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.


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old April 17th, 2009, 01:46 AM   #1001
ryebreadraz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,597
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by berkshire royal View Post

I have no doubt that they can handle the crowds the security and infrastructure would be top notch but I think the atmosphere would be rubbish.

We all know the US suspects soccer fans of being hooligans and it's not exactly the best kept secret that soccer isn't big in America the reality is I don't see people from Chicago enjoy having 40,000 English, Argentinian, Mexican, German etc etc fans drinking and singing until the early hours of the morning and I'm thinking as a fan who is planning to go to 2014 and went to the fan parks in 2006 that the experience wouldn't be the same in the US as it would be in England, Australia, Spain etc. The world cup is a whole lot more then the games at the stadiums and housing a few thousand fans, every game is like the super bowl and I'm sorry if you think that is a hugely over stated it is a fact the whole thing is miles bigger then what it was in 1994 and thousands upon thousands of fans from all over the world go to the thing.
Yes we think soccer fans are hooligans. That's exactly it and that's why soccer has grown very quickly lately. There is a portion of Americans who think soccer fans are hooligans, but it doesn't even approach the majority. Not many people believe such a thing.

You're just making it more and more obvious that you are clueless about the American culture and population. This country has hosted Olympics where people inundated a city and stayed up all hours of the night. It's not uncommon for people to stay up all hours of the night following big wins by teams in the NFL, NBA, NHL or MLB. You clearly don't know much about this country. There are concerns about the bid, but you haven't touched on one yet.

You say the Cup has gotten much bigger than it was in 1994. The Cup is bigger outside of the stadiums with all of the different ways to watch matches and screens and such, but the 1994 World Cup drew more people than the 2006 Cup so handling the people inside the stadium and inundating the cities won't be an issue.
ryebreadraz no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old April 17th, 2009, 02:07 AM   #1002
berkshire royal
Registered User
 
berkshire royal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 557
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by en1044 View Post
You clearly dont know americans. Dont have that typical "Americans are intolerant of other people" mentality, it just isnt true. We would have no problem with all kinds of people in our cities. We dont have problems with other people.

Remember, the US is among the most ethnically diverse countries in the world.
It's not meant as a slur to America it is just my point on what I find to be the only negative of this bid other then the fact that the US hosted only a short while ago, would you prefer I come up with the BS about stadiums not having roof as to why the US shouldn’t get a World Cup after all every bid has it’s weakness and I am just picking out the weakness I see.

What I am saying is based upon what I have seen from the US media and from what a number of Americans have told me about how the sport is represented in the US and also the fact that it is a very different crowd then what you get at an Olympics, Super Bowl and that isn't a slur on any of them all sporting events have different crowds. Although I have no doubt that a large amount of the media and public in general would be psyched about hosting such a huge prestigious event, you would also have that section of people that would not be so enthusiastic. I am certain that there would be parts of the American media spinning how bad the sport was, how all these fans are potential hooligans rather then what they should be seen as, a fan who is their to have a good time and enjoy the party and the sport. When I went to Germany everyone was having a good time everyone was enjoying the games on the screens the fan parks were well run, the locals we’re extremely friendly and welcoming and the security was relaxed. Everyone knows how strict security is in the US and that doesn’t provide for such a welcoming feel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomarandlee View Post
Early morning hours? You are right, Chicagoans would be disappointed, in the fact that the imports couldn't keep up and match the enthusiasm. The Chicago Cubs provide the city an atmosphere 81 times per year, trust me the city (along with most major U.S. cities) would not be fazed.
Chicago was a poor example I was just picking it out of the hat in all honesty and wasn’t picking it out for any specific reason other then that. But to be honest it’s hard to compare hosting 81 Cubs games a year to having thousands of tourists coming over the 3 /4 games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Livno80101 View Post
area you normal? what benelux? it's the worst of bids after qatar's

they dont have cities big enough to host world cup, there are only four cities suitable for world cup (Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Eindhoven in NED and Bruxelles in Belgium)

all other cities are like villages for cities like Newcastle or Sheffield or some other city from England or even Russia (like Tomsk, Samara, Kazan). so i'd like England or Russia for '18 and Australia or USA for '22
My reason is that those regions have a huge affinity and tradition within the game, they have some very ambitious stadium proposals on the table, their geographical location and high quality infrastructure makes it an easier location to get too, their security would be better and I think it would be a safer more fun World Cup. Obviously my preference would be for England to get the shout but if not then it should go to Spain or the Benelux. I would also have it as a toss up between the US and Australia for the other slot.
berkshire royal no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 02:10 AM   #1003
Kapow32
Registered User
 
