Should England get the 2018 World Cup?

[BirraImperial]

I would like either Australia or the USA to get the cup. USA because its relatively close for me to go there, and Australia because I think it would be awesome.

 

[Joe Harker]

I would pick Scotland as well, since you have plenty of stadiums capable of holding a finals match. I mention Wales simply because of the Millenium stadium, which is huge and i think it is the biggest stadium in Britain outside England so it would make a good semi final ground as well.

 

[Arminius]

The US could go with a regional look. Group A plays in the Northeast, Group B in the Southeast, etc. Just put together 3 stadiums in close proximity to one another for each group. No other country could pull that off...

 

[Pangur Bán]

No. Russia should get it, or if not Australia. England have already hosted the tournament, so I don't see any moral reason why they should get to have hosted it twice, yet Russia, Europe's largest country and three times the size of England, should never have had it. There's also the opportunity to increase the profile of football there; although it is expanding now, football has been for decades the sport of Moscow and the Russian Caucasus with only limited popularity in most other places. Then of course Australia would be an attractive destination too for many reasons.

Benelux? What a friggin joke. You might as well give it to San Marino.

 

[downtown]

The US could go with a regional look. Group A plays in the Northeast, Group B in the Southeast, etc. Just put together 3 stadiums in close proximity to one another for each group. No other country could pull that off...

Thats what we did in 1994. The final was held in LA, but group play had matches in Detroit, Boston...all over.

 

[Arminius]

Thats what we did in 1994. The final was held in LA, but group play had matches in Detroit, Boston...all over.

Yeah, but I don't remember it being as specialized then. I'm thinking we should use upwards of 20 stadiums. I'm saying that each group have 3 stadiums in which to play it's six games. That way you can travel to certain part of the US and see all your team's group games.

 

[Lord David]

Australia aught to have the 2018 World Cup!

Here's a 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.

In this setup, we'd most likely have only 4 Oval stadiums (MCG, Adelaide Oval Kardinia Park and Mararra Stadium), in the 12 stadium setup.

It can work, and should work!

 

[Lord David]

^^

Maybe that is because other leagues in Europe don't need that much crowd control?

dutchfire@ I'd really want to see Russia host it! Not a long trip to St. Petersburg to watch some matches, only couple of hundred kilometres!

Da. You have your team (Finland? ) Play in St Petersburg for one match, only to have their next scheduled match in Vladivostok!

 

[woodelf]

This might be the only way that England can participate in the 2018 WC the way they are going...

 

[Joe Harker]

This might be the only way that England can participate in the 2018 WC the way they are going...

Why do you think we want it so desperatly!

 

[classical_hero]

Perth - Stadium WA - 70,000

Only if the State Government gets off its behind and approves the damned thing. A Stadium of such quality is needed Here for many years now, but there has been nothing done about it. It is annoying that it has not been a single thing about this stadium for plenty of time now. Hopefully with us bidding for the World cup it will spur the state government into action in getting us a bigger stadium than what they originally ha planned, since they say that they are wanting to build a 60,00 seat stadium, but that is too small.

 

[warpus]

Yeah, but I don't remember it being as specialized then. I'm thinking we should use upwards of 20 stadiums. I'm saying that each group have 3 stadiums in which to play it's six games. That way you can travel to certain part of the US and see all your team's group games.

I think FIFA caps the number of stadiums at world cups at some number.. way lower than 20.

12?

 

[downtown]

Yeah, and unless we were able to use college football stadiums, we wouldn't have 20 quality fields in cities that could actually host cup matches. Remember, you need more than just a stadium...you need police, nice hotels, places to eat, stuff to do at night...

Sure, Jacksonville has a stadium, but you don't want to host a cup match there!

I'm thinking...Boston(Foxbro? Whever the Pats and the Revolution play), NY/NJ (Meadowlands), Columbus (Crew Stadium, or the Horseshoe), Chicago (Solider Field), Miami, Dallas (whatever their soccer stadium is called), Phoenix and LA.

 

[downtown]

In 1994, Matches were held in:

Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Detroit, LA, NY/NJ, Orlando, San Fran, and DC.

So swap Detroit with Columbus, Miami with Orlando, and Phoenix with DC or San Fran. I don't think Standford Stadium is around anymore.

 

[philippe]

Well the Benelux would be really nice, we are both (netherlands and Belgium) very football enthousiastic countries, the atmosphere is good around here, and we would show what great combination we can be!
(BTW it doesn't always has to be bigger and better)

 

[Marla_Singer]

Remember that in 1994, only 24 teams participated to the world cup making a total of 52 games instead of 64 as currently. As a result, it's a lot more understandable to hold a world cup in 12 different venues nowadays, making it an average of 5.33 games in each city.

 

[Pangur Bán]

I don't think the US should get it again, not so soon anyways, but if they do Seattle should be one of the locations. It has an appropriate stadium, has all the hotel and tourist stuff, and most importantly Seattle has its own cultural profile while the Pacific North-West region in turn offers something distinctive for non-Americans.

I wouldn't object to San Diego being a location, but it is very close (by US standards) to LA.

Internal air travel in the US is easy and dirt cheap. It's far more trouble to travel from Frankfurt to Munich than Chicago to Seattle or New York to Atlanta, as I know by my own experience.

 

[Lord David]

I think FIFA caps the number of stadiums at world cups at some number.. way lower than 20.

12?

It's supposedly 8 - 10 for the World Cup. Brazil currently has 18 stadiums bidding for the World Cup in 2014 where they hope that 12 of those will be chosen.

So basically and ideally 8 - 12 stadiums should be chosen for a World Cup.

 

[Arminius]

I thought they were requiring 12 stadiums...

 

[Lord David]

I thought they were requiring 12 stadiums...

Nope, it's just FIFA and their ever changing rules. There are 10 host cities for the 2010 World Cup, there were 12 permitted for the 2006 World cup. FIFA now states only 8-10 stadiums may be used for the World Cup. Brazil is requesting 12 out of 18 bidders for 2014.