Quintana Posted November 16, 2005 Report Posted November 16, 2005 Demolished as far as I know :sniffle:
BethnalGreen Posted November 16, 2005 Report Posted November 16, 2005 I expect they saved any plaques that were on the building!!!!
mr.x Posted November 17, 2005 Author Report Posted November 17, 2005 what are the odds that Wembley will be the Olympic Stadium instead of a planned new stadium?
dronkula Posted November 17, 2005 Report Posted November 17, 2005 It was impossible to save the towers. If they weren't moved, they'd now be in the centre of the new pitch (the whole stadium's been shifted slightly). The towers themselves were also solid concrete - so it was impossible to dismantle them and move them somewhere else. When this whole thing started, the FA did offer the towers to any organisation that could come up with a viable plan to move them for a token amount of money (something like £10). However, the logistics of it made it impossible. I'm sure the plaques on them were saved though and I suspect they'll be displayed either somewhere in Wembley or move to the new Olympic Stadium in Stratford.
arwebb Posted November 17, 2005 Report Posted November 17, 2005 What a sight that is. What were we worried about?
Rob2012 Posted November 17, 2005 Report Posted November 17, 2005 what are the odds that Wembley will be the Olympic Stadium instead of a planned new stadium? zero
arwebb Posted November 17, 2005 Report Posted November 17, 2005 They left the building a long time ago.
Suit U Sir !!! Posted November 17, 2005 Report Posted November 17, 2005 I'm actually really glad that Wembley wasn't designed to hold a permanent athletics track, and that a brand new purpose built stadium had to be designed for 2012. The city will therefore have 3 stadiums with a capacity 80,000 or above: Wembley- 90,000 Twickenham- 82,000 Olympic Stadium- 80,000 That is something to feel proud of.
its a bid of magic Posted November 17, 2005 Report Posted November 17, 2005 Well it could only happen in a City like London, coudn't it. All three stadiums will have their respective area's of interests too, and should be sustainable from a finanacial point of view. I remember I too was very much against Wembley not incorporating the Twin Towers into the New Wembley, but now I've seen how good that Arch looks, and the practical use it has in keeping up the majority of the roof. Then I'm very glad they chose it in their designs.
greenman Posted November 17, 2005 Report Posted November 17, 2005 Well it could only happen in a City like London, coudn't it. All three stadiums will have their respective area's of interests too, and should be sustainable from a finanacial point of view. I think its also a sign of where stadiums are going in general. The old idea of the big publically owned multi purpose stadium seems to be dieing and instead were getting mutiple stadiums designed and owned by individual clubs or sports federations.
Lee Posted November 18, 2005 Report Posted November 18, 2005 New Wembley is already fast on the way to becoming the most famous stadium in the world. I can't wait for it to be unveiled.
arwebb Posted November 18, 2005 Report Posted November 18, 2005 It would almost be worth Town missing out on automatic promotion so we could go to a play-off final if we made it. Almost, but not quite. Still, there's the rugby league Challenge Cup final?
Suit U Sir !!! Posted November 18, 2005 Report Posted November 18, 2005 New Wembley is already fast on the way to becoming the most famous stadium in the world. I can't wait for it to be unveiled. It already is the most famous stadium in the world, even though it's still under construction. Wembley is lot about brand name as well- that's why when Birmingham put forward a counter bid for the national stadium, they too said they'd call it Wembley. Also, structures/ monuments don't have to exist/ be complete for them to be famous icons. New York's most famous landmark is the twin towers of the world trade center- even though they no longer exist.
