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 August 22nd, 2008, 03:19 PM   #3981
berkshire royal
Registered User
 
berkshire royal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 557
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Toby View Post
Frankly. football doesn't have a large following in East Asia. In Japan, Korea, and Taiwan its baseball, something the Europeans have no love for. In fact the love is so low, during the London Olympics baseball won't be a sport.

While most of the venues at Beijing will be empty, I fully expect to see sold out baseball games. The only problem is that the European television won't show the baseball games at all, or if they do it will be during the wee hours of the morning.
Actually football does have a large following in East Asia. In Korea football is considered the most popular sport in the country. The Professional football league in Korea gets 5,000 more than its equivalent in Baseball and is the oldest professional league in Asia. In Japan the pro baseball league averages 2000 more than the pro football league and yes baseball is more popular but the gap is becoming slimmer all the time and in time Football probably will overtake Baseball. In China despite the national team not being up to much football still is one of the most popular sports and is more popular than any North American Sport, viewing figures for the EPL are astonishing with figures getting as high as 400million for one game. And it is only in Taiwan where football has very little following and in all honesty it would be hard to find anywhere else in Asia where football has such a small following. I'm sure FIFA and AFC will work on that market at some point and i'm sure that when they do their efforts will be rewarded with a much greater following.
berkshire royal no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old August 22nd, 2008, 04:00 PM   #3982
Vermeer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 124
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knitemplar View Post
If? Since Major League Soccer was launched in 1995, there are now 14 franchises. So that's a little more than one new team a year. I would say that's a great success.
Do you call that great success. You have been trying for the last 30 years to develop profesional football and so far you have franchises. For a European Franchises and football has nothing to do with each other. Maybe one day you will manage do form real profesional football clubs.
Vermeer no está en línea  
Old August 22nd, 2008, 06:39 PM   #3983
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
As for the MLS, as far as world football leagues are concerned, its shit. For a nation of USA's size, the crowds are pathetic, the quality is poor, overall FIFA was expecting a lot more from the MLS
The league still PAYS for matches to be broadcast on TV.

What other league in any sport in any country PAYS tv channels to broadcast its matches???

Its still well behind the other big 4 leagues in the USA. It barely rates a mention on highlight shows, and still requires retired European stars on exorbitant unsustainable wages (Beckham) to get talked about.
a) Beckham wasn't retired. I think he should've been, but that's besides the point.

b) In return for the "paying to be aired" approach you're referring to MLSTV gleans the advertising revenue. Thus far it's an approach that has garnered the league more air time and regular increases in revenue. Right now they know what they're getting for exposure, and it's a hell of a lot more than the NHL and light years beyond what soccer was getting before MLS.

c) For a nation of USA's size it rates poorly. But if you're gonna go that route then where the hell do China and India rate?

d) How the f*** do you know what FIFA was expecting?!

- - - -

Compared to what pro soccer had prior to MLS, and considering the obstacles it has to maneuver around in those other big sports, MLS has made tremendous strides.
Is it perfect? Hardly, but no one else out there is.
Is it Top 10? No, and no one's pretending it is. But the teams are operating with budgets that put them among the top 20 leagues in the world, they're building new facilities and following business models that have helped the league grow better each year. Clearly the sponsors have noticed or they wouldn't be getting the 9 figure contracts from Nike or Adidas.

You want to hate, by all means have at it. They'll get along fine without you, thank you very much. Probably moreso.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea  
Old August 22nd, 2008, 06:42 PM   #3984
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vermeer View Post
Do you call that great success. You have been trying for the last 30 years to develop profesional football and so far you have franchises. For a European Franchises and football has nothing to do with each other. Maybe one day you will manage do form real profesional football clubs.
The business model traditionally known as the club will in all likelihood never be allowed here as the leagues won't have promo/releg rules and the start-up costs will dictate wealthy owners. That doesn't mean the operation can't be first rate.

