England 2010

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

prideofzootv

War Child
Joined
May 1, 2006
Messages
864
Location
Newcastle
anybody read this article in the newspaper?

it said something like

"england are the ideal alternative to hold the 2010 world cup, as the FA and FIFA are unsure that South Africa will be ready intime for the tournament. Fears are that the stadiums will not be ready, security is not up to standard among other things."

So if England ARE to hold the World Cup, which stadiums do you think will be used?

i think: -

St James Park (Newcastle)
Anfield (Livepool)
Emirates (Arsenal)
Stamford Bridge (Chelsea)
White Hart Lane (Tottenham)
Old Trafford (Manchester Unt)
City Of Manchester Stadium (Manchester City)
Riverside Stadium (Middlesborough)
Wembley (Wembley!)
And possibly Reebok? (somebody i forgot!)

your opinions
 
prideofzootv said:

And possibly Reebok? (somebody i forgot!)


The temple of football that is the Mighty Bolton Wanderers of course! :bow:

It won't go to England even if South Africa isn't ready. England will already have a bid in by then to host the 2018 tournament.
 
I reckon the Poms would rather bid for 2018 than merely host a World Cup due to another nation being incapable of hosting one.

By 2018, there will be a new 60,000+ seater stadium in Liverpool (Anfield will be no more), and the city of Leeds will be hoping to have a bigger and better stadium by then as well.

If the Poms were to host 2010 (though the chances of that are less than 1%):

Wembley
Old Trafford
Anfield
St James Park
St Marys Stadium
Villa Park
Pride Park
Emirates Stadium
Stadium Of Light
Hillsborough
Portman Road
Elland Road

Reebok, and Riverside won't be considered because they are nowhere near up to FIFA standards.

Stamford Bridge and White Hart Lane would be pointless because Wembley and the Emirates are bigger and better

Ideally, South Africa will be ready, though they are well behind in preparations, so here's hoping they will be ready.

I hope to see the 2014 World Cup go to Brazil (as will probably be the case with all other candidates pulling out), and I'd rather not see England host 2018.

Oz are looking to put a bid in for 2018, and while I'd be fully behind such a bid and I'd be stoked if we won the right to host 2018, it seems a little unfair on Europe (the heart of the beautiful game) being without a World Cup for 16 years.

Australia 2022 would suit me enough, but I'd like to see 2018 go to a joint bid between Greece & Turkey, two countries who are yet to host a World Cup and who both should be rewarded for their recent effors in major football tournaments. England can have 2026, while China can have 2030.

If 2010 was to be given to someone else, the United States would probably be the most likely, though some have mentioned Oz, Germany (again), Japan and France as other possibilities
 
prideofzootv said:
Stamford Bridge (Chelsea)
White Hart Lane (Tottenham)
Riverside Stadium (Middlesborough)
And possibly Reebok? (somebody i forgot!)

How dare you propose such stadiums when Villa Park is bigger than all of them and if the proposals go to plan will be at least a 51,000 seat stadium by 2009!

Intedomine - How many decent sized stadiums does Australia have that could host world cup football matches? i suppose they could use rugby grounds too.
 
Re: Re: England 2010

1stepcloser said:



Intedomine - How many decent sized stadiums does Australia have that could host world cup football matches? i suppose they could use rugby grounds too.

I don't actually want us to host the 2010 World Cup should South Africa fail to prove itself to FIFA, simply because we're not ready and football is undergoing a gradual revolution in this country to ultimately become our national sport.

We need to delay the World Cup until we're ready and we need to popularise the importance of hosting the World Cup before we are actually given the right (i.e. bulid up to the announcement of Sydney 2000)



What we do have (and what would be approved by FIFA) is:

Melbourne
* MCG (100 000)
* Docklands Stadium (55 000)

Sydney
* Homebush Olympic Stadium (82 000)
* Aussie Stadium (44 000)

Brisbane
* Suncorp Stadium (52 000)

Perth
* Subiaco (42 000)



PROPOSED/UNDER CONSTRUCTION STADIUMS:

Perth
* multi-purpose stadium with soccer/rugby especially in mind (60,000+)

Melbourne
* Melbourne Rectangular Stadium (30 to 35 000)

Gold Coast
* Skilled Park (25,000)



STADIUMS ILL-SHAPED or CRAPPY FOR WORLD CUP FOOTBALL:

Brisbane
* Gabba (38,000)

Adelaide
* Football Park (52,000)

Launceston
* York Park (23 000)



RUGBY/SOCCER STADIUMS THAT ARE NOT YET BIG ENOUGH BUT COULD BE (OR ARE PROPOSED TO BE) EXPANDED:

Canberra
* Bruce Stadium (25 000)

Newcastle
* Energy Australia Stadium (26 000)

Adelaide
* Hindmarsh Stadium (16 500)

Gosford
* Bluetongue Central Coast Stadium (20 000)

Perth
* Members Equity Stadium (17000)

Townsville
* Dairy Farmers Stadium (25 000)

Parramatta
* Parramatta Stadium (20 000)

Wollongong
* WIN Stadium (20 000)


Several of those however, won't be considered as necessary to host World Cup matches (i.e Parramatta, Members Equity)
 
in the news apparently the south african FIFA representive claimed that the chances of South Africa being ready now are slim, and even he reckons that england/ Ireland combined will get it. he even listed the 10 stadiums, let me try remember them

Wembley
Croke Park
St James
Emirates

shit i forgot oh well. Come on ENGLAND!
 
I know South Africa won't be able to pull through. It's just as well, really. All the hooligans who come out to support their countries would be raped and murdered three days into the tournament. Honestly, South Africa is in far too big of a mess to host the World Cup. All the money they'd waste on getting stadiums ready would be far better spent on the virtually non-existent police force.
 
Back
Top Bottom