Xtratime Community banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
nomad
Joined
·
5,597 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The ambitious plan details have been released today,
the transportation problems in the capital will not be a problem, as 15 of the games will be in the same area,
I guess that since Germany will host the 2006 World Cup, & France hosting the 1998 WC, thus, London will have a better chance than Paris & the German city, & there's also the Comonwelth games at Manchester 2 years ago
IMO Madrid will be the main contender with London..

And on Sky News, they said that the stadiums that will host the football matches are :
-Old Trafford
-St. James park
-a stadium at Belfast (dunno the name)
-Parkhead or Ibrox
-the new Wembley
- Villa Park

I'm gutted that the new Anfield & Arsenal's new ground aren't included, but that's all assuming that London win the right..

what do you think? is London's bid good enough to beat Paris, Germany's city, Madrid, Moscow, Istanbul, & Rio?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
I think Ukraine/Poland has a bid, and maybe some more... London has a chance, but the Euros were in England for 1996 so its about time to give somebody else a turn.
 

·
nomad
Joined
·
5,597 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Remento said:
I think Ukraine/Poland has a bid, and maybe some more... London has a chance, but the Euros were in England for 1996 so its about time to give somebody else a turn.
I stated that France had 1998, Germany will host the 2006 WC, imo the Turkish & Brazilian bid aren't strong enough, same for Moscow..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,811 Posts
No not a chance in the world, i think it's going to be tough for the U.K to get the go ahead for any event like this, i think we need to realise we aren't liked so theres always going to be natural opposition against events being held here. The fact that 99% of the world was against a war we participated in could be a big factor, even in 2012.

I just don't see it happening :depress:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
37,734 Posts
Rio is completely out of the running.

I think the best chance are New York $$$$ (they are bidding also right?) & Paris.

However it would be good if it was not in the USA.... tehy already had it in 84 & 96..... it would be interesting for another country to host it;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,513 Posts
This is about the European Championships, right? I think Ze da Fiel, you are talking about the Olympics. :tongue:
London will bid for that aswell though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,513 Posts
And London 2012 means the Olympics. Euro 2012 or England 2012 means the Euros because the stadiums will be all across Great Britain (or England :confused: ) and not only London. The Olympic bid includes Wembley and Wimbledon to be used, which means London. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,513 Posts
Sorry, I have just realised we are talking about the Olympics and not the Euros, hence:

And on Sky News, they said that the stadiums that will host the football matches are :
-Old Trafford
-St. James park
-a stadium at Belfast (dunno the name)
-Parkhead or Ibrox
-the new Wembley
- Villa Park

Are England bidding for the Euro2012 hosting at all?
 

·
Third Place Winner, December 2011 Photo Contest
Joined
·
12,813 Posts
L4E Welcome back mate :)

Haven't seen you in a while, hope alls well :)

I'm afraid I agree with Russ here, cant see us getting anything due to us not being liked at present.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,845 Posts
I would have thought London would need to sort out in congestion/transport problems first.

I think London haa a reasonalbe chance, seeing as the Olympic Committee is one of the most corupt organisations in sport. We just have to give back-handers to the right people. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,245 Posts
The Olympic commitee have nothing to do with FIFA so i dont think they care what was staged in whatever country.I'd think Paris would be the best, I think Athens will flop.
 

·
World Class Player
Joined
·
7,673 Posts
We will win if we meet one criterion. We must improve one aspect of London that has made our lives hell on a daily basis: the largest abberation in civic planning in British history. Of course, I refer to the London Underground.

For the bid to stand a chance, a whole new batch of rolling stock must be introduced for 2012, plus new routes built, new ventilation systems installed, security improved, and stations renovated. I guess that the whole lot would set us back £20bn, but it must be done if London wishes to host a major sporting event at any time in the future.

Holding football matches in Northern Ireland is not an option for the Olympics. The matches should be concentrated in Britain. Games on different islands makes the whole thing too messy. Instead, Wembley, Ashburton Grove, Stamford Bridge, Villa Park, Old Trafford, Anfield (New), and St James Park should be the venues. If need be, hold some games in Scotland, but that's a last resort (as is Newcastle, to tell the truth).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,432 Posts
Without doubt London looks the best bid.

