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 April 1st, 2009, 02:25 PM   #4941
Ecological
BANNED
 
Ecological's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,518
Likes (Received): 23

Was this the same tournment that couldn't manage the influx of English fans in its largest stadium almost causing a stampede and crush? The organisation for Englands first game against France was atrocious. We ended up having to jump over the ticket barriers and search centres.
Ecological no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old April 1st, 2009, 04:13 PM   #4942
seattle92
Registered User
 
seattle92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Lisboa
Posts: 8,400
Likes (Received): 2852

Funny how this kind of stuff only happens with english fans...


Needless to say that the only hooligan problem we had in the tournment was also caused by english fans in Algarve

Last edited by seattle92; April 1st, 2009 at 04:18 PM.
seattle92 no está en línea  
Old April 1st, 2009, 09:29 PM   #4943
Republica
BUND
 
Republica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4,036
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by seattle92 View Post
Funny how this kind of stuff only happens with english fans...


Needless to say that the only hooligan problem we had in the tournment was also caused by english fans in Algarve
Woooaaah hang on ive got to comment on this.

1. It doesnt only happen with english fans, and when it does, more often than not its provocation or attacks from other fans, as seen in turkey and italy.

2. The Algarve thing is a drinking thing, not a football thing - the people there were there for drinking, not football.

3. The only major trouble at the WC2006 was.... oh, Germans fighting Polish.

4. It is well known that Italy, Poland, Turkey and many other countries have hooligan problems. England does not have a hooligan problem.

Now its time to change your outdated ideas. Football in england is a family affair.
__________________
Rant
Republica no está en línea  
Old April 2nd, 2009, 12:57 AM   #4944
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Italian hooligans rarely travel abroad to fight!

I also thought there was some trouble with a load of Russians at euro 2004 as well??
bigbossman no está en línea  
Old April 2nd, 2009, 03:52 AM   #4945
inzane
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 27
Likes (Received): 0

[QUOTE=bigbossman;34454572]
You should know 1 season does not make a fair sample. There are many mititgating scircumstances. The only way to truely evaluate is to see if the stadiums have ever been filled or worthwhile and that takes look at the bigger picture, not just capturing last season and saying look it proves my point. When all it proves is last season crowds were bad.


of course it doesnt. Going by your logic, we may as well add up averages spanning 10 years and then perhaps comparing? i dont think this is a good method when evaluating the future growth of any sport.


[QUOTE=bigbossman;34454572]
Only you doesn't think there is a demand in Brazil or Argentina. When there clearly is. These are football crazy countries.

I actually can't even believe you don't think cities in Argetina and Brazil could sustain a 40,000 seater football stadium.

I think you fail to understand just because clubs don't come close to filling their grounds every week, it doesn't mean there is no demand for that capacity. It's just how it is in football, in some countries ticketless games are still common place. It was the same in England until the 90s, hence why in England clubs didn't fill their grounds even in the good old days.


Yes they (brazil and agentina) are football crazy moreso than other countries and they could probably sustain those capacities in some areas. The same scenario occurs in Australia with some domestic leagues. And i think i can safely assume that similar cicumstances occur in many countries around the world.


[QUOTE=bigbossman;34454572]
I don't see the problem in you guys building temporary 40,000 stadiums and scaling them back after the world cup.


That may be the case for some locations. As for our major population centres, permenent capacities of at least 40000 are sustainable, even by your argument, as there is scope for large continued growth, just like their probably is in any other sport in any country around the world.


[QUOTE=bigbossman;34454572]
Why shouldn't Mexico benefit, if they can host it, then let them. I'm not in the lets include everyone business and have a shit world cup. We do that by letting the likes of Trinidad and Tobago qualify, lets not do it in hosting as well.


fair enough. Fairly unlickley nevertheless.


[QUOTE=bigbossman;34454572]
are you seriously comparing a 20m country with 8 teams who play 90 games to countries with half and a quarte your population and double the amount of games??

Sweden's biggest city is smaller than your fifth biggest city and it has 3 teams in it. LASt season attendances went down by 25%.

Why do persist with this comparison??

Australia has what 4 super 14 teams? Each in major population centres.
And the NRL is a closed league, you can't compare it to a country with a proper sports system. And that's by the by, it's not football.


the AFL and NRL are closed yes. It's a different system, though its not an improper system - just another kind. i dont see why averages attenances cannot be compared.

AFL average: 37000
NRL average: 17000
Super14 (australia only): 20000
A league: 13000

Remember all these codes are comparable in attendance to many first division football leagues around the world. Football being the lowest.


