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.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old December 1st, 2005, 06:47 PM   #21
Paulo2004
Luso from Aveiro
 
Paulo2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lusitania
Posts: 4,658
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB
They're nice looking stadiums but they're too small.

All but three of them have a capacity of 30,000, two have 50,000 and one has 65,000. And there is no need, with regard to long term use (as opposed to the requirements of the World Cup for a period of five weeks), for increased capacity at any of them.
You can easily sit more 8.000 in those 32.000/33.000 seat stadiums. There is space for that. Even the Algarve stadium can quickly receive 40.000, since its side stands are movable!
__________________
Murtosa em Fotos

For the best photos or information on Portugal, visit the PORTUGUESE FORUM.
Paulo2004 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old December 1st, 2005, 07:02 PM   #22
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,016
Likes (Received): 4782

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulo2004
You can easily sit more 8.000 in those 32.000/33.000 seat stadiums. There is space for that. Even the Algarve stadium can quickly receive 40.000, since its side stands are movable!
I'll take your word for it.

But the point still remains that there is no need for an increased capacity at any Portuguese stadium. Most of them are operating at much less than half capacity already. Whatever the World Cup may be and may become, it should never be an excuse for building white elephants.
JimB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 1st, 2005, 08:02 PM   #23
CharlieP
Tax avoider
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 23,752
Likes (Received): 1973

Quote:
Originally Posted by eomer
Italy (1934 and 1990), and France (1938 and 1998) allready hosted WC twice. Germany (1974 and 2006) will host it twice soon.
1934 Italy
1938 France
1966 England
1974 West Germany
1980 Spain

1990 Italy
1998 France
2006 Engl - hey, what the?! Don't Germans know how to wait their turn?!
__________________
This signature is socialist and un-American.
CharlieP no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 1st, 2005, 08:59 PM   #24
michal-skoczen
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

London could host WC London ponly has more stadiums than some countries

Wembley
Twickenham (stadium of rugby national team)
Emirates Stadium (Arsenal)
Stampford Bridge (Chelsa)
Wimbeldon F.C. Stadium
Crystal Palace Stadium
future London 2012 Olympic Stadium
future UK Athletc National Team stadium

and I'm sure taht there would be no problem to find some other good stadiums in London Area.

Last edited by michal-skoczen; December 1st, 2005 at 09:11 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old December 1st, 2005, 11:11 PM   #25
Iggui
Tercermundista de corazn
 
Iggui's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Posts: 2,288
Likes (Received): 1237

there was some serious talk of a joint chile-argentina bid for the 2014 world cup, but this is now a moot point since the world cup is essentially guaranteed to go to brazil (and deservingly so) for that year.

chile hosted the cup in 1962 but it was a different world and the world cup much smaller. i think a future chile-argentina co-host is possible and FIFA has shown itself to be in favor of these two countries submitting a joint bid in the future. naturally, this would involve building new stadiums and renovating some of the better existing ones (especially in the case of chile, who have some of the worst stadiums in south america).
__________________
Occidental de segunda mano
Iggui no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 1st, 2005, 11:53 PM   #26
Saigoneseguy
Vivat capitalismus
 
Saigoneseguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Saigon
Posts: 5,330
Likes (Received): 106

China is the most prominent country with all the infrastructure already built for 2008 Olympics.....Malaysia mayb Thailand?,Argentina,Russia,Australia,Sweden,Brazil,England,India and Pakistan,Canada,a gulf country like Saudi Arabia or UAE,all do have the potential.....imo
__________________
' ' Si Gn khng bao giờ ngủ - V tiền khng bao giờ đủ '
Saigoneseguy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2005, 04:10 AM   #27
Iggui
Tercermundista de corazn
 
Iggui's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Posts: 2,288
Likes (Received): 1237

it's only a matter of time before china hosts a world cup. surely they'll get the next one hosted in asia, though i could also see australia (joint australia-new zealand?) hosting a cup.
__________________
Occidental de segunda mano
Iggui no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2005, 12:11 PM   #28
Loranga
Hoj!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Ludvika
Posts: 359
Likes (Received): 4

Sweden would be great climate-wise (not too hot in the middle of the day, and nice sunny evenings), but not stadium-wise
Loranga no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2005, 04:28 PM   #29
Paulo2004
Luso from Aveiro
 
Paulo2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lusitania
Posts: 4,658
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB
I'll take your word for it.

But the point still remains that there is no need for an increased capacity at any Portuguese stadium. Most of them are operating at much less than half capacity already. Whatever the World Cup may be and may become, it should never be an excuse for building white elephants.
I agree. But the increase in seating capacity should only be carried out for the world cup - I mean, the profits involved are more than suficient to cover the costs involved in this short term operation that would only last during the competition itself. The normal seating capacity would then be restablished.
__________________
Murtosa em Fotos

For the best photos or information on Portugal, visit the PORTUGUESE FORUM.
Paulo2004 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2005, 06:13 PM   #30
Loranga
Hoj!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Ludvika
Posts: 359
Likes (Received): 4

i think there should be a world cup in Europe, by the nations that has no chance in hosting the world cup on their own.
Loranga no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2005, 06:20 PM   #31
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): 2759

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loranga
i think there should be a world cup in Europe, by the nations that has no chance in hosting the world cup on their own.

