BoyBlue_1985
Well-Known Member
He really is the epitome of it isn't he?JoeMercer'sWay said:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Euro 2020 Across Europe
- Thread starter rickmcfc
- Start date
D
D
Deleted member 52846
Guest
Football is going to be for posh toffs and rich business owners. In ten years time most of us will be armchair fans or will be watching another sport.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Because it's cheaper to travel to/watch the team in the Ukraine than France/Spain? Hardly.Caveman said:Football is going to be for posh toffs and rich business owners. In ten years time most of us will be armchair fans or will be watching another sport.
Also 'posh toffs'? Is this the 1973 Beano Annual?
BoyBlue_1985
Well-Known Member
Sounds like the whole forum to megordondaviesmoustache said:Because it's cheaper to travel to/watch the team in the Ukraine than France/Spain? Hardly.Caveman said:Football is going to be for posh toffs and rich business owners. In ten years time most of us will be armchair fans or will be watching another sport.
Also 'posh toffs'? Is this the 1973 Beano Annual?
bluetonium
Well-Known Member
Will be interesting to see how they work this out. I mean, at least in the initial stages, you'd have to expect England could not play at Wembley, and we'd probably prefer not to play any of our games in Wales, Ireland or Scotland.
But as said above, if we have one group game in Germany, one in Austria, then one in Sweden, who the hell can afford to attend all three? Not the fans, that's for sure. I guess as a minimum you need to have grounds assigned by group, which can't be done until we know who has qualified. I guess only the winners of 2016 will get automatic qualification and not the host country this time. Which as we all know means an even more complicated UEFA draw system... "that's England's ball being drawn , but they can't go in to group A because Wembley stadium is assigned to that group, Group B is the Millennium and D is Hampden. That leaves just Group H for England to go in to, except I had fish fingers last night so that rules that one out. I did have some peas too, so Group K it is."
But then you have the knockout stages - where you finish in a group will determine not just which ground you play at, but which country you play in. Imagine, you win the group and know you'll be in Russia for the next game, the rush for tickets, flights and accommodation, people swapping and selling on black markets so that they get to see the game they want...
Then there is the capacity for violence. As one poster above said - England vs Germany, in Istanbul? So, not only pissed up Englishmen and Germans, throw in a local Turkish element who don't take kindly to their local city being taken over by foreign football fans.
I'd love to say it is a grand gesture by UEFA, but it already is showing signs of being a massive cock up that could alienate more fans than usual. But that's seemingly what UEFA really want - 100% corporate seats at maximum profit, and more fans stay at home and watch on telly.
Only way I can see to make it work is fix the venues as early as possible. If England end up at Wembley for the semi final, tough luck to our opponents Same in reverse.
But as said above, if we have one group game in Germany, one in Austria, then one in Sweden, who the hell can afford to attend all three? Not the fans, that's for sure. I guess as a minimum you need to have grounds assigned by group, which can't be done until we know who has qualified. I guess only the winners of 2016 will get automatic qualification and not the host country this time. Which as we all know means an even more complicated UEFA draw system... "that's England's ball being drawn , but they can't go in to group A because Wembley stadium is assigned to that group, Group B is the Millennium and D is Hampden. That leaves just Group H for England to go in to, except I had fish fingers last night so that rules that one out. I did have some peas too, so Group K it is."
But then you have the knockout stages - where you finish in a group will determine not just which ground you play at, but which country you play in. Imagine, you win the group and know you'll be in Russia for the next game, the rush for tickets, flights and accommodation, people swapping and selling on black markets so that they get to see the game they want...
Then there is the capacity for violence. As one poster above said - England vs Germany, in Istanbul? So, not only pissed up Englishmen and Germans, throw in a local Turkish element who don't take kindly to their local city being taken over by foreign football fans.
I'd love to say it is a grand gesture by UEFA, but it already is showing signs of being a massive cock up that could alienate more fans than usual. But that's seemingly what UEFA really want - 100% corporate seats at maximum profit, and more fans stay at home and watch on telly.
