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: What European bid should be selected as host?
England 217 35.06%
Portugal & Spain 119 19.22%
Belgium & Netherlands 85 13.73%
Russia 198 31.99%
Voters: 619. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old October 5th, 2009, 06:58 PM   #101
SSE
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 124
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skycrap View Post
I got some inside information:

The FIFA is afraid of the hooliganculture in England, thats a big problem for there bid. Spain and Portugal are 2 seperated organisations, just like South-Korea and Japan. The also don't like that idea. The Netherlands and Belgium got some good advantages (1 organisation, great transport, small distances), but don't have extrodonary stadiums.

It's going to be interesting!
Absolute rubbish.

The West Ham v Millwall incident was nothing compared to what happens in Europe much more often. In the Netherlands Feyenoord v Ajax attracts far more trouble than anything in England. Even in Spain I'd say there were more problems than in England, Atletico Madrid received a two game stadium ban and were fined over racist abuse and violence against Marseille a couple of years ago.

As someone else said, England is the safest place in the world to watch a football match.
SSE no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old October 5th, 2009, 07:02 PM   #102
SSE
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 124
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by TEBC View Post
You don´t have to be rude!! I just said that Qatar alone is completly impossible to host it. But I dont see why in future FIFA wont consider a 4-6 joint bid. UEFA already did with Scandinavian bid fr UEFA and Asia Cup was hosted by 4 countries. They don´t need necessarily be automatic qualified. We could have a main Host, like Saudi Arabia and the others countries only taking part as host. But anyone, I was just saying that Qatar alone is not viable. They will host ASian CUp 2011 though.
I didn't think I was being rude? Just giving my honest appraisal of the situation.
SSE no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 07:56 PM   #103
jandeczentar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 152
Likes (Received): 1

England should get it in 2018. They have the best stadiums in Europe and guarenteed huge interest which means sell-outs even for modest group games. They could be undone by the anti-British sentiment in Europe and by the plethora of other events in Britain (London Olympics 2012, Glasgow Commonwealth Games 2014, Rugby World Cup 2015)

Spain/Portugal is a strong bid but why is it a joint one. Surely Spain could go alone. They have big stadiums, big support and a strong national team. Why do they need Portugal?

I just can't see the World Cup in the Belgium and the Netherlands. They're too small (even combined) and most of their domestic teams do not merit building 40,000-plus stadiums that will never be full after the event. Plus there are no strong financial or political reasons to go there.

Russia has big plans and big stadiums. Plus, Putin will probably threaten to turn off Eastern Europe's gas supply if they don't vote for Russia. However, the vast distances between venues and Russia's lack of press freedom might be off-putting to people not directly affected by Russia's energy policy.

I've written this before on other threads and I'll write it again. Hooliganism has no bearing on the choice of hosts for major football tournaments. If it did then Euro 2012 wouldn't be in Poland and the Ukraine (or anywhere else in Eastern Europe). The 2005 Champions League Final wouldn't have been in Istanbul or the 2009 Final in Rome.
jandeczentar no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 08:32 PM   #104
Rekarte
Registered User
 
Rekarte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Ketu, Kingdom of Dahomey
Posts: 33,798
Likes (Received): 27608

I'm hoping to Indonesia, its people like football, is a country that is growing, the crown would come in good time
__________________
Comó ogue atôtô orisá
obá alabaxé kzambi ki osauá
Rekarte no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 08:34 PM   #105
ryebreadraz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,597
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by hngcm View Post
Like I've said before...I think FIFA would rather have China host the 2026 WC...
Ding, ding, ding. I've said it a few times before, but I think Australia, who needs work to host, but could do a fantastic job, will lose their chance at hosting soon because of their move to AFC.

I think 2018 is earmarked to England. The only thing that could have it go anywhere else is a major, major hooliganism episode and Millwall/West Ham is not close to large enough. Because there is no indication of something like that happening, England takes 2018.

I think FIFA desperately wants a China hosted World Cup. They would have loved for them to bid for 2022, but they chose a Winter Olympics bid instead. A 2026 bid is likely though and FIFA knows it. They will want to keep 2026 open for China, which means another Asian nation, to which Australia now belongs, will be ruled out for 2022 because they really cannot return to Asia for consecutive World Cups.

