England's 2018 World Cup Bid

[Sparks]

I've started a new thread for a couple of reasons, this is solely to deal with England's bid not others, secondly a took me a while to do this, and thirdly, I plan to keep this first page a bit like Will's full summary of projects thread in the London section.

Caution, Long Post!, May take a while to load.
If the we had to make the bid now these are the stadiums I would use. The list is subject to change as we get closer to the bid being launched.

ENGLAND’S 2018 WORLD CUP BID, THE STADIUMS.

Main Considerations:

• Stadiums in England only.
• No more than two stadiums in any one city.
• Only one city can have two host stadiums.
• Twickenham will not be used.
• 8 - 12 stadiums need to be used, all must comply with FIFA regulations, including standard pitch size as well as player and media facilities.
• Minimum capacity of 45,000 per stadium, or 40,000 excluding media and VIPs. 60,000 for the semi-finals, final and opening game.
• Stadiums need to be geographically spread.
• Cities and stadia need to have good International and Domestic transport links.
• Stadium expansions will only occur if they can be realistically be filled after the World Cup.

Venues that would be used, if England submitted a bid now.



There are twelve venues in the above list, potentially the list could be reduced to ten or even as low as eight if it is deemed that twelve or ten stadiums are not needed. The Walkers Stadium and Ricoh Arena would likely be the first knocked off the list if this was the case.

Secondary / Reserve Venues



The above venues have the realistic potential to be used if one of the venues on the primary list is not able to be expanded and thus be used in the World Cup.

The New Nottingham Stadium if built, would likely replace one of the current three Midlands stadiums on the list of the Walkers Stadium, Pride Park or the Ricoh Arena. Plans for the ground are very tentative at this stage and the it wouldn’t open any earlier than 2014.

Hillsborough is in virtually identical situation to that of Elland Road, Leeds. With significant investment needed to improve the ground up to world class standards. Sheffield is a major football city and Wednesday are a big club with significant potential, there is also room to expand around the current ground if money can be found and Wednesday achieve promotion to the Premiership.
If Elland Road cannot be redeveloped, Hillsborough would replace it as the regional Yorkshire stadium on the final list.

Notes:
(1) Pitch needs to be expanded to the mandatory requirement of 105 x 68m, it currently is 103.5 x 67.5m.

(2) In 2000 Leeds members overwhelmingly voted for a new stadium, however recent relegation and major financial problems have put the plans on indefinite hold. A move to a new stadium will be dependent on future on field success, increased attendances and an improvement in the clubs finances. If the club doesn’t move, Elland Road would require a major upgrade to be considered.

(3) Southern England stadium choice between Southampton, Reading, or potential new grounds in Portsmouth or Bristol. Southampton is currently the most realistic, due to it's size, footballing demand and transport links.

(4) The Ricoh Arena’s inclusion on the list is largely dependent on the construction of a new railway stadium at the ground which would be able to ferry supporters to the stadium from the city centre.

Map of the selected venues



Stadiums that missed out:

City Of Manchester Stadium: 47,726, The most glaring omission from the list, under current rules Manchester would only be able to have one stadium, therefore the smaller COMS misses out.

Twickenham: 82,000, Owned by RFU, football has never been traditionally played there, London already has two venues.

Anfield: 45,362, Should be demolished by 2012 with the opening of the New Anfield.

Stamford Bridge: 42,449, Currently unable to host major internationals due to a lack of space and access problems around the ground, this isn't going to improve in the future.

Goodison Park: 40,569, Poor outdated facilities, and likely to be closed before 2018.

White Hart Lane: 36,240, Poor transport links and no current confirmed plans to upgrade.

Upton Park: 35,647, Average transport links, poor location, potential closure after 2013.

Riverside Stadium: 35,049, Already two venues in the North East, no real demand for expansion after the World Cup.

Portsmouth New Stadium: 36,000, Planned stadium in reclaimed docklands area. Currently along way from gaining planning permission and even if built would be at least 9,000 under minimum capacity with no known expansion plans. Southampton has superior transport links, and an expansion of St Mary’s is far more realistic.

