Jump to content

England 2018- World Cup Bid


Recommended Posts

I would think so, unless another, bigger stadium, perhaps a redeveloped Stamford Bridge, is also avaliable.

.... or the 80,000 all seater London Olympic Stadium, never downscaled after the games and handed over to Spurs/West Ham instead.

The disadvantage of either Stamford Bridge or the Emirates Stadium would be their proximity to Wembley - in real terms probably farther apart than the Manchester stadiums, but in London terms, pretty darn close. Either Twickers or the Olympic Park would be well away from Wembley

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It shouldn't matter if the governing body does its job properly and if its leaders are actually worthy of the offices they hold. I suspect there are many British reporters who would say that the task

Reading one of the papers today, it would seem that the Russian bid has seen the Triesman rubbish and raised us by insulting every single football fan in this land. Russia 2018 bid: "England fans are

Fifa made the right decision. Quite frankly, I am ashamed of England's behaviour in the wake of the decision. What if they had won? Would they be so boisterous in their calls for reform in FIFA? NO! W

At the end of the day, something will most definetly happen with regards to Chelsea's stadium, within the next few years.

I'm sure that after they've won the premiership (this season) and grabbed a few other titles (either this season, or next season etc), their stadium will be deemed too small at 42,500. (compared to Old Trafford 76k, Emirates 60k, and Nou Camp 98k etc).

Certainly they have the money to extend Stamford bridge, or build a new stadium.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember hearing somewhere that Chelsea could only expand the Bridge if they knocked down the Chelsea Village complex, which I think Ken Bates still has something to do with, so that may make things interesting further down the line.

Were they to move, near neighbours Fulham have had all sorts of problems trying to find a site for a new stadium, as have another West London club, Brentford.

With the Olympic Stadium, assuming the capacity were reduced to 50,000, why use that when you've got a bigger stadium elsewhere?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Yesterday, the first images and details of the new £200 million Birmingham City Stadium were revealed:

0,,10412~569515,00.jpg

0,,10412~569520,00.jpg

0,,10412~569518,00.jpg

The 50,000 capacity stadium, which was exclusively revealed in The Birmingham Post over a year ago, has been earmarked for 24 acres of land in Saltley.

The new stadium would have a fully-retractable roof and lower-level seating which can be retracted to reveal a running track or a full-sized cricket pitch.

Birmingham City Football Club will play at the stadium, which will also host cricket internationals, world-class athletic competitions and massive rock concerts.

The site will also include a range of bars, restaurants, club retail facilities and a casino, and it is hoped the whole thing could be completed in time for the 2008-09 football season.

NB, if these pics don't work, you can see the pictures of this new stadium at the following site:

http://www.blues.premiumtv.co.uk/page....00.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks awesome from the outside, but a bit like scaffolding on the inside.

The scaoffolding from the inside, reminds me of the San Siro stadium in Milan, Italy.

san-siro.jpg

But i think the 50, 000 capacity is a bit disappointing. A year ago, when talk of a new Birmingham city football stadium were started, there was talk of a 60-70, 000 stadium being planned. Now it's down to 50,000.

But importantly, it's above the 40,000 capacity needed to host world cup matches, so this stadium would probably be used if England were to host the 2018 world cup.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to Suit U for posting the pics ...

Conceptually this stadium is stunning ... the idea of using a stadium for football and for cricket is superb and shows the sort of joined up thinking normally lacking in sports facilities planning in the British Isles.

Could this provide a model for Leeds for example, where the cricket ground is seriously past it? Or for Bristol, which doesn't have a test cricket venue and the venues for football and for rugby are from a different era! Equally we have Surrey redeveloping the Oval alone, while a number of London football and rugby clubs are in need of new homes

The only stumbling block for the Brummies, is who is going to pay for it? I think they are hoping the City Council will stump up a lot of the cash to build and then lease it to the football club and to the cricket board. If that is the case, then I'd expect a long period of political wrangling before the diggers start clearing the site for construction.

And I'de definitely expect to hear some talk of a Brummie Commonwealth games bid or a IAAF bid or something similar to help justify the cost

Also, does this imply that Edgbaston will no longer be a test venue? and will it be sold?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Conceptually this stadium is stunning ... the idea of using a stadium for football and for cricket is superb and shows the sort of joined up thinking normally lacking in sports facilities planning in the British Isles.

Could this provide a model for Leeds for example, where the cricket ground is seriously past it? Or for Bristol, which doesn't have a test cricket venue and the venues for football and for rugby are from a different era!

It looks interesting, but the idea of such a multi-purpose stadium is fantastic. I hope it can work.

The rugby ground at Headingley is the dump, not the cricket ground. Yorkshire County Cricket Club have spent a lot of money on the ground in recent years building several new stands. It's a good ground now.

As for Bristol, Bristol City have plans to increase the capacity of their Ashton Gate ground to aroud 30,000. I believe there are also plans to redevelop the Memorial Stadium, the home of Bristol Rovers and Bristol Shoguns Rugby Club and there has been talk of Gloucestershire County Cricket Club looking at redeveloping their ground with a view to bringing Test cricket to the city in the future (they already host one-day internationals).

I suppose, if it is successful, it does show a potential way forward, but certainly not in Bristol at this time, although that may change.

Also, does this imply that Edgbaston will no longer be a test venue? and will it be sold?

