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: -
- 0 0%
- 0 0%
Voters: 0. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old November 26th, 2009, 04:14 PM   #881
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

Quote:
Originally Posted by TallPaul_H View Post
Wembley is guaranteed, so I'm guessing it would be 1 of the Emirates or the new White Hart Lane?
I doubt it.
Mo Rush no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old November 26th, 2009, 04:19 PM   #882
gincarnated
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4
Likes (Received): 0

Is Twickenham completely out of the question? 20 thousand more seats that would certainly be put to good use.
gincarnated no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 04:28 PM   #883
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

Quote:
Originally Posted by gincarnated View Post
Is Twickenham completely out of the question? 20 thousand more seats that would certainly be put to good use.
Its very much in the running. Lots of space around the venue, large capacity, etc.
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 04:30 PM   #884
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,780
Likes (Received): 10347

London is not submitting Twickenham, so it isn't in the running as far as the city is concerned.
RobH no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 06:41 PM   #885
Kobo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 420
Likes (Received): 16

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
London is not submitting Twickenham, so it isn't in the running as far as the city is concerned.
Really, I thought they were considering submitting Twickenham. I thought the FA and RFU had a deal that the RFU could use Wembley for the 2015 rugby world cup, and the FA could use Twickenham for the potential 2018 fifa world cup. It would be a shame not to at least have Twickenham as an option.
Kobo no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 06:49 PM   #886
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,780
Likes (Received): 10347

Really. London is submitting, in its bid book which was delivered to Wembley Stadium today:

Wembley
Emirates
New WHL
Olympic Stadium
RobH no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 07:06 PM   #887
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

Every venue is in the running until the final host city list is drawn up after the bid is won.
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 07:06 PM   #888
TallPaul_H
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Derby
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mo Rush View Post
I doubt it.
Why not? I read that Wembley will always spearhead the bid, and its place is guaranteed because it would be where the final takes place.

I also read that they are looking at 2 stadiums from 2 cities at the most, which would mean both stadiums in Manchester and Wembley (plus one of Emirates or New WHL - the Olympic Stadium won't be chosen)
TallPaul_H no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 07:13 PM   #889
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

I just don't see how Emirates or WHL could accommodate the spaces around the stadium required by FIFA to stage WC matches.

Perhaps WHL without the shopping centre/resi developments, but to even be considered as a first round venue requires large hospitality/sponsors/commercial affiliate spaces.
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 07:47 PM   #890
carlspannoosh
Registered User
 
carlspannoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Islington
Posts: 2,215
Likes (Received): 745

Right so The Olympic stadium is either a non starter or a very poor compromise choice, The Emirates and WHL are non starters because of lack of space for sponsors, and Twickenham is a no go because its not even being offered as a choice. Thats 1 London stadium.Triffic. What with the Merseyside clubs having so many problems getting their stadium plans off the ground this bid is starting to look a bit ropey.
carlspannoosh no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 08:05 PM   #891
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,780
Likes (Received): 10347

Emirates or New WHL would be alright I think. FIFA know that if they come to England many of our stadiums are in city centres, so they'll have to compromise somewhat anyway - and that'll be the case for the forseeable future; 2018/22/26.... Creative solutions can be found for sponsors tents; we're talking London here, one of the biggest commercial centres in the world!

Brands love to be associated with the Premier League and that's the biggest asset our bid has - Premier League stadiums. If the US bid has bigger stadiums to offer our trump card is having football stadiums to offer. It'd be a shame to dilute that by choosing a Rugby or athletics stadium, and it would be a mistake because it's NOT what the world would expect from a world cup in England.

If I were the CEO of Nike I'd much rather have my logo plastered all around the Emirates than in a stadium which has zero connection to football such as Twickenham or the Olympic stadium. It offers a more powerful brand connection for sponsors if we use world famous football stadiums.

