Jump to content


Photo

World Cup Cities


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,610 posts

Posted 16 Dec 2009 - 03:02

The results will be revealed today. At least three of the following will be dropped:

Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Leeds, Derby, Hull, Newcastle-Gateshead, Nottingham, Plymouth, Leicester, Milton Keynes, Sheffield, Sunderland and Bristol.

Personally. I'm not too fussed about Liverpool's bid, LFC have put forward both Anfield and Stanley Park plans. Everton have only put forward Finch Farm as a training base (which ironically strengthens Manchester's bid because it's within an hours travel from their stadiums).

I'd like to see Bristol and Plymouth make the grade - it'd be a welcome change.

Everton chief executive Robert Elstone said: "I'm sure Liverpool's bid and Everton's place in that bid has been very much damaged by the rejection of the Kirkby project.

"It's clear to us that Goodison is not a stadium fit to host World Cup games in the modern era.

"[But] it's important for us to support the city and as one of the country's most famous football clubs important for us to support the country's bid.

"The World Cup is nine years away and we are determined to do everything we can to sort our stadium out."


  • 0

#2 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,610 posts

Posted 16 Dec 2009 - 15:41

Liverpool's bid has been accepted. The committee have said it could be New Anfield or Anfield.
  • 0

#3 Romey 1878

Romey 1878

    Mildo

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 44,131 posts

Posted 16 Dec 2009 - 15:52

Liverpool's bid has been accepted. The committee have said it could be New Anfield or Anfield.



Well that's a surprise.
  • 0

#4 lembot

lembot

    Tim Howard

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 116 posts

Posted 16 Dec 2009 - 16:23

Im watching Sky sports news now,Is there only one club in this city? not a mention of us developing a new ground nothing,just blabbering on about what Bill shankley would thik of Milton keynes being picked....... <_<

Edited by lembot, 16 Dec 2009 - 16:24.

  • 0

#5 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,610 posts

Posted 16 Dec 2009 - 16:25

lembot - Apparently Everton only put Finch Farm forward. Daily Mail reported Goodison Park had been accepted but it seems to have been a mistake and they've corrected their original article.
  • 0

#6 lembot

lembot

    Tim Howard

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 116 posts

Posted 16 Dec 2009 - 16:27

Ahhh ill get off my soapbox then :lol:
  • 0

#7 MikeO

MikeO

    Scars are tattoos with better stories.

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,413 posts

Posted 16 Dec 2009 - 16:31

Why the f'ck would what Shankley thought of Milton Keynes being selected be of any more interest than anyone elses opinion?

Pleased to see Bristol and Plymouth being accepted, don't plan to be living down here in 2018 (bloody hope I won't be) but it's good for the region.
  • 0

#8 nogs

nogs

    Trevor Steven

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 16 Dec 2009 - 18:46

I'm a little confused as to how Home Park and Elland Road (and utter tip) can be suitable for World Cup football but Goodison isn't - why on earth wouldnt Everton have put Goodison forward as a back-up but promised investment in a new stadium, which Plymouth and Leeds (and others) must have done? Makes you wonder if the club have any serious intention of coming up with an alternative to Kirkby at all.
  • 0

#9 MikeO

MikeO

    Scars are tattoos with better stories.

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,413 posts

Posted 16 Dec 2009 - 19:12

Home Park was redeveloped on three sides at the beginning of the decade, the final phase has been delayed but I'd have thought this would kick-start it. Nice little stadium, it couldn't host any on the big sides but (for example) games like Slovenia/Algeria or New Zealand/Paraguay where demand for tickets wouldn't be great it would work well :) .

Elland Road is (however) a slum B) .
  • 0

#10 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,610 posts

Posted 16 Dec 2009 - 19:21

I'm a little confused as to how Home Park and Elland Road (and utter tip) can be suitable for World Cup football but Goodison isn't - why on earth wouldnt Everton have put Goodison forward as a back-up but promised investment in a new stadium, which Plymouth and Leeds (and others) must have done? Makes you wonder if the club have any serious intention of coming up with an alternative to Kirkby at all.


Everton say they can't afford to do anything with Goodison. Robert Earl freely admits he is only on the board to push for a new stadium. I was shocked when I learned Goodison hadn't been put forward as a plan B if Kirkby fell through. I'm concerned that it may be a case of stubbornness. On a cost per seat basis, it's been suggested that 12,000 seats could be added to the Park End for 22m.

Home Park seems relatively modern:

Posted Image
  • 0

#11 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,610 posts

Posted 16 Dec 2009 - 21:38

http://www.evertonfc...8-omission.html

Robert Elstone has revealed his bitter disappointment at Everton not being considered as a venue for World Cup 2018 by the England bid team.

The Blues learned on Wednesday that Liverpool was to be given host city status with the existing Anfield Stadium and the proposed new stadium on Stanley Park given preferred status.

Everton had been instrumental in Liverpool City Council's attempts to gain host city status, putting forward its ambitious plans for a new FIFA compliant venue in Kirkby, which was rejected for planning by the Government last month.