US isn't hurting for the business end, it's simply lacking becuase the sport rates so low on the sporting radar.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea  
Old August 22nd, 2008, 07:06 PM   #3985
coexist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 75
Likes (Received): 0

In terms of average attendance, the MLS is the 11th ranked football (soccer) league on Earth, and the 9th ranked top flight league on Earth. That's not bad for a nation in which football is our 5th sport and really did not get much attention before 1994. Plus, there's a ton of football fans that pay no attention whatsoever to the MLS in the US - I'd say the number of football fans that don't pay attention to the MLS and don't attend/watch their games outnumbers the number of football fans who do pay attention to the MLS. So there really are a lot of football fans in the US, even if most of us follow leagues across the Atlantic from us.
coexist no está en línea  
Old August 22nd, 2008, 10:06 PM   #3986
Iain1974
Registered User
 
Iain1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Longvieew
Posts: 950
Likes (Received): 0

But the point people are trying to make is that there are just a handful of teams in MLS and attendances had been relatively stagnant, even taking into account the free tickets to boost crowds.
Of course, I accept, that many potential supporters may live too far from the nearest team to be able to make regular trips.

The figure of 3.27M isn't bad, but compared to population it's about 1%. Compare this to England ,58% Scotland, 79% both for league only and you must try to understand why overseas folks are underwhelmed by MLS.

FYI
Baseball ~ 25%
College Football ~ 12%
College Basketball ~ 9%
NBA ~ 7%
NHL ~ 7%
NFL ~ 5%
Iain1974 no está en línea  
Old August 22nd, 2008, 10:12 PM   #3987
Knitemplar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,655
Likes (Received): 276

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
For the stadium thing, USA 94 is the only WC where stadiums weren't built. Obviously (its staring you in the face) it doesnt matter for FIFA. Like you said, if a country needs to build 10 stadiums from scratch which will sit empty after the cup, FIFA wouldnt like that, but as far as redeveloping existing stadiums and building one or two new ones, thats part of what the WC has become. Why do you think there is the one stadium per city rule? Its so stadiums are built in regions of host countries which have in the past missed out on major football infrastructure.
Just look at what has happened with EVERY other WC, new stadiums are built and existing ones upgraded.

As for the MLS, as far as world football leagues are concerned, its shit. For a nation of USA's size, the crowds are pathetic, the quality is poor, overall FIFA was expecting a lot more from the MLS
The league still PAYS for matches to be broadcast on TV.

What other league in any sport in any country PAYS tv channels to broadcast its matches???

Its still well behind the other big 4 leagues in the USA. It barely rates a mention on highlight shows, and still requires retired European stars on exorbitant unsustainable wages (Beckham) to get talked about.
IRRELEVANT.

It's good enough for the US, so outside kibitzer's opinions, like yours, are TOTALLY IRRELEVANT to the matter.

Why don't you first try getting your house in order before offering these total AMATEUR views no one is paying you for?

Last edited by Knitemplar; August 22nd, 2008 at 11:32 PM.
Knitemplar no está en línea  
Old August 22nd, 2008, 10:20 PM   #3988
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
For the stadium thing, USA 94 is the only WC where stadiums weren't built. Obviously (its staring you in the face) it doesnt matter for FIFA. Like you said, if a country needs to build 10 stadiums from scratch which will sit empty after the cup, FIFA wouldnt like that, but as far as redeveloping existing stadiums and building one or two new ones, thats part of what the WC has become. Why do you think there is the one stadium per city rule? Its so stadiums are built in regions of host countries which have in the past missed out on major football infrastructure.
Just look at what has happened with EVERY other WC, new stadiums are built and existing ones upgraded.

As for the MLS, as far as world football leagues are concerned, its shit. For a nation of USA's size, the crowds are pathetic, the quality is poor, overall FIFA was expecting a lot more from the MLS
The league still PAYS for matches to be broadcast on TV.

What other league in any sport in any country PAYS tv channels to broadcast its matches???

Its still well behind the other big 4 leagues in the USA. It barely rates a mention on highlight shows, and still requires retired European stars on exorbitant unsustainable wages (Beckham) to get talked about.
hmmmm...

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
So it's between China and Australia.
because they have the strongest leagues in the world right?

