|
|
Post by His Royal Noelness on Dec 16, 2009 10:23:02 GMT -5
Cities and stadiums to be used if bid is accepted
London - Wembley
Sunderland - SoL
Birmingham - Villa Park
Manchester - CoM
Nottingham - New Nottingham Forest stadium
London - Emirates
Leeds - Elland Road
Sheffield - Hillsbrough
Newcastle/Gateshead - St.James' Park
Bristol - New Ashtonville Stadium
London - New White Hart Lane or Olympic Stadium
Plymouth - Home Park
Manchester - Old Trafford
Liverpool - Anfield or New Anfield
Milton Keynes - Stadium MK
Just anounced today. Really hope England gets it
|
|
|
|
Post by Liffonmelsmork on Dec 16, 2009 13:34:38 GMT -5
This is assuming England actually wins the bid!
Some surprising venues there. I reckon Home Park's location makes it ideal for hosting big games, being by the sea and in a big park and all that. I wonder what'll happen with Liverpool's Anfield plans now? Very interested in finding out the reasons why Hillsborough was chosen over Bramall Lane.
|
|
|
|
Post by supersonic1983 on Dec 16, 2009 14:59:30 GMT -5
Really hope England gets it No thanks. I can just about handle the furore when we play in a World Cup, let alone host one. |
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Dec 16, 2009 15:04:20 GMT -5
i don't think england will get it because of the 2012 olympics. too close together. i think australia, belgium/holland or the us will get it.
|
|
|
|
Post by His Royal Noelness on Dec 16, 2009 16:32:24 GMT -5
Brazil have the World cup in 2014 and the olympics in 2016 can't see why England can't have 2012 and 2018
|
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Dec 16, 2009 16:53:05 GMT -5
Brazil have the World cup in 2014 and the olympics in 2016 can't see why England can't have 2012 and 2018 i see your point, but remember that they had the world cup before they had the olympics. this is the other way around. |
|
|
|
Post by supersonic1983 on Dec 16, 2009 17:04:07 GMT -5
i see your point, but remember that they had the world cup before they had the olympics. this is the other way around. Splitting hairs, aren't we? |
|
|
|
Post by His Royal Noelness on Dec 16, 2009 18:23:03 GMT -5
i see your point, but remember that they had the world cup before they had the olympics. this is the other way around. Splitting hairs, aren't we? Yes. Would love to see it in England personally |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Dec 17, 2009 5:29:33 GMT -5
Would love to see England get it. Fingers crossed. Also, I know there are plans to expand Plymouth's stadium to 40,000 due to the possibility of new ownership.
What about Hillsbrough? Isn't that a bit small?
Also, it's about time England hosted another major tournament. Last time was Euro 96 and before that the WC in 1966.
|
|
|
|
Post by globe on Dec 17, 2009 7:05:04 GMT -5
^Hillsbrough used to be one of the biggest stadiums in England before it was made all seater, so I'm sure its capacity now must be around 40-50,000.
I really hope England get it, but I'm a bit baffled why Milton Keynes and Plymouth have been chosen to be honest. Neither Plymouth or MK Dons are ever going to require stadiums that are the size needed to host a Word Cup, so why not just used existing stadiums elsewhere?
I know they are trying to spread it throughout the county, but isn't there a danger of these new stadiums for theses places being white elephants?
|
|
|
|
Post by Superguiller. on Dec 23, 2009 4:10:10 GMT -5
I find it a bit contradictory that the UK won't sign the Schengen treatee but still they want to host football world cups and olympics. Not that it's just the UK that is contradictory about certain policies, for instance, in Spain they crucify people who hit dogs but still they stab bulls in the neck every weekend.
That's that anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by Billy Davey ツ on Dec 30, 2009 16:51:45 GMT -5
well, receiving tourists from all around the world that visit your country for 3-4 weeks is not the same as automatically letting in any person who comes from Europe...
|
|
|
|
Post by Jazzvi on Dec 30, 2009 17:42:57 GMT -5
yes it's like comparing apples and oranges. nothing to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Jan 1, 2010 14:25:47 GMT -5
USA hosted it in 1994, that's still pretty damn recent. England deserve to host it.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 3, 2010 17:30:49 GMT -5
I find it unbelievable how FIFA/UEFA have only given two major tournaments for England to host (World Cup 66, Euro 96) - major footballing nation that created the sport.
I say this as a Scotsman because I can't be arsed to fly abroad to go to a World Cup.
|
|
|
|
Post by Billy Davey ツ on Jan 4, 2010 15:11:26 GMT -5
yes it's like comparing apples and oranges. nothing to do. mmm, oranges... |
|
|
|
Post by His Royal Noelness on Jan 7, 2010 8:33:53 GMT -5
I find it unbelievable how FIFA/UEFA have only given two major tournaments for England to host (World Cup 66, Euro 96) - major footballing nation that created the sport.I say this as a Scotsman because I can't be arsed to fly abroad to go to a World Cup. coughCHINAcough |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 7, 2010 11:34:54 GMT -5
I find it unbelievable how FIFA/UEFA have only given two major tournaments for England to host (World Cup 66, Euro 96) - major footballing nation that created the sport.I say this as a Scotsman because I can't be arsed to fly abroad to go to a World Cup. coughCHINAcough You know what I mean, the FA devised all the rules that are in today's game... I think. |
|
|
|
Post by Marcos on Jan 7, 2010 23:25:44 GMT -5
England has the best stadiums and the best national league in the world.. it'd be the fairer choice! not to mention how crazy the british are when it comes to football
|
|
|
|
Post by Jazzvi on Jan 8, 2010 13:25:14 GMT -5
That's your opinion my friend. To me the best national league is the spanish league. The premier is so mediocre apart from manu, liverpool, chelsea and arsenal. That's why all good players want to play and actually play in La Liga. Also the two best stadiums of the world are located in Madrid and Barcelona, though as a whole England has better stadiums.
|
|
|
|
Post by Billy Davey ツ on Jan 8, 2010 17:07:51 GMT -5
if it was just that, all WC would be in Spain/England/Italy/Germany and next in Brazil/Argentina/Mexico
but we all know these elections (Olympic games too) are based on many other things with little to do with the sport passion. like Atlanta Coca Cola '96, Beijing, South Africa WC...
|
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Jan 8, 2010 19:09:36 GMT -5
That's your opinion my friend. To me the best national league is the spanish league. The premier is so mediocre apart from manu, liverpool, chelsea and arsenal. That's why all good players want to play and actually play in La Liga. Also the two best stadiums of the world are located in Madrid and Barcelona, though as a whole England has better stadiums. completely agree. |
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Jan 8, 2010 19:51:52 GMT -5
That's your opinion my friend. To me the best national league is the spanish league. The premier is so mediocre apart from manu, liverpool, chelsea and arsenal. That's why all good players want to play and actually play in La Liga. Also the two best stadiums of the world are located in Madrid and Barcelona, though as a whole England has better stadiums. Yeah the spanish league is mediocre except Real and Barca. We do have better stadiums on the whole, by some distance to. |
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5