Suit U Sir !!! Posted November 18, 2005 Report Posted November 18, 2005 Well it could only happen in a City like London, coudn't it. All three stadiums will have their respective area's of interests too, and should be sustainable from a finanacial point of view. I think its also a sign of where stadiums are going in general. The old idea of the big publically owned multi purpose stadium seems to be dieing and instead were getting mutiple stadiums designed and owned by individual clubs or sports federations. I think it's great and refreshing how in the UK, each sport has it's own special stadium, in the majority of cities (not just London). Manchester for example has 2 football stadiums for individual peremier league teams, not to mention separate cricket and rugby grounds. I'm not in favour of the situation in cities like Paris and Melbourne, where the one stadium host everything. I find this quite dull...... In Paris, St.Denis hosts everything, whether it be athletics, rugby or football. A lot of people like this type of situation, but I much rather prefer having football games at Wembley, Rubgy at twickenham and athletics at a brand new specially built athletics stadium in 2012. The Telstra dome (Melbourne) is only a very recent addition (2003), but even still 2006 commonwealth games are in essence going to be held in a cricket ground, rather than a specially build athletics stadium.
baron-pierreIV Posted November 18, 2005 Report Posted November 18, 2005 New Wembley is already fast on the way to becoming the most famous stadium in the world. I can't wait for it to be unveiled. It already is the most famous stadium in the world, Also, structures/ monuments don't have to exist/ be complete for them to be famous icons. New York's most famous landmark is the twin towers of the world trade center- even though they no longer exist. Well, I could think of others: the Astrodome, Yankee Stadium, the LA Memorial Coliseum, Montreal's (Unfinished) Doughnut (of 1976), Estadio Azteca of Mexico City, the Maracana Stadium in Rio, a few others. I think these are equally famous. I think Wembley is only famous among you Brits. I certainly don't hold it up there among my top 6 'legendary' stadia. Re New York icons: yes, the WTC is now 'legendary' because it is part of history; but other EQUALLY great NYC icons are certainly (1) Lady Liberty herself; (2) the EMpire State Bldg; (3) the Chrysler Bldg; (4) the UN Headquarters
Suit U Sir !!! Posted November 18, 2005 Report Posted November 18, 2005 New Wembley is already fast on the way to becoming the most famous stadium in the world. I can't wait for it to be unveiled. It already is the most famous stadium in the world, Also, structures/ monuments don't have to exist/ be complete for them to be famous icons. New York's most famous landmark is the twin towers of the world trade center- even though they no longer exist. Well, I could think of others: the Astrodome, Yankee Stadium, the LA Memorial Coliseum, Montreal's (Unfinished) Doughnut (of 1976), Estadio Azteca of Mexico City, the Maracana Stadium in Rio, a few others. I think these are equally famous. I think Wembley is only famous among you Brits. I certainly don't hold it up there among my top 6 'legendary' stadia. Re New York icons: yes, the WTC is now 'legendary' because it is part of history; but other EQUALLY great NYC icons are certainly (1) Lady Liberty herself; (2) the EMpire State Bldg; (3) the Chrysler Bldg; (4) the UN Headquarters Wembley is not just famous amongst British people, it is the most famous football stadium in the world. Even people who do not know much about football/ soccer will probably heard of Wembley. Similary people who do not know much about baseball will have heard of New York's Yankee stadium. From your list of stadia, I agree that Yankee Stadium and the Macarena have near/ equal fame to Wembley, but the others most definetly are not a match and the Astrodome and Estadio Azteca most certainly are not world famous. The reason why Wembley dosen't make your top 6 is because you come from a country where football is not a mainstream sport. Infact Americans call it "soccer" which is not even it's proper name. The proper name is football, or Fussball (in German). Similarly, the British call baseball "rounders," because the UK is a country where baseball is not a mainstream sport.
