Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/11/13 in all areas

  1. I know. 'Mr.Carta' spouts the most unintelligible, manic drivel.
    2 points
  2. Let me present the facts: 5 Stadiums were refurbished. 7 Stadiums are brand new. Amongst those 7 brand new Stadiums only 2 stadiums weren't built in the place of an older one. Arena Corinthians - São Paulo. Home of the Almighty Coringão. Arena Pernambuco - Didn't exactly replace an old stadium but one of the teams that will play in there abandoned their old stadium (a Mall will be built in its place, IIRC). So yeh, the WC added to Brazilian Fooball Economics an incredibly surplus of ONE, UNO, UM stadium. Amazing, ain't it? Remember: no opinion involved until now. Only the FACTS. Onto t
    2 points
  3. I agree about Atlanta, but some parts of London made the 1996 OC look like a masterpiece (and i 'm not american). Especially Frank & June was the most unwatchable OC segment ever (imo).
    1 point
  4. I don't think many people have a beef against Russia. Yes, FIFA could've made it clearer if they really wanted a new land, especially for the European cup. That would've saved many of the bids (including England) a lot of time, effort, money, & grief if FIFA had made their intentions clear at the start instead of making them evident at the end. Unlike Qatar, Russia's bid made sense on a purely footballing level (the laws of Russia are another story), with them being an ex-power quickly rising in the football world, and emotionally, with the whole new area of Eastern Europe never having hos
    1 point
  5. Oslo's in Europe, but it's not in France, Germany or Italy. Therefore, by a process of elimination, it must be in the UK (probably a far-flung part of Scotland).
    1 point
  6. If you read the technical report you will see that the England bid was stronger than Russia. The Executive Committee ignored the reports.
    1 point
  7. Exactly! I'm confused by some of the responses to your post given that you're from Oslo and not a Brit. Very bizarre! At the very least your post further diminishes the myth that some here like to peddle that this ceremony was only enjoyed by Brits, but we get fingers in ears and accusations of lack of objectivity when people point out this isn't true. Thanks Athensfan for reminding me why I've given this thread a wide berth for a while.
    1 point
  8. To make the brillant post from Catra even more complete, the map of availability of tickets for Brazil World Cup, after first phase of orders. Green means that category in stadium was not full filled... Red means sold out. And USA Today is worried about empty seats? C'mon... Cuiaba and Manaus... Athensfan, listen more to Brazilians, when subjects are related to Brazil... It's a better shot. I already tried to explain this to people from other countries here, SEVERAL TIMES. We don't have budgets approved like in the USA. Our budget is guaranteed by law. Education and Healthcare will ge
    1 point
  9. Who's lost objectivity? I reckon we're not talking about Lillehammer:-) The ceremony was extremely well received around the world, having read up on wikipedia and as this thread has documented, it has won loads of prizes and nominations. That's a pretty good (objective) suggestion that it was actually a very good show.
    1 point
  10. Uhm, well that it was only enjoyed in britain was the statement that I disagreed with, so when you represent my view with a statement completely opposite to reality, it's not surprising that you fail to recognize the reasoning. It was not exclusive at all. Sometimes, a director or writer just has to say, okay if you didn't get that, that's alright, but it's not my problem. Or else we could just watch two hours of fireworks display; I'm sure that would please everybody... It turns out, Boyle's show was very well received. The "problem" here is not that it was for the british only (it was no
    1 point
  11. No You creates a straw-man version of Schola's reasoning: "It wasn't enjoyed outside of the native country; but it's OK because it was made for the natives, etc., etc." which was exactly the opposite of what Schola was actually saying (that his non-British nation seemed greatly to enjoy the 2012 OC). NB: creates=created
    1 point
  12. Some say that about the IOC, too. But I don't see blatantly coming out with such a process as a solution. Thing is, doesn't FIFA have kind of a rule now that the same continent can't host twice in a row for the World Cup. And as far as soccer is concerned, the U.S. is still a "new land" for the sport. I think it's debatable, at the very least, that a World Cup in the U.S. would take the sport to a whole new, much bigger level. And a 2022 U.S. World Cup would've been a game changer for the sport here in this country. The U.S. just didn't offer enough cold, hard cash for FIFA's 2022 vote.
    1 point
  13. The biggest Russian names (Ovechkin, Malkin, Kovalchuk) have already said they'll be going no matter what. I'm sure the rest of the Russians will follow suit, regardless any threat of consequences.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...