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 March 25th, 2009, 10:16 PM   #4861
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,769
Likes (Received): 10322

Quote:
Originally Posted by seattle92 View Post
Sorry mate but are you joking here????

How is it normal for you to an organization to switch the venues during the tournment?

Had it ever happened before??

Did it happened again after??


It's amazing how do you pretend this is a normal thing. Don't tell me that England will try that joke again if they win the 2018 bid????

Of course it's not normal. Of course England got advantage of Portugal.

England played in Wembley with more suporters and the organization just informed the portuguese team the venues had changed in the night before the game. They made the trip by train in the same day of the game.

This could NEVER happen in our days. This was cheating.
No it wasn't. It was poor organisation which may have put the Portugese at a slight disadvantage. Portugal played a good match by all accounts so can't have been that put out by the change. Cheating is far too strong a word and I resent that.
RobH está en línea ahora  

Sponsored Links
Old March 25th, 2009, 11:59 PM   #4862
cmc
Registered User
 
cmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 364
Likes (Received): 253

Quote:
Originally Posted by en1044 View Post
Australia or the US, although I would like to see Russia host it sometime. The US will probably get it.

You know, just countries who havent already hosted it twice., leaving Mexico completely out of the conversation.
and having it hosted twice, is that a rule of FIFA or yours?....
cmc no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 12:38 AM   #4863
Ecological
BANNED
 
Ecological's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,518
Likes (Received): 23

Quote:
Originally Posted by seattle92 View Post
Sorry mate but are you joking here????

How is it normal for you to an organization to switch the venues during the tournment?

Had it ever happened before??

Did it happened again after??


It's amazing how do you pretend this is a normal thing. Don't tell me that England will try that joke again if they win the 2018 bid????

Of course it's not normal. Of course England got advantage of Portugal.

England played in Wembley with more suporters and the organization just informed the portuguese team the venues had changed in the night before the game. They made the trip by train in the same day of the game.

This could NEVER happen in our days. This was cheating.

Jeez. Do you know anything about this or are you just here to throw around your wanted truth to try and cause a ruckus?

Yes venues have changed numerous times. And have since.

England played every single game of thier tournament at Wembley. The draw in these times was made days before the tournament kicked off.

38,000 fans turned up to watch the other semi-final at Goodison Park. 95,000 watched England V Portugal. Now, are you telling me it would've been better to have played the game with 60,000 more people watching it at a stadium half the size? It would've been a disaster. It was the world governing body that would have made any decision to move the game.

England against whoever they played, be it Portugal, Brazil, Korea, USSR would've played the game at THIER NATIONAL STADIUM.

And Portugal were not told the night before the game nor were they forced to travel by train on the day of the game. Stop fibbing little one.
Ecological no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 12:39 AM   #4864
Ecological
BANNED
 
Ecological's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,518
Likes (Received): 23

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
No it wasn't. It was poor organisation which may have put the Portugese at a slight disadvantage. Portugal played a good match by all accounts so can't have been that put out by the change. Cheating is far too strong a word and I resent that.
Portugal had a great match. This game was one off the finest in World Cup history.
Ecological no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 12:45 AM   #4865
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmc View Post
and having it hosted twice, is that a rule of FIFA or yours?....
I think its a rule of common sense and fairness. Mexico shouldnt even be mentioned.
__________________
WASHINGTON REDSKINS
en1044 no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 12:52 AM   #4866
Ecological
BANNED
 
Ecological's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,518
Likes (Received): 23

I personally find it hard to believe Mexico should host it in 2022, especially considering not only have they hosted it twice but Brazil is having it in 2014. 2022 is a very difficult choice.
Ecological no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 01:16 AM   #4867
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

You again

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiwiBrit View Post
I just don't get you bbm.

You almost congratulate Maradona on his 'hand of god' goal, calling it sportsmanship,
How do you work out that i called it sportsmanship, I didn't really call it anything, i referred to other countries calling it cleverness. The fact is he took a chance (cheated if you will) and got away with it, if you wanna call that congratulations then be my guest.