[QUOTE=bigbossman;34454572]
If you combined total of the average attendances in the nordic countries and benelux for professional clubs. You would see that more people watch professional football in these countries than watch sport in your country.


Estimated population of COMBINED nordic region and Benelux: 52 million
(the same as england).
Australia - 22 million.

Yes, logically, more people would watch football in these countries (52 million)where football is the dominant code, than people in Australia who watch any sport.
inzane no está en línea  
Old April 2nd, 2009, 08:34 AM   #4946
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Bigbossman, just because Turkey has a large population doesnt necessarily mean it will have larger football attendance and need larger capacity stadiums.

Poland has a population of 40 million, has football as number one sport but only manages a 7000 average attendance. Russia has 145 million but only averages crowds of 13,000. China has a population of 1 billion but only averages in the teens.

Just because there is potential doesnt mean that potential will be fullfilled. Portugal built a whole lot of stadiums but I dont think attendance has significantly increased.


Norway league total attendance: 1,899,834
Sweden: 1,866,956 + 353,640
Denmark: 1,604,592
TOTAL: 5,725,022

I couldnt find figures for cup football but you would expect 1/5 so lets say about 1 million.


In Australia:
NRL: 3,332,648
A league: 1,382,000 (expanding to 10 teams next season, 12 teams the following season so this will increase by about 50%)
Super 14: Roughly 420,000
TOTAL: 5,134,648

AFL: 7,084,759
GRAND TOTAL: 12, 219,407 (this figure is just under total attendance for the premier league. K league is 2,489,491. Japans total for league 1 and 2 is 7,899,063).

Attending sport is HUGE pass time in Australia.



Ill just point out, that if Australia were to host in 2022, then for a few decades following that event, it will be one of the countries that has the infrastructure necessary for hosting a WC, just as Mexico, Korea and Japan are now.
woozoo no está en línea  
Old April 2nd, 2009, 11:38 AM   #4947
www.sercan.de
Galatasaray SK
 
www.sercan.de's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 27,950
Likes (Received): 2718

Actually we need bigger ones
Because the clubs had never big ones. So 3/4 stands have been ultra stands -> no stand for families or normal spectator.
Fenerbahce's attendance rised from 16k to 40k.
Galatasaray's attendance is 16-18k. But at we filled 70k in the Olimpiyat stadium.
Its a lil bit like in Italy. Bad stadiums low attendance.

BTW ther aren't "Hools" in Turkey. Which means groups who want to fight every week.
Just some riots at derbies etc. (Throwing stones etc and this is seldom. maybe every 10 derby)
__________________
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 April 2nd, 2009, 01:17 PM   #4948
seattle92
Registered User
 
seattle92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Lisboa
Posts: 8,400
Likes (Received): 2852

Quote:
Originally Posted by Republica View Post
Woooaaah hang on ive got to comment on this.

1. It doesnt only happen with english fans, and when it does, more often than not its provocation or attacks from other fans, as seen in turkey and italy.

2. The Algarve thing is a drinking thing, not a football thing - the people there were there for drinking, not football.

3. The only major trouble at the WC2006 was.... oh, Germans fighting Polish.

4. It is well known that Italy, Poland, Turkey and many other countries have hooligan problems. England does not have a hooligan problem.

Now its time to change your outdated ideas. Football in england is a family affair.

This wasn't really an attack at english fans, that are always welcome in every tournment. Just a response to the stupid comments that ecological continues to post.

Even so, what your wrote isn't completly true.

1 - It doesn't happen only with english fans. But it happens a lot. The provocation factor can be use the other way around. When you have a group of drunk guys singing England's songs in a square and making comments to the people that are passing in the streets (many times locals), you're kind of asking for trouble. It's not bad luck why this problems happens more with english fans than any other.

2 - The Algarve thing was an "english football fans drinking thing". Algarve was full of foreigners and portugueses. Many fans went to spend some days in Algarve while their teams weren't playing. The only ones that caused trouble... where the english.

3 - One day after i left Sttutgard, there was a massive fight beetwen english and germans in the main square (i'm not saying it was the worse, just saying that... one more time... it happen).