Last edited by RobH; November 26th, 2009 at 08:16 PM.
RobH no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 08:07 PM   #892
TallPaul_H
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Derby
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

I think England will miss out, got a feeling Russia and Australia will take the 2 places - I'm not fussed on Russia, just don't want it in Australia
TallPaul_H no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 08:35 PM   #893
carlspannoosh
Registered User
 
carlspannoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Islington
Posts: 2,215
Likes (Received): 745

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
Emirates and New WHL would be alright I think. FIFA know that if they come to England many of our stadiums are in city centres, so they'll have to compromise somewhat anyway. Creative solutions can be found for sponsors tents; we're talking London here, one of the biggest commercial centres in the world! Brands love to be associated with the Premier League and that's the biggest asset our bid has - Premier League stadiums. If the US bid has bigger stadiums to offer; our trump card is having football stadiums to offer. It'd be a shame to dilute that by choosing a Rugby or athletics stadium, and it would be a mistake.

If I were the CEO of Nike I'd much rather have my logo plastered all around the Emirates than in a stadium which has zero connection to football such as Twickenham or the Olympic stadium. It offers a more powerful brand connection for sponsors if we use world famous football stadiums.
I hope you are right. I too would like to think that FIFA will be more flexible than Mo Rush suggests, but I really dont know how they view these things. If I had my way of course, there would be at least 3 London stadiums and The Olympic stadium certainly wouldnt be one of them.
carlspannoosh no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 09:24 PM   #894
Chimbanha
Registered User
 
Chimbanha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Brasília
Posts: 1,667
Likes (Received): 1965

My country is also within preparations to host the World Cup and I have a feeling FIFA will not be OK with these stadiums located at city centres, without spaces to their hospitality centers around it. That is, for the opening and the finals. The city of São Paulo in Brazil, the biggest one in the Southern Hemisphere, may not get the opening match because it refuses to build a new stadium with a lot of space sorrounding it, and also because there's an athletics track around the field. Brasília and Belo Horizonte, smaller cities (2-3 million people), are now front-runners to host the opening game, because they fullfil such space requirements and have very ambitious projects for their stadiums, unlike São Paulo. in this particular case, I think FIFA's right: São Paulo's project is really poor for a World Cup, let alone an opening match.
Chimbanha no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 09:41 PM   #895
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,780
Likes (Received): 10347

That's all very well Chimbanha but it doesn't make it right in London's case.

Compromising not only what the world expects from a world cup in England (i.e. Premier League football stadiums), but also the 2012 legacy is unacceptable and, even more frustratingly, entirely unnecessary. FIFA, I would hope, wouldn't be so selfish as to expect London to leave the Olympic park in a state of limbo for 6 years, at a cost of tens of millions to the taxpayer, just because there isn't quite enough enough space for a tent outside Arsenal's ground. That would be ridiculous state of affairs.

It's not at all unreasonable for London to say "the Olympic stadium will be a 28,000 seat athletics stadium after 2012 as planned, and we're offering Wembley, the Emirates, and the New White Hart Lane as options for FIFA." In fact, there are very few cities that could match that selection!

Finally, does anyone seriously believe that had Paris won the 2012 Olympics there'd be any question marks over world class stadiums like the Emirates? Of course there wouldn't be; FIFA and the sponsors would find creative ways around any problems. If the Olympic stadium (a mostly temporary stadium with a bloody great running track and no inbuilt facilities) is chosen over a purpouse built Premier League football ground in London it'll be a joke, and the final proof that FIFA doesn't care for the fans, only for the corporates.
RobH no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 09:51 PM   #896
kerouac1848
Registered User
 
kerouac1848's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NW London
Posts: 3,641
Likes (Received): 1543


I think you're missing the point; it is not FIFA's job to compromise for an England WC, but for the FA to compromise for FIFA. If England cannot offer what FIFA want then they won't go there; there are, after, several other bids. The thing is there is more competition at these bids than any other, so FIFA can afford to be less flexible than they were towards, say, Brazil due to context of the 2014 bid (i.e. only Brazil bidded!). The fact that they are even including the Olympic stadium (and seriously considered another non-football ground in Twickenham) suggests to me that they want to keep all options open.
kerouac1848 no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 09:55 PM   #897
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,964
Likes (Received): 74

