FIFA has 3 alternate sites for 2010 World Cup

kmart6

I know there has been talk of this already here, but just came across this link and found it interesting.

Sepp Blatter wrote:

"I have spoken to three possible, not only possible, but three associations and countries that would be able to stage the World Cup in one year's time,''

The full article can be found here.

And I think it's be more appropiate that any Ronaldo talk goes in the Man United Superthread instead of here!

Xavi6

Fingers crossed Australia is one.

kmart6

Well it certinly has the facilities to hold it! It would be hard to justify holding it in Europe after Germany, and since Brazil is holding 2014 it wouldn't go to South America! So IMO it only leaves Oz or the US!

gimmick

Oz would be a disaster from a TV point of view in this part of the world. Would not surprise me if England is one of them.

Jazzy

it should never have gone to South Africa imo

gixerfixer

South Africa was an insane choice for it.It will be moved to one of these three according to inside rumours and the like.Italy,Australia or England.Apparently Fifa cant get a rock certain guarentee from South Africa that they will be ready and hence need to make a decision before the qualifiers kick off.For instance if Italy didnt make it past the qualifers and where hosting the tournament it would be a farce.Likewise England and Australia.

pvt.joker

Xavi6 wrote: »

Fingers crossed Australia is one.

+1 then I can have an excuse to go over there for a few months!

Vokes

I'd say Germany, England, Oz are the 3 options.

Would like to see it in Australia.

Villain

Back to the states a Possibility?

pvt.joker

Villain wrote: »

Back to the states a Possibility?

no , would hate to see it back there.

Oz is the best choice imo.

Perfect time of year, as it's winter over there around the time it would be on.

pvt.joker

SofaK wrote: »

I'd say Germany, England, Oz are the 3 options.

Would like to see it in Australia.

I don't think Germany would get it so soon after 2006.

England.....has a good shout , I'd like to see it in Australia too. The olympics there was the best one in living memory

Xavi6

On second thoughts, I'll probably be back in Ireland by World Cup 2010 so keep it away from Australia!

Villain

pvt.joker wrote: »

no , would hate to see it back there.

Oz is the best choice imo.

Perfect time of year, as it's winter over there around the time it would be on.

Oh not saying I want it in the States, but I think it could be a possible candidate.

pickarooney

Dubai could probably throw together a full set of stadia in under 12 months.

Jivin Turkey

gimmick wrote: »

Oz would be a disaster from a TV point of view in this part of the world. Would not surprise me if England is one of them.

Sure Japan and Korea are ahead of parts of Australia in terms of time zones.

Personally I'm not sure Australia would work. Logistically it would be a nightmare for fans. Perth is about 4000kms from Sydney, and 2000kms from anywhere else of note! They've only about eight good stadia, two in Melbourne, two in Sydney, two in Brisbane and one each in Geelong, Perth and Adelaide. Quite a few of these probably wouldn't meet FIFA criteria either.

I'd say if the Australian FA thought they'd have a chance to get a WC they'd have put themselves forward for one by now, particularly seeing as they usually struggle to qualify and most of all they'd love the chance to progress as far as possible and then dress it up as if they were one of the best teams in the world :rolleyes:

Benedict XVI

pvt.joker wrote: »

no , would hate to see it back there.

Oz is the best choice imo.

Perfect time of year, as it's winter over there around the time it would be on.

Why would you prefer OZ over the US ?

• The US would be cheaper a quicker to get to
  
• The US time zone difference is not as bad as Oz.
  
• The population of soccer knowledgeable people in the US would guarntee filled stadiums for each game.

Personally I'd prefer Germany or England so logistical reasons.

Chardee MacDennis

Benedict XVI wrote: »

Why would you prefer OZ over the US ?

• The US would be cheaper a quicker to get to
• The US time zone difference is not as bad as Oz.
• The population of soccer knowledgeable people in the US would guarntee filled stadiums for each game.

Personally I'd prefer Germany or England so logistical reasons.

I would take any of U.S., England and Germany, as I would then get to go to a World Cup!!!