Despite the rejection from Whitehall, the legacy of the Destination Kirkby project is that subject to funding and planning – as is the case with other cities and stadia – there can be an Everton facility capable of staging World Cup football.

Mr Elstone said: "What is truly disappointing is that we at Everton have been ruled out of contention despite constantly re-iterating our belief that we will have a new stadium built, open and fully-functioning many years before a World Cup in either 2018 or 2022.

"We have fully supported the City of Liverpool's bid for host-city status and, yes, we do feel aggrieved that it was not a case of Anfield, a new Liverpool stadium OR a new Everton stadium.

"If the result of the Public Inquiry into the Destination Kirkby project had not come when it did two weeks ago - had it been delayed until after today's announcement - I don't think there is any doubting that we would have been included.

"We are pleased for the residents of our City. It is right that the City hosts the World Cup.

"However, it is not without irony that the City played a major role in defeating Kirkby. Indeed, in the City's official bid document, the proposed Kirkby stadium was described by the City council leader Warren Bradley as 'outstanding'.

"But as we take in the announcement made today by the England 2018 bid team we seem to have fallen foul of timing with the decision taken at the very worst time in our long-standing, and ongoing search for a new stadium."

Frustratingly for Everton and its Chief Executive the protestations on the merits of the plans for a new Everton stadium were not met with the same enthusiasm by the England bid team.

He added: "The search for a new Everton stadium post Kirkby will of course intensify and as I have said previously we remain absolutely confident of delivering that within the timeframe of the World Cup bid for 2018.

"Clearly, the bid team did not feel comfortable with this approach and when we sat down with them, we wholeheartedly disagreed on their point of view.

"Other clubs that will face similar funding and planning challenges just like Everton have been included - so why not Everton?

"A fundamental of any successful stadium funding package is, almost certainly, occupancy by a strong, viable and robust PL club. Such an occupant is also the only way to support a lasting legacy.

"If we do deliver a stadium within the timeframe then we would be delivering a FIFA compliant venue and in our opinion it would be crazy not to play World Cup games at Everton."


On a day that Liverpool becomes a step closer to hosting a World Cup game and that Everton's facilities will be used he comes across as very whiney to me.
  • 0

#12 Sheeeeeedy

Sheeeeeedy

    Tim Howard

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 103 posts

Posted 17 Dec 2009 - 07:48

It is a opportunity missed though, World Cups don't come round very often and it is a sign of our mis-managemnt over tha spast 20 years that the likes of Plymouth and Bristol have grounds accepted yet our delapidated old ground (or a possible replacement) isn't consdiered. Chance missed.
  • 0

#13 nogs

nogs

    Trevor Steven

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 17 Dec 2009 - 09:25

http://www.evertonfc...8-omission.html



On a day that Liverpool becomes a step closer to hosting a World Cup game and that Everton's facilities will be used he comes across as very whiney to me.


I think it shows a) what an utter farce the whole World Cup bid is turning into and B) how crap Elstone et al are at negotiating. Again I return to the Elland Road point - I live in Leeds, there are absolutely no concrete plans whatsoever to redevelop/rebuild, in fact Ken Bates' latest plan is to try to talk the city council into buying the stadium. So one of two things has happened with the Leeds bid (I'll try and find out which) - either the club have said 'we will have a new/redeveloped stadium, honest' and the bid team have accepted that, in which case it seems pretty unfair not to take Everton at their word that we will have a new ground, OR Leeds have included the current Elland Road in the proposal, and the bid team have accepted that if it came down to it, it would do for World Cup football (it's 30+ thousand capacity after all). In which case, it makes Everton look ridiculous for not putting Goodison in the proposal as a back up - I mean I know everyone keeps saying its old, but its not THAT bad, I'm sure it will match up to some of the venues you'll get in Brazil and in Ukraine/Poland when the Euros are held there.

Good to see Elstone building bridges with Liverpool City Council as well - seeing as we're now gonna have to come to some kind of arrangement with them to find land for a new/redeveloped stadium, it might be a good idea to stop all the petty sniping. It's all very well the club whinging on that Liverpool are given preferential treatment and we're treated as a secondary club etc etc, but they don't help themselves - perhaps if they had a bit more nous in the way they went about things we wouldn't keep being overlooked.
  • 0

#14 Blue Oz

Blue Oz

    Mikel Arteta

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 167 posts

Posted 17 Dec 2009 - 13:19

I'll admit I don't know loads about how these things work but one thing that stood out to me is that Forest have got a new 50'000 (approx) seater stadium planned to be ready by 2018, what puzzles me is they've been out of the top flight for several years now so how come they can afford to create that when we don't seem to have 2 pennies to rub together what the fuck's with that??
  • 0

#15 duncanmckenzieismagic

duncanmckenzieismagic

    Howard Kendall

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,575 posts

Posted 17 Dec 2009 - 17:16

Im watching Sky sports news now,Is there only one club in this city? not a mention of us developing a new ground nothing,just blabbering on about what Bill shankley would thik of Milton keynes being picked....... <_<




Lol that is probably because we are not developing a new ground in fact at the moment we havent even got any plans to redevelop our old ground!
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users