MEXICO - Stadium and Arena Development News

[Carrerra]

Mexican Nou Mestalla!

[hngcm]

Why is the stadium on a plate?

The "plate" even goes over part of the road...

[Benjuk]

Head of the Mexican FA Decio De Maria reckons Mexico are one of the three back-up plans Sepp Blatter mentioned last week...

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/st...up2010&cc=9999

Near as I can tell they have 7 suitable stadiums spread over 6 cities. Next best is a 39k stadium in Mexico City (which already has 2 other venues). None of these stadia are under 20 years old. Completion of the Jorge Vergara Cabrera will bring them another, but it will be in Guadalajara which already has a venue. So, at best it's 8 or 9 over 6 cities.

Seems bizarre that FIFA would lower standards for a back-up when the USA could step in with a multitude of venues at 6 months notice!

(and yes, I know, this will only in the event of a natural disaster in SA, which won't happen - touch wood)

[PoLy_MX]

i hope so but i think SA deserved this WC

[elbart089]

lol, that's how we stole our second World Cup to Colombia and became the first country to host it twice, if it happens again then we would be the first country to host it 3 times.

BTW the Chivas Stadium will be complete by the end of this year.

[Benn]

I think there would be more infrastructure work needed than Mexico would like to deal with in the next two years, the new Chivas stadium would be great, and if they build the new Monterrey proposal that would be another. But the other 8-10 likely venues would need work. Some like the Azteca would probably just need new seats, and maybe expanded media areas, some extra bathrooms. But other spots would need serious expansion or replacement.

It seems that if South Africa is unable to pull it together (which would be kind of suprising) I would figure Spain, the US and England would be the short list, but who knows for sure.

[Kobo]

Who are the other 2 nations that will step in if there is a problem with South Africa? And what natural disasters are likely to strike South Africa?

[elbart089]

Yeah, the Estadio Azteca is quite old now, but still looks good. Even though all Mexican stadiums are clean and functional we wouldn't have enough time (1 1/2 years??) to build new espectacular stadiums, I mean they would've had to told us at least 4 years before so we could build them, but oh well let's see if South Africa can solve its problems on time.

Estadio Azteca

[dande]

I think it´s more due to SA inability to organize the event rather than natural disaster.

[BobDaBuilder]

Been to Mexico, it is too dangerous for travellers.

As a back up to S.A. You have to pick a 1st world nation.

Canada, Oz, England, etc.. (not the USA, I was shocked at how many poor people they have and had trouble distinguishing it from Mexico). For a nation that harps on about how religious it is, I think they have trouble distinguishing their worship of money to that of a God.

Personally I don't think somewhere like S.A. should be hosting World Cups and spending valuable resources when they should be spending the money on housing projects, education and welfare.

To give you an idea how nasty things are in S.A. The British Army sends their doctors there in order to get 'battle prepared.'

It is purely political having it in S.A.

[en1044]

Originally Posted by BobDaBuilder

Been to Mexico, it is too dangerous for travellers.

As a back up to S.A. You have to pick a 1st world nation.

Canada, Oz, England, etc.. (not the USA, I was shocked at how many poor people they have and had trouble distinguishing it from Mexico). For a nation that harps on about how religious it is, I think they have trouble distinguishing their worship of money to that of a God.

Personally I don't think somewhere like S.A. should be hosting World Cups and spending valuable resources when they should be spending the money on housing projects, education and welfare.

To give you an idea how nasty things are in S.A. The British Army sends their doctors there in order to get 'battle prepared.'

It is purely political having it in S.A.

Wow, um... your comments about the US are pretty inaccurate. There are poor people here, but just as many as any other country (proportionally). Dont even think about comparing us to Mexico in that category.

[Iain1974]

Theres not much notice between July 08 and June 2010 so you've realistically got to go with a European nation (England/France/Germany/Spain) or the USA.

How could Mexico be a backup? Their facilities are second rate at best.

[PoLy_MX]

Originally Posted by BobDaBuilder

Been to Mexico, it is too dangerous for travellers.

As a back up to S.A. You have to pick a 1st world nation.

Canada, Oz, England, etc.. (not the USA, I was shocked at how many poor people they have and had trouble distinguishing it from Mexico). For a nation that harps on about how religious it is, I think they have trouble distinguishing their worship of money to that of a God.

Personally I don't think somewhere like S.A. should be hosting World Cups and spending valuable resources when they should be spending the money on housing projects, education and welfare.

To give you an idea how nasty things are in S.A. The British Army sends their doctors there in order to get 'battle prepared.'

It is purely political having it in S.A.

WTF???????!!!

[BobDaBuilder]

You are obviously a strong supporter of the old Caeser theory of just giving the people circuses and they won't need bread etc..

[woozoo]

To give you an idea how nasty things are in S.A. The British Army sends their doctors there in order to get 'battle prepared.'

Where did you read this? Do you really believe it?

There are poor people here, but just as many as any other country (proportionally). Dont even think about comparing us to Mexico in that category.