Vokes

pvt.joker wrote: »

I don't think Germany would get it so soon after 2006.

England.....has a good shout , I'd like to see it in Australia too. The olympics there was the best one in living memory

I think someone mentioned in a previous thread that a host has to agree to be an emergencey candidate for the next World Cup after. Would prefer England or maybe Spain would be good too.

Benedict XVI

Why don't they just call it over for South Africa and get over with it.

leninbenjamin

Benedict XVI wrote: »

Why don't they just call it over for South Africa and get over with it.

giant inflated egos.

Xavi6

Jivin Turkey wrote: »

Sure Japan and Korea are ahead of parts of Australia in terms of time zones.

Personally I'm not sure Australia would work. Logistically it would be a nightmare for fans. Perth is about 4000kms from Sydney, and 2000kms from anywhere else of note! They've only about eight good stadia, two in Melbourne, two in Sydney, two in Brisbane and one each in Geelong, Perth and Adelaide. Quite a few of these probably wouldn't meet FIFA criteria either.

I'd say if the Australian FA thought they'd have a chance to get a WC they'd have put themselves forward for one by now, particularly seeing as they usually struggle to qualify and most of all they'd love the chance to progress as far as possible and then dress it up as if they were one of the best teams in the world :rolleyes:

No problems for Australia when hosting the egg chasing World Cup so should be no different for the soccer. Stadiums are all all-seater and off good capacity. No reason why it couldn't be here.

Benedict XVI

Xavi6 wrote: »

No problems for Australia when hosting the egg chasing World Cup so should be no different for the soccer. Stadiums are all all-seater and off good capacity. No reason why it couldn't be here.

there is no way you can compare egg-chasing with soccer.

the egg-chasing world cup is a small tournament compared to the World Cup.

It had a smaller number of teams playing and was played only at weekends.

As stated in a earlier post, a lot of Aus, stadia are in a few cities, Fifa like a geographical spread, which you will get in any big European country and the US,but not in Australia

Third_Echelon

I'd vote for the U.S. to get it. I went to the '94 World Cup and I have to say their facilities are excellent. They could host it in the morning if they needed to... plus the soccer knowledge and its popularity is a lot more evident now than it was in 1994.

8 Stadiums that I reckon would be great:

Giants Stadium (New York/New Jersey, 80,000 cap.) - New stadium being built at the moment and should be ready by August 2010. A bit of speed and they could have it ready well in time for June/July 2010.



Gillette Stadium (Boston, 69,000 cap.) - Another great stadium in a great city.



Lincoln Financial Field (Philadelphia, 69,000 cap.) - Excellent stadium. A city that is often overlooked in terms of tourism. Would be a great 'world cup venue' city.



Soldier Field (Chicago, 62,000 cap.) - another recent refurbishment on this great stadium. Great venue



Qwest Field (Seattle, 67,000 cap.) - one of my favourite stadiums in the US, which regularly hosts soccer matches and also a good city.



Rose Bowl (LA, 93,000 cap.) - not necessarily the nicest city in the world, but it has a stadium with a huge capacity and it has hosted a world cup final before, so an obvious candidate.



Candlestick Park (San Francisco, 70,000 cap.) - an older stadium, which is expected to still be in use in 2010. SF 49ers plan to build a new one by 2012, which will be too late for 2010 world cup. Again, great city and venue.



New Dallas Stadium (Dallas, 80,000 cap. (100,000 possibly) - Dallas Cowboy's new stadium is currently under construction and it looks like it will be one of the best stadiums in the world when completed.

Xavi6

Benedict XVI wrote: »

there is no way you can compare egg-chasing with soccer.

the egg-chasing world cup is a small tournament compared to the World Cup.

It had a smaller number of teams playing and was played only at weekends.

As stated in a earlier post, a lot of Aus, stadia are in a few cities, Fifa like a geographical spread, which you will get in any big European country and the US,but not in Australia

Perth, Melbourne, Canberra, Adelaide, Hobart, Sydney, Brisbane. That's 6 cities spread across the country. What's wrong with that? No different from the hosting capabilities of the US or any European country.