Contradiction much?
__________________
WASHINGTON REDSKINS
en1044 no está en línea  
Old August 22nd, 2008, 11:01 PM   #3989
Iain1974
Registered User
 
Iain1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Longvieew
Posts: 950
Likes (Received): 0

Goodness, this thread has deteriorated. I've just killed half and hour at least reading from page 4 onwards.

Realistically, 2022 will go to the US. Aus is a non-runner because of the lack of facilities. The US bid isn't flawless but likely to be better than China's. The 2008 facilities becoming white elephants would count against them quite strongly. On the plus side, there are no age restrictions on competitors in the World Cup.

Beyond 2022 I'm not sure how viable a World Cup will be. The super-rich clubs are not exactly fond of international games as it is and I can forsee some kind of legal challenge in the not too distant future.
Iain1974 no está en línea  
Old August 23rd, 2008, 12:50 AM   #3990
Knitemplar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,655
Likes (Received): 276

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain1974 View Post
But the point people are trying to make is that there are just a handful of teams in MLS and attendances had been relatively stagnant, even taking into account the free tickets to boost crowds.
Of course, I accept, that many potential supporters may live too far from the nearest team to be able to make regular trips.

The figure of 3.27M isn't bad, but compared to population it's about 1%. Compare this to England ,58% Scotland, 79% both for league only and you must try to understand why overseas folks are underwhelmed by MLS.

FYI
Baseball ~ 25%
College Football ~ 12%
College Basketball ~ 9%
NBA ~ 7%
NHL ~ 7%
NFL ~ 5%
I agree with what you're saying. But why are u Euros holding US to only one sport?

* We have many choices; we are not a one-sport nation. We have such a diversity on our palette to suit any taste.

* We are pretty much inclusive, and those MLS attendances are not really a measure to go by because the 1994 World Cup's all-time attendance figures still have to be topped.

* So that doesn't mean the US can't hold ANOTHER record-breaking tournament.

I just sense a lot of insecurity and envy from the pooh-poohing parties.

Last edited by Knitemplar; August 23rd, 2008 at 07:11 PM.
Knitemplar no está en línea  
Old August 23rd, 2008, 12:57 AM   #3991
rockin'.baltimorean
Registered User
 
rockin'.baltimorean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Owings Mills, Md. / Baltimore, Md.
Posts: 7,170
Likes (Received): 2413

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knitemplar View Post
If? Since Major League Soccer was launched in 1995, there are now 14 franchises. So that's a little more than one new team a year. I would say that's a great success.
truly.....
__________________
B'more Birds' Nest..........Go Orioles!!!! Go Ravens!!!!
rockin'.baltimorean no está en línea  
Old August 23rd, 2008, 06:45 AM   #3992
theespecialone
Top
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 309
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain1974 View Post
Goodness, this thread has deteriorated. I've just killed half and hour at least reading from page 4 onwards.

Realistically, 2022 will go to the US. Aus is a non-runner because of the lack of facilities. The US bid isn't flawless but likely to be better than China's. The 2008 facilities becoming white elephants would count against them quite strongly. On the plus side, there are no age restrictions on competitors in the World Cup.

Beyond 2022 I'm not sure how viable a World Cup will be. The super-rich clubs are not exactly fond of international games as it is and I can forsee some kind of legal challenge in the not too distant future.
the world cup will stay for a very long time. I think China will host 2022.
theespecialone no está en línea  
Old August 23rd, 2008, 07:58 AM   #3993
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
The league still PAYS for matches to be broadcast on TV.

What other league in any sport in any country PAYS tv channels to broadcast its matches???
That's no longer true.
hngcm no está en línea  
Old August 24th, 2008, 09:57 AM   #3994
rantanamo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,507
Likes (Received): 353

What is the ******* problem some of you have with the US? This board is becoming tiresome and quite frankly insulting to read. The US wants to host like any other nation does, so what?
rantanamo no está en línea  
Old August 24th, 2008, 05:42 PM   #3995
Iain1974
Registered User
 
Iain1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Longvieew
Posts: 950
Likes (Received): 0

I think it's perfectly reasonable to question the development and commitment of the US to football.

