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 February 22nd, 2007, 09:03 PM   #1701
cementationfurnace
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Down at Fraggle Rock
Posts: 381
Likes (Received): 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyrmetros View Post
Here is the Amtrak map
Poor Wyoming and South Dakota. Never any love...
cementationfurnace no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old February 22nd, 2007, 10:13 PM   #1702
Jack Rabbit Slim
Divemaster!
 
Jack Rabbit Slim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The Empire
Posts: 6,607
Likes (Received): 6300

There's no doubt that the USA could provide an unrivaled aray of high capacity stadiums in big cities with lots of space around them for advertising, which is what FIFA drool over, but I'd be so angry if they got the WC in 2018, it would show a clear money-grabbing bias by £I£A.

When it's countries like Germany or England that host it, everyone in the country gets excited about it, there is no bigger competition anywhere, and to host it is like the ultimate honour. Football in those kinds of countries is steeped in history and passion, with big leagues being played each year, with clubs building up stadiums as they get more prosperous, and fans filling those stadiums each year becasue they love the sport.

But in the USA, it's treated by most as just anotehr sporting event, hosted in stadiums that are meant for American football, in cities that couldn't really give a crap about football, and in many cases object to having it forced on them. You will of course get full capacity attendances because of the scale of the WC, but it is still just about the corporate advertisers wet dreams as alwasy when it comes to sports in the USA.

England may not have the consistantlu high capacity stadiums like the USA and obviosuly won't have the number of big cities suitable for the event, but the desire, passion and history is their, and not having hosted it for 62 years by 2018, the wait is long overdue (unlike in the USA who hosted it in '94).

If you think about it, England is smallest nation (don't correct me about whether it is a nation or not) that can host a modern day WC on it's own. Remeber, we're not talking about Britain here, we're talking about England, and for such a small arae of land to have the cities and stadiums for a Wc these days is pretty impressive!
__________________
Over ONE HUNDRED MILLION sharks are killed each year by humans, 11,000 sharks every hour of every day.

Many species of the oldest predator on this planet will be extinct in less than 50 years at this rate. They will never be here again.

Last edited by Jack Rabbit Slim; February 22nd, 2007 at 10:19 PM.
Jack Rabbit Slim no está en línea  
Old February 23rd, 2007, 12:27 AM   #1703
Riise
Registered User
 
Riise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South London & Sprawlgary
Posts: 104
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Rabbit Slim View Post
There's no doubt that the USA could provide an unrivaled aray of high capacity stadiums in big cities with lots of space around them for advertising, which is what FIFA drool over, but I'd be so angry if they got the WC in 2018, it would show a clear money-grabbing bias by £I£A.

When it's countries like Germany or England that host it, everyone in the country gets excited about it, there is no bigger competition anywhere, and to host it is like the ultimate honour. Football in those kinds of countries is steeped in history and passion, with big leagues being played each year, with clubs building up stadiums as they get more prosperous, and fans filling those stadiums each year becasue they love the sport.
Even for countries not so steeped in history, or having a large league such as, Australia, Canada, and South Africa hosting a WC is very meaningful to them. They know that they aren't going to host it very often so when they do they really tend to embrace it and get all they can out of the experience. This happened to some extend in USA '94 but it would be lost with them having it quite often, like the Olympics. FIFA should reward countries like England, France, and Germany but they also have to showcase and spur the game in other countries. I'd really like to see a CONCACAF nation get the 2018 WC, even though I'd love to have it here in Canada I don't think the state of the football will be good enough by then so my vote goes for Mexico! If they can't hold it either Canada, or the motherland (England) should get it!
__________________
"A city can be friendly to people or it can be friendly to cars, but it cannot be both" | Enrique Penalosa
Riise no está en línea  
Old February 23rd, 2007, 03:29 AM   #1704
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Rabbit Slim View Post
There's no doubt that the USA could provide an unrivaled aray of high capacity stadiums in big cities with lots of space around them for advertising, which is what FIFA drool over, but I'd be so angry if they got the WC in 2018, it would show a clear money-grabbing bias by £I£A.
No matter what happens with the 'rotation' policy, I don't think FIFA - in it's continued attempt to dominate world sport - will ever allow consecutive finals tournaments to be played in the same 'zone'. If you read between the lines of FIFA reports, they seem to have 3 unofficial zones (Europe, the Americas, the rest). With 2014 in South America, it's extremely unlikely that 2018 would be in North America.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old February 23rd, 2007, 03:32 AM   #1705
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juddy View Post
Is it safe to say that more people will come to Australia, USA then to places like China, Arab countries??
I'd say yes today, but who knows in 20 years time? The Emirates is pouring billions into becoming a tourist haven - I wouldn't be surprised if a few other Middle East states went in the same direction over the next two decades.