Norwich / Ipswich, East Anglia Stadium: 45,000, A stadium located in the East of England would bring the World Cup to a new area of the country. Expansion to the minimum capacity of the 45,000 would be difficult at both locations, while there would be questions as to both cities abilities to host such a major international event as well as the future demand for the stadium after the World Cup.

New Everton Kirby Stadium: 50,000, Like the COMS, due to only one city being able to have two host stadiums, the new Everton stadium would miss out to the larger New Anfield.

Potential additional future stadiums to be used:

New Chelsea Stadium: 55,000 - 70,000. Could be used to replace the Emirates Stadium if built, very much at the pre planning stage now.

London Olympic Stadium: 40,000 - 60,000. Highly unlikely to be retained as a football stadium after 2012, although there remains a small outside chance a football team could become a tenant. Good transport links would be an advantage.

City of Birmingham Stadium: 55,000. Still very much on the drawing board, but a potential new multi-purpose sports stadium to be the home of Birmingham City F.C., has been planned in the Saltley area of Birmingham. However, little progress has been made since it was first muted three years ago. Would compete with Villa Park for a spot on the final list if it was built.

New Bristol / Plymouth Stadium: 45,000 - 50,000. With currently no West Country stadium in the plans and the pressure to include as many regions as possible in the bid, a new stadium could be constructed in one of the countries biggest cities. Funding will be a problem however, as well as the ability to fill such a large stadium after the World Cup. Bristol City being promoted to the Premiership and remaining there would realistically be the only chance of a new stadium being built.

England’s advantages over its main rivals.

• The maximum distance between any one stadium to another is just over 300 miles by road, (Newcastle - Southampton). This means each stadium can be reached by car, train and coach in under 8 hours, or less than 1 hour by domestic flight. The large number of cheap domestic flights operated between UK Airports and European cities mean the average fan from Europe (the competitions biggest and largest market) can afford to attend World Cup games.
  
• All the stadiums listed are purposely designed and built football “Soccer” stadiums. None have athletics tracks built around them, and none have exceptionally large gaps behind the goal or side of the pitch where other sports such as Aussie Rules and Cricket are played. All will be able to conform to the required pitch size regulations.
  
• England will be able to accommodate the need to spread the stadiums around the country to different cities. A total of 9 cities will be used from 10 stadiums. Other countries may struggle to find the required number of cities needed to host the event.
  
• All stadia have to able to accommodate a pitch that is 68m wide and 105m long. There must be an at least an additional 6m space to the stand to the side of the pitch and then a 7.5m gap behind the goal to the stand.

American Stadiums could have a problem with this as (NFL) Football pitches are just 48.8m wide. Going by the dimensions of a (NFL) Football pitch there must be at least 12.6m of space each side of the current position of the sideline on both sides. Problems could also occur with the distance from the corner flag to the stand.

The UK government feasibility study report is good source of information on the certain requirements needed to host a World Cup. Regulations are far tighter now than they were 20 years ago.

Link: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/...easibility.pdf

• 11 of the 12 stadiums listed are already built, a massive array of construction in the run to the World Cup will not be needed.
• With a significant amount of the Infrastructure already in place or set to completed years prior to the event, massive spending will not be required.
• All the stadiums listed have an International Airport within 15 miles of the ground.

International Airports to be used.

• England and the cities listed have the experience of hosting major football events year round and knowing what special requirements are needed when it comes to the management and policing of thousands of football fans.

The Stadiums, as they look now.


This is the current state of the stadiums listed. Remember a fair bit of expansion and redevelopment will take place before the actual hosting of the World Cup. Grounds such as Elland Road, Pride Park, and St Mary’s will likely look significantly different in 2018.

Wembley Stadium
(Group Stages, Last 16, Quarter-Finals, Semi-Finals, Final)
The home of English football, second largest capacity in Europe and the largest football stadium in the world with every seat under cover. 3 railway stations with ½ mile of the ground and a transformation of the area surrounding the stadium should make it a great place to enjoy pre and post match entertainment.