As a result, I think the US will get the 2022 World Cup without much of a challenge. Indonesia isn't much of a threat IMO. I think they're doing well to upgrade their infrastructure and coul have nice stadiums, but I think it's too much for them to do by 2022, plus it's close to China, which could deter some. I don't see another European World Cup in 2022 so Africa is the only other option and I doubt FIFA will seriously consider another African bid until they can fully evaluate 2010.
ryebreadraz no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 08:37 PM   #106
Rekarte
Registered User
 
Rekarte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Ketu, Kingdom of Dahomey
Posts: 33,798
Likes (Received): 27608

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryebreadraz View Post
Europe needs to host one of every three World Cups. Because of their influence in FIFA it will happen and because Europe accounts for nearly 1/3 of FIFA countries, it makes sense. Also, why would the World Cup go back to Asia 20 years after they last had it and to South American only 12 years later when North America is forced to wait 36 years?
Canadians do not like football, Americans prefer other sports, the Mexicans are divided in South America, all are fanatics about football, until now Venezuela, this turning to this magnificent sport!
__________________
Comó ogue atôtô orisá
obá alabaxé kzambi ki osauá
Rekarte no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 08:41 PM   #107
xlchris
Not much
 
xlchris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Haarlem
Posts: 11,087
Likes (Received): 201

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB View Post
It's not as if hooliganism is unheard of in Holland either. Feyenoord v Ajax always leads to some trouble.
Yeah well, Feynoord will not play against Ajax during the WC The hooliganism in England is a bit worse.
__________________
"
xlchris no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 08:41 PM   #108
HendrX
Registered User
 
HendrX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Breda
Posts: 445
Likes (Received): 29

**** England...............

2018 World CUP Belgium and the Netherlands period!

They will have the best bid! And that´s what its all about!
HendrX no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 08:42 PM   #109
Rekarte
Registered User
 
Rekarte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Ketu, Kingdom of Dahomey
Posts: 33,798
Likes (Received): 27608

Go Russia!
I love Russia, the Russian girls and vodka, but I think England won the cup in 2018
__________________
Comó ogue atôtô orisá
obá alabaxé kzambi ki osauá
Rekarte no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 08:42 PM   #110
ryebreadraz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,597
Likes (Received): 17

Here's what I think many people overlook. Just how good of a job England could do hosting the World Cup. People like to talk about the English football, history, how long it has been since they hosted and their stadia. All true and all convincing, but to me, I think of it as a country that could top what Germany did in 2006, which was spectacular.

The size of the country makes it condusive to hosting a World Cup. It is very easy to get anywhere in the country and the rail system, which already does a good job, should be upgraded by 2018. It would make travel from city to city very easy. The airports there are top notch and with it being a European nation, you can bet that there will be floods of visitors in the country, making for great fun. The accommodations are already there and it's a desirable place to visit. The weather, which not cold, doesn't get too hot, making for good football and the support from the English, as well as all the visiting countries would be fantastic because of the sheer numbers. Oh yeah, the stadia, which are already good, would be upgraded.

I think people know what England has to offer, but don't really think about it all. When you do, I think you're thinking about the best World Cup to date. England would do a tremendous job, plus they still have all that history and waiting too.
ryebreadraz no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 08:50 PM   #111
ryebreadraz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,597
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rekarte View Post
Canadians do not like football, Americans prefer other sports, the Mexicans are divided in South America, all are fanatics about football, until now Venezuela, this turning to this magnificent sport!
Brazil was chosen as the 2014 World Cup host basically without any competition, partly because the rest of the South American countries couldn't manage to host such an event. Argentina could probably host as well, but there are countries in South America that either are too small, do not have a stable enough economy or stable enough government for FIFA to commit to. How many South American countries can really host?

Also, Canada does like football. Toronto FC is one of MLS' flagship franchises, Vancouver will be welcomed to the league soon, Montreal will likely get a franchise soon and they are already one of the best supported USL sides. Toss in that the 2007 U-20 World Cup, hosted by Canada, is the best attended youth World Cup in history and I do not understand why it would be assumed that they don't like football. Stadium improvements need to be made, but Canada could host a World Cup and I could certainly imagine Mexico doing so again in the future.