The world keeps turning.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old February 23rd, 2007, 06:47 AM   #1706
nomarandlee
My Mind Has Left My Body
 
nomarandlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: 1060 W. Addison, City by the Lake
Posts: 7,209
Likes (Received): 2761

Quote:
[nyrmetros;11855874]KC has to be considered because of the Legacy of Lamar Hunt and his contribution to US soccer over the past 40 years. Without Lamar Hunt, there is no MLS, there is no significant national team, and we are not discussing hosting 2018. Plus the stadium in KC is undergoing major upgrades the next few years.
That may be a nice sentiment but I don't know if that makes KC a must on a U.S. WC stop. I think the city and venue itself are more important then the nations biggest soccer advocate hails from some place.

Quote:
FIFA no longer has problems with domed stadiums. There was 1 in Germany.
Was it domed or retractable? Even if FIFA doesn't have a problem I do, especially for a summer sport. All outdoor sports are best played under the almighty big blue sky or the stars as I see it.


Quote:
FedEx Field in DC has held soccer games there, however it has been mentioned that if a FIFA sanctioned mens event were to be held, the field would have to be widened. FIFA obviously didn't care about the women playing a WC game there. Wideneing the field there might involve ripping out portion of the lower stands. Not happening.
Never heard that. That is rather unfortunate considering what a big venue it is and it being in the nations capitol. If that is the case it could be moved to the Baltimore Ravens stadium or just have Boston/Philly/NYC host on the East coast.

Quote:
And the one thing you forgot to take into account is fan travel. The US is bloody massive compared to other countries that have hosted, and our rail network is lacking. Flying is expensive. Therefore you have to take into account that not every great city with a great stadium will get a game solely based on logitstics.
Well, outside of a few corridors I pity the fan who plans to depend on travel by train to see all the games. Unless if train service picks up in this country the once a twice a day frequency outside the main corridors will just not cut it. The U.S. is just too big not to host such an event and not depend largely on air travel.
If it is centered on frequent rail travel we aren't going to see many games outside of the Midwest/Northeast/California which would be bypassing some real good cities and venues.


Quote:
In addition the magic number for hosting cities appears to be around 12
If that is the case then I guess cutting out cities like Denver, Miami, Arizona, and DC could be in the cards.
nomarandlee no está en línea  
Old February 23rd, 2007, 07:03 PM   #1707
Its AlL gUUd
Cute but Psycho...
 
Its AlL gUUd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 6,017
Likes (Received): 296

Im sure UEFA members would not allow another world cup out of Europe in 2018?
__________________
I T S Y
Its AlL gUUd no está en línea  
Old February 23rd, 2007, 11:01 PM   #1708
nyrmetros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,274
Likes (Received): 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomarandlee View Post
That may be a nice sentiment but I don't know if that makes KC a must on a U.S. WC stop. I think the city and venue itself are more important then the nations biggest soccer advocate hails from some place.



Was it domed or retractable? Even if FIFA doesn't have a problem I do, especially for a summer sport. All outdoor sports are best played under the almighty big blue sky or the stars as I see it.




Never heard that. That is rather unfortunate considering what a big venue it is and it being in the nations capitol. If that is the case it could be moved to the Baltimore Ravens stadium or just have Boston/Philly/NYC host on the East coast.