Quote:
then say it's up to the referee to do something about it...
Well that's what the referee is there for is it not?? You know, to enforce the rules. If he (or she) doesn't think the rules have been broken then it's not up to the players to tell him.

The fact that a player can cheat is not their fault if they don’t get caught. It's poor refereeing, or a flaw in the game which allows cheating to sometimes go unpunished.

Blaming Maradona doesn't change that fact, 9 times out of 10 he gets sent off, if you were a precog and knew beforehand that a rival player would blatantly punch the ball into the goal you would be ecstatic in anticipation, why? Because it was is stupid and careless act, which should lead to a red card. "We" only moan because he wasn't punished but it's not his fault that he wasn't!!

Quote:
not the player. If he can cheat and get away with it then good on him is your thought.
I've said it before and I’ll say it again. If you cheat in sport, unless you are caught NO ONE will admit to it, whether English, Argentine or other (we only have to look to our very own Olympic diving team for that).

This was clearly a spontaneous act (despite what he might say), the situation presented itself and he took advantage of it, many players have done before and have done since and have been sent off or have gotten away with it. He didn't get caught what do you expect him to do?

Quote:
Well, if England are staging a finals tournament (in this case 1966), what is wrong with them changing a venue to aid the team?
There is a difference between being a pawn within the game, and being able to change the rules of the game. England changed the rules to suit themselves, there is a lot wrong with that.

Quote:
Surely it's up to the governing body at that time to do something about that if it's wrong.
Of course, and I’m sure the governing would’ve done if it’s (FIFA) president wasn’t none other than Sir Stanley Rous an Englishman. Do you expect him to make a rational logical decision which could impact upon the fortunes of the football team of his homeland?

And if you say yes, you surely do not know the character we are dealing with, this is the guy along who when secretary of the FA along with then FIFA president Arthur Drewry got the world cup to England. This is a guy who when he became FIFA president in 1961 turned FIFA Eurocentric and caused the near universal boycott of the 1966 world cup by African nations. Come on, in an ideal world FIFA would’ve done something but with the old boys club in charge of FIFA and the FA what do you expect.

No conspiracies or nothing, but if the pieces fit.

Quote:
I'd have thought you whould be congratulating the FA on their sportsmanship (just like Maradona),
Do you understand the meaning of the word sportsmanship?? This is because you keep using it in the wrong context. In answer to your question, no i wouldn't.

Quote:
but no you'd rather slag off England and it's football at ANY chance.
Are we talking about England the country as you refer to "it's football" as a separate issue? If so, when have I slagged off England the country, I may have taken some swipes at the north of England, but I love this country, it's heritage, history and tradition, within and outside of Football.

Just because you love something doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to criticize or question what you see as flaws, and that is all I am doing. I see the premier league chocked with foreigners as bad and not a representation of football in this country so I criticise. I see the England football team as heavily overrated and having had some dubious luck in winning it's only world cup so I make a point about it, what the hell is wrong with that, it's called freedom of speech!

This is only towards England because that is who we are discussing, I could take about others, for example, Italy quite clearly abused their power as hosts in 1934, Argentina quite clearly bought off Peru n 1978, and South korea quite clearly got some of the iffiest decisions ever in 2002.

Quote:
Maybe you can tell us the difference between the two examples?
By us, do you mean us in the way northerners say us to refer to me, and by me I mean you not me? or do you just mean us as in the general skyscrapercity nation? anyway i digress

The differences, on one hand Maradona is in a free flowing game where he can only truly exert influence when in control of the ball, and on the other England are hosts of the world cup and can make decisions which impact the preparations of any team in the tournament. The nature of Maradona’s “hand of God” goal relied on spontaneity, where as England moving the game was a pre meditated move to gain an advantage. For arguments sake ff it were the same, Maradona would've changed the rules pre match to say that he was the only player on the pitch allowed to hand ball it for that moment only, and there is your difference.

Quote:
LOL that is such a patronising smiley, and so inappropriate with it.

And finally, with regards to Maradona of course it is against the rules of sportsmanship, but in the cold light of day when has sportsmanship ever really mattered in sport. If it mattered teams wouldn't park the bus, send out hackers and celebrate goals that are offside etc, but they do! If it benefits us, then really who cares, if it doesn't then we will moan to the cows come home, that my son is the reality of this whole debate.