Kapow32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: chicago
Posts: 97
Likes (Received): 3

people here act like all americans are rascist, reactionary, isolationist whackjobs. It drives me nuts. The cities that would host a world cup are all very diverse, cosmopolitan areas, where people are used to seeing foreigners on a daily basis. I think the vast majority of people in these cities would enjoy seeing herds of brazilians, or croatians, or italians singing their songs and waving their flags in the streets. And once again look at world cup 94, Americans did not have a problem with foreign visitors.
Kapow32 no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 02:17 AM   #1004
berkshire royal
Registered User
 
berkshire royal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 557
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryebreadraz View Post
Yes we think soccer fans are hooligans. That's exactly it and that's why soccer has grown very quickly lately. There is a portion of Americans who think soccer fans are hooligans, but it doesn't even approach the majority. Not many people believe such a thing.

You're just making it more and more obvious that you are clueless about the American culture and population. This country has hosted Olympics where people inundated a city and stayed up all hours of the night. It's not uncommon for people to stay up all hours of the night following big wins by teams in the NFL, NBA, NHL or MLB. You clearly don't know much about this country. There are concerns about the bid, but you haven't touched on one yet.

You say the Cup has gotten much bigger than it was in 1994. The Cup is bigger outside of the stadiums with all of the different ways to watch matches and screens and such, but the 1994 World Cup drew more people than the 2006 Cup so handling the people inside the stadium and inundating the cities won't be an issue.
I'm not saying that the majority thinks fans are hooligans. I'm putting it in a worst case scenario as such because a minority can sometime be much louder and more forceful then the majority and if that we’re to happen it would not make for a fun event. No one knows how a World Cup would be like until it comes around I’m still not sure what to expect from South Africa next year let alone from a proposed US bid in 10+ years. As I said the crowds you get at a World Cup are very different to an Olympics, Super Bowl, World Series etc.

Although 1994 got the largest attendances there wasn't much in terms of travelling fans and I can guarantee that more fans traveled to Germany then to the US in 1994. The 2018/2022 would have 10 times as many travelling fans if not more and I am certain that the attendance record would be shattered.
berkshire royal no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 02:38 AM   #1005
ryebreadraz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,597
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by berkshire royal View Post
I'm not saying that the majority thinks fans are hooligans. I'm putting it in a worst case scenario as such because a minority can sometime be much louder and more forceful then the majority and if that we’re to happen it would not make for a fun event. No one knows how a World Cup would be like until it comes around I’m still not sure what to expect from South Africa next year let alone from a proposed US bid in 10+ years. As I said the crowds you get at a World Cup are very different to an Olympics, Super Bowl, World Series etc.

Although 1994 got the largest attendances there wasn't much in terms of travelling fans and I can guarantee that more fans traveled to Germany then to the US in 1994. The 2018/2022 would have 10 times as many travelling fans if not more and I am certain that the attendance record would be shattered.
You may want to start choosing your words more carefully then because "we all know the US suspects soccer fans of being hooligans" sure comes off like the majority of US people believe such a thing.

There likely won't be as large of a traveling contingent for a WC here as there was in Germany. There will likely always be more travelers for a WC in Europe as opposed to anywhere else. The attendance record definitely will be shattered if the US hosts another WC, but like in 1994, you will see a lot of locals there because of the composition of the US population. You underestimate the size of the US and the distance between many cities here.

Crowds for a WC are different than other events, but it's not as if there are no similarities. I was in Germany for 2006 and I've been in different cities here in the US and I can assure you that this country would have no issue with the fans here. In major cities, the populations are so diverse that it's not an issue welcoming so many people from different countries (not to mention major cities welcome hundreds of thousands of tourists at other times). In the smaller cities, they have hosted major events, some of which result in over 100,000 people visiting the city. Hosting the numbers isn't an issue and accepting the cultures and behavior of the different people would not be an issue at all. Take into account that it would be a summer tournament and it's be fine.

