2018 World Cup bid

[surfinjim]

I'm on a local forum to me currently debating the merits of either Hillsborough or Bumhole Lane being used to stage World Cup games for the 2018 event, if we are successful.

You have one side, our Porky friends, going on about how good and up to date Bumhole Lane is. On the other side, you have the argument that Hillsborough was used in 66 and 96, but is now a little run down in areas, and also the significance, if any of the disaster.


I'd be interested in other views and also which other grounds are serious contenders for the event.

The 15 city groups who have registered their interest are: Birmingham, Bristol, Derby, Hull, Leeds, Leicester, Liverpool, London, Manchester, Milton Keynes, Newcastle/Gateshead, Nottingham, Portsmouth, Sheffield and Sunderland.

I think they will use a maximum of 10 grounds so my list would be;

Wembley
Old Trafford
Villa Park
Emirates
Hillsborough
Anfield
City of Manchester
Elland Road
Newcastle
Derby



Thoughts and comments.

Jim
_________________
26th December 1979

Bolder, Blackhall, Williamson, Smith, Pickering, Hornsby, King, Johnson, McCulloch, Mellor, Curran.

Scorers; Mellor, King, Curran, Smith (pen)

GODS EVERY ONE OF THEM!

[Dellboye]

Stamford bridge would do well instead of elland road as it is now a league 1 stadium.
_________________
This is my website which has pictures of my chelsea programme collection. www.freewebs.com/dellboye

[Barrett]

What I don't understand is that you can't use 2 stadiums within the same city but then you could have the likes of Wembley, Emirates and Stamford Bridge all being used???

[grimsbybarralad]

I don't think they will use two stadia in Manchester. Old Trafford would appear to be the best size-wise but would it be filled for some of the smaller games?

I'd like to see the K.C. included instead of Elland Road as it is a marvellous stadium. Newcastle might have to consider being second fiddle to "The Stadium of Light" . (My last visit to Elland Road required me to perform acts of contortionism which would have had Houdini panicking to get some leg room in the "away" end.)

M.K. Dons stadium is the best I've visited with GTFC and would fit quite well into any plans for a midland group along with the aforementioned Villa Park.

Won't there just be two stadia in London being used? Wembley and The Emirates would get my vote. Went past the latter on the train the other week and thought it looked brilliant from a distance.

If I was pressed I'd say:

Wembley
The Emirates
MK Dons
Villa Park
Anfield
Old Trafford
K.C. Stadium
Hillsborough
The Stadium of Light
St James' Park

[robbo]

Now now Jim , you know full well Hillsborough as a football ground these days would make a very fine Asda. I really don`t think wednesdays`s ownership of the the world`s biggest urinal, quaint though it may be, is going to convince anyone football should be played there during a World cup.


Football hasn`t been played there for donkey`s years full stop.


By the way Jim , thanks for the Hodgy prog info matey!!, got it!!

alan

[stodin]

If we won the bid we want to host games in cities that would give a good impression of England.

Therefore NO games should be held in Sheffield

[pastpirate]

Having rarely been to any of these grounds I find it hard to comment.
I only have one opinion.
Please god don't let one of the cities be Bristol.
_________________
I am not gas, I am a Pirate.

www.bristolroversmemorabilia.weebly.com The definitive list of Bristol Rovers programmes

[MisterGas]

pastpirate wrote:

Having rarely been to any of these grounds I find it hard to comment. I only have one opinion. Please god don't let one of the cities be Bristol.

Dont worry Pirate.......There aint a decent Stadium in Bristol.

[pastpirate]

MG.
There could be if the scum get their way.

But then it will still be over trashton way so the fans would need body guards to get them there and back in one piece.

Can you imagine those lovley Brazillian ladies in the Robins pub. They'd never get out alive.
_________________
I am not gas, I am a Pirate.

www.bristolroversmemorabilia.weebly.com The definitive list of Bristol Rovers programmes

[ToffeeDan]

Why restrict it to 10 cities or whatever the number is? They seem quite happy to split the WC/Euros across 2 countries these days..

One presumes that they still insist on the 40,000 minimum but, fhs who wants to watch some random 3rd rate Asian or Middle East nation take on Colombia or whoever? They could more than fill Plymouth Argyle for example and get the competition all around the country - one or two games at these other venues and say 3-4 at the bigger ones with Old Trafford, Wembley (obviously all of England's games naturally) and The Emirates meriting a few more games.

There's going to be what 32 teams - that's 64 games with the 3/4th place game. No reason whatsoever why the event can't be played in 20 odd stadia with some modernised for the event. If the 1 per city rules are going to exclude the likes of Arsenal (Chelsea, Spurs, Man City, Everton (presumably) one of Sunderland or Newcastle) etc. and the likes of Villa are going to be a shoe-in because the other major stadia in the area are much too small - albeit it's a decent stadium) then the rules are rubbish.