Old Trafford
(Group Stages, Last 16, Quarter-Finals, Semi-Finals,)
UEFA 5* rated stadium, Located in one of the UK’s largest cities. Expansion to over 90,000 is very realistic possibility by 2018, with the development of the South Stand. It could possibility max out at 95,500 if the South Stand mirrored the North.









Old Trafford as it is today.



With the expansion of the South Stand, taking it to over 95,000.



Stanley Park / New Anfield
(Group Stages, Last 16, Quarter-Finals, Third Place Playoff,)
Set to open in 2010 or 2011, capacity is expected to rise to up to 80,000, although it may open with 60,000. Improved railway links should form part of the development.









Emirates Stadium
(Group Stages, Last 16, Quarter-Finals)
Second London stadium, 5 stations within 10 minutes walking distance can be realistically be used to help people get to the ground. The centre of London is only 10 minutes away by Tube. Expansion is highly improbable given its design.













St James’ Park
(Group Stages, Last 16,)
Most Northern venue on the list, it has its own Metro station and two additional two stations within 5 minutes walk of the ground. Its town centre location means it is ideal for pre and post match amenities with a large array of pubs, bars and restaurants less than a ¼ mile away. Expansion to “at least 60,000” had been planned regardless of any World Cup bid with the extension of the Gallowgate End to match the other two large (Milburn and Leazes) stands already built.













With the Expansion of the Gallowgate End.



Stadium Of Light
(Group Stages, Last 16)
Opened a decade ago and located roughly 10 miles from St James’ Park. Again, it has its own Metro Station which is linked to rest of the Tyne and Wear area including Newcastle Airport. The Stadium has longed been planned to be eventually expanded to 64,000 with second tiers added to the remaining sides of the ground to form a two tier bowl.











Villa Park
(Group Stages, Last 16)
Located in the UK’s second city, Villa Park is a traditional English stadium with 4 separate individual stands. Three sides of the ground have been recently developed. The North Stand should be replaced in the next few years increasing capacity to over 50,000.











The Current North Stand.



Redeveloped



Elland Road
(Group Stages, Last 16)
Dominated by the large East Stand, the rest of the stadium is in significant need of improvements. Space exists on two thirds of the rest of the stadium for major expansion. Leeds as a city is the best part of the stadium at the moment.



East Stand



The other sides







Pride Park
(Group Stages)
Opened in 1997, it followers the typical bowl design that has been copied all around Europe in the past 10 years. The addition of tiers to three sides of the stadium should see its capacity raised to 44,000 and give it some much needed unique character. At the moment like a number of stadiums it’s functional rather than spectacular.











St Mary’s
(Group Stages)
Opened in 2001, like Pride Park it comprises of a standard bowl design. New ownership of the club should hopefully mean the release of the finance needed to expand the stadium. Located 10 minutes walking distance from a vibrant city centre, Southampton will serve as the regional stadium to the large population living on the south coast of England. Three sides of the stadium can be expanded with the Itchen Stand (closest to The River Test) the only one that can‘t accommodate a new tier.











Ricoh Arena
(Group Stages)
Previously mooted as a site for the new national stadium before the New Wembley was given the green light. Opened in 2005 with a slightly more exciting design than the above two. A railway line runs from the city centre to the stadium, which is located a fair distance away, a railway station needs to be built before an expansion can take place however. An arena and large retail park is adjoined to the stadium. Expansion can be made to three sides of the ground.











Walkers Stadium
(Group Stages)
Opened in 2002, it’s another one of those bowls again. Located far closer to the city centre than the Ricoh Arena and Pride Park. Expansion as with the rest of the bowl designs will be relatively simple provided the money can be generated. With tiers being able to be added to three sides.













Secondary / Reserve Venues

New Nottingham Stadium
(Group Stages)

Little is known about the planned new stadium other than it’s location some way outside the city but closer to East Midlands Airport, with good transport links.

Only renders released so far.





Hillsborough
(Group Stages, Last 16)
Located in a strong traditional football city. The ground while traditional needs a major shake up with both ends needing replacing. A tier could be added to the North Stand (SWFC) to take the capacity up to 50,000. It is not impossible but unlikely this could be used as well as Elland Road.













That's it!

