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 27th, 2008, 02:48 PM   #4161
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,018
Likes (Received): 4786

Quote:
Originally Posted by SIC View Post
yeah, except that for most of those years you'd be within 1-2 hour plane flight of all those UEFA world cups.
Meanwhile a 2 hour flight won't even get someone in Tijuana time to get to Mexico City. Let's not even talk about the US.
The fact is a strict rotational policy would notindeed be the fairest way to go, but thats not convenient to an organization based in Zurich. But every third world cup seems like a bitch much.

I bet theres some guy from some country who would kill to have a world cup, even every 200 years.

Also theres no way in hell England goes 200 years without a world cup. I mean...really, some other country would be screwed over...but England would get it's cup.

It's called the WORLD CUP. Not the every 3rd team is European plus others Cup.
I see that you still haven't worked on getting rid of that chip on your shoulder.

Frankly, it doesn't really matter how far away a World Cup is held from your country. The truth of the matter is that only a tiny percentage (0.05%??) of any nation's population travel abroad to watch the World Cup - even if it's staged in a neighbouring country. In other words, if the World Cup isn't actually held in your country, it might just as well be held a million miles away as far as the vast majority of people are concerned.

As to whether or not England would go 200 years without a World Cup - that is precisely what would happen if, as suggested, FIFA adhered to a strict rotation policy. Under strict rotation, the World Cup would only return to Europe, once every twenty years. And there are potentially 10 (or even more) different nations (or joint bids) that could host a World Cup in Europe. Under strict rotation, those potential hosts would surely have to be rotated too?

You have to remember that countries like Spain, Germany, France, Italy and Russia are equally important as England (whether in terms of football or other matters). No way could England be favoured over any of them. And that's before considering the valid claims of countries like Holland, Belgium, Portugal, Turkey, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Poland, Ukraine, Greece, Scotland, Ireland, Czech Republic etc - all of whom, doubtless, will want to host (or co-host) the World Cup at some point in the future.

Meanwhile, you think that it's unfair that the USA, Mexico and Canada should be put in the same hat as the three or four CONMEBOL countries capable of hosting a World Cup? Truth is, under such a system, the USA would still get to host the World Cup more frequently than the likes of England or Germany.

Last edited by JimB; November 27th, 2008 at 02:53 PM.
JimB no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old November 27th, 2008, 03:38 PM   #4162
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

hngcm, 2030 is very probably going to Uruguay-Argentina joint bid, as far as I know. It will be the 100 year anniversary of the first world cup, held in Uruguay. Both countries are pressing very hard to get that WC, and I wouldn't be surprised if FIFA awarded it to them, and Europe had to wait four terms, just this once.

As for Sic, you're not getting it. Yes its a world cup, made up of the best national teams in the world. Currently, 21 of the best 32 countries in the world according to the FIFA ranking are from Europe. By rights Europe should have two thirds of teams in a WC, but FIFA has decided to only give Europe one third of places.

That still means that more than every third team is from Europe.

By all standards, most European countries are most deservant:
National league quality
National team quality
Stadiums
Infrastructure
Ability for people to freely move around the country

If the strict rotation policy were in place, USA would get the cup every 30 years or so. How is that fair? Currently, Japan and China would get the cup every 50 years or so. Spain, or Italy, or France, would have to wait 150/200 years. How is that fair?
woozoo no está en línea  
Old November 27th, 2008, 03:41 PM   #4163
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Yes but Mexico has hosted twice, as recently as 22 years ago.

I wouldn't like to see FIFA start a precedent of awarding countries hosting rights for the THIRD time quite yet. It would open up a pandoras box of bids from Germany and France, meaning smaller countries in Europe would miss out.
woozoo no está en línea  
Old November 27th, 2008, 05:54 PM   #4164
Vicman
La capital rielera
 
Vicman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Apizaco,Mex.
Posts: 435
Likes (Received): 39

Will I live in 2030??? jajaja

KiwiBrit a game in Mexico depends of the team, for example when Clubs like America, Guadalajara, Cruz Azul play, the more expesive ticket is about 40 dollars aprox, or more i don´t know that´s the average.