Most Compact, best Stadia, and best renovation (with no white elephants afterwards).

Unfortunatelty things haven't swayed for us in the past... but I know Tony Blair was speaking to members of the commonwealth about it, so hopefully we can get them onside.

It'd be great :)

I mean Wimbledon, Wembley, Hyde Park/.. what more could you ask?

(Oh and Transport will be improved :/)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38,223 Posts
This is the worst bid I've ever seen. Its general mish-mash of places put together to make a bid. Its like London was asked to make a bid with no time to build anything or something. Using Trafalgar Square, Buckingham Palace and several places outside of london, even SCOTLAND, is a joke. When manchester hosted the commonwealth games EVERYTHING was local. We had the stadium, velodrome, aquatics centre, G-Mex and hockey all local. The only event outside of Greater Manchester was the rowing in Liverpool. Manchester seemed to have everything purpose built, London meanwhile has a philosophy more like "Oh lets use this as it could sort of be used for diving with some modifications, if Nelsons Column will support a good diving board." I'd rather London failed and saved us from National humiliation if it somehow won.

Also, Villa Park is a shithole, why go to scotland and wales? Also SJP is too far. Villa PArk is just there to make Birmingham feel part of it. I'd like to see Eastlands used, but thats never going to happen thanks to OT.

Please let Moscow win. I don't want it to go to America AGAIN. Paris I'd tolerate, but Moscow would be a welcome change from the westernised countries such as Athens, Sydney, Atlanta, and Barcelona like the last lot have been. Thankfully Beijing is doing 2008.

~ The Green ;)ne
 

·
nomad
Joined
·
5,597 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
The green one :

in all Olympic games, the football games have been at various venues, one stadium cannot host all the football games, it'd ruin the pitch, & football simply can't be played at one stadium, there are way too many matches, in such a short space of time, that even football matches usually start before the opening day!!

and in my opinion, fielding some events in such locations is imaginative and creative, rather than the boring places that events at Sydney were at..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,432 Posts
The Green One said:
This is the worst bid I've ever seen. Its general mish-mash of places put together to make a bid. Its like London was asked to make a bid with no time to build anything or something. Using Trafalgar Square, Buckingham Palace and several places outside of london, even SCOTLAND, is a joke. When manchester hosted the commonwealth games EVERYTHING was local. We had the stadium, velodrome, aquatics centre, G-Mex and hockey all local. The only event outside of Greater Manchester was the rowing in Liverpool. Manchester seemed to have everything purpose built, London meanwhile has a philosophy more like "Oh lets use this as it could sort of be used for diving with some modifications, if Nelsons Column will support a good diving board." I'd rather London failed and saved us from National humiliation if it somehow won.

Also, Villa Park is a shithole, why go to scotland and wales? Also SJP is too far. Villa PArk is just there to make Birmingham feel part of it. I'd like to see Eastlands used, but thats never going to happen thanks to OT.

Please let Moscow win. I don't want it to go to America AGAIN. Paris I'd tolerate, but Moscow would be a welcome change from the westernised countries such as Athens, Sydney, Atlanta, and Barcelona like the last lot have been. Thankfully Beijing is doing 2008.

~ The Green ;)ne
Are you joking?

Your talking crap. Absoloute crap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,432 Posts
The Green One said:
Why the hell would I be joking? If I typed something that long up it would not be a joke. Tell me in what way I must be joking please.

~ The Green :rolleyes:ne
Okay..

Firstly the football side is just one aspect to the games, so you shouldn't be so centralised in focusing on that aspect. How can you host so many matches in such a short time? You cant. Why don't you take a look at Paris' bid... you'll see that they also have matches over the place in Marseilles, Lyon and Montpellier etc.. London's bid also has everything within a centralised area, that includes a Swimming Pool, a Veldodrome etc.. They also have The Millenium dome which is just across the river which will host events such as gymnastics etc.. London also has teh best tennis centre in the world (well apart from Melbourne) in Wimbledon and it's a beautifal place withgood facilities. They could row in the thames... and obviously they can use landmarks (which the iOC want) as events. Unfortunately Manchester isn't really steeped in culture is it?

Well Thanks, I enjoy showing people up ^_^. Base your facts in comparison, not just from seeing one bad and deciding.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top