Here we go again

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecological View Post
Clearly changing my point? Sure its not a case off you not being able to read properly?
If you say so, the evidence is out there, and clearly highlighted.

Quote:
Im under no illusion that England would've played thier 1966 world cup semi-final anywhere other then thier national stadium.
typo?? You are under no illusion because the act as happened, the FA weren't confident or they would've scheduled it so it could happen.

Do you think that if England came runners up in their group in Euro 96 they would've changed the venue to wembley to suit (i hope you say yes )

Quote:
However. You seem assured that the only reason it was switched was to get one over the Portugese.
No to gain an advantage, having more home fans in the stadium is an advantage whether you like it or not.

Quote:
Yes venues have changed numerous times. And have since.
give examples then...

A little of the post 1966 hosts, and as far i can see no match switching or swapping going on here.

In 1970 mexico came runners up in there group to the USSR and were forced to play there games in Toluca not the Azteca. A stadium which held less than 25% of the capacity of the Azteca, which for the USSR/Uruguay QF was filled to the tune of 24,000 around 22% of capacity. Exactly the same situation, but did old rous change it for the sake of the fans, HELLLLLL NO

In 1974 germany played there home games at different stadiums

We've talked about 1978, Argentina came runners up in their group to Italy, and in the second group phase were bumped down from the large el monumnetal, to the smaller stadium in Rosario for their second group phase. But now old joao havelange was in charge, i doubt he would've buckled to the old enemy (of brazil that is) military dictators or no military dictators.

1982 spain used a load of different stadiums

In 1986, mexico played their quarter final in monterrey not the Azteca, despite playing all there games there previously, go figure

1990, italy played all there games in Rome until the semi which was in Naples, a smaller stadium, they got 15,000 less than any of there rome games, and to boot, naples is the home of Napoli who idolise non other than our friend Diego armando Maradona, and those fans didn't support Italy. If ever there was a case to move a game, but no Italy stuck with it and lost.

1994, the USA lol

1998 So we come to france, France win their group and are sent to where Lens. With half the capacity.

Get the picture yet??

Quote:
England played every single game of thier tournament at Wembley. The draw in these times was made days before the tournament kicked off.
So if England played all of there games at wembley why was the quirk that the semi finals would switch location, and if they didn't like the quirk why did they put that in the draw in first place. These are simple questions, with simple answers which are unsuprisingly not forth coming from you.

Quote:
38,000 fans turned up to watch the other semi-final at Goodison Park.
Which shows the apathy that English fans still had for the foreign game despite the Hungary humiliation, and being humbled at wembley by the swedes. Not to mention countless failed world cup campagins.

Quote:
95,000 watched England V Portugal. Now, are you telling me it would've been better to have played the game with 60,000 more people watching it at a stadium half the size? It would've been a disaster.
Once again it was the organising comitees fault, you expect only 38,000 to have turned up for the semi in London?? The lowest crowd for a wembley game was 61,000 for Uruguay/Mexico game, around the same as the highest Goodison crowd. Now i am no expert, but surely the World cup semi final is a much bigger draw than Mexico/Uruguay so you expect only 38,000 to have been there??

Also although i am unssure of the exact capacity of Goodison, in the seasons prior they had breached 70,000 on at least 2 occasions, now to me saying that more people could watch is an excuse, 70,000 close to the pitch is healthy, and what about the people from the North west getting access to their own national team...

Quote:
It was the world governing body that would have made any decision to move the game.
who FIFA?? Run by stanley Rous the ex head of the FA, as previously mentioned a totally shady chap!

Quote:
England against whoever they played, be it Portugal, Brazil, Korea, USSR would've played the game at THIER NATIONAL STADIUM.
Then if that was the case, why didn't they make it so before the tournament that England would progress to play at wembley regardless

Quote:
And Portugal were not told the night before the game nor were they forced to travel by train on the day of the game. Stop fibbing little one.
Haha you call him a liar, when all you do is fill your posts with lies and hope that nobody notices.