Well, outside of a few corridors I pity the fan who plans to depend on travel by train to see all the games. Unless if train service picks up in this country the once a twice a day frequency outside the main corridors will just not cut it. The U.S. is just too big not to host such an event and not depend largely on air travel.
If it is centered on frequent rail travel we aren't going to see many games outside of the Midwest/Northeast/California which would be bypassing some real good cities and venues.




If that is the case then I guess cutting out cities like Denver, Miami, Arizona, and DC could be in the cards.
We can agree that the rail system in America is shite. However, we can also agree that fans flying to each different venue is also not ideal. I tried to keep the venues as close together as possible. Ideally Amtrak can work with the USSF and the local commuter and freight lines to reroute express trains between certain cities - aka fan trains.
Some great cities/stadiums had to be passed over due to FIFA 12 city limit. The stadium in Germany had a dome, not retractable. Most anyone who went to WC '94 in Dallas with the 105 DF heat will tell you that sometimes being outside ain't the greatest. But yes, we can agree that playing under the sky is always ideal. But many of our stadiums in the heatbelt offer a choice.
nyrmetros no está en línea  
Old February 24th, 2007, 01:49 PM   #1709
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

If Australia are serious about getting involved in the 2018/2022 World Cup Finals - I can't understand why the FFA is pushing clubs to move into stadiums with 30-35k capacities. Surely it would make sense to push clubs toward 40-45k stadiums, even if it means playing infront of 15k empty seats - better to pay for them now than wait a decade and have to extend/rebuild... Especially as the new stadiums (Gold Coast, Melbourne) appear to be being built as virtually unextendable.

Also, another negative mark on the MCG in football mode...
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old February 24th, 2007, 02:17 PM   #1710
dunwyn
Registered User
 
dunwyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 252
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjuk View Post
A Spanish fan offered me 500 euros for my ticket to Spain vs Saudi, when I said no, he said, "Name your price"... All of the 'major' footballing nations were heavilly represented in Germany. It might be different in the US, China, Australia, South America, etc., as not as many Europeans would travel. Polish, Croatians, etc., whilst short on cash, could easilly jump in the car and drive up to Germany, watch the match, then drive home - to the extent that we watched Germany vs Poland with a few thousand Polish fans who had driven over the border to watch the game on the big screen in Nurenberg (despite the game taking place on the other side of the country).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wezza View Post
You're right, there might not be as many travelling fans in a country like Australia, USA etc. I would think by now, WC tickets would all still sellout no problems. Take Sydney Olympics for example, they didn't have too much trouble selling out most events there.
If people are prepared to pay 500 euros for a ticket than to pay double that amount for an airline ticket is nothing. Australia's isolation will not hamper the enthusiasm of football fans across the world to see there national side and favourite players. The main problem would be the accommodation. With 31 other nations each could have say 20,000 fans at each game thatís at least 620,000 fans across Australia. Can we accommodate such a large number of visitors?
dunwyn no está en línea  
Old February 24th, 2007, 02:47 PM   #1711
Lostboy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,028
Likes (Received): 19

Lets say the USA holds a World Cup in 2022 or 2026, do you think as the current case is today, or any recent trends, that it would be of more interest to Americans than in 1994?
__________________
The Scottish people have a moral duty to vote SNP in May.
Lostboy no está en línea  
Old February 24th, 2007, 02:50 PM   #1712
dunwyn
Registered User
 
dunwyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 252
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wezza View Post
By the time our chance comes around to host the WC here in Oz, Townsville could easily cope with a permanent 40,000+ size stadium. Newcastle could cope with a stadium that size already. It's just the matter of having rectangle shaped fields in the AFL cities.
Both Adelaide and Perth need new world class stadiums for football but with AFL and cricket the main sports it would be more profitable to build multi purpose stadiums that could cater for all.

