Alexikokopops Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 I'm currently living in Munich right now and THIS is what a world cup host city is supposed to look like imo.....the thought of Leicester having it is embarrassing in comparison ........... Yeah, because Gelsenkirchen is fucking BANGING List of ambassadors unveiled for England 2018Good to see the list featuring Foxes past and present.. Look two posts above yours...
Ozwin Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 What's that website that keeps getting mentioned at The Walkers each week? The one where I have to vote for Leicester.
Guest Mee-9 Posted 23 October 2009 Posted 23 October 2009 http://www.england2018bid.com/support/register.aspx I think Or you can text: Leicester To 62018.
davieG Posted 5 November 2009 Posted 5 November 2009 Councillors whole-heartedly back Derby's World Cup campaign Thursday, November 05, 2009, 07:30 Comment on this story CITY councillors last night unanimously supported proposals to underwrite Derby's £15m bid to become a World Cup host city. The authority also agreed to continue discussions with Derby County FC over a possible £26m extension to Pride Park, which would be required if the stadium was to stage World Cup matches. Organisations in the city have been working since May to persuade the Football Association that Derby should be part of England's bid to host the tournament in 2018 or 2022. Involvement could bring in as much as £100m in revenue and investment to Derby, based on the experience of cities involved in the 2006 World Cup, held in Germany. The city council was told last night that the authority would be required by the FA to guarantee it would deliver on the promises described in its bid. This includes the anticipated £15m "hosting" costs for infrastructure improvements, fan parks and other changes required to bring Derby up to host-city standards. But the council said it fully expected to recoup those costs and councillors voted unanimously to back the campaign. Councillor Hilary Jones, Derby City Council and Liberal Democrat leader, said: "This is a fantastic opportunity for the city and an opportunity that we don't want to miss. "There may be concerns about cost but we have been reassured on this and it is with great pleasure that we put forward this motion." Councillors were invited to watch a video presentation outlining Derby's bid during a meeting of the full council. They heard how costs could be offset through sponsorship, admission fees to supporters wanting to stay or from those watching games at the giant fan parks. It could also consider a possible additional levy on rates for businesses in sectors that might benefit directly from the World Cup – although this is at a provisional stage. Discussions with Derby County centre on an extension to the stadium that would provide the additional 12,000 seats necessary to bring the club up to the 45,000 capacity required by world football's governing body, FIFA. It is likely that, if any deal went ahead, the authority might seek to include a new leisure complex within the extension and recover other costs from a lease arrangement with the club on the extra seats. Councillor Matthew Holmes, deputy Conservative leader, said: "This is an opportunity to tell the FA that we believe Derby will embrace the World Cup and to tell them we want to help strengthen their bid." Deputy Labour leader Hardyal Dhindsa said: "We are giving 110% support in making this bid and Derby City Council, along with all its other partners, is ready and willing to push this forward." Derby is one of 16 cities competing for the right to stage World Cup matches if England is chosen to host the tournament. The FA will choose 12 suitable venues. The council and the rest of the city's bid team, comprising Derby County, the county council, Marketing Derby and the University of Derby, among others, must now finalise their bid before its submission to the FA on November 26. The FA will make a decision on which cities will be included in its bid in December. Richard Williams, the city's assistant director, regeneration, said: "Councillors pledged their support to this bid in the same way Derby County supporters show theirs every weekend at Pride Park because they could see the real benefit that is there for the city." Chief executive Adam Wilkinson said: "There is an absolute benefit for both the city and county and we've been able to give the FA some really good reasons why we can host this tournament." Derby Telegraph readers can still show their support at www.thisisderbyshire. co.uk/bid and www.therams.co.uk. You can also pledge your support on www.derby2018bid.com and www.england2018bid.com.