Aha:
Poverty by percentage by country:


Despite this, I think the US would be best capable of hosting the cup at such short notice. They have as good facilities as anywhere in the world, pretty much.
The only thing is that it's going to Brazil in 2014, so two world cups side by side in western hemisphere? Probably not, but due to the fact its a hosting by default, maybe they will allow it.

[Benn]

Originally Posted by BobDaBuilder

Been to Mexico, it is too dangerous for travellers.

As a back up to S.A. You have to pick a 1st world nation.

Canada, Oz, England, etc.. (not the USA, I was shocked at how many poor people they have and had trouble distinguishing it from Mexico). For a nation that harps on about how religious it is, I think they have trouble distinguishing their worship of money to that of a God.

Personally I don't think somewhere like S.A. should be hosting World Cups and spending valuable resources when they should be spending the money on housing projects, education and welfare.

To give you an idea how nasty things are in S.A. The British Army sends their doctors there in order to get 'battle prepared.'

It is purely political having it in S.A.

Where in the US were you? That description might fit a few trailer parks in Missouri, but I have never seen part of the country like that. Now the dollar is down, but you're talking like we're a 3rd world country. Granted some of the major cities have alot of homeless people (LA, San Fran, Houston ect), but so do cities like Berlin, Prague, Paris ect. if you saw a 2nd or 3rd world country in the US you are either blind or lying. I guess since I am American you're going to tell me that I must be a Bible thumping gun nut talking about how we need to get rid of all the foreigners. Wanna hear something crazy? I don't even own a single gun, I take the LRT to work and am not a Christian fundementalist! What a shock. I also don't think we should have invaded Iraq (doesn't England have troops there too), I want universal healthcare and I think Bush is probably the worst President in our history. I'll agree we're too obsessed with money, but that isn't just an American problem. My city doesn't have bad homeless problem, and we have 3 million people in the area. I have spent a summer in Germany and it was great, (great mass transit, more history, really good schools) but it really wasn't that much different).

With a line like that I doubt you have actually been to this country.

[Iain1974]

I hate to agree with Bob here but...........

Many of the larger US cities, especially in my experience, Chicago/Detroit and New Orleans (pre-Katrina) have large tracts of poor housing with very high levels of unemployment that can understandably be equated to the 3rd world.

I don't think for a second that the extrapolation Bob is making is viable, but there really are some shocking levels of poverty in the large cities. Poverty in Berlin/Paris doesn't compare to these places.

[BobDaBuilder]

Where did I get the thing about the British Army doctors using South African violence as a way of training up it's quacks. Well I spent time in South Africa and met a lot of army surgeons from the UK getting trained up in 'battle scenarios'.

Johanesburg has more weapon related injuries and deaths than you get in war zones.

As for parts of the US which had staggeringly poor persons which shocked me as I thought the US was a wealthy nation, obviously some people do not share. I saw it in most major cities. LA shocked be the most. It was the closest I had seen to what you get in Soweto, just near Johanesburg in S.A. It left me very shaken and disgusted. I'd never want to live in America, a country that discards it's own like that is outrageous. It reminded me of that Blade Runner city.

What I don't get about Americans, is they are always 'praising God', and 'thanking God for making me win this Oscar...' or 'scoring in some game' yet they have this fuck-you attitude to the down and outers.

[Iain1974]

It's not such a surprise. They use to train army medics in Northern Ireland. The hospital get some extra security and the medics get valuable training.

[en1044]

Originally Posted by BobDaBuilder

Where did I get the thing about the British Army doctors using South African violence as a way of training up it's quacks. Well I spent time in South Africa and met a lot of army surgeons from the UK getting trained up in 'battle scenarios'.

Johanesburg has more weapon related injuries and deaths than you get in war zones.

As for parts of the US which had staggeringly poor persons which shocked me as I thought the US was a wealthy nation, obviously some people do not share. I saw it in most major cities. LA shocked be the most. It was the closest I had seen to what you get in Soweto, just near Johanesburg in S.A. It left me very shaken and disgusted. I'd never want to live in America, a country that discards it's own like that is outrageous. It reminded me of that Blade Runner city.

What I don't get about Americans, is they are always 'praising God', and 'thanking God for making me win this Oscar...' or 'scoring in some game' yet they have this fuck-you attitude to the down and outers.

You have a very distorted view of this country my friend. The only people you see who are all about God are the people who are newsworthy. Example: The Westboro Baptist Church. Just because they thank GOd for scoring in a game or winning some award doesnt mean that they are Bible thumpers. As a wealthy nation you will experience a gap between the rich and poor, its only natural that it happens. Im not saying that its good, just that theres not much to stop it. Dont say that we discard our own, we dont. The problem is that the people who CAN do anything about it (the very wealthy) are a VERY small proportion and dont care. The fact that you think that we have a fuck you attitude towards lesser people just shows your ignorance towards this country. Dont judge a book by its cover. Ever look to see how much money is donated to charity every year?