Jump to content

Fifa Drops Cup Rotation From 2018


Recommended Posts

Yep good news that the rotation has been dropped.

Go Australia 2018! :D

Go Sydney for the final!

:P

Hmmm. I think our biggest drawback is that to win 2018, we'd be the third southern hemisphere host in a row (South Africa 2010, Brazil 2014, Oz 2018). That might be just one too for FIFA to stomach.

Still, I'll support our bid all the way!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Why should we suffer cause we're on the "wrong" ;) side of the world? Sure, it's a hurdle for say hosting a Winter Olympics, but it shouldn't be a problem considering we're a new frontier for the sport of Football. Anyhow, if FIFA do believe that a 3rd consecutive World Cup hosted in the Southern Hemisphere is too much, then they should have been explicit in the rotation policy and just say that Northern Hemisphere nations could bid... so basically go Australia, and go Melbourne for the final! :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why should we suffer cause we're on the "wrong" ;) side of the world? Sure, it's a hurdle for say hosting a Winter Olympics, but it shouldn't be a problem considering we're a new frontier for the sport of Football. Anyhow, if FIFA do believe that a 3rd consecutive World Cup hosted in the Southern Hemisphere is too much, then they should have been explicit in the rotation policy and just say that Northern Hemisphere nations could bid... so basically go Australia, and go Melbourne for the final! :P

Well, if anyone can show bidding and hosting expertise, it's us. But it is sure going to be a tough campaign.

Anyway, I look forward to watching the opening match of 2018 from the MCG, and the final at Telstra!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is Russia also bidding? I think that it would be really nice to see a WC there! But I think China or Australia would be perfect hosters....... USA already did it some years ago....

In nearly every news item I've seen about the 2018 race, Russia is mentioned as a bidder, but I've never seen anything official out of Russia itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In nearly every news item I've seen about the 2018 race, Russia is mentioned as a bidder, but I've never seen anything official out of Russia itself.

Well as much as a Russian World Cup would be nice, I couldn't possibly see them as hosts (at the 2018 WC at least), as the country is just too big for such an event. Sure, you can always cluster all the host venues at say the central to western side of Russia, at the obvious expense of the major eastern city of Vladivostok (which aught to be a host city at any rate), which is not a bad idea, but it would seem that the eastern cities (primarily Vladivostok...) would be left out (It should also be noted, that if the eastern cities were left out, they would still be an integral part of a Russian World Cup, perhaps in the form of being the "home cities, of national teams' stay in Russia).

Well if Vladivostok were to be a host city, it would be rather difficult to get the teams traveling to and from there...

At any rate, Russia will showcase itself to the world at the 2014 Winter Olympics, a World Cup, though nice, should at least wait until after 2018.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, what's the best Russia has ever done at a World Cup _ they don't seem to me to be one of the great football powers, which I'd consider surprising _ it's obvious it's one sport they have a passion for and has always been popular among the people.

I was actually watching a documentary on Soviet football a few weeks ago _ very interersting. It concentrated on how Spartak Moscow was the team of the people in the 1930s, but earned the ire of Beria, and how one of their star players (I can't remember his name) was sent to a gulag on trumped-up charges in 1958 right before that year's World Cup (where they flopped). I was disappointed they didn't mention much about Russia's (or the USSR's) international record.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, what's the best Russia has ever done at a World Cup _ they don't seem to me to be one of the great football powers, which I'd consider surprising _ it's obvious it's one sport they have a passion for and has always been popular among the people.

I was actually watching a documentary on Soviet football a few weeks ago _ very interersting. It concentrated on how Spartak Moscow was the team of the people in the 1930s, but earned the ire of Beria, and how one of their star players (I can't remember his name) was sent to a gulag on trumped-up charges in 1958 right before that year's World Cup (where they flopped). I was disappointed they didn't mention much about Russia's (or the USSR's) international record.

The USSR was actually pretty successful on European and Olympic level: European Champion 1960, Vice European Champion 1964, 1972 and 1988, Olympic Champion 1956 and 1988 and Olympic Bronze Medallist 1972, 1976 and 1980. At the World Cup, their best result was a fourth place in England in 1966.

But all that is past. It's true: Today's Russia is far away from being a football powerhouse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone see a possible Greece/Turkey bid happening? Or would the most of say we're "too small" and it's too early for either of these nations to go at it?