When i say soccer/football/Futbol is expensive here, I mean that invertions are so considerable by tv companies and other ones but mostly tv´s.
__________________
A P I Z A C O
Tlaxcala * Mexico

From capital mix, cradle of the nation! ::: DESDE LA CAPITAL DEL MESTIZAJE, CUNA DE LA NACIÓN!
Vicman no está en línea  
Old November 27th, 2008, 05:56 PM   #4165
Vicman
La capital rielera
 
Vicman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Apizaco,Mex.
Posts: 435
Likes (Received): 39

Quote:
Originally Posted by larsul View Post
yes, now it seats there.. the club that was playing in there, Toros Neza was bankrupt and sold...
MMM but Atlante Club was playing in Neza stadium 3 or 4 years ago, before they move to Cancun.
__________________
A P I Z A C O
Tlaxcala * Mexico

From capital mix, cradle of the nation! ::: DESDE LA CAPITAL DEL MESTIZAJE, CUNA DE LA NACIÓN!
Vicman no está en línea  
Old November 27th, 2008, 08:10 PM   #4166
daniel220776
Cómete una banana
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Bilbao-EU
Posts: 289
Likes (Received): 6199

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
The fact that such a relatively small country
Your knowledge about geography or demographics is seriously bad

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
has also hosted twice already will not work in its favour either.
It didn't affect London with the Olympics, so why not?
__________________
A veces es mejor no decir nada y dejar que la gente piense que eres estupido, a abrir la boca y que lo confirmen.
daniel220776 no está en línea  
Old November 27th, 2008, 08:50 PM   #4167
JYDA
Registered User
 
JYDA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,172
Likes (Received): 94

South Africa's crime problems got a bit of a pass due to the fact the continent deserved a world cup. For a country like Mexico who's hosted twice I don't see them getting such an easy ride on the subject.
JYDA no está en línea  
Old November 27th, 2008, 10:16 PM   #4168
Bobby3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,267
Likes (Received): 52

It's a decent stadium, and still pretty new (well, by 1900's standards, not by 2000's). It's a shame for it to just sit there.
Bobby3 no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2008, 02:36 AM   #4169
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,018
Likes (Received): 4786

Quote:
Originally Posted by daniel220776 View Post
It didn't affect London with the Olympics, so why not?
The Olympics and the World Cup are entirely different events run by entirely separate organisations. It's therefore pointless trying to second guess FIFA decisions on the basis of what the IOC has done in the past.
JimB no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2008, 04:05 AM   #4170
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by hngcm View Post
Every third WC for Europe is fair enough. Hell, it used to be every second WC.

Europe, The Americas, Rest of The World, Europe, The Americas, Rest of The World, etc;

IMO, the next couple of WC's should be like this:

2010- South Africa
2014- Brazil
2018- England
2022- USA
2026- China/Australia
2030- Spain
2034- Mexico/Argentina
2038- Australia/China
2042- Italy
2044- Argentina/Mexico

So worst case scenario, Mexico gets a World Cup in 2044, within my lifetime. Hopefully Mexico plays a game in Tijuana so I can just go across the border to see them play lol.
Probably about right until 2026. Good chance that FIFA will want the centenial finals to be in Uruguay/Argentina in honour of the first finals in Uruguay. After that I'd suspect another African finals will be in their somewhere (or failing that, something in the middle-east).
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2008, 06:59 AM   #4171
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

I thought about that but I seriously doubt they'll get it, especially at Europe's expense.

Uruguay has the Centenario and...nothing else.

I don't see Uruguay being able to build and justify 4 new 40k stadiums.
hngcm no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2008, 03:51 PM   #4172
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Uruguay would have 1, maybe 2 stadiums.
Argentina would have the rest???????????????????

What u think?
woozoo no está en línea  
Old November 28th, 2008, 09:42 PM   #4173
ryebreadraz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,597
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
Uruguay would have 1, maybe 2 stadiums.
Argentina would have the rest???????????????????

What u think?
That's if FIFA is even willing to allow co-hosts again. After 2002, they indicated that they wanted to stay away from co-hosts from now on.
ryebreadraz no está en línea  
Old November 29th, 2008, 05:40 AM   #4174
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryebreadraz View Post
That's if FIFA is even willing to allow co-hosts again. After 2002, they indicated that they wanted to stay away from co-hosts from now on.
They don't object to joint bids so long as they have a single committee. The problem with 2002 was that it was two separate bids slammed together with no real understanding of the huge cultural and political differences between the two nations.

A Uruguay/Argentina joint bid, conceived as such from the very start, with Uruguay supplying a couple of venues - including the final venue - and Argentina providing the rest, would be a huge boost to both nations, as well as a nod to the history of the tournament.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old November 29th, 2008, 07:31 AM   #4175
Bobby3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,267
Likes (Received): 52

I think a URU/ARG bid henges not on Uruguay, but questions about how sustainable will Argentina's venues be? So many of Argentina's top clubs come from Buenos Aries and it can only have two stadiums in a bid (and even that's questionable because with Uruguay, Montevideo almost certainly has to be the two stadium city in the bid).