4 - England doesn't have a hooligan problem in the national leagues anymore. Good for you. It still has some problems in the international games (specially the NT). But it's nothing like it was in the past. That is good.
Italy's hooligan problem, it's more a domestic thing. Lazio against Roma, Palermo against Catania,...
seattle92 no está en línea  
Old April 2nd, 2009, 03:30 PM   #4949
AFCAMIKE
Registered User
 
AFCAMIKE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Loerbeek
Posts: 7
Likes (Received): 0

I think the World Cup in 2018 should go to Holland and Belgium.
It are two football nations and we are both small countries. The infrastructure is great and the stadiums are also great.
The Amsterdam ArenA will be bigger --> 80.000 / 70.000
A new stadium in Rotterdam --> 70.000
Abe Lenstra Stadion in Heerenveen will be bigger --> 40.000 / 50.000
And the Grolsch Veste will be also bigger --> 40.000 / 50.000

From Belgium I don't know everything.
AFCAMIKE no está en línea  
Old April 2nd, 2009, 06:10 PM   #4950
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

wow that was hard to read

Quote:
Originally Posted by inzane View Post

of course it doesnt. Going by your logic, we may as well add up averages spanning 10 years and then perhaps comparing? i dont think this is a good method when evaluating the future growth of any sport.

Past trends do give an indication of future growth if analysed properly. i never advocated 10 years. I am advocating 3-5 years as a sample base.

Quote:
Yes they (brazil and agentina) are football crazy moreso than other countries and they could probably sustain those capacities in some areas. The same scenario occurs in Australia with some domestic leagues. And i think i can safely assume that similar cicumstances occur in many countries around the world.
It was never a comparison with australia...


Quote:

That may be the case for some locations. As for our major population centres, permenent capacities of at least 40000 are sustainable, even by your argument, as there is scope for large continued growth, just like their probably is in any other sport in any country around the world.

[/QUOTE]

So why aren't these being advocated then?


Quote:
fair enough. Fairly unlickley nevertheless.
Best bid should win out.


Quote:
the AFL and NRL are closed yes. It's a different system, though its not an improper system - just another kind. i dont see why averages attenances cannot be compared.
Because they are inherently different. One includes promotion and relegation and many teams spanning many leagues. 1 is 1 closed league the supporter base for a closed league is going to be far larger per team than an open league. Hence why you cannot compare

Quote:
AFL average: 37000
NRL average: 17000
Super14 (australia only): 20000
A league: 13000
I wasn't comparing them to the A league, he compared them to european football leagues.

Quote:
Remember all these codes are comparable in attendance to many first division football leagues around the world. Football being the lowest.
And like i said, you introduce promotion and relegation and it completely changes the base of supporters. As there aren't only 16 teams de facto to choose from.

Quote:
Estimated population of COMBINED nordic region and Benelux: 52 million
(the same as england).
Australia - 22 million.


?? They were separate so they were comparable to Australia. I don't know why you have come to the conclusion that these two regions should be combined???? Both the Benelux (26m) and NOrdic (25m) Region have siimilar populations to oz, hence the comparison.

Quote:
Yes, logically, more people would watch football in these countries (52 million)where football is the dominant code, than people in Australia who watch any sport.
I don't understand your point. His point was the australian league has a higher attendance. I said that if we compare the regions which have similar populations, you can see that Australia is only higher because it has it's professional teams condensed into one closed league. you need to take total average attendance to see the true demand for professional football in each population sample!
bigbossman no está en línea  
Old April 2nd, 2009, 06:22 PM   #4951
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by woozoo View Post
Bigbossman, just because Turkey has a large population doesnt necessarily mean it will have larger football attendance and need larger capacity stadiums.
That was never the argument. The argument was that these are FOOTBALL countries, and that demand will rise as long as certain factors are satisfied. That including bigger, modern stadiums as sercan has said.

Quote:
Poland has a population of 40 million, has football as number one sport but only manages a 7000 average attendance. Russia has 145 million but only averages crowds of 13,000.
Both adhere to the original point, ask any of the polish forumers, the new stadiusm are seeing crowds increase incrementally. And once they have ridded corruption, there is no reason why poland can't average 20,000+

Russia is exactly the same (bar corruption maybe).

Quote:
China has a population of 1 billion but only averages in the teens.
what??

Quote:
Just because there is potential doesnt mean that potential will be fullfilled. Portugal built a whole lot of stadiums but I dont think attendance has significantly increased.
DOn't think, you mean you don't know.

Attendances have gone up every season since 2003/04. From c7,000 to c11,000. Yes that may not seem a big leap, but that's on average, not all clubs got new stadiums etc, you need to look deeper.

Quote:
Norway league total attendance: 1,899,834
Sweden: 1,866,956 + 353,640
Denmark: 1,604,592
TOTAL: 5,725,022

I couldnt find figures for cup football but you would expect 1/5 so lets say about 1 million.