I'm not advocating that North America host every three or four World Cups, but South America has how many countries that could conceivably host? I can't imagine it being more than four, only one more than North America.
ryebreadraz no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 09:55 PM   #112
poxuy
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Moscow
Posts: 531
Likes (Received): 11

Quote:
Originally Posted by jandeczentar View Post
Plus, Putin will probably threaten to turn off Eastern Europe's gas supply if they don't vote for Russia. However, the vast distances between venues and Russia's lack of press freedom might be off-putting to people not directly affected by Russia's energy policy
OMG victim of media propaganda.. For all 35 years of gas supply to Europe, Russia NEVER cut gas transit to Europe, even during risky moments in Cold War. In january 2009 Ukraine (US puppet Ushenko) cut transit (documented by EU observers and SGS company), so Europe freezed. At the same time, Georgia cut RUSSIAN gas to South Ossetia since august DURING MORE THAN A YEAR, and of course no one media source mentioned it, because Georgia is painted as "democracy". Typical media propaganda. This theme is huge, I can write you hundreds of facts what Russia is doing for safety of European consumers, but the problem is that US doing all (even placing puppets in transit countries) to blackmail and discredit Russia. Why do you think we are paying billions $ on building Nord Stream (directly from Russia to Germany without any transit countries), Blue Stream, South Stream? For diversification of gas supply and to prevent such conflicts like Ukraine cut of transit. It's just incredible how people are misinformed, media doing great job in this. Every person, who at least know SOME of these facts, realise that Russia is doing all for safety of gas supply, but some busturds like Ushenko with help of media creating problems for it and misinforming people. Because US don't need normal cooperation between Europe and Russia. The same with so-called "lack of press freedom". In august 2008 only Russian "controlled" media reported truth about Georgian attack. And only now this truth is opening (EU report) and what a surprise.. Everything was truth, and it was Mass Media which totally misinformed people, and even didn't appologise for this lies. This is a direct propaganda campaign against Russia. Just because we have biggest natural resources, and US elite have their usual tactic - to steal resources under pretext of "spreading democracy", which in the end only killing civillians..

And such misinformed people like you only helping them. Like "people from cave" who know nothing about world, except media lies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jandeczentar View Post
vast distances between venues
Another example of misinformation. Or maybe you just don't want to know some information? Just look at the map on page 2. Damn, ignorance is a real, very big barrier to common sense..

Last edited by poxuy; October 5th, 2009 at 10:14 PM.
poxuy no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 09:57 PM   #113
RMB2007
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,529
Likes (Received): 15653

@ ryebreadraz. Great post. I like you.
RMB2007 no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 10:13 PM   #114
Skycrap
Enschede goes high 8)
 
Skycrap's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Enschede
Posts: 792
Likes (Received): 8

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
Inside information? Who are you? I could have made that lot up off the top of my head.

England doesn't have a problem with hooliganism, and certainly compared to places like Poland/Ukraine, who've just been awarded 2012, it's nothing.

The last incident was at the West Ham v Millwall match, and other Europeans who saw that said that that wasn't hooliganism compared to what they see in their own countries now.

England has one of, if not the safest matchday experiences in Europe. Why do you think the Italians are looking to the British policing/stewarding/stadium model for reforming their own game?
I'm a privat driver for a very influence person in the soccerworld. Can't say anymore ofcourse.
I don't give my opinion about the situation, I only tell you guy's what I know.
__________________
Avatar: New Dish Hotel tower @ Enschede, The Netherlands. U/C jan. 2008
Skycrap no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 10:26 PM   #115
TEBC
Registered User
 
TEBC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: São Paulo
Posts: 23,198
Likes (Received): 5793

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryebreadraz View Post
Brazil was chosen as the 2014 World Cup host basically without any competition, partly because the rest of the South American countries couldn't manage to host such an event. Argentina could probably host as well, but there are countries in South America that either are too small, do not have a stable enough economy or stable enough government for FIFA to commit to. How many South American countries can really host?