All you're doing is throwing out "issues" that are baseless and show a lack of understanding for this country. As I said earlier, there are concerns about the US bid, but you haven't addressed a single one.
ryebreadraz no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 05:04 AM   #1006
massp88
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,182
Likes (Received): 215

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryebreadraz View Post
You may want to start choosing your words more carefully then because "we all know the US suspects soccer fans of being hooligans" sure comes off like the majority of US people believe such a thing.

There likely won't be as large of a traveling contingent for a WC here as there was in Germany. There will likely always be more travelers for a WC in Europe as opposed to anywhere else. The attendance record definitely will be shattered if the US hosts another WC, but like in 1994, you will see a lot of locals there because of the composition of the US population. You underestimate the size of the US and the distance between many cities here.

Crowds for a WC are different than other events, but it's not as if there are no similarities. I was in Germany for 2006 and I've been in different cities here in the US and I can assure you that this country would have no issue with the fans here. In major cities, the populations are so diverse that it's not an issue welcoming so many people from different countries (not to mention major cities welcome hundreds of thousands of tourists at other times). In the smaller cities, they have hosted major events, some of which result in over 100,000 people visiting the city. Hosting the numbers isn't an issue and accepting the cultures and behavior of the different people would not be an issue at all. Take into account that it would be a summer tournament and it's be fine.

All you're doing is throwing out "issues" that are baseless and show a lack of understanding for this country. As I said earlier, there are concerns about the US bid, but you haven't addressed a single one.
I would be willing to bet that the next World Cup in the U.S. will see sellouts at every game. This is largely assuming the cities chosen are those with large metro areas, a decent to large foreign population and easy access for fans. (airports with non-stop flights to Europe, South America, etc.)

The U.S. is home to massive local populations of Europeans that all came out to the matches (Did anyone happen to attend the Italy-Bulgaria match at Giants Stadium? Place was LOUD).

I read somewhere that about 18,000 English fans traveled to the Cup in South Korea/Japan which is crazy considering the distance and expense.

If the current currency situation does not change that much in 13 years, then I would expect thousands of Germans, Spaniards, English, Italians, Russians, etc. to come to America to cheer their teams on.
massp88 no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 06:45 AM   #1007
nyrmetros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,274
Likes (Received): 19

For our foreign friends here, let me offer up some facts.

Fact - the anti soccer xenophobia that swept the nation years ago is not as big as 3 or 4 jerks in the media make it out to be. ESPN has a vested interest in growing soccer here, and people follow whatever ESPN tells them to do here.

Fact - every stadium would be sold out, and every host city would be more than capable of putting on a good show for the traveling fans.

Fact - there is no denying that WC parties and gatherings would be different in the states as opposed to Europe. But at the same time, that would not be discouraged. It would just be different.

Fact - Our USSF doesn't need to build 1 stadium for the WC. Every NFL team would love to host a WC game at their stadium, and would make any necessary rennovations or upgrades.

Fact - Our airports and hotels would be more than capable of hosting our vistors. Our intra-city rail networks are for the most part very good. Our inter-city rail networks SUCK and we are ASHAMED of how bad it is compared to Europe.

need anything else?
nyrmetros no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 08:30 AM   #1008
El Mariachi
Registered User
 
El Mariachi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 7,156
Likes (Received): 5995

Quote:
Originally Posted by massp88 View Post
So you honestly believe that Detroit will be able to fill 2 stadiums at one time? I highly doubt it, even with Toronto being a short drive away. Look at the Makeup of the Metro Boston and Metro Atlanta areas. The metro Boston area is more diverse and Boston is a better sports supporting city than is Atlanta.