I'm just interested to see what you guys might say regarding this IDEA. I mean, I think that both Greece and Turkey can upgrade some of the 1,000 stadiums they each have to meet WC standards. This is keeping in mind that they both already have Olympic sized stadiums ready to be used in any occasion. Perhaps they both can even build some new stadiums from scratch. Personally, I think that Turkey could do it, obtaining funding & solving the traffic nightmare are the two biggest obstacles in any bid that we place forward. What do the rest of you say about this suggested proposal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

A Greece-Turkey bid seems a good idea, but I don't think it could defeat England, Russia, Australia, USA or China if they bid. And certainly, the problem is the FIFA's rejection of joint bids...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, if anyone can show bidding and hosting expertise, it's us. But it is sure going to be a tough campaign.

Anyway, I look forward to watching the opening match of 2018 from the MCG, and the final at Telstra!

Hosting the final final at a venue with 15,000 less seats is a ludicrous idea. Unless the Telstra Stadium undergoes considerable redevelopment, the MCG must host the final.

If Australia were to host, 10 venues in 9 cities would be desirable. Since the AFL requires larger venues than the NRL, Sydney would have to be the city with two venues (Telstra and Aussie); while Melbourne's Telstra Dome, despite having a capacity of 55,000 and being the most technologically advanced stadium in Australia, would have to be sparred for AFL commitments. The most likely venues to feature during an Australia WC would be:

MCG-100,000 (Melbourne); Telstra Stadium-85,000 and Aussie Stadium-upgraded to 46,000 (Sydney); Stadium WA-new venue 65,000 (Perth); New Adelaide Stadium replacing AAMI-65,000 (Adelaide); Lang Park-52,000 (Brisbane); EnergyAustralia Stadium-upgraded to 40,000 (Newcastle); Bruce Stadium-upgraded to 40,000 (Canberra); Robina Stadium or Carrara Stadium-upgraded to 40,000 (Gold Coast); New Hobart Stadium-40,000 (Hobart).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd Like to refine my list of potential stadiums:

We'd have 12 or 13 stadiums (12 if 2 stadiums in Melbourne or Sydney is not permitted)

In order of Capacity:

Melbourne - MCG - 100,000

Sydney - (Telstra Stadium) Olympic Stadium - 83,500

Perth - Stadium WA - 70,000

Brisbane - (Suncorp Stadium) Lang Park - 52,500

Adelaide - Adelaide Oval - 50,000

Townsville - (Dairy Farmers Stadium) Stockland Stadium - 45,000

Canberra - Canberra Stadium - 43,000

Newcastle - (Energy Australia Stadium) Marathon Stadium - 41,000

Gold Coast - (Skilled Park) Robina Stadium - 40,000

Hobart - New Stadium - 40,000

Geelong - (Skilled Stadium) Kardinia Park - 36,000 (with 4,000 temporary seats) - 40,000

Darwin - (TIO Stadium) Marrara Stadium - 25,000 (with 15,000 temporary seats) - 40,000

12 stadiums in 12 cities, with the possibility of having Telstra Dome or Aussie Stadium used as a 2nd venue in the respective cities. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd question whether even including the MCG in the bid is a good idea, though if it is used I can't see it being the stadium for the final.

The MCG is simply the wrong shape to host a world cup final. Up against Wembley, the Luzhniki, a swanky modern US stadium, an upgraded Amsterdam Arena or De Kuip and a monstrous Chinese stadium, the MCG whilst bigger than all of them would provide an inferior experience for the spectator because of the distance the stands are from the pitch.

Would you rather watch a soccer match here:

800px-Wembley_enggermatch.jpg

Wembley

OR here:

MCG3.jpg

MCG

Because that's the kind of choice FIFA execs will have when assessing the bids. Telstra is the correct option for an Australian final imho. It's the only stadium in Australia that can compete with the large purpose built football grounds other bids will have for their final stadium.

94-022a.jpg

BTW, I hear the Melbourne soccer team are planning a new stadium, is that true?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there are plans underway to construct a rectangular stadium for the specifics of hosting Football and Rugby. Initially it was intended to be 25,000 with potential for expansion, but now it's going to be 31,000 seater +. Anyways, it wouldn't possibly be upgraded to the 40,000 minimum for group matches and certainly not 60,000+ for a final (Though could easily play host to warm up matches).