A solution to the new stadiums in Adelaide and Perth is build an oval stadium as per normal but instead of moving the seats closer to the pitch like TD, lower the field then rollout extra seating to fill the gaps. Indoor arenas have this ability.
dunwyn no está en línea  
Old February 25th, 2007, 05:39 AM   #1713
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

I would say that Adelaide should build a 40-45k seater on the site of Santos Stadium, with a sunken pitch and first tier of seating. Once the world cup has been and gone, 'fill in' the sunken area and put down an athletics track, with a pitch inside that - they'd still have a 30-35k stadium, have their athletics track back, and the location is fantastic for a World Cup venue in Adelaide.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old February 25th, 2007, 05:46 AM   #1714
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by dunwyn View Post
If people are prepared to pay 500 euros for a ticket than to pay double that amount for an airline ticket is nothing. Australia's isolation will not hamper the enthusiasm of football fans across the world to see there national side and favourite players. The main problem would be the accommodation. With 31 other nations each could have say 20,000 fans at each game thatís at least 620,000 fans across Australia. Can we accommodate such a large number of visitors?
If you split the 620,000 over the 8 venues, that means around 77.5k per city. For some of the venue cities this would almost double the population!! That said, you'd think that the Queensland venues should be well served by all the tourist facilities up there, Sydney will have plenty of rooms as a result of it's tourism industry as well as the Olympics a few years back, Melbourne, Perth and Adelaide, I don't know.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old February 26th, 2007, 02:22 AM   #1715
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lostboy View Post
Lets say the USA holds a World Cup in 2022 or 2026, do you think as the current case is today, or any recent trends, that it would be of more interest to Americans than in 1994?
Yes, MLS is rising in popularity.
hngcm no está en línea  
Old February 26th, 2007, 02:28 AM   #1716
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjuk View Post

Also, another negative mark on the MCG in football mode...
Damn, you can't even see the ball from up there.
hngcm no está en línea  
Old February 26th, 2007, 02:33 AM   #1717
Tancred
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 51
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by dunwyn View Post
If people are prepared to pay 500 euros for a ticket than to pay double that amount for an airline ticket is nothing. Australia's isolation will not hamper the enthusiasm of football fans across the world to see there national side and favourite players. The main problem would be the accommodation. With 31 other nations each could have say 20,000 fans at each game thatís at least 620,000 fans across Australia. Can we accommodate such a large number of visitors?
If 98, 02 & 06 have shown anything, it's that for many of nations it will be 20k with tickets and another 50-100k just there for the experience. Australia just cannot move that many people around.
Tancred no está en línea  
Old February 26th, 2007, 02:38 PM   #1718
Ari Gold
Mr Superstar
 
Ari Gold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Perthzillia
Posts: 2,391
Likes (Received): 126

Remember, we are not getting anything until 2022.
Sydney, Melbourne, Perth and Brisvegas would look after themselves no worries.
Adelaide is an ideal location due to the fact their basically a train ride away from Melbourne and you can also say to Sydney as well.
Hobart should be able to get the scapes from Melbourne and Adelaide (i mean crowds can get to Hobart easily).
Gold Coast should have a pretty decent stadium in 15 years with the Titans and AFL team their. And that place is going gang-busters in growth and tourists right now.
Which leaves a smaller town such as Wollongong, Newcastle, Central Coast team. Hopefully the NRL can sustain its growth and a bigger stadium is built in any of these locations. Im sure these places will be prepared for the tourist onslaught in 15 years time.

So i dont see Australia having a problem in having a mass influx of tourists. Im just more worried about the stadiums (That MCG pic just proves the point). But we are Australia after-all and we will sort our shit out.
__________________
Perth - Lawns n Yawns for All
Ari Gold no está en línea  
Old February 26th, 2007, 06:39 PM   #1719
Martuh
◊◊◊
 
Martuh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 860
Likes (Received): 23

Quote:
Originally Posted by hngcm View Post
Yes, MLS is rising in popularity.
I'd even dare to say when WC 2010 isn't going to be in RSA, they should move it to USA, because it's the perfect time for it. Now with Beckham in LA, and many more, MLS is also becoming more of a name in Europe.
Martuh no está en línea  
Old February 26th, 2007, 11:24 PM   #1720
Mr. Maciek
Registered User
 
Mr. Maciek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 395
Likes (Received): 0

No chance... if it was to be moved from RSA then australia will get it no doubt, but it wouldnt matter because they wont move it full stop
__________________
Planning for the greater good
Mr. Maciek 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 02:49 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