Future World Cups In England.

[marshbags]

The following article is about Englands chances of hosting a future world cup.

Taken from the the Telegraph. Co. U.K.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtm...MC-spo_29082006

Fifa's grounds for complaint

By Henry Winter (Filed: 29/08/2006)

England's hopes of staging a future World Cup have "little chance" of becoming flag-waving, party-hosting reality according to sources within Fifa, the governing body of the global game who decree where the quadrennial spectacular takes place. Backed by Whitehall, the FA have excitedly scribbled 2018 into their diaries for an English World Cup, but such optimism appears misplaced.

The problem is neither the clogged travel system, nor expensive hotel rooms - the usual gripes about an English bid, such as the failed attempt to win the rights for 2006. The FA's widely praised organisation of a hugely successful Euro 96 proved that the country can take the strain. The FA have the expertise.

The stadiums are not the obstacle either. The new Wembley, which even pessimists concede should be ready for 2018, an ever-expanding Old Trafford, a sumptuous Emirates, atmospheric St James' Park, well-placed Villa Park and a possible new Anfield will head a list of venues even eclipsing Germany's impressive spread this summer.

The FA boast the stadiums to mount a credible World Cup bid. Wembley, for all its building woes, will be a 90,000-seater home fit for a final. Other capacities meet Fifa's stipulation of 40,000-plus; the catering will satiate the most demanding Fifa palate; and most can be reached relatively easily, contraflows, leaves on the line and the wrong kind of snow permitting.

Sadly, where England's 2018 World Cup campaign struggles is the area around the grounds, according to Fifa sources. Unlike England, Germany were able to provide the huge tracts of adjoining space that Fifa require to satisfy the ravenous demands of the corporate and media worlds.

For a billion financial reasons, Fifa dance to television and commerce's tune. As the small screen and big business underwrite the World Cup, their desire for space around the grounds must be accommodated, which is why England's bid is inherently compromised.

The charm of England's urban arenas is also their weakness, in Fifa eyes. They lie at the heart of the community, hemmed in by rows of housing and work-places disgorging loads of modern matchstick-men. People flood into crowded areas on match days. Space is at a premium.

The ritual journey to an English ground is a celebration of tradition (even Arsenal moved only 500 yards), weaving through familiar streets, parking in special spots (inside a car-wash next to Barnsley's Oakwell was my favourite) and stopping at ancient watering-holes.

All wonderful, atmospheric stuff but anathema to Fifa. A tented village for the media? No room. A corporate Camelot? No chance. Parking? Move along please. There is not enough room to swing a cat around English grounds, let alone a prawn sandwich. Of the stadiums likely to be included in an FA bid for 2018, probably only Wembley, Old Trafford and, at a push, Eastlands, match Fifa's requirements.

The Emirates is a work of art, with magnificent sight-lines and unrivalled facilities inside the building, but Arsenal's swanky new abode is utterly ill-suited for staging a World Cup finals match because there is no room nearby for sponsors. Stamford Bridge could probably just about find space off the Fulham Road for a couple of short-wave radio reporters and slim-line marketing men in a shared Portakabin.

The hinterland to Germany's World Cup stadia was staggering: row upon row of white marquees, each housing a separate sponsor. Fifa are also aware the corporate and media beasts are hardly going to shrink. Commerce will continue to hitch its many carriages to Fifa's attractive engine. Even if the World Cup finals stay at 32 teams, the media will carry on growing, with the Chinese coming on board, along with the Russians.

So if the FA are to stage a tournament, this indication from Fifa suggests they should target the more modest European Championships than the space-consuming extravaganza that is the World Cup. A repeat of 1966, on and off the pitch, looks as distant as ever.

I hope it is of interest and maybe generates a few comments / observations.

marshbags

Edited August 29, 2006 by marshbags

[BlimeyCharlie]

I totally agree. As good as it would be to host the WC here again i just don't think we have the external space. The only ground i can think of with the space is Man City. I have been to Old Trafford and the main road wouldn't really accomodate much when you take into account the number of burger vans that already have pitches there.

Man city is the only place i can think of that would be able to host internal and external entertainment. I'm not a city fan btw. LFC for me.

You only have to look at Wimbledon and how popular Henman Hill is now. The atmosphere is equal to being inside centre court.

It's unfortunate that the UK's major grounds are surrounded by industrial sites, and i'm sorry to say grotty streets.

You could argue that the venues could be help in city centres, but hearing and being close to the stadium makes the differece IMO.

Edited August 29, 2006 by BlimeyCharlie

[mrbojangles]

Man city is the only place i can think of that would be able to host internal and external entertainment.

See, renting does have it's upsides

[Mel Brooks]

See, renting does have it's upsides

Depends if you're the jockey or the pillow biter.

[Papa_Lazarou]

Enough, enough already.

England's useless performance in every international football event should have provoked a backlash against such pointlessness.

Instead, soccer is ludicrously popular in the UK. When I was a kid, yes, it was the national game, but there were never such extremes of silly obsession. In the summer in the UK the frenzy was palpable, yet any sensible onlooker knew it was in vain.

Everyone seems so upset when the inevitable happens.

I'd prefer England to focus on building up a good national team. If that means max'ing out the number of foreign players per team....GOOD !

At least England wouldn't have to qualify for the World Cup if in UK though.