Even though the MCG is not ideally shaped, it's sheer capacity, as well as great atmosphere should be more than adequate to counter it's oval shaped field (Heck, advances in stadium design could even possible permit a lowering of the pitch for additional seating :P)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd Like to refine my list of potential stadiums:

We'd have 12 or 13 stadiums (12 if 2 stadiums in Melbourne or Sydney is not permitted)

In order of Capacity:

Melbourne - MCG - 100,000

Sydney - (Telstra Stadium) Olympic Stadium - 83,500

Perth - Stadium WA - 70,000

Brisbane - (Suncorp Stadium) Lang Park - 52,500

Adelaide - Adelaide Oval - 50,000

Townsville - (Dairy Farmers Stadium) Stockland Stadium - 45,000

Canberra - Canberra Stadium - 43,000

Newcastle - (Energy Australia Stadium) Marathon Stadium - 41,000

Gold Coast - (Skilled Park) Robina Stadium - 40,000

Hobart - New Stadium - 40,000

Geelong - (Skilled Stadium) Kardinia Park - 36,000 (with 4,000 temporary seats) - 40,000

Darwin - (TIO Stadium) Marrara Stadium - 25,000 (with 15,000 temporary seats) - 40,000

12 stadiums in 12 cities, with the possibility of having Telstra Dome or Aussie Stadium used as a 2nd venue in the respective cities. :)

Darwin and Townsville would be inadequate cities, considering their remotness and relatively small populations of 100,000 and 150,000 respectively. Neither of these cities could sustain the high influx of tourists; and a redevelopment of Marrara stadium to a capacity of 25,000 would be a complete waste of money.

Currently, only 6 cities in Australia could manage possibly 20,000 tourists; the 5 major cities, and the Gold Coast (tourism capital of Aus). With all of these cities featuring suitable venues already built (MCG, Stadium Australia, SFS, Lang Park) planned to be built (Stadium WA), proposed to be built (New Adelaide Stadium) or venues which could be extended (Robina or Carrara), these cities must be part of an Australia WC. Newcastle probably wouldn't have the capacity to support 20,000 tourists currently, yet with a population of 500,000 and a venue suitable for the WC, Newcastle should also be included. Canberra, with 350,000 residents, is Australia's capital; and for that reason almost alone, the city should feature during an Aus WC.

The site for the event's 10th stadium and 9th city is difficult to distinguish. Geelong would probably handle the influx of tourists; considering it's basically an outer suburb of Melbourne. Yet the proposition of using an oval shaped venue with the minimum capacity is unattractive (oval shaped venues, IMO, should only be used if they have significant capacity ie MCG, WA stadium etc). Australia's 6th state, Tasmania, will want to feature; yet Hobart, it's largest city, has a population of just 200,000 and no suitable venue. still, i would endorse hobart featuring in the WC instead of geelong, Townsville or Darwin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Darwin and Townsville would be inadequate cities, considering their remotness and relatively small populations of 100,000 and 150,000 respectively. Neither of these cities could sustain the high influx of tourists; and a redevelopment of Marrara stadium to a capacity of 25,000 would be a complete waste of money.

Currently, only 6 cities in Australia could manage possibly 20,000 tourists; the 5 major cities, and the Gold Coast (tourism capital of Aus). With all of these cities featuring suitable venues already built (MCG, Stadium Australia, SFS, Lang Park) planned to be built (Stadium WA), proposed to be built (New Adelaide Stadium) or venues which could be extended (Robina or Carrara), these cities must be part of an Australia WC. Newcastle probably wouldn't have the capacity to support 20,000 tourists currently, yet with a population of 500,000 and a venue suitable for the WC, Newcastle should also be included. Canberra, with 350,000 residents, is Australia's capital; and for that reason almost alone, the city should feature during an Aus WC.

The site for the event's 10th stadium and 9th city is difficult to distinguish. Geelong would probably handle the influx of tourists; considering it's basically an outer suburb of Melbourne. Yet the proposition of using an oval shaped venue with the minimum capacity is unattractive (oval shaped venues, IMO, should only be used if they have significant capacity ie MCG, WA stadium etc). Australia's 6th state, Tasmania, will want to feature; yet Hobart, it's largest city, has a population of just 200,000 and no suitable venue. still, i would endorse hobart featuring in the WC instead of geelong, Townsville or Darwin.

Actually, a WC w/ 32 teams, could do very well w/ 8 cities (32 div. by 4 teams = 8 cities). The minimum 9 scenario was started with US-94 (altho there were only 24 teams; but the organizers wanted to spread it out). And then things got totally blown out of proportion w/ the joint Japan-Korea hosting in 2002. "Stadium overkill" would be an understated term for that year. But it can be done w/ 8 cities, w/ no shame. I forget how many SA cities are hosting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...