In Australia:
NRL: 3,332,648
A league: 1,382,000 (expanding to 10 teams next season, 12 teams the following season so this will increase by about 50%)
Super 14: Roughly 420,000
TOTAL: 5,134,648

AFL: 7,084,759
GRAND TOTAL: 12, 219,407 (this figure is just under total attendance for the premier league. K league is 2,489,491. Japans total for league 1 and 2 is 7,899,063).

Attending sport is HUGE pass time in Australia.
You massaged those figures like some sort of dodgy accountant.

1. You can't compare just the top flights of only 3 of The nordic countries. Where's Finland or Iceland??

2. As they are open leagues you have to add in at least teams in the second tiers also. Your leagues are closed, as said in my previous post, close leagues horde fans on a far larger scale than open leagues.

3. The case is AFL may be well supported, but AFL has nothing to with how well Football will be supported.


Quote:
Ill just point out, that if Australia were to host in 2022, then for a few decades following that event, it will be one of the countries that has the infrastructure necessary for hosting a WC, just as Mexico, Korea and Japan are now.
ok...
bigbossman no está en línea  
Old April 3rd, 2009, 08:24 AM   #4952
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Iceland has a population of 300,000, and I dont think Finland has a professional league (I couldnt find any attendance figures at least), so I left them out.

I added the Swedish 2nd tier league, its the +363,640. Couldnt find stats for the other countries, but I expect they would be similarly insignificant.

Overall, the figures for the Nordic countries and Australian rectangular grounds are similar.

My point was that Australia has the enough attendance to support the required stadiums for a World Cup. In Australia, stadiums arent code specific. Why would they be when Rugby and soccer grounds are almost identical?
What does whether the leagues are closed or not matter? Fact is the attendances are high, have been high and will continue to be high so hence support a number of large stadiums.




Luckily FIFA is more progressive than you, and see's the merit in giving the WC to developing football nations. Back in the 90s Korea was a footballing minnow, but FIFA gave them the rights to host and now they have adequate infrastructure and a well functioning league.

Rotating the wc between the same nations would simply keep the wealth and benefits in the same countries, despite other nations providing teams, players and financial support for the cup and those countries domestic competitions.
woozoo no está en línea  
Old April 3rd, 2009, 04:10 PM   #4953
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by seattle92 View Post
Funny how this kind of stuff only happens with english fans...

Needless to say that the only hooligan problem we had in the tournment was also caused by english fans in Algarve
Funny - from first hand experience, I seem to remember a huge riot in Germany between Polish and German fans. Oh, wait a minute, it was obviously my presence, as an Englishman that caused all the bother.

Other than that... Anyone who thinks football hooliganism is an English problem might want to take 15 minutes and skim through this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_hooliganism
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old April 3rd, 2009, 05:14 PM   #4954
seattle92
Registered User
 
seattle92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Lisboa
Posts: 8,400
Likes (Received): 2852

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjuk View Post
Funny - from first hand experience, I seem to remember a huge riot in Germany between Polish and German fans. Oh, wait a minute, it was obviously my presence, as an Englishman that caused all the bother.

Other than that... Anyone who thinks football hooliganism is an English problem might want to take 15 minutes and skim through this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_hooliganism

If you want to keep the context and understand the debates, you'll see that we were talking about Euro2004.

But in the my last post i said what i think about the english hooliganism problem. Go read it if you want... or keep talking alone.
seattle92 no está en línea  
Old April 3rd, 2009, 07:50 PM   #4955
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,239
Likes (Received): 228

Quote:
2 - The Algarve thing was an "english football fans drinking thing". Algarve was full of foreigners and portugueses. Many fans went to spend some days in Algarve while their teams weren't playing. The only ones that caused trouble... where the english.
Thats a cultural more than a footballing problem I'd say, unfortunately getting very drunk and acting like a prat has become socially acceptable here in recent years. The more important issue when it comes to hosting a WC is the ability to police games well and were definately amoungst the best at that these days.


One thing I'v not heard discuessed is the possibility of lowering the playing surface at the MCG. Obviously not perminately but couldnt they come up with something similar to the new valencia rising and lower pitch? do the seats/boxers have the viewing angles to do that?
MoreOrLess no está en línea  
Old April 5th, 2009, 06:11 AM   #4956
inzane
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 27
Likes (Received): 0

[QUOTE=bigbossman;34558142]wow that was hard to read
... yeh i dont know how to quote properly.