Any thoughts or suggestions for improvements to the above would be welcomed. Likewise if you have any questions, fire away.

[2005]

BRILLIANT POST!

By the way, Spurs have said they'll make a decision on what to do, stadium wise, in the next six months, they better keep to that, I've been waiting for ages. Also you've got Chelsea as well, hoping to have something big. The Emirates is a great stadium but the problem is Transport. I've heard that it's truly awful at the moment. I think you can only use two tube stations, one of them is closed down on matchdays. I'm sure the problem will be resolved someday.

[Lostboy]

Only one city can have two host stadiums.

This certainly isn't a FIFA Rule, so long as the minimum amount of cities with adequate stadiums are fufilled then it is perfectly acceptable to have two stadiums in other cities.

I think we should go for 16 Stadiums. 12 Cities. 4 Cities have two Stadiums: London, Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool

There are two excellent stadiums in London that can be used, there are two very good ones in Manchester and likewise there will be in Liverpool, it would be wasteful if our largest cities had the same number of games as Derby or Reading.

[Phil Actery]

Reading have received planning permission for an expansion of the Madejski Stadium to 38000 and work begins in the summer of 2008:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...ng/6687041.stm

There's also a new train station "Reading Green Park" being built near the stadium improving links.

I think this now makes it a serious rival to Southampton for the southern stadium in any bid, particularly with the excellent links to Heathrow.

[danz013]

Excellent post sparks... very informative.

[cinosanap]

You could have put a bit more thought and effort into that...


Nah, it's great. I would like England to get the 2018 WC so it would be an easy, affordable and good trip to see Scotland play there!!!

[Sparks]

Originally Posted by Lostboy

Only one city can have two host stadiums.

This certainly isn't a FIFA Rule, so long as the minimum amount of cities with adequate stadiums are fufilled then it is perfectly acceptable to have two stadiums in other cities.

I think we should go for 16 Stadiums. 12 Cities. 4 Cities have two Stadiums: London, Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool

There are two excellent stadiums in London that can be used, there are two very good ones in Manchester and likewise there will be in Liverpool, it would be wasteful if our largest cities had the same number of games as Derby or Reading.

The Govt report states "8-12 stadia are required", I can't see us using more than 12.

As for the "Only one city can have two host stadiums" rule, I thought that was common knowledge, I first heard about it years ago, although I have never seen it in official FIFA writing. Somebody has put it in on wikipedia for the England bid 2018 though.

England is unique in the world in that only a handful of cities have virtually all the best stadiums. I can't see anyway in which we will have four cities having two stadiums though, we might get away with two given our unique situation but three or four is really pushing it.

[Kobo]

FANTASTIC POST SPARKS
Very clear and informative.

However there isn't a vast geographic spread of grounds on your map. If you compare it to Germany's of 2006 W.C were a bit off, I believe Fifa would prefer a wider spread. I think we really need to add Bristol. Although it would be hard for Bristol City to fill a 45,000 seat ground after world cup, given their record attendance is 43,335. I think the city itself could offer lots for the tournament, and grounds can always be scaled down after.





Did you read this article in the Observer back in February on 2018 W.C venues it has some good points. http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_...015555,00.html

[Sparks]

Yep thanks for that, I read that back when it first came out.

It makes no sense to build a large stadium in places like Blackpool or Preston, when there is no way they can be sustained after the World Cup. Places like that are going to need a minimum of £40 million to improve their grounds for the sake of 2 or maybe 3 matches. We would just be creating a white elephant.

Like I said at the top of my post, stadiums should only be expanded if they have a realistic chance of being filled after the World Cup.

[Scarecrow]

Best scrap New Anfield, and get New Goodison on the list. Much better national motorway access and better access to Manc and L'pool airports. Kirkby isn't Liverpool anyway, if you believe the R/S. Should be at least 60,000 by then.

[Lostboy]

The Govt report states "8-12 stadia are required", I can't see us using more than 12.

That would be an absolute minimum, South Africa was allowed to do the minimum due to the extremely specific circumstances of havint it in Africa.