Any arrogance with regards to FIFA's explicit requirements for venues could be costly for England.
Mo Rush no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 10:03 PM   #898
Chimbanha
Registered User
 
Chimbanha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Brasília
Posts: 1,667
Likes (Received): 1965

Quote:
Compromising not only what the world expects from a world cup in England (i.e. Premier League football stadiums), but also the 2012 legacy is unacceptable and, even more frustratingly, entirely unnecessary. FIFA, I would hope, wouldn't be so selfish as to expect London to leave the Olympic park in a state of limbo for 6 years, at a cost of tens of millions to the taxpayer, just because there isn't quite enough enough space for a tent outside Arsenal's ground. That would be ridiculous state of affairs.
RobH, it is virtually the same situation that is happenning in São Paulo. We're offering a fully renovated Morumbi, with two big inconveniences: the athletics track and the lack of space around the stadium (see my avatar). FIFA is willing to discuss the track situation, but the outside space is NON-NEGOTIABLE. They have already stated that, unless São Paulo builds another stadium, it will only host up to the Round of 16. But São Paulo already has 4 stadiums and no teams are interested in building a new one. So, what does FIFA want? A stadium with no tenants, i.e. a big ol' white elephant. They do not care about legacy.
Chimbanha no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 10:11 PM   #899
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,780
Likes (Received): 10347

Quote:
I think you're missing the point; it is not FIFA's job to compromise for an England WC, but for the FA to compromise for FIFA. If England cannot offer what FIFA want then they won't go there; there are, after, several other bids. The thing is there is more competition at these bids than any other, so FIFA can afford to be less flexible than they were towards, say, Brazil due to context of the 2014 bid (i.e. only Brazil bidded!). The fact that they are even including the Olympic stadium (and seriously considered another non-football ground in Twickenham) suggests to me that they want to keep all options open.
I didn't suggest otherwise with regard to the bid process and no, I'm not missing the point.

What is wrong, exactly, with offering Wembley, the Emirates and the New White Hart Lane? If FIFA think that's not good enough then we can do without their world cup as far as I'm concerned. A London bid with these three stadiums is more than good enough; in fact it's world class. So, there's absolutely no need for the Olympic Park legacy to be completely thrown out of kilter for the prospect of two or three matches. And I doubt anyone at FIFA would expect it to be if we explained the situation.

I'm convinced that if, in the new year, the Olympic Legacy body rubber-stamps plans for the stadium to be reduced in capacity post-2012, we'll not hear a single person from FIFA complaining, because it's obvious the other three stadiums being offered by London are more than good enough. London should follow through its post Olympic plans, and if they do, by 2018 the Olympic Park will be ideal for a fan-park, and the reduced stadium would be ideal as a training base for a team like Brazil. If they don't follow through on these plans what will be left in 2018 will be parts of a temporary stadium looking its age, temporary bridges and walkways where there should be parkland, and £100m wasted in maintainance and conversion fees.

Sorry for getting so worked up about this, but it's such a no-brainer. The discussion, as well as the inclusion of the Olympic stadium, is so unecessary given the stadiums London has!
RobH no está en línea  
Old November 26th, 2009, 10:15 PM   #900
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,780
Likes (Received): 10347

Quote:
Any arrogance with regards to FIFA's explicit requirements for venues could be costly for England.
I'm sorry Mo, there is absolutely nothing arrogant about going ahead with the plans for the Olympic Park's legacy after 2012, saving the taxpayer £100m in conversion and maintainance fees which is what it'd reportedly cost to include the Olympic stadium in the bid, and offering three world class Premier League stadiums instead.

It's not arrogance what I'm suggesting, it's purely and simply common sense.
RobH no está en línea  


Closed Thread

Tags
world cup 2018

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 06:27 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