Chicago will be a host, therefore your idea that people will drive down from there to go to Indianapolis is moot. Indianapolis has a small metro area, a small foreign population and is not a city that supports their sports teams that well when compared to other cities (Philadelphia, Boston, New York, Dallas, etc)

Flat out, it will be highly unlikely that we will see St. Louis, San Antonio, Indianapolis host. Atlanta has a chance, but I would put it behind many other cities to host.
I have to disagree with all this. I think you are seriously writing off the entire middle of the country as poor sports fans. Obviously, the bigger cities would be more prime locations for games---but lets be honest. New York, Boston, Philly, etc. Not a single one of these cities are proven soccer markets. They might have slightly more international populations, but I don't think that even matters that much anymore. Even if games were held at Lambeau Field or in Lincoln, Nebraska---these games will sell out. People from Brazil, Germany, England, and Argentina will make their ways to these cities.
El Mariachi no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 08:56 AM   #1009
El Mariachi
Registered User
 
El Mariachi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 7,156
Likes (Received): 5995

Quote:
Originally Posted by berkshire royal View Post

I have no doubt that they can handle the crowds the security and infrastructure would be top notch but I think the atmosphere would be rubbish.

We all know the US suspects soccer fans of being hooligans and it's not exactly the best kept secret that soccer isn't big in America the reality is I don't see people from Chicago enjoy having 40,000 English, Argentinian, Mexican, German etc etc fans drinking and singing until the early hours of the morning and I'm thinking as a fan who is planning to go to 2014 and went to the fan parks in 2006 that the experience wouldn't be the same in the US as it would be in England, Australia, Spain etc. The world cup is a whole lot more then the games at the stadiums and housing a few thousand fans, every game is like the super bowl and I'm sorry if you think that is a hugely over stated it is a fact the whole thing is miles bigger then what it was in 1994 and thousands upon thousands of fans from all over the world go to the thing.
Like mass, I really think you are writing off the U.S. in a big way. First off, American cities would be delighted to have 40,000 people from anywhere spending money and giving their city international publicity. Drunken singing is not really a concern--especially in sports-rich, diverse cities like Chicago. I don't know why the U.S. gets these negative perception when it comes to sporting passion.

Not to get too offtopic, but why Australia? I can understand Spain or England---but Australia is probally a lesser soccer nation then the U.S. I can't possibly understand how it would be any better then a U.S. W.C.

Last edited by El Mariachi; April 17th, 2009 at 09:02 AM.
El Mariachi no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 06:05 PM   #1010
massp88
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,182
Likes (Received): 215

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Mariachi View Post
I have to disagree with all this. I think you are seriously writing off the entire middle of the country as poor sports fans. Obviously, the bigger cities would be more prime locations for games---but lets be honest. New York, Boston, Philly, etc. Not a single one of these cities are proven soccer markets. They might have slightly more international populations, but I don't think that even matters that much anymore. Even if games were held at Lambeau Field or in Lincoln, Nebraska---these games will sell out. People from Brazil, Germany, England, and Argentina will make their ways to these cities.
My point is this, a city like Chicago, aside from the large metro area and diverse population, is easily accessed by people from Europe, Asia and South America via non-stop flights. A city like Green Bay, Wisconsin is not.

I am sorry, but a city like San Antonio or Indianapolis is going to be very low on the list of cities that get to host the games. As far as Boston, New York and Philadelphia not being proven soccer markets, you are wrong in this regard. Both Boston (Foxboro) and New York are solid market for the MLS with each team averaging solid attendance figures. Both cities also have a long track record for hosting World Cup qualifiers and friendly matches with good attendance.

Since the field has expanded by 8 teams since 1994, the U.S. would really only need 2 more venues, maybe 3. So besides the cities that hosted last time, I could see Philadelphia and Houston as the 2 most obvious choices.

What's interesting to point out is that every city that hosted in 1994, will have a new venue by the time 2022 rolls around.
massp88 no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 06:22 PM   #1011
skaP187
Registered User
 
skaP187's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Alicante
Posts: 2,207
Likes (Received): 503

Look letīs be hounest. The only reason why the USA should not be given a WC is that theyīve allready had one in ī94.
For the rest itīs a lot of ....
To me thatīs a very important reason though.
skaP187 no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 06:40 PM   #1012
parcdesprinces
churches & stadia/arenas
 
parcdesprinces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Auteuil, Paris XVI | Quercy | Monaco, MC
Posts: 16,707
Likes (Received): 9708

Quote:
Originally Posted by Livno80101 View Post
what benelux? it's the worst of bids after qatar's

they dont have cities big enough to host world cup, there are only four cities suitable for world cup (Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Eindhoven in NED and Bruxelles in Belgium)

all other cities are like villages for cities like Newcastle or Sheffield or some other city from England or even Russia (like Tomsk, Samara, Kazan). so i'd like England or Russia for '18 and Australia or USA for '22
Remember, France 98 with Lens (35,000 inhabitants) and Germany 2006 with Kaiserslautern (90,000 inhabitants), anyway Bene(lux) cities are bigger than you are saying and they can host with two stadiums in the two biggest cities.