Don't be so sensitive. You're acting like a Chinese security officer.
Iain1974 no está en línea  
Old August 25th, 2008, 08:48 AM   #3996
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Quote:
$100m upgrade for AAMI
June 01, 2008 01:20pm

THE South Australian Government will provide $100 million for the redevelopment of AAMI Stadium, it was announced today.

It will also provide $2.5 million each for the state's two AFL clubs in this week's state Budget.

The Government's contribution to the stadium's redevelopment will help to enhance the roof to provide greater shelter and improve dining and toilet facilities.

It will also build a new convention centre and western grandstand upgrade, improve stadium entrances, build new corporate suites and expand administration offices.

Premier Mike Rann said the government was supporting the redevelopment because it was the only venue in the state that could seat more than 50,000 for a range of sporting and major events.

"This redevelopment will bring AAMI Stadium up to international standard," he said in a statement.

"It will not only enhance the experience for spectators and users of AAMI Stadium, it will put us in a stronger position to compete for major events such as World Cup soccer matches."

State treasurer Kevin Foley said it was the view of the SANFL, the AFL and both the AFL clubs that "a redevelopment of AAMI Stadium is the best result for football in South Australia".

SANFL chief executive Leigh Whicker welcomed the announcement.

"This redevelopment is indeed the logical solution for providing the South Australian community with a symbolic, world class sports and entertainment stadium," he said in the statement.

Recreation and Sport Minister Michael Wright said the state government was also supporting Port Adelaide and the Crows by matching a commonwealth commitment of $2.5 million to each club.

"AAMI Stadium draws over one million spectators every year and most of those are Port Adelaide or Crows supporters," he said in the government statement.

"It makes sense for us to support the teams who attract the majority of patrons through the gates."
There goes any chance of Australia hosting the WC.

I cant imagine WC games at AAMI stadium. Too shit, too big (Field not capacity), too far out from the city. Without Adelaide there is no WC in Australia.
woozoo no está en línea  
Old August 25th, 2008, 09:42 AM   #3997
Knitemplar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,655
Likes (Received): 276

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
There goes any chance of Australia hosting the WC.
I could've told you that long ago.
Knitemplar no está en línea  
Old August 25th, 2008, 02:29 PM   #3998
cornelinho
Registered User
 
cornelinho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 321
Likes (Received): 0

evrybody says usa..australia..china... aniting else?
wikipedia says that the candidates are :

Confirmed Unconfirmed
Australia Canada
Belgium/Netherlands/Luxembourg China
England Japan
Portugal/Spain Mexico
Qatar United States
Russia Israel

mexico,russia,portugal/spain(if the rule on co-biding expires) nothing? whay would the not have a equal chance?
suporters will shurely come... and fifa would be pleased...

Last edited by cornelinho; August 25th, 2008 at 02:35 PM.
cornelinho no está en línea  
Old August 26th, 2008, 09:15 AM   #3999
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

If Europe wins in 2018, then Europe can't do it in 2022:

That leaves...

Australia
Canada (doesn't have the stadia)
China
Japan (too soon after 2002)
Mexico (stadia are lacking, would be its third WC)
Qatar (ok seriously)
USA

So that leaves Australia, China, and the US
hngcm no está en línea  
Old August 26th, 2008, 09:37 AM   #4000
aaronaugi1
Registered User
 
aaronaugi1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Perth
Posts: 2,551
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by hngcm View Post
If Europe wins in 2018, then Europe can't do it in 2022:

That leaves...

Australia
Canada (doesn't have the stadia)
China
Japan (too soon after 2002)
Mexico (stadia are lacking, would be its third WC)
Qatar (ok seriously)
USA

So that leaves Australia, China, and the US
At this stage Australia and the US are bidding for 2018. So if 2018 goes to Europe then 2022 will almost certainly go to China or another bidder due to FIFA's new concurrent awarding system.

IMO Australia and England will fight it out for 2018 with 2022 going to either the US (who will, in time, remove themselves from any 2018 commitments) and China.

It would probably be better for the US having Australia win 2018 in that regard assuming there are no major European contenders in 2022.
aaronaugi1 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 09:39 PM.


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

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

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

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