Also, Canada does like football. Toronto FC is one of MLS' flagship franchises, Vancouver will be welcomed to the league soon, Montreal will likely get a franchise soon and they are already one of the best supported USL sides. Toss in that the 2007 U-20 World Cup, hosted by Canada, is the best attended youth World Cup in history and I do not understand why it would be assumed that they don't like football. Stadium improvements need to be made, but Canada could host a World Cup and I could certainly imagine Mexico doing so again in the future.

I'm not advocating that North America host every three or four World Cups, but South America has how many countries that could conceivably host? I can't imagine it being more than four, only one more than North America.
Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Venezuela, Colombia. 50% of Conmebol Members.

Equador and Uruguay would probably able if it is a join bid with other major country.
TEBC no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 10:27 PM   #116
SSE
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 124
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by xlchris View Post
Yeah well, Feynoord will not play against Ajax during the WC The hooliganism in England is a bit worse.
How is it worse?

Feyenoord won't be playing Ajax, but neither will West Ham be playing Millwall.

Anyway, West Ham/Millwall happened because they haven't played each other for so long.
SSE no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 10:29 PM   #117
A340-500
Registered User
 
A340-500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 57
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by jandeczentar View Post

I just can't see the World Cup in the Belgium and the Netherlands. They're too small (even combined) and most of their domestic teams do not merit building 40,000-plus stadiums that will never be full after the event.
As I wrote on another thread; The BeNeLux (The Low Countries) is the 11th economy in the world with a population of only 27 million, just after Spain and before Canada. It could easily be the most wealthy region on this planet.

So, review your statement about being too small.

And about stadium development; we're talking about a period of almost 10 years from now. The average attendance in the Eredivisie is growing steadily, new stadiums will be build or exisiting stadiums upgraded unregarded a possible WC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jandeczentar View Post
Plus there are no strong financial or political reasons to go there.
What do you mean with this? What has politics to do with a football game?
A340-500 no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 11:29 PM   #118
SSE
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 124
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by A340-500 View Post
As I wrote on another thread; The BeNeLux (The Low Countries) is the 11th economy in the world with a population of only 27 million, just after Spain and before Canada. It could easily be the most wealthy region on this planet.

So, review your statement about being too small.

And about stadium development; we're talking about a period of almost 10 years from now. The average attendance in the Eredivisie is growing steadily, new stadiums will be build or exisiting stadiums upgraded unregarded a possible WC.



What do you mean with this? What has politics to do with a football game?
You make a good point, but bare in mind Luxembourg has a large (for it's size) impact on the BeNeLux economy. Luxembourg has the highest GDP per capita in the world.
SSE no está en línea  
Old October 5th, 2009, 11:41 PM   #119
ryebreadraz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,597
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by TEBC View Post
Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Venezuela, Colombia. 50% of Conmebol Members.

Equador and Uruguay would probably able if it is a join bid with other major country.
I have serious doubts about Venezuela and Colombia's ability to host a World Cup. They hosted Copa America, but I think that's about as big a tournament as either could hold. There's also the financial and political instability that both have had issues with. Committing to either 8-12 years in advance is a dangerous proposition.

I think Brazil, Argentina and Chile are really the only three capable of hosting.
ryebreadraz no está en línea  
Old October 6th, 2009, 12:04 AM   #120
A340-500
Registered User
 
A340-500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 57
Likes (Received): 0

True; the figures of the Benelux

National GDP: Netherlands + Belgium + Luxembourg = 860 + 497 + 54 = 1,412 billion USD

Population: Netherlands + Belgium + Luxembourg= 16,5 + 10,6 + 0,5 = 27,6 million

Top 15 economies would look like this (population in millions):

1. USA 307
2. Japan 128
3. China 1345
4. Germany 82
5. France 65
6. UK 61
7. Italy 60
8. Brazil 191
9. Russia 142
10. Spain 37
11. Benelux 27
12. Canada 34
13. India 1198
14. Mexico 111
15. Australia 22

GDP (nominal) per capita:

1. Luxembourg with 111,182 USD
7. Netherlands with 52,322 USD
13. Belgium with 46,486 USD

Source: Worldbank

Last edited by A340-500; October 6th, 2009 at 12:13 AM.
A340-500 no está en línea  


Closed Thread

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 05:54 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