Last edited by bigbossman; March 26th, 2009 at 02:11 AM.
bigbossman no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 01:59 AM   #4868
Gherkin
actual gherkin
 
Gherkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 13,796
Likes (Received): 515

Updated the list! Go mad!



In alphabetical order:



Australia

Existing Venues:

Melbourne Cricket Ground (Melbourne)
Cap. 100,000


ANZ Stadium (Sydney)
Cap. 83,500


Etihad Stadium (Melbourne)
Cap. 56,400


Suncorp Stadium (Brisbane)
Cap. 52,500


Sydney Football Stadium (Sydney)
Cap. 42,000



Potential/future Venues:

Perth stadium (Perth)
Cap: ~60,000




Belgium/The Netherlands:


Amsterdam Arena (Amsterdam)
Cap. 55,000


Stadion Feijenoord (Rotterdam)
Cap. 51,000


Koning Boudewijn Stadion (Brussels)
Cap. 50,000






England:

(potential venues listed - currently only 2 London stadia are allowed)


Wembley (London)
Cap. 90,000


Twickenham (London)
Cap. 82,000
image hosted on flickr


Old Trafford (Manchester)
Cap. 76,000


Emirates Stadium (London)
Cap. 60,000


St. James Park (Newcastle)
Cap. 52,000+ (may be expanded for the tournament)


City of Manchester Stadium (Manchester)
Cap. 48,500 (May be expanded to 60,000)


Stadium of Light (Sunderland)
Cap. 48,000




Potential/future Stadia:


New Anfield (Liverpool)
Cap. 60,000~75,000


New White Hart Lane stadium (London)
Cap. 58,000


City of Birmingham Stadium
Cap. ~55,000


New Everton Stadium (Liverpool)
Cap. 50,000+






Indonesia

Bung Karno Stadium (Jakarta)
Cap. 100,000


Palaran Stadium (Samarinda)
Cap. 60,000


Jaka Baring Stadium (Palembang)
Cap. 55,000
[IMG]http://i43.************/125sx8g.jpg[/IMG]

Jalak Harupat Soreang Stadium (Bandung)
Cap. 40,000
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium...ng_soreang.jpg



Japan

Yokohoma Stadium (Yokohoma)
Cap. 70,000



Saitama Stadium (Saitama)
Cap. 63,700


Tokyo Olympic Stadium (Tokyo)
Cap. 57,000


Shizuoka Stadium
Cap. 51,000


Nagai Stadium (Osaka)
Cap. 50,000


Sapporo Dome (Sapporo)
Cap. 42,000







Mexico

Estadio Azteca (Mexico City
Cap. 105,000


Estadio Olimpico Universitario
Cap. 72,400


Estadio La Corregidora
Cap. 50,000


Estadio Jalisco (Guadalajara)
Cap. 63,000


Estadio Chivas (Guadalajara)
Cap. 45,000


Unviersity Stadium (Monterrey)
Cap. 45,000



Potential/future Stadiums:

Arena Indios (Ciudad Juárez)
Cap. ~40,000






Russia

Olimpiyskiy Kompleks Luzhniki Stadion (Moscow)
Cap. 83,000



Potential/future stadiums:


Zenit Stadium (St. Petersberg)
Cap. 62,000



Stadion Spartak (Moscow)
Cap. 42,000
[IMG]http://i43.************/ie49qq.jpg[/IMG]



Spain/Portugal

Camp Nou (Barcelona)
Cap. 108,000
[IMG]http://*************************/barcelona/jpgs/camp_nou_fosters_oct07_1.jpg[/IMG]

Santiago Bernabeu (Madrid)
Cap. 80,400


New Mestella (Valencia)
Cap. 75,000


Estadio da Luz (Lisbon)
Cap. 65,000


Estadio Vicente Calderón (Madrid)
Cap. 57,000
[IMG]http://i39.************/df9ikx.jpg[/IMG]

Barcelona Olympic Stadium (Barcelona)
Cap. 56,000


Estadio Alvalade (Lisbon)
Cap. 50,000


Estádio do Dragão (Porto)
Cap. 50,000
[IMG]http://i44.************/ipmic2.jpg[/IMG]