As for the "Only one city can have two host stadiums" rule, I thought that was common knowledge, I first heard about it years ago, although I have never seen it in official FIFA writing. Somebody has put it in on wikipedia for the England bid 2018 though.

Nope. Again only one city can host two stadiums and have those two stadiums count towards the required number. After the required number of cities and stadiums are achieved, there is no such limitation.

England is unique in the world in that only a handful of cities have virtually all the best stadiums. I can't see anyway in which we will have four cities having two stadiums though, we might get away with two given our unique situation but three or four is really pushing it.

No it isn't, there are many countries in a similar position.

We wouldn't be breaking any rules by including four cities with two stadiums each. In fact when we bid for the 2006 World Cup, this was exactly the plan 12 Cities with 2 Stadiums in London, Manchester, Birmingham and Liverpool.

Using the C.O.M. and New Everton Stadium breaks no rules.

[Lostboy]

Bristol City being promoted to the Premiership and remaining there would realistically be the only chance of a new stadium being built.

In the Mid Sou-Wes remember rugby is on par or bigger than football (as witnessed by a quarter of the Premiership Teams coming from here. I could easily see the Guiness Premiership growing in following, certainly combining it with Bristol City a rugby club would get something out of a bigger stadium.

[JackTindale]

Theoretically, a World Cup bid could provide the impetus to construct a high-speed rail network around the country. Transport, as seen in the Olympic bid is the major stumbling block for most sporting events in this nation, but as seen from the London Games, having a strong investment plan in the works could play a major part in deciding who gets the event in question. Assuming the planning is well advanced by the time the World Cup is awarded in 2011, which as seen by the rate at which key elements for the Olympics has occurred is quite possible (excluding Crossrail of course!). A high-speed rail network, which has been quite acutely discussed on this forum, is something gravely needed in the UK and would also have the effect of making any World Cup bid from England a low carbon affair, again granting a major boon for the FIFA executive committee.

[Gherkin]

Great thread Sparks! May I use some of your pics on my thread?

I think the South West is missing out a bit, as I'm sure the FA would like tourists to travel to Cornwall and Devon, being such scenic parts of the UK. I also expect a new stadium in Sheffield to be built for the WC, and the dull stadiums like Walkers, Pride Park, St. Mary's to be replaced or expanded to give some character to them. Finally, I'm sure that the COMS would be used. It's a great stadium!

[Kobo]

Originally Posted by Sparks

Yep thanks for that, I read that back when it first came out.

It makes no sense to build a large stadium in places like Blackpool or Preston, when there is no way they can be sustained after the World Cup. Places like that are going to need a minimum of £40 million to improve their grounds for the sake of 2 or maybe 3 matches. We would just be creating a white elephant.

Like I said at the top of my post, stadiums should only be expanded if they have a realistic chance of being filled after the World Cup.

No I do understand your point, but then you have to realise this is a global tourist advertisment for our country. We should want to show off the best of it, and spread it right across the country. Here is a quote on this topic from the vice chairman of 2006 German W.C ‘The status of a club is not important. It is to do with the tourist and cultural package of a venue.’ - Horst Schmidt, vice-chairman of the 2006 World Cup organising committee.

Originally Posted by Lostboy

[I]
We wouldn't be breaking any rules by including four cities with two stadiums each. In fact when we bid for the 2006 World Cup, this was exactly the plan 12 Cities with 2 Stadiums in London, Manchester, Birmingham and Liverpool.

Do you have any links or info on our 2006 bid I would like to see it.

Originally Posted by Lostboy

Bristol City being promoted to the Premiership and remaining there would realistically be the only chance of a new stadium being built.

In the Mid Sou-Wes remember rugby is on par or bigger than football (as witnessed by a quarter of the Premiership Teams coming from here. I could easily see the Guiness Premiership growing in following, certainly combining it with Bristol City a rugby club would get something out of a bigger stadium.

Bristol Rugby club are moving to a new 18,500 seat ground soon and share with Bristol Rovers. They do get large crowds 20,000+ but only for local derby's. I could see Bristol City getting larger crowds but they have to stay and do well in the Championship for several seasons for this.