Benedict XVI

Third_Echelon wrote: »

I'd vote for the U.S. to get it. I went to the '94 World Cup and I have to say their facilities are excellent. They could host it in the morning if they needed to... plus the soccer knowledge and its popularity is a lot more evident now than it was in 1994.

8 Stadiums that I reckon would be great:

Giants Stadium (New York/New Jersey, 80,000 cap.) - New stadium being built at the moment and should be ready by August 2010. A bit of speed and they could have it ready well in time for June/July 2010.



Gillette Stadium (Boston, 69,000 cap.) - Another great stadium in a great city.



Lincoln Financial Field (Philadelphia, 69,000 cap.) - Excellent stadium. A city that is often overlooked in terms of tourism. Would be a great 'world cup venue' city.



Soldier Field (Chicago, 62,000 cap.) - another recent refurbishment on this great stadium. Great venue



Qwest Field (Seattle, 67,000 cap.) - one of my favourite stadiums in the US, which regularly hosts soccer matches and also a good city.



Rose Bowl (LA, 93,000 cap.) - not necessarily the nicest city in the world, but it has a stadium with a huge capacity and it has hosted a world cup final before, so an obvious candidate.



Candlestick Park (San Francisco, 70,000 cap.) - an older stadium, which is expected to still be in use in 2010. SF 49ers plan to build a new one by 2012, which will be too late for 2010 world cup. Again, great city and venue.



New Dallas Stadium (Dallas, 80,000 cap. (100,000 possibly) - Dallas Cowboy's new stadium is currently under construction and it looks like it will be one of the best stadiums in the world when completed.

I totally agree, plus all those cities have big ethnic\immigrant communities (NY/ Boston - Italian/Irish, Dallas/calf. - Hispanic) thus generating a lot of local interest.

Benedict XVI

Xavi6 wrote: »

Perth, Melbourne, Canberra, Adelaide, Hobart, Sydney, Brisbane. That's 6 cities spread across the country. What's wrong with that? No different from the hosting capabilities of the US or any European country.

What stadiums are in what cities and what size are they ?

Xavi6

Benedict XVI wrote: »

What stadiums are in what cities and what size are they ?

Perth - Subiaco Oval - 43,000

Melbourne - Telsta Dome - 56,000 but can go up to 74,000

Melbourne - Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) - 100,000

Sydney - ANZ Stadium - 84,000

Sydney - Sydney Football Stadium - 46,000

Sydney - Sydney Cricket Ground (SCG) - 44,000

Adelaide - AAMI Stadium - 52,000

Canberra - Canberra Stadium - 25,000

Brisbane - GABBA - 42,000

On closer inspection Hobart would be too small but there's 9 suitable stadia.

SantryRed

Xavi6 wrote: »

Perth - Subiaco Oval - 43,000

Melbourne - Telsta Dome - 56,000 but can go up to 74,000

Melbourne - Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) - 100,000

Sydney - ANZ Stadium - 84,000

Sydney - Sydney Football Stadium - 46,000

Sydney - Sydney Cricket Ground (SCG) - 44,000

Adelaide - AAMI Stadium - 52,000

Canberra - Canberra Stadium - 25,000

Brisbane - GABBA - 42,000

On closer inspection Hobart would be too small but there's 9 suitable stadia.

I think FIFA would object this because of having 5 of the stadiums in two of the cities.

USA or Germany I reckon.

Xavi6

Well then just leave one of the three Sydney one's out.

8 stadia spread over 6 cities. Not bad at all.

Royale with Cheese

Why do people want it in Australia? Aside from people who are living there that is. It's a nightmare for us. Bloody expensive to fly there, stupid times to watch on tv. I couldn't care less if Europe had it last. I couldn't care less if Germany had it last, would love to see it back there. England would also be great.

Benedict XVI

Xavi6 wrote: »

Well then just leave one of the three Sydney one's out.

8 stadia spread over 6 cities. Not bad at all.