Potential/future stadia:


New Estadio Manuel (Seville)
Cap. 64,000


San Mames (Bilbao)
Cap: 56000







USA (hundreds of potential venues, just a sample)

Giants Stadium (New York)
Cap: 80,000


Reliant Stadium (Houston)
Cap: 72,000


University of Phoenix Stadium (Phoenix)
Cap: 63,400



Qwest Field (Seattle)
Cap: 67,000


Dallas Stadium (Dallas)
Cap: 80,000 (Completed 2009)



Lincoln Financial Field (Philadelphia)
Cap: 68,000


Soldier Field (Chicago)
Cap: 61,000


Fedex Field (Washington D.C)
Cap: 91,000


Invesco Field (Denver)
Cap : 76,000


L.A Memorial Coliseum (Los Angeles)
Cap: 92,000


Bank of America Stadium (Charlotte)
Cap: 73,000



Pictures from www.worldstadiums.com, www.stadiumguide.com and www.photobucket.com

Feel free to list any additions!

Last edited by Gherkin; April 1st, 2009 at 02:42 AM.
Gherkin no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 02:09 AM   #4869
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Amazing post

Don't some of the NFL stadiums have too narrow an area for football??

Also the Betis stadium could be an alternative instead of sevilla's they are expanding too, The new Atletico stadium too and Aston villa have plans to expand villa park

Last edited by bigbossman; March 26th, 2009 at 02:32 AM.
bigbossman no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 02:30 AM   #4870
ryebreadraz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,597
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
Amazing post

Don't some of the NFL stadiums have too narrow an area for football??
Yes, some do, which is an issue, but we're looking at a World Cup in 2022 (let's be realistic. 2018 is England's) so by that point a lot of new stadiums will have been built and nearly every stadium built now is built wide enough. Giants Stadium will be demolished soon after the new stadium opens in 2010 and that will be wide enough. The New Cowboys Stadium will be wide enough, as will the proposed new stadium in Los Angeles. Throw those in with the current stadiums that are wide enough in Phoenix, Seattle, Chicago, Houston, Miami, Boston, Denver, Detroit, Charlotte, Tampa Bay, Nashville and others and there are plenty of stadiums. That doesn't even include the new stadiums sure to be built from 2010 to 2022.
ryebreadraz no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 03:34 AM   #4871
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiwiBrit View Post
You almost congratulate Maradona on his 'hand of god' goal, calling it sportsmanship, then say it's up to the referee to do something about it...not the player. If he can cheat and get away with it then good on him is your thought.

Well, if England are staging a finals tournament (in this case 1966), what is wrong with them changing a venue to aid the team? Surely it's up to the governing body at that time to do something about that if it's wrong.
:
He never congratulatyed Maradonna. He simply said that no one in their right mind would ever admit to a foul if the ref didnt notice it. And they SURELY wouldnt apologise for it after the event.

During the 2006 world cup, Josip Simuic recieved two yellow cards during the match against Australia, but the ref didnt send him off, so he stayed on the field until the ref gave him a third yellow card in the 90th minute. Hes a pric for it, but I cant imagine anyone else doing anything different. Like bbm said - play by the whistle. And I sure as hell wouldnt expect him to apologise after the game for a refereeing mistake.

As for changing the venue - YOU CANT DO IT!!! ITS AN INTERNATIONAL TOURNAMENT.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecological
Yes venues have changed numerous times. And have since.
When?
woozoo no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 03:55 AM   #4872
Gherkin
actual gherkin
 
Gherkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 13,796
Likes (Received): 515

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
Amazing post
Thanks - took bloody ages!


And thanks to sercan for copying and pasting it to the beginning of the thread


Quote:
Originally Posted by ryebreadraz View Post
let's be realistic. 2018 is England's
Come on... The 2012 Olympics belonged to Paris 99% up until the announcement when London stole it. Anything can still happen.
Gherkin no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 11:20 AM   #4873
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

Qatar 2022!!! The one city world cup.
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 11:55 AM   #4874
Ecological
BANNED
 
Ecological's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,518
Likes (Received): 23

Alot of people here have incredibly thick skulls.