baron-pierreIV Posted November 18, 2005 Report Posted November 18, 2005 New Wembley is already fast on the way to becoming the most famous stadium in the world. I can't wait for it to be unveiled. It already is the most famous stadium in the world, Also, structures/ monuments don't have to exist/ be complete for them to be famous icons. New York's most famous landmark is the twin towers of the world trade center- even though they no longer exist. Well, I could think of others: the Astrodome, Yankee Stadium, the LA Memorial Coliseum, Montreal's (Unfinished) Doughnut (of 1976), Estadio Azteca of Mexico City, the Maracana Stadium in Rio, a few others. I think these are equally famous. I think Wembley is only famous among you Brits. I certainly don't hold it up there among my top 6 'legendary' stadia. Re New York icons: yes, the WTC is now 'legendary' because it is part of history; but other EQUALLY great NYC icons are certainly (1) Lady Liberty herself; (2) the EMpire State Bldg; (3) the Chrysler Bldg; (4) the UN Headquarters Wembley is not just famous amongst British people, it is the most famous football stadium in the world. Even people who do not know much about football/ soccer will probably heard of Wembley. Similary people who do not know much about baseball will have heard of New York's Yankee stadium. From your list of stadia, I agree that Yankee Stadium and the Macarena have near/ equal fame to Wembley, but the others most definetly are not a match and the Astrodome and Estadio Azteca most certainly are not world famous. The reason why Wembley dosen't make your top 6 is because you come from a country where football is not a mainstream sport. Infact Americans call it "soccer" which is not even it's proper name. The proper name is football, or Fussball (in German). Similarly, the British call baseball "rounders," because the UK is a country where baseball is not a mainstream sport. Well, the Astrodome was ONLY the first AIR-conditioned, fully-roofed UNobstructed-view stadium in the world that could seat 65,000 people and where astroturf (not that I'm impressed by that fact) was born. Opened 40 years ago. The main reason it's called 'soccer' here in the States is to differentiate it from our home-grown (US) football. I say tomato; you say toe-ma-to.
arwebb Posted November 21, 2005 Report Posted November 21, 2005 Does anyone else know that? More to the point, does anyone care?
Rob2012 Posted November 21, 2005 Report Posted November 21, 2005 Original presentation video http://news.bbc.co.uk/media...._vi.ram
baron-pierreIV Posted November 21, 2005 Report Posted November 21, 2005 Does anyone else know that? More to the point, does anyone care? Actually, people in the States do, assh*le. You don't -- and I don't care because you don't count anyway.
arwebb Posted November 21, 2005 Report Posted November 21, 2005 Read what I wrote again. You will notice I didn't actually say I didn't care, even though the truth is I don't. The truth of the matter is that, on a global scale, that venue is not in the same league of fame as Wembley. That is why Wembley is one of the most famous and well loved stadia in the world.
BethnalGreen Posted November 21, 2005 Report Posted November 21, 2005 Read what I wrote again. You will notice I didn't actually say I didn't care, even though the truth is I don't.The truth of the matter is that, on a global scale, that venue is not in the same league of fame as Wembley. That is why Wembley is one of the most famous and well loved stadia in the world. Actually arwebb, Baron's post that you originally responded to gave the game away! He said people in the States do! That doesn't sound like a world-renowned stadium to me! Oh and Baron where astroturf (not that I'm impressed by that fact) was born - why quote this if even you are not impressed? If you aren't, why the hell should we?Wembley is well-known throughout the world simply because it is football and was one of the first famous stadiums that a lot of people around the world knew of! Add to that list the Bernabeu, (I forget its name), the one in Brazil and a fair few others around the 'old' world of soccer. I could go on for ages, but I won't. There are very few people in the world outside the US that, if asked the question 'name a famous US soccer stadium', could actually name one!
Jimbo II Posted November 21, 2005 Report Posted November 21, 2005 In my view, the most famous sporting Arenas in the world are as follows (in no particular order): Wembley Stadium Melbourne Cricket Ground Lords Cricket Ground Wimbledon Stade De France Bernabeu Nou Camp San Siro Twickenham Yankees Stadium Madison Sq Gardens Augusta Golf Course St Andrews Golf Course Hampden Park Old Trafford Anfield Roland Garros Flushing Meadows Berlin Olympic Stadium Munich Olympic Stadium Ellis Park Fair?
Jimbo II Posted November 21, 2005 Report Posted November 21, 2005 Apologies... Plus, Maracana Azteca Monaco Grand Prix Helsink Olympic Stadium And that whopper football stadium in Buenos Aires, the one they always show footage of thousands of streamers and confetti coming donw during a world cup football match.
BethnalGreen Posted November 21, 2005 Report Posted November 21, 2005 All great and famous stadiums Jimbo II!!! Thanks for that as I couldn't remember them all and couldn't be bothered looking for the list. However, some of them are only famous for certain sports and therefore not known all around the world, which was the argument with Baron. If you look at Twickenham, yes its famous in Rugby, but only big Rugby nation would know of it! If you get my drift?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.