At 25K Canberra is a bit small

Vokes

Wouldn't a host need to supply something like 8 - 10 locations like previous World Cups? Doesn't like Aus could do that from Xavi's above post.

Benedict XVI

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

I couldn't care less if Germany had it last, would love to see it back there. England would also be great.

I was so impressed with Germany as a country when I was there for the Ireland game in '06 I would love to back and have a better look.

feck it , it should be in Europe every 4 years anyway

Xavi6

Benedict XVI wrote: »

At 25K Canberra is a bit small

Ah it'd be grand for some shitty group games.

SofaK wrote: »

Wouldn't a host need to supply something like 8 - 10 locations like previous World Cups? Doesn't like Aus could do that from Xavi's above post.

I really couldn't see them moving it to Europe again so only the US and Australia would realistically have a chance.

leninbenjamin

Xavi6 wrote: »

I really couldn't see them moving it to Europe again so only the US and Australia would realistically have a chance.

this would be considered an emergency situation within FIFA. i don't think concerns about equality would come into much, they'll just be giving it to the best alternative.

Guy:Incognito

ENgland FTW. They havnt had it in 44 years (by the time 2010 rolls around) and I'm selfish so want it in Europe as much as possible. I really dont care about lesser continents "having a go"

yayamark

it should be england defo much better suited than Australia

ArmaniJeanss

Aren't all those Aussie stadia municipal/council grounds which are played on by multiple other sports?
I think there would be an issue with them being able to free up the grounds enough to comply with the FIFA rules regarding no other sports being played on the pitches a) during the competition, and b)in the months leading up to the competition.

I'd be 95% sure it'll go ahead in SA anyway.

Jivin Turkey

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Aren't all those Aussie stadia municipal/council grounds which are played on by multiple other sports?
I think there would be an issue with them being able to free up the grounds enough to comply with the FIFA rules regarding no other sports being played on the pitches a) during the competition, and b)in the months leading up to the competition.

I'd be 95% sure it'll go ahead in SA anyway.

That's a good point. Most of the stadia would be hosting AFL games every weekend during the WC time.

It adds another reason as to why they never put themselves forward for it.

Dont be at yourself

Please not to a hot & humid climate. The football really suffers when it's in hot countries!

loyatemu

i'd say england is the obvious candidate (given the unusual circumstances they could even throw a few games to the other "home" nations)

but I'd be surprised if it doesn't go ahead in SA.

mike65

Germany is not one of the three. (sorry if I missed this before)

Mike.

leninbenjamin

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I'd be 95% sure it'll go ahead in SA anyway.

south Africa's in an absolute mess right now. even if they can sort they stadium and infrastructure out (which is a long shot at this stage) the country is in turmoil. there's been an awful lot of violence recently, most of it racially motivated from what I hear. If it continues to escalate i can see a lot of countries advising people not to travel.

Guy:Incognito

loyatemu wrote: »

i'd say england is the obvious candidate (given the unusual circumstances they could even throw a few games to the other "home" nations)

.

There no chance of the other countries having games. For one , 2 countries woudl be the max for auto qualification anyway and England are not goign to jeopardise their chance of a first WC in nearly 50 years by making demands on behalf of the others.

gixerfixer

leninbenjamin wrote: »

south Africa's in an absolute mess right now. even if they can sort they stadium and infrastructure out (which is a long shot at this stage) the country is in turmoil. there's been an awful lot of violence recently, most of it racially motivated from what I hear. If it continues to escalate i can see a lot of countries advising people not to travel.

Yeap.Unfortunatly although it isnt the popular thing to say the country is going down the tubes and there is a hell of a lot of violence againest foreigners and also white South African people.Used to work with 3 white South African lads in a previous job and they had no intention of ever returning home mostly because of the racial hatred towards them from black South Africans.Very very sad state of affairs.IMO the tournament will be taken away from them within the next few months as it's becoming obvious that Fifa made a huge mistake granting them the chance to hold it there.:( So sad as i think the tournament would be wonderful for the people of Africa as a whole