[QUOTE=bigbossman;34558142]
Past trends do give an indication of future growth if analysed properly. i never advocated 10 years. I am advocating 3-5 years as a sample base.

I know you never advocated it, but yes a 3-5 year sample sounds reasonable.


[QUOTE=bigbossman;34558142]
So why aren't these being advocated then?

a) i dont work for the FFA
b) who says they aren't?
c) the 22' world cup is 13 years away


[QUOTE=bigbossman;34558142]
Best bid should win out.

agree. Though i wouldn't put my money on the likes of Mexico or Japan for reasons already mentioned earlier in this thread.


[QUOTE=bigbossman;34558142]
Because they are inherently different. One includes promotion and relegation and many teams spanning many leagues. 1 is 1 closed league the supporter base for a closed league is going to be far larger per team than an open league. Hence why you cannot compare

And like i said, you introduce promotion and relegation and it completely changes the base of supporters. As there aren't only 16 teams de facto to choose from.


Not neccessarily. Average attendances for promotion/relegation leagues will vary as smaller clubs will naturally attract lower attendances while wealthier clubs will attract higher attendances.

Closed leagues usually have fairly consistent crowds across most clubs.
If it were to change over, the supporter base would remain but would be dispersed according to an individuals allegance.

It depends on the popularity of the sport and how enrenched it is within the culture. On this grounds, Australian football (soccer) certainly does not compare to other nations.
But compared to within our own backyard - it raises a few eyebrows.
If our other popular codes were to be converted to promomtion and relegation systems, they would be fairly sustainable as a stronger culture exists for these different sports.
Would the average attendance still be the same? Yes - if it was the dominant code like it is in most European countries. But this is Australia, where there are 4 football codes trying to compete with each other. Even if perhaps there wasn't 2 different codes to begin with, that would leave a significant population with an allegence to one sport or the other.
It is the % of people that follow a sport, which would determine the success of a promotion and relegation system.


[QUOTE=bigbossman;34558142]
?? They were separate so they were comparable to Australia. I don't know why you have come to the conclusion that these two regions should be combined???? Both the Benelux (26m) and NOrdic (25m) Region have siimilar populations to oz, hence the comparison.


Re-read your post. You suggested that a combined average attendance in Nordic countries AND Benelux would be higher than the amount of people that watch sport in Australia.
inzane no está en línea  
Old April 5th, 2009, 08:42 AM   #4957
arsmoriendi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Arad
Posts: 7
Likes (Received): 0

There are a lot more countries that could host the Fifa World Cup. England leads in poll, but does not make sense, because in England in 1996 was an European championship, if I remember, so other countries should have the chance to host it, not continually rotate same countries.
__________________
  • Travel Tips and Pictures
arsmoriendi no está en línea  
Old April 5th, 2009, 08:43 AM   #4958
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmoriendi View Post
There are a lot more countries that could host the Fifa World Cup. England leads in poll, but does not make sense, because in England in 1996 was an European championship, if I remember, so other countries should have the chance to host it, not continually rotate same countries.
You realize theres a difference right? Because England hosted Euro '96, they cant host the 2018 World Cup 22 years later?

I want what youre smoking.
__________________
WASHINGTON REDSKINS
en1044 no está en línea  
Old April 5th, 2009, 01:18 PM   #4959
woozoo
Registered User
 
woozoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 800
Likes (Received): 185

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrLess View Post
One thing I'v not heard discuessed is the possibility of lowering the playing surface at the MCG. Obviously not perminately but couldnt they come up with something similar to the new valencia rising and lower pitch? do the seats/boxers have the viewing angles to do that?
Well, apparently during the 2006 renovations for the commonwealth games, the lower tier was designed so that temporary seating can be attatched halfway down the bottom tier, extending the stand 25 meters onto the field. I read that from another forumer in the ozscrapers subforum, and dont know how true this is though.

Lowering the pitch wouldnt happen I thiink, as it would take too long and the AFL, the main user of the stadium, would have to play its games in interstate stadiums, which they wouldnt agree to.
woozoo no está en línea  
Old April 5th, 2009, 03:49 PM   #4960
arsmoriendi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Arad
Posts: 7
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by en1044 View Post
You realize theres a difference right? Because England hosted Euro '96, they cant host the 2018 World Cup 22 years later?

I want what youre smoking.
So this is not enough for England, the European Champioship ?
__________________
  • Travel Tips and Pictures
arsmoriendi 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 07:42 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