I actually really like that idea. So which countries could you exclude from that list? That would be easier.
nomarandlee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2005, 01:20 PM   #32
Loranga
Hoj!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Ludvika
Posts: 359
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomarandlee
I actually really like that idea. So which countries could you exclude from that list? That would be easier.
England, Germany, Italy, France and Spain seems to be quite realistic to exclude then.
Loranga no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2005, 01:41 PM   #33
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,239
Likes (Received): 228

The problem I'd guess would be fans having to follow their team over large distances after the group stages(which could be held in each country) although I spose you could say the same about the US hosting a WC. There could be not automatic places in such a WC obviously but sorting it out so all the hosts who did qualify were in their own countries group would be quite tough aswell.

It would have the advanatage that each nation would only need a couple of stadiums so rather than building mutiple 30-40 k stadia that often won't be used to anywhere near capacity after the WC they could put all their money into building a new national stadium that would.

Last edited by MoreOrLess; December 3rd, 2005 at 01:51 PM.
MoreOrLess no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2005, 02:28 PM   #34
eomer
Bring Constantinople back
 
eomer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Val de Marne (Paris)
Posts: 13,816
Likes (Received): 4634

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loranga
i think there should be a world cup in Europe, by the nations that has no chance in hosting the world cup on their own.
Why not: that would be a good idea. So:
- We would have to exclude 5 countries (France, Germany, Italy, Sapin, UK in alphabetic order). As a compensation, they would be automatically qualified with the 12 hosts.
- 40 teams would play the first round in 8 group of 5.
- 12 cities would host matchs: Bruxelles, Amsterdam, Lisboa, Dublin, Warsaw, Copenhagen, Wien, Bern, Stokohlm (or Goteborg), Praha, Budapest, Athens.
- Each host would play at least one match in his own country
- The final match must take place in Bruxelles.
- Semi final would be plaid in Amsterdam and Lisboa.

IMHO, the first thing to do, is to build a real HSR network toward Europe.
__________________
Cordialement, Kind Regards
Eomer
Look to my coming, at first light, on the fifth day. At dawn, look to the East.
A l'aube du cinquime jour, regardez vers l'est
eomer no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2005, 05:28 PM   #35
Giorgio
Registered User
 
Giorgio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 10,677
Likes (Received): 480

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrLess
The problem I'd guess would be fans having to follow their team over large distances after the group stages(which could be held in each country) although I spose you could say the same about the US hosting a WC. There could be not automatic places in such a WC obviously but sorting it out so all the hosts who did qualify were in their own countries group would be quite tough aswell.

It would have the advanatage that each nation would only need a couple of stadiums so rather than building mutiple 30-40 k stadia that often won't be used to anywhere near capacity after the WC they could put all their money into building a new national stadium that would.
I assume your talking about Australia?

Don't worry. The day Australia wins the Hosting right to the world cup, is the day that AFL Becomes the second sport. Its going to happen sooner or later just look at what the stars of the future prefer.

Ofcourse those 30-40k stadia will be used to capacity once the Australian public realise how glorious the real football is compared to that mickey mouse game they call Australian Rules .

Just a thought.
Giorgio no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2005, 06:22 PM   #36
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,239
Likes (Received): 228

I was talking about a euro WC.

Quote:
The final match must take place in Bruxelles.
Why exactly? what does being the capital of banana measuring burocrats have to do with football?
MoreOrLess no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2005, 06:39 PM   #37
Loranga
Hoj!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Ludvika
Posts: 359
Likes (Received): 4

The thread is getting interesting! Bruxelles as final venue sounds reasonable due to its geographical location. Isn't there also talk about extending de Kuip in Rotterdam, another potential final venue in that case.
Loranga no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2005, 06:46 PM   #38
JohnnyMass
Whatever
 
JohnnyMass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Porto
Posts: 46,077
Likes (Received): 1493

The final should be in the geographic center of europe..something like Prague or Vienna...not Brussels.
__________________
Edit my Signature
JohnnyMass no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2005, 06:49 PM   #39
Loranga
Hoj!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Ludvika
Posts: 359
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by eomer
Why not: that would be a good idea. So:
- We would have to exclude 5 countries (France, Germany, Italy, Sapin, UK in alphabetic order). As a compensation, they would be automatically qualified with the 12 hosts.
- 40 teams would play the first round in 8 group of 5.
- 12 cities would host matchs: Bruxelles, Amsterdam, Lisboa, Dublin, Warsaw, Copenhagen, Wien, Bern, Stokohlm (or Goteborg), Praha, Budapest, Athens.
- Each host would play at least one match in his own country
- The final match must take place in Bruxelles.
- Semi final would be plaid in Amsterdam and Lisboa.

IMHO, the first thing to do, is to build a real HSR network toward Europe.
Sounds interesting. I am though not really sure if hosting also would mean that you are automatically qualifyed, but anyway. The list of cities sounds very reasonable too. Lots of initial work to do, but I believe it could work!
Loranga no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2005, 08:29 PM   #40
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,239
Likes (Received): 228

If you want to be that specific then the UK isnt a footballing nation so Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland could also co host.
MoreOrLess no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
olympics

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 03:13 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