There's just so much going on there.

I understand why people would want Uruguay in, but if Argentina launches a successful bid it's best bet would be with Chile.
Bobby3 no está en línea  
Old November 29th, 2008, 10:41 AM   #4176
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Well Chile isn't much better. It currently only has two stadiums suitable too, and niether look fantastic.

Some of the rules FIFA has in place for hosts seem a bit much. If they were all to be followed then there are currently only a handful of countries which qualify.

I can foresee a lot of bent and broken rules as far as hosts is concerned in the future...
woozoo no está en línea  
Old November 29th, 2008, 11:06 AM   #4177
daniel220776
Cómete una banana
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Bilbao-EU
Posts: 289
Likes (Received): 6199

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB View Post
The Olympics and the World Cup are entirely different events run by entirely separate organisations. It's therefore pointless trying to second guess FIFA decisions on the basis of what the IOC has done in the past.
It is not pointless this comaprison since both are global events with open bids which ussually rotate between countries from one region to the other (the similarities between IOC's host city bid winner and FIFA's one are evident even though they are not related the system is very similar however IOC is more globalised since it has hosted more events in Asia and Oceania than FIFA's that has had stronger presence in the America's and Europe).

When london was bidding for the Olympics no city had the priviledge of hosting that event for 3 times and they dit it in spite of everyone's argument and that there were bidding cities that have never had hosted the event not even once.

Well, so far no country has had the priviledge of hosting 3 times the World cup and it is not impossible to achive it just as London did it with the Olympics.
__________________
A veces es mejor no decir nada y dejar que la gente piense que eres estupido, a abrir la boca y que lo confirmen.
daniel220776 no está en línea  
Old November 29th, 2008, 11:39 AM   #4178
ryebreadraz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,597
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by daniel220776 View Post
It is not pointless this comaprison since both are global events with open bids which ussually rotate between countries from one region to the other (the similarities between IOC's host city bid winner and FIFA's one are evident even though they are not related the system is very similar however IOC is more globalised since it has hosted more events in Asia and Oceania than FIFA's that has had stronger presence in the America's and Europe).

When london was bidding for the Olympics no city had the priviledge of hosting that event for 3 times and they dit it in spite of everyone's argument and that there were bidding cities that have never had hosted the event not even once.

Well, so far no country has had the priviledge of hosting 3 times the World cup and it is not impossible to achive it just as London did it with the Olympics.
There were 2 bids that were considered superior most of the time in London and Paris, BOTH of which had hosted twice before. The other one even in contention was Madrid and Spain had hosted in 1992 with Barcelona. London would not have won in most years, but they were going against another city that had hosted twice and a country that had hosted recently.
ryebreadraz no está en línea  
Old November 29th, 2008, 03:33 PM   #4179
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,018
Likes (Received): 4786

Quote:
Originally Posted by daniel220776 View Post
It is not pointless this comaprison since both are global events with open bids which ussually rotate between countries from one region to the other (the similarities between IOC's host city bid winner and FIFA's one are evident even though they are not related the system is very similar however IOC is more globalised since it has hosted more events in Asia and Oceania than FIFA's that has had stronger presence in the America's and Europe).

When london was bidding for the Olympics no city had the priviledge of hosting that event for 3 times and they dit it in spite of everyone's argument and that there were bidding cities that have never had hosted the event not even once.

Well, so far no country has had the priviledge of hosting 3 times the World cup and it is not impossible to achive it just as London did it with the Olympics.
I repeat: you cannot make a direct comparison between the IOC and FIFA. They are two entirely separate organisations. It would be futile to try to second guess FIFA decisions on the basis of previous IOC decisions.

With regard to London and the Olympics, while it is true that London had twice before had the Olympics, 2012 was the first time that London was awarded the Games in normal circumstances. On both other occasions - 1908 and 1948 - London came to the rescue of the Olympic movement.

In 1908, London stepped in at short notice when Rome pulled out after the eruption of Vesuvius. In 1948, after the ravages of the second world war, London hosted the "austerity" Games - so called because Britain (and the world) was counting the cost of six years of war. No new stadiums, venues or athletes village was built. There was barely even enough food to feed the athletes!

Last edited by JimB; November 29th, 2008 at 07:54 PM.
JimB no está en línea  
Old November 30th, 2008, 03:51 AM   #4180
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

And have ugly running tracks. Yuck.
hngcm 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 10:45 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