For International fans the most important is downtown and many American cities have a very small downtown as I saw.

Quote:
Originally Posted by massp88 View Post
My point is this, a city like Chicago, aside from the large metro area and diverse population, is easily accessed by people from Europe, Asia and South America via non-stop flights. A city like Green Bay, Wisconsin is not.
Do you really think there is non-stop flights between Montpellier or Nantes (France 98) and Asia or South America (same for Hannover or Leipzig, Germany 2006) ??
parcdesprinces no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 07:02 PM   #1013
miguelon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Diego/Tijuana
Posts: 755
Likes (Received): 304

the US has no doubt the capacity to put at least 10 cities, that are capable of hosting WC games, they have the cities, hotels, airpots, etc...

my only concern is that the US security forces just dont have criteria, I mean, If police in the US sees a bunch of people in the street, the last thing they think is that they are celebrating a win, more likely the officers will report a riot, and disperse the crowd and arrest a couple of guys.

On the other hand because of inmigration and geografical position, my team Mexico will be the de facto local team. similar situation with many latinamerican countries.
miguelon no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 07:09 PM   #1014
Chimaera
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bruges
Posts: 2,709
Likes (Received): 173

Quote:
Originally Posted by Livno80101 View Post
area you normal? what benelux? it's the worst of bids after qatar's

they dont have cities big enough to host world cup, there are only four cities suitable for world cup (Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Eindhoven in NED and Bruxelles in Belgium)

all other cities are like villages for cities like Newcastle or Sheffield or some other city from England or even Russia (like Tomsk, Samara, Kazan). so i'd like England or Russia for '18 and Australia or USA for '22
What are you talking about? Villages

- Belgium and the Netherlands are among the most densily populated countries in the world. There are plenty of cities with 100,000-500,000 inhabitants, a few with 500,000-1,000,000 and Brussels with over a million. Plus you have the Randstad around Amsterdam. Especially in Flanders and Holland those cities are very well connected by railways and highways. Enough airports to serve the area. The small distances are an extra advantage, so is the common language (out of the 25 million inhabitants in the Benelux, 20 million speak Dutch; plus many speak a second and third language, English or French; in the touristic cities even more).
- Do not compare a smaller city in Belgium or the Netherlands with one in most countries. A lot of our cities are relatively wealthy, attract a lot of tourists, have important seaports, plenty of hotels, an attractive historic city center.
- Football has been around here since the second half of the 19th century. You won't find many countries in the world that are that small but have achieved so well in international tournaments.
- Only four cities big enough? You are probably talking about the current stadiums. But even then I have to disagree, since the Philips Stadium isn't big enough to host WC matches. And the stadium in Brussels isn't suitable in its current state, it would need major renovations (especially more comfort, it doesn't have any skyboxes or business seats). But we can certainly build those stadiums needed.
If you are talking about city size, you forgot Gent, Antwerpen (definitely bigger than Eindhoven!), Ličge, Charleroi and many others (Den Haag, Utrecht...). If you are talking about top teams and their potential to draw big crowds, you forgot Brugge, Standard, Genk, Heerenveen and a few more in the Netherlands.

So, really, I don't see your point!
__________________
My websites:
Belstadions Belgian stadiums and arenas
Arch4MC Sketchup designs
Chimaera no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 08:23 PM   #1015
massp88
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,182
Likes (Received): 215

Quote:
Originally Posted by skaP187 View Post
Look letīs be hounest. The only reason why the USA should not be given a WC is that theyīve allready had one in ī94.
For the rest itīs a lot of ....
To me thatīs a very important reason though.
The game should be spread out. As much as I would love for the Cup to come back here as soon as possible, I would like to see 2018 England, 2022 Australia, 2026 USA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by parcdesprinces View Post
Remember, France 98 with Lens (35,000 inhabitants) and Germany 2006 with Kaiserslautern (90,000 inhabitants), anyway Bene(lux) cities are bigger than you are saying and they can host with two stadiums in the two biggest cities.