weluv Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 sorry guys but the idea of Leicester or Derby (or worse, Milton Keynes) getting the world cup is awful. They need to pick the biggest & best cities in England, and spread them about a bit. E.g. London-Wembley London-Twickenham Manchester-Old Trafford Liverpool-New Anfield Leeds-Elland Road (with expansion) Sheffield-Hillsborough (with redevelopment) Newcastle-St James' Park Sunderland-Stadium of Light Nottingham-City Ground (with expansion) Bristol-Ashton Vale (new ground) Southampton-St Marys
StanSP Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 London - WembleyArsenal- Emirates Stadium Manchester-Old Trafford Liverpool-New Anfield Aston Villa - Villa Park Sheffield-Hillsborough (with redevelopment) Newcastle-St James' Park Tottenham - New Ground Chelsea - Stamford Bridge Manchester - City of Manchester Stadium Leicester - Walkers Stadium (may have expansion?) Fixed
Webbo Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 sorry guys but the idea of Leicester or Derby (or worse, Milton Keynes) getting the world cup is awful. They need to pick the biggest & best cities in England, and spread them about a bit. E.g.London-Wembley London-Twickenham Manchester-Old Trafford Liverpool-New Anfield Leeds-Elland Road (with expansion) Sheffield-Hillsborough (with redevelopment) Newcastle-St James' Park Sunderland-Stadium of Light Nottingham-City Ground (with expansion) Bristol-Ashton Vale (new ground) Southampton-St Marys I don't think Twickenham has been built with segregation in mind and Nottingham has pulled out. As for Elland Rd the world cup should only go to teams in the top 2 divisions.
davieG Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 sorry guys but the idea of Leicester or Derby (or worse, Milton Keynes) getting the world cup is awful. They need to pick the biggest & best cities in England, and spread them about a bit. E.g.London-Wembley London-Twickenham Manchester-Old Trafford Liverpool-New Anfield Leeds-Elland Road (with expansion) Sheffield-Hillsborough (with redevelopment) Newcastle-St James' Park Sunderland-Stadium of Light Nottingham-City Ground (with expansion) Bristol-Ashton Vale (new ground) Southampton-St Marys We are actually bigger than Nottingham not that they're going for it. We're the best suited for the Midlands
Fosse Boy Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 sorry guys but the idea of Leicester or Derby (or worse, Milton Keynes) getting the world cup is awful. They need to pick the biggest & best cities in England, and spread them about a bit. E.g.London-Wembley London-Twickenham Manchester-Old Trafford Liverpool-New Anfield Leeds-Elland Road (with expansion) Sheffield-Hillsborough (with redevelopment) Newcastle-St James' Park Sunderland-Stadium of Light Nottingham-City Ground (with expansion) Bristol-Ashton Vale (new ground) Southampton-St Marys The RFU will only allow rugby union to be played at Twickenham I believe. I think the FA enquired about using it for Cup semis a few years back. If you're gonna spread them about a bit, why make both Sunderland and Newcastle host cities? It'd be far more logical to give Leicester or (heaven help us, Derby) some games and give the East Midlands a bit of exposure too for once instead of the current situation where people presume that the Midlands just means Birmingham. The idea of Milton Keynes getting games actually makes me want to chunder though.
Corky Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 sorry guys but the idea of Leicester or Derby (or worse, Milton Keynes) getting the world cup is awful. They need to pick the biggest & best cities in England, and spread them about a bit. E.g.London-Wembley London-Twickenham Manchester-Old Trafford Liverpool-New Anfield Leeds-Elland Road (with expansion) Sheffield-Hillsborough (with redevelopment) Newcastle-St James' Park Sunderland-Stadium of Light Nottingham-City Ground (with expansion) Bristol-Ashton Vale (new ground) Southampton-St Marys Have Southampton but not Leicester?
weluv Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 sorry, forgot Villa park, so Southampton drops out. If Nottingham doesn't want it that's a bit of a blow. As for the ridiculous earlier suggestion, the host cities should be the biggest cities, with the biggest stadia, and the best ability to cope with the influx of people. As England's 3rd largest city, Leeds is better placed to do this than Leicester. Oh, and you can only have 1 city with 2 stadia in, so if Wembley & Emirates were being used, you couldn't use New White Hart Lane.
sdb Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 sorry guys but the idea of Leicester or Derby (or worse, Milton Keynes) getting the world cup is awful. They need to pick the biggest & best cities in England, and spread them about a bit. E.g.London-Wembley London-Twickenham Manchester-Old Trafford Liverpool-New Anfield Leeds-Elland Road (with expansion) Sheffield-Hillsborough (with redevelopment) Newcastle-St James' Park Sunderland-Stadium of Light Nottingham-City Ground (with expansion) Bristol-Ashton Vale (new ground) Southampton-St Marys How is 2 London stadiums and 2/3rds Nothern clubs 'spread a bit'??!