Take the best of what we have and use them all. If it means having host-areas (Merseyside/Manchester/London etc) then fine but all the clubs want to be part of the event.

Apparently the need to section off part of the grounds for FIFA/Press etc and still remain over 40,000 could well knock out Everton (current ground), Spurs, Chelsea and perhaps Liverpool anyway - so no football in the hotbed that is Merseyside - unless of course the two clubs finally get their respective ground plans off and running.

If we're talking stadia with a significant capacity we have to include Twickenham, Millenium Stadium, Wembley (obviously) - and in Scotland: Glasgow (one of 3) and Murrayfield - many of which aren't club football stadia - unless someone's going to give a lot of football clubs/grounds a lot of money (and no doubt ship in slave labour at 90p an hour to do the work!)

[stodin]

ToffeeDan wrote:

If the 1 per city rules are going to exclude the likes of Arsenal (Chelsea, Spurs, Man City, Everton (presumably) one of Sunderland or Newcastle) etc.

Sunderland and Newcastle are different cities

[Barrett]

stodin wrote:

ToffeeDan wrote: If the 1 per city rules are going to exclude the likes of Arsenal (Chelsea, Spurs, Man City, Everton (presumably) one of Sunderland or Newcastle) etc. Sunderland and Newcastle are different cities

That's true but in the eyes of the general public they are near enough the same place. Plus they wouldn't have 2 stadiums from the North East I don't think.

What did they do in Euro '96?

Which stadiums did they use?

[ToffeeDan]

OK - ballpark estimate here:

48 group games 8 groups of 4:

Reasonable candidates (current/projected new grounds)

7 Wembley
7 Man Utd
7 Cardiff Mill.
5 Arsenal
5 Aston Villa
4 Twickenham
4 Newcastle
2 Chelsea
2 Everton
2 Sunderland
2 Liverpool
2 Man City
2 Tottenham
2 Leeds
2 Derby County

Lower capacity modern stadia with potential
1 Bolton
1 Middlesbrough
1 Stoke City
1 Coventry
1 Leicester
1 Reading
1 Southampton

Other reasonable capacity grounds
1 Sheffield United
1 West Ham Utd

Spread of games by region
21 London
14 North West
10 Midlands-ish
10 North East/Yorkshire
7 Wales
2 South/West

[stodin]

ToffeeDan wrote:

so no football in the hotbed that is Merseyside!)

Hotbed of Football? Are you having a laugh?

Next you will be rolling out the old cliches of cheeky scallys with a great sense of humour

Deary, deary me

[stodin]

Barrett wrote:

[What did they do in Euro '96? Which stadiums did they use?

Wembley
Old Trafford
Villa Park
Anfield - Hotbed of football?!?
City Ground - Forest
Elland Road
St James Park
Hillsborough

[ToffeeDan]

Yeah I know Sunderland and Newcastle are different cities but I'm sure they'd apply the rules on the basis it's a handful of miles...

[Barrett]

stodin wrote:

Barrett wrote: [What did they do in Euro '96? Which stadiums did they use? Wembley Old Trafford Villa Park Anfield - Hotbed of football?!? City Ground - Forest Elland Road St James Park Hillsborough

So we had:

London
Manchester
Birmingham
Liverpool
Midlands
Yorkshire
North East
Yorkshire again


So if you apply that to today's stadia what would we have?

[James]

stodin wrote:

If we won the bid we want to host games in cities that would give a good impression of England. Therefore NO games should be held in Sheffield

Cities to give a good impression, errr none in England, hold the world cup somewhere else...

1996 was a good tournament and you didn;t have all the stories of england hooligans, which tbh only exist when the local people and the local police see people form england and want to rough them up. The other downside to these tournaments is that they always seem to be a gateway for crap imports to be signed up by the idiots in the premiership.

If you want another stadium to add to the list of ones open for debate, The Reebok in Bolton should be considered as well

[Auchinleckian]

If you can't get sufficient stadia in England don't bother scurrying north of the border, Auchinleck wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.....

[stodin]

James wrote:

1996 was a good tournament and you didn;t have all the stories of england hooligans, which tbh only exist when the local people and the local police see people form england and want to rough them up

True, it was a great tournament and one of the best summers of my life. I saw all the Wembley games, including the final. I was offered £500 for my final ticket by a German but out of badness I refused to sell it to him.

Oh yes, you could get a decent fight during that summer if you knew where to go Not me of course. You are quite correct that whenever England played abroad the scare stories would start weeks in advance in the local press, no wonder we always had gangs of foreign wannabees trying to take us on.