Great post Gherkin
Ecological no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 12:37 PM   #4875
www.sercan.de
Galatasaray SK
 
www.sercan.de's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 27,950
Likes (Received): 2717

Thanks again to Gherkin.
__________________
International titles of Galatasaray SK
UEFA Europa League (1): 2000
UEFA Super Cup (1): 2000

ULEB Eurocup (1): 2016

FIBA EuroLeague Women (1): 2014
FIBA EuroCup Women (1): 2009

IWBF Champions Cup (5): 2008, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2014
IWBF André Vergauwen Cup (1): 2017
IWBF Intercontinental Cup (4): 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012

EJU Golden League (1): 2014
www.sercan.de no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 01:44 PM   #4876
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,769
Likes (Received): 10322

COME ON YOU NAMING RIGHTS!!
RobH está en línea ahora  
Old March 26th, 2009, 02:10 PM   #4877
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecological View Post
Alot of people here have incredibly thick skulls.
no, just you, and your friend kiwibrit.
bigbossman no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 05:13 PM   #4878
seattle92
Registered User
 
seattle92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Lisboa
Posts: 8,400
Likes (Received): 2852

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecological View Post
Jeez. Do you know anything about this or are you just here to throw around your wanted truth to try and cause a ruckus?

Yes venues have changed numerous times. And have since.

Looking at the amout of crap you write in this post, i would say your're the one who doesn't know anything about it.

It's insane to say it's normal for a home nation to change the venues just because... they want to. I hope for your sake you don't propose that to FIFA for your 2018 bid... or else you wont have a chance. We're not in 1966 any more.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecological View Post

And Portugal were not told the night before the game nor were they forced to travel by train on the day of the game. Stop fibbing little one.
I don't know if you're just being a liar or an ignorant...
seattle92 no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 05:47 PM   #4879
Gherkin
actual gherkin
 
Gherkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 13,796
Likes (Received): 515

Was my post biased? I couldn't really find any info on Indonesia, Belgium/Netherlands and Russia...


Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
COME ON YOU NAMING RIGHTS!!



Looking forward to the next set of renders for the stadium released this week
Gherkin no está en línea  
Old March 26th, 2009, 06:29 PM   #4880
Fizmo1337
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Bruges
Posts: 931
Likes (Received): 61

Hi guys!! Allthough I follow this site for years (4-5 years at least) already, it's the 1st time I post here!
I thought I wouldn't contribute anything useful so I never bothered to register

Anyway, on topic now, allthough I'm from Belgium and would love a WC here, I'm realistic and I'm sure we won't get it. I'm just glad that they will finally start building some new stadiums because we don't have 1 modern stadium here and now that they want a WC here they HAVE TO start buildings some new stadiums.

My guess is that England will get 2018. We have to be fair in this, England deserves it the most. The only thing that stands in their way is the political voting stuff where anything can happen. England is the absolute favourite and everyone knows that so other countries will maybe rather give their vote to another country then to the country that will almost surely get it. This can create some surprises but otherwise I don't see anyone beating England in 2018. Spain could do it but with a joint-bid I would be surprised if they would get it. In 2018 it should be at least in Europe tho.

In 2022 it will be between China/Australia/USA depending on the evolution (popularity) of football, stadiums, results of the country in previous WC, money, etc...
If I have to guess I think Australia will get it. They have a good image (good for getting votes from other countries), very good infrastructure, the national team is getting good results in WC's, etc...
I also think they will give the US another chance to host a WC. Last years football is getting more and more popular + the league is improving + more interest from the media to follow the sport. I'm not too sure if it will be in 2022 already because they hosted it in 1994 (too soon). China seems an interesting country. It would be more or less be the same like the olympics, to show the world they can organise such an event + to show some positive stuff etc... Negative points are the results of the national team in previous WC's and the poor league so I don't think they will get it.

2018: England
2022: Australia


Last edited by Fizmo1337; March 26th, 2009 at 06:37 PM.
Fizmo1337 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 10:44 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