Originally Posted by JackTindale

Theoretically, a World Cup bid could provide the impetus to construct a high-speed rail network around the country. Transport, as seen in the Olympic bid is the major stumbling block for most sporting events in this nation, but as seen from the London Games, having a strong investment plan in the works could play a major part in deciding who gets the event in question. Assuming the planning is well advanced by the time the World Cup is awarded in 2011, which as seen by the rate at which key elements for the Olympics has occurred is quite possible (excluding Crossrail of course!). A high-speed rail network, which has been quite acutely discussed on this forum, is something gravely needed in the UK and would also have the effect of making any World Cup bid from England a low carbon affair, again granting a major boon for the FIFA executive committee.

I doubt the government would build a high speed rail network similar to ones in France etc. Building new high speed lines from London to the north would cost an estimated £30bn to £40bn and represent a planning nightmare. Yes we would all love them but I don't see it happening. Fortunately our country is small and you can get from London to major cities in 2 or 3 hours. Plus you get to relax and enjoy the journey more instead of all this rushing about.

[ChrisH]

Fantastic post. I would agree about the spacing, however: the Midlands are very well served under your plan so I would cut Coventry and Leicester/Derby to give Norwich and Bristol hosting rights - or possibly even Exeter or Plymouth? It would be good to spread the games around the country as much as possible.

[manc_monkey]

Maybe Manchester can use it's disjointed boundaries to good effect for once, and claim COMS & OT are actually in different cities?

COMS in the City of Manchester, Old Trafford in Trafford or if we are really stretching it say City of Salford as it's only a stones through away from Salford Quays...

The FIFA guys will believe that and won't really care - will they?

[Kobo]

Originally Posted by Sparks

The Govt report states "8-12 stadia are required", I can't see us using more than 12.

As for the "Only one city can have two host stadiums" rule, I thought that was common knowledge, I first heard about it years ago, although I have never seen it in official FIFA writing. Somebody has put it in on wikipedia for the England bid 2018 though.

England is unique in the world in that only a handful of cities have virtually all the best stadiums. I can't see anyway in which we will have four cities having two stadiums though, we might get away with two given our unique situation but three or four is really pushing it.

I know this is a different tournament, and so may have different rules but in Euro 2004 Portugal had 2 cities with 2 stadiums in it. Now this might have been because Portugal is a small country and so they bent the rules a little, I don't know.

The 2 stadiums in Lisbon were:
Estádio da Luz, Capacity: 65 647 seats


And

Estádio José Alvalade, Capacity: 50 300 seats


And the 2 stadiums in Porto were:
Estádio do Dragão, Capacity: 50 106 seats


And

Estádio do Bessa Século XXI, Capacity: 28 263 seats

[Chogmook]

I believe a stadium should be in Plymouth over Bristol.....maybe?

[Its AlL gUUd]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/6921154.stm

England gets Beckenbauer backing

Beckenbauer's backing is a big boost for England
Former Germany World Cup winner Franz Beckenbauer has backed England's hopes of staging the 2018 tournament.
Beckenbauer, a member of Fifa's executive committee, believes the continental rotation policy should end.

He told BBC Five Live's Sportsweek: "There is no better country in Europe to host the World Cup in 2018. England is the favourite."

England are set to launch an official bid next year, and the government has indicated its support.

Former sports minister Richard Caborn has already been appointed as World Cup ambassador.

And Beckenbauer, who headed Germany's organising committee for the 2006 finals, believes England have a great chance of hosting the event.

He added: "The most important thing is to end the rotation and bring the tournament back to Europe.

"The Premier League at the moment is the best league in Europe and the stadiums are outstanding.

"In my opinion, there is only one very serious candidate and it is England.

"I think there is not really a problem to pick a host of the 2018 World Cup."

Fifa president Sepp Blatter is expected to end the rotation experiment, but he insisted that Europe has no divine right to host the 2018 tournament.

Instead, Fifa are likely to approve a format which only precludes the continents which held the previous two World Cups from bidding again, which in 2018, would be Africa and South America.

Despite Beckenbauer's backing, England are expected to face strong competition from Russa and Italy among European countries, while Fifa may choose to give it to an emerging football nation such as China or Australia.