Only way I can see to make it work is fix the venues as early as possible. If England end up at Wembley for the semi final, tough luck to our opponents Same in reverse.
bluebanana83
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 934
gordondaviesmoustache said:Because it's cheaper to travel to/watch the team in the Ukraine than France/Spain? Hardly.Caveman said:Football is going to be for posh toffs and rich business owners. In ten years time most of us will be armchair fans or will be watching another sport.
Also 'posh toffs'? Is this the 1973 Beano Annual?
shut it Lord Snooty ;-)
BimboBob
Well-Known Member
gordondaviesmoustache said:So an emerging country with a population of over 100 million who's never hosted a major tournament before shouldn't be allowed to host a World Cup because of its surface area? Maybe it should be located in Luxembourg.Dubai Blue said:What with Russia, Qatar and now this, it would appear that the whole 'festival of football' ideal has finally died.
Are you talking about Qatar? A country so steeped in football that they will have to build all the stadiums?
I'm all for expanding this beautiful game (or it was a few years ago) but hosting a major competition in Qatar was a mistake. Money talks. Much like this new idea. Nothing is aimed at the fans anymore.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
I may be Snooty, but I certainly ain't no Lord ;-)<br /><br />-- Fri Dec 07, 2012 12:56 pm --<br /><br />bluebanana83 said:gordondaviesmoustache said:Because it's cheaper to travel to/watch the team in the Ukraine than France/Spain? Hardly.Caveman said:Football is going to be for posh toffs and rich business owners. In ten years time most of us will be armchair fans or will be watching another sport.
Also 'posh toffs'? Is this the 1973 Beano Annual?
shut it Lord Snooty ;-)
Er.. no. Russia, Bob.BimboBob said:gordondaviesmoustache said:So an emerging country with a population of over 100 million who's never hosted a major tournament before shouldn't be allowed to host a World Cup because of its surface area? Maybe it should be located in Luxembourg.Dubai Blue said:What with Russia, Qatar and now this, it would appear that the whole 'festival of football' ideal has finally died.
Are you talking about Qatar? A country so steeped in football that they will have to build all the stadiums?
I'm all for expanding this beautiful game (or it was a few years ago) but hosting a major competition in Qatar was a mistake. Money talks. Much like this new idea. Nothing is aimed at the fans anymore.
Barcon
Well-Known Member
gordondaviesmoustache said:I think people are dismissing this as a bad idea because it appears it's come from Platini, which is not without some merit, but I actually think prima facie it's a good idea.
All the major European nations (apart from Russia) have now hosted a modern European Championships and perhaps it's now time to look at a different format. People point to fans only being able to attend one game, but that's my experience of how a lot of fans operate at these tournaments in any event: I certainly did at Portugal in 2004 and Germany 2006 (albeit a World Cup). In any event at the last tournament in Ukraine the amount of travelling England fans had to endure was pretty epic.
If this is properly thought out it could work out very well. I certainly think there would be more occasion to an England v Italy game in the Nou Camp than in Kiev. It would have to be organised in such a way as to not give a particular advantage to one team if possible, unlike the present system which clearly favours the host nation. There would be significant logistical considerations, especially when it comes to England's travelling contingent, which is by far the largest. It is quite conceivable that England could win a game on the Wednesday and be in a quarter final on the Saturday at a venue yet to be determined. The demands on European transport infrastructure in a very short space of time could be very testing as I reckon England could take 50,000 to that game, depending on the location.
It could, however, give the tournament a real life of its own and a proper sense of being a truly European tournament. It will not be without significant questions about the logistics and fairness of its structure and rules, but I reckon this format has got the chance of really capturing the imagination.
I think the second part that I highlighted is the reason why most people think it's a bad idea. If say they were hosting the tournament in Portugal, I would be able to fly over from Canada with my wife and stay for 2-3 weeks and see a few games, but I can't fly over and then try, and hope to get a hotel in Italy a few days later. And to be honest I wouldn't want to. I also don't see how it would make any difference to people watching on telly either. It makes no sense to me.
baildon blue
Well-Known Member
What a potty idea by Platini