For International fans the most important is downtown and many American cities have a very small downtown as I saw.



Do you really think there is non-stop flights between Montpellier or Nantes (France 98) and Asia or South America (same for Hannover or Leipzig, Germany 2006) ??
Nope, nor did I say there were. To further explain my point, if there are cities that have the air service to major cities on other continents, then those are the better options. The U.S. has over 20 cities with non-stop service to at least 1 city in Europe. No other country can claim that. Of course in 17 years I am sure lower tier U.S. cities, such as San Antonio, St. Louis, Indianapolis, etc. will have non-stop service.


What's wrong with Belgium and Holland hosting? Did you happen to see the 2000 Euro? It was an awesome tournament.
massp88 no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 09:01 PM   #1016
Bobby3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,267
Likes (Received): 52

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyrmetros View Post
For our foreign friends here, let me offer up some facts.

Fact - the anti soccer xenophobia that swept the nation years ago is not as big as 3 or 4 jerks in the media make it out to be. ESPN has a vested interest in growing soccer here, and people follow whatever ESPN tells them to do here.

Fact - every stadium would be sold out, and every host city would be more than capable of putting on a good show for the traveling fans.

Fact - there is no denying that WC parties and gatherings would be different in the states as opposed to Europe. But at the same time, that would not be discouraged. It would just be different.

Fact - Our USSF doesn't need to build 1 stadium for the WC. Every NFL team would love to host a WC game at their stadium, and would make any necessary rennovations or upgrades.

Fact - Our airports and hotels would be more than capable of hosting our vistors. Our intra-city rail networks are for the most part very good. Our inter-city rail networks SUCK and we are ASHAMED of how bad it is compared to Europe.

need anything else?
I'm sure you as a Metrostars fan will have to agree with me on this:

Fire the current Giants Stadium security staff because they DO think all soccer fans are hooligans...even 5'4" female fans.
Bobby3 no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 09:42 PM   #1017
metros11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 418
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby3 View Post
I'm sure you as a Metrostars fan will have to agree with me on this:

Fire the current Giants Stadium security staff because they DO think all soccer fans are hooligans...even 5'4" female fans.
I would go as far as saying that the Giants Stadium security and NJSEA security in general are fascists.
metros11 no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 11:16 PM   #1018
hingus2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 123
Likes (Received): 7

A lot has been said about 94 being the best attended, and most profitable WC ever.

But I think a lot of people are missing the point. To those of us passionate about football (soccer), the World Cup isn't about the profitibility for the host nation or FIFA, nor is it that a certain country managed to have the biggest stadiums and hence the biggest attendances.

It is about the overall perception, and experience. And the fact is, of the modern games, USA 94 isn't perceived as a particularly successful competition outside of North America.

Everything that Germany 06 had, I can't see USA 18/22 having. And that is no slight on USA as a nation whatsoever, I love the USA, but when it comes to football, it just isn't the same.
hingus2000 no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2009, 11:59 PM   #1019
The-E-Vid
Politically Incorrect
 
The-E-Vid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,219
Likes (Received): 789

some how you're right..
Korea/Japan '02 wasn't a very 'memorable' WC like France 98 or Germany 06..due to the lack of football tradition,distance,local time,(damn,those matches at 3am..one have to go to work!)

but over all,USA is the best bid to host any big sport tournament,thanks to the big infraestructure and media.
things like tradition and 'spirit'(wich the US soccer doesnt have and is the main debate here) are brought to the WC by the real footballer countries national teams and fans..
The-E-Vid no está en línea  
Old April 18th, 2009, 12:00 AM   #1020
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

it was only the best attended because they had bigger stadiums, and it was a novelty to americans!

I agree that germany has set the benchmark which all future tournaments must follow
bigbossman no está en línea  


Closed Thread

Tags
los angeles, 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 03:33 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