finals for 2030 (huge bunfight for the Centenial Finals is likely between South America, hosts of the first finals, and Europe 'home of the game'), they may be able to garner enough votes to get them beyond the rest.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old July 29th, 2008, 09:52 AM   #3918
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Quote:
More like 6 - three in the Tri-Nations and two or three against touring international sides.
This year its 3 tri nations and 6 in the bundaberg rum series. Dont see why other years would be any less.



It 2022 Gold Coast will have a population of 800,000. Thats big enough for a 40K stadium. If it weren't for the world cup there would maybe be less purpose for upgrading, but with the world cup in town it provides reason to increase capacity.

If you think Morrocco has more chance of hosting the world cup in 2022 or 2026 than Australia your delusional. It got 10 votes against South Africa, not against any country with a sound bid. Poland/Ukraine are struggling to put together euro 2012, and thats two industrialised countries with a combined population of 90 million. FIFA isnt going to risk giving hosting rights to Moroco.

By twice in a row i meant giving Japan the world cup hosting rights twice in a row in terms of the confedaration.
woozoo no está en línea  
Old July 29th, 2008, 02:50 PM   #3919
JohanSA
Registered User
 
JohanSA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Napier/Stellenbosch/Cape Town
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 478

Just to put one thing straight. To all the biggots that stated that South Africa only got 2010 because it had to be in Africa and wouldnt have stood a chance in normal bidding you are forgetting that for the 2006 bid Germany only beat us by one vote in the final round of voting. This is after the New Zealand representative ignored orders from New Zealand to vote for South Africa and didnt cast a vote. It would have ended in a tie.

Puts things into perspective doesnt it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kreed View Post
Wow, so you really are fruity. Damn, I thought they were joking.
Twitter, Instagram : @JohanTTBlom
JohanSA no está en línea  
Old July 29th, 2008, 03:40 PM   #3920
Weebie
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 227
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohanSA View Post
Just to put one thing straight. To all the biggots that stated that South Africa only got 2010 because it had to be in Africa and wouldnt have stood a chance in normal bidding you are forgetting that for the 2006 bid Germany only beat us by one vote in the final round of voting. This is after the New Zealand representative ignored orders from New Zealand to vote for South Africa and didnt cast a vote. It would have ended in a tie.

Puts things into perspective doesnt it.
Shuttup you fool.

You only got it because of FIFAs promise for Africa and already 2 years out your world cup is turning into a joke. SA is the only african country that might be able to host a world cup.

Ocieana got screwed again and again so its best thing was not to vote.

You weren;t ready in 2006 to host the world cup so blatter used his vote get over it
Weebie 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 04:57 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