Euro 2020 Across Europe

gordondaviesmoustache said:
bluebanana83 said:
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Because it's cheaper to travel to/watch the team in the Ukraine than France/Spain? Hardly.

Also 'posh toffs'? Is this the 1973 Beano Annual?

shut it Lord Snooty ;-)
I may be Snooty, but I certainly ain't no Lord ;-)

-- Fri Dec 07, 2012 12:56 pm --

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.

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.
Er.. no. Russia, Bob.

Righto...carry on then.
 
The concept basically removes from the equation those fans that make a holiday of the tournament. I also expect that a lot fewer fans will attend as neutrals, they will not engage with the tournament in the same way that fans from a host country might.

I expect that when they realise that attendances for the Group stage will be around 10,000, they'll panic and give each country one home fixture, one away and one at a neutral venue.
 
Depends on who football is for. In my time I've had great holidays in Portugal, Holland/Belgium, Germany and Japan (world cup obviously) watching football. Gave me opportunity to watch games in some obscure places and travel to places I will probably never go to again. Won't ever forget being in Porto, Bruges, Rotterdam or Braga with many different nationalities and the friendly mayhem that ensued. Platini's idea means that this will be a thing of the past. Games in Bruges or Braga ever again? Nope, it'll mean the same stadiums/cities every single time and the complete removal of the atmosphere that the travelling fans experience. On the other hand if football is for the TV audience it won't make any difference, for the corporates it'll be enhanced. Did anyone see Heathrow when CL final was on? I'm hoping to go to Brazil (although with current finances this is unlikely) and then France. For the football and for the experience. Platini's idea removes the prospect of this happening in the future. A one-off, I think that's unlikely when the profits roll in.
 
Perhaps it could work like this:

We know that there will be 32 teams competing in that tournament, so that means that there will be 8 groups. So the tournament could be spread over 8 countries. In this scenario, each selected country would would be a top seed and would host a group. So if England was selected as a host country, we would host, say, Turkey, Bosnia and Switzerland. All those group games would then be played in England, as group hosts.

Once we get to the knockout stages, those 8 countries would become 4 and the knockout stages would take place at cities in the 4 countries. If you're lucky, England may get through as winners, and may keep their "Host" status.

The selection of countries and cities, however, would be pre determined, so if we finished as runners up in the group we hosted, we would still host games for other teams, but have to go abroad to play.

Obviously the semis and final (and 3rd place match) would either be played in one selected country, or in two.

Given the above, I think it would bring several games to the country in the group stages across various cities in England.
 
Franny Lee's Barrel Chest said:
Perhaps it could work like this:

We know that there will be 32 teams competing in that tournament, so that means that there will be 8 groups. So the tournament could be spread over 8 countries. In this scenario, each selected country would would be a top seed and would host a group. So if England was selected as a host country, we would host, say, Turkey, Bosnia and Switzerland. All our games would then be played in England, as group hosts.

Once we get to the knockout stages, those 8 countries would become 4 and the knockout stages would take place at cities in the 4 countries. If you're lucky, England may get through as winners, and may keep their "Host" status.

The selection of countries and cities, however, would be pre determined, so if we finished as runners up in the group we hosted, we would still host games for other teams, but have to go abroad to play.

Obviously the semis and final (and 3rd place match) would either be played in one selected country, or in two.

Given the above, I think it would bring several games to the country in the group stages across various cities in England.

Bet the final is in Paris......
 
Euro 2020: Wembley to host seven matches after Brussels loses right to host games http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42270759

Hadn’t realised that Wales (and other countries) were being excluded. Seems weird (although very predictable by UEFA) to keep it in the bigger countries, especially when we’ve now got 7 games at Wembley!
 
Euro 2020: Wembley to host seven matches after Brussels loses right to host games http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42270759

Hadn’t realised that Wales (and other countries) were being excluded. Seems weird (although very predictable by UEFA) to keep it in the bigger countries, especially when we’ve now got 7 games at Wembley!

Especially with Wembley having the semis and the final already.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.