I wouldn't think so, considering the fact that the football and cricket seasons overlap so heavily.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You’re so lucky, the UK has two new 50,000+ stadiums and a 90,000 stadium but our government can’t even cough up 200m for even one new National Stadium, cheep government
Link to post
Share on other sites
You’re so lucky, the UK has two new 50,000+ stadiums and a 90,000 stadium but our government can’t even cough up 200m for even one new National Stadium, cheep government

You think that's bad there? In Canada, it is pretty much in the same scenario, too. However, Canada is about to host a FIFA-sanctioned event in two years and Toronto has "gave up" on building a new stadium for the tournament. As a result, Montreal took the reins of being the "eastern host" while Edmonton retains its stature from the beginning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
And I'de definitely expect to hear some talk of a Brummie Commonwealth games bid or a IAAF bid or something similar to help justify the cost

In terms of justifying the reasons/ cost to build a new stadium, the people to thank are Birmingham City Football Club- they got promoted to the premier league and have stayed there for a few years now.

Their existing stadium (at St.Andrews) is being deemed too small for a premiership team, and that's why there is eagerness to build a new stadium.

Because the stadium is planned for multiple purposes (football, athletics, cricket), I would imagine that the cost would be a mixture of private money (from Birmingham City Football club) and Birmingham city council.

As for Edgbaston cricket ground- there is no news as to what the future of the ground will be after this new stadium.

It's not really been clarified as to whether this new stadium will be the new and regular home of Warwickshire cricket team, or whether it will just be used occasionally as a cricket ground (ie. in hosting international fixtures like England vs. India etc..)

The survival of this stadium depends really on the Birmingham City Football team- if the team were to drop out of the premier league, and go back down to division 1, then this stadium could well be cancelled.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I suspect if London doesn't win its Olympic bid, it will go for the 2018 World Cup 'tooth and nail'.

And I also think more people in Britain would prefer a World Cup, than an Olympic games, but I could be wrong.

I reckon England will go full throttle at the 2018 world cup regardless of how the 2012 race goes ...

2018 is almost certain to return to Europe after rotating around Africa and South America.

Of the other major footballing "powers" in Europe, Spain, Italy, france and Germany have all hosted since the one and only time England hosted ... so the only probable competition would come from the east, which doesn't have the infrastructure or the experience yet.

The vast majority of the infrastructure is already in place - although I think they may look at new developments in Leeds and Sheffield

The FA has played the UEFA/FIFA political game a bit more intelligently since the 2006 fiasco

And, finally, they will need to get the world cup to pay for Wembley!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I suspect if London doesn't win its Olympic bid, it will go for the 2018 World Cup 'tooth and nail'.

Yes it does seem likely they will bid for 2018. The FA are secretly planning a bid for the world cup, but they are keeping quiet about it until after the result of the 2012 olympic bid.

The following article was published in the scotsman (yes- my favourite source of information), regarding a 2018 England bid:

http://sport.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=358&id=588682004

Here are the most interesting parts of the article:

"FIFA vice-president David Will yesterday gave his support to a potential England World Cup bid claiming they would have a "very strong" chance of hosting the tournament.

It was revealed on Saturday that the ground is being prepared for England to launch a campaign to stage the tournament in 2018, when the World Cup is expected to return to Europe.

Scottish lawyer Will told the Press Association: "I would think England would have a very strong bid. The English bid for 2006 was much stronger than appeared from the pattern of voting but so much has changed since then anyway.

They suddenly realised after the 2006 bid that the FA had become a little bit unknown in some parts of the world and have started this huge programme - that’s bound to help.

Will said there was a "strong likelihood" that the 2018 tournament would be in Europe - under FIFA’s new rotational system South Africa are hosts in 2010 and a South American country - probably Brazil - in 2014.

The Government will wait until the outcome of the London 2012 Olympic bid before making a final decision but a campaign for the 2018 tournament looks increasingly likely

Sports minister Richard Caborn said: "We have had discussions this week about whether we should throw our hat into the ring, and talked very seriously about it.

"There are tactical points to consider. We don’t want to dilute the potency of our bid for 2012. The outcome of that could have a bearing so we want to wait for the 2012 bid to be resolved before we progress any further."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
I say USA in 2018.  If they are going to rotate fairly, it would go Asia-2002, Europe-2006, Africa-2010, South America-2014, North America-2018, then back to Asia.  And trust me, with the growth of soccer's popularity here, the sooner the World Cup returns, the greater the impact.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I say USA in 2018.  If they are going to rotate fairly, it would go Asia-2002, Europe-2006, Africa-2010, South America-2014, North America-2018, then back to Asia.  And trust me, with the growth of soccer's popularity here, the sooner the World Cup returns, the greater the impact.

Once again...

Why should Northamerica (with only 2 important teams and potential hosters) have the same importance than Southamerica or Europe?

US hosted in 1994... England hosted in 1966

The best place of the US was 3rd in 1930 and 8th in 2002... nothing more.

The best place of England was the 1st.

England deserves the WC!

And US or Australia for 2022

Link to post
Share on other sites
I say USA in 2018.  If they are going to rotate fairly, it would go Asia-2002, Europe-2006, Africa-2010, South America-2014, North America-2018, then back to Asia.  And trust me, with the growth of soccer's popularity here, the sooner the World Cup returns, the greater the impact.

Once again...

Why should Northamerica (with only 2 important teams and potential hosters) have the same importance than Southamerica or Europe?

US hosted in 1994... England hosted in 1966

The best place of the US was 3rd in 1930 and 8th in 2002... nothing more.

The best place of England was the 1st.

England deserves the WC!

And US or Australia for 2022

Exactly, and I prefer Mexico than the USA, DO YOU PLAY FOOTBALL IN YOUR COUNTRY ALL THE YEAR LIKE IN SOUTHAMERICA OR EUROPE??? NO!!! THEN YOU HAVEN'T GOT THE SAME IMPORTANCE!!!! :alien:

Link to post
Share on other sites
I suspect if London doesn't win its Olympic bid, it will go for the 2018 World Cup 'tooth and nail'.

And I also think more people in Britain would prefer a World Cup, than an Olympic games, but I could be wrong.

I wouldn't be at all surprised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...