lavrentis Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 Nottingham's stadium ? Leicester already has a better stadium suitable for expansion, good transport links M1 etc. And Leicester Isn't exactly a small city so It would be able to deal with influxes of people, after all the council want people to visit.
lcfc81 Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 sorry guys but the idea of Leicester or Derby (or worse, Milton Keynes) getting the world cup is awful. They need to pick the biggest & best cities in England, and spread them about a bit. E.g.London-Wembley London-Twickenham Manchester-Old Trafford Liverpool-New Anfield Leeds-Elland Road (with expansion) Sheffield-Hillsborough (with redevelopment) Newcastle-St James' Park Sunderland-Stadium of Light Nottingham-City Ground (with expansion) Bristol-Ashton Vale (new ground) Southampton-St Marys And how are cities like Leicester, Derby or Milton Keynes ever going to improve if they never bid for and get events like the world cup? Half the cities you cite as the biggest and best were industrial waste grounds in decades not so distance, but government investment has pulled them out of this. Now its time cities like Leicester got investment for things like a world cup (in football as well as rugby) so that we as the people of Leicester can hold our head high and not be continually derided by people for being 'awful'. Fair play to everyone (and particularly the council and bid organisers) for fighting for a better future for Leicester and for those those who really imply our city is 'awful' you are only holding us back so go and live somewhere else. Rant over.
CosbehFox Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 As for the ridiculous earlier suggestion, the host cities should be the biggest cities, with the biggest stadia, and the best ability to cope with the influx of people. As England's 3rd largest city, Leeds is better placed to do this than Leicester. FYI City - Biggest Stadium - Stadium Capacity - Population Birmingham - Villa Park - pp for 51k - 2.2million inc. suburbs Bristol - Ashton Vale - 42k if WC bid successful - 551k Derby - Pride Park - 44k if WC bid successful - 229k Hull - KC Stadium - 32k - 301k Leeds - Elland Road - 50k - 761k (City pop.) Leicester - Walkers Stadium - 40k - 380k (inc. Wigston & Oadby) London - Wembley/Emirates - 90k/60k - 8.5m Manchester - Old Trafford - 72k - 2.2million MK Dons - Stadium:MK - 32K - 184K Newcastle - St James Park - 55k - 879k (debateable given that's the Tyneside area but its catchment area) Nottingham - New Stadium- 50k - 666k (urban area - catchment area) Plymouth - New Stadium - no figure announced - 243k Portsmouth - New Stadium - 40k - 442k (catchment area) Sheffield - Bramall Lane/Hillsborough - 45k - 530k (excl. RovRum) Sunderland - Stadium of Light - 49k - 290k After typing all that up, the population figures are useless, it's too difficult to define city and its catchment area.
Father Ted Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 FYICity - Biggest Stadium - Stadium Capacity - Population Birmingham - Villa Park - pp for 51k - 2.2million inc. suburbs Bristol - Ashton Vale - 42k if WC bid successful - 551k Derby - Pride Park - 44k if WC bid successful - 229k Hull - KC Stadium - 32k - 301k Leeds - Elland Road - 50k - 761k (City pop.) Leicester - Walkers Stadium - 40k - 380k (inc. Wigston & Oadby) London - Wembley/Emirates - 90k/60k - 8.5m Manchester - Old Trafford - 72k - 2.2million MK Dons - Stadium:MK - 32K - 184K Newcastle - St James Park - 55k - 879k (debateable given that's the Tyneside area but its catchment area) Nottingham - New Stadium- 50k - 666k (urban area - catchment area) Plymouth - New Stadium - no figure announced - 243k Portsmouth - New Stadium - 40k - 442k (catchment area) Sheffield - Bramall Lane/Hillsborough - 45k - 530k (excl. RovRum) Sunderland - Stadium of Light - 49k - 290k After typing all that up, the population figures are useless, it's too difficult to define city and its catchment area. Extending a stadium, espescially for the likes of Bristol, Plymouth, Portsmouth, Hull and even possibly ourselves could lead to serious shit and is it really worth it for 1 group game between Angola and Honduras?? Edit: Forgot MKDonalds.
weluv Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 if you're going to use population figures use the right ones. The Birmingham & Manchester city regions have 2.2m people. But these include places like Wolverhampton, West Bromwich, Wigan, Rochdale & Oldham. The Leeds City Region has a population of 2.9m so, to correct you Leeds-Elland Road-50k (assuming only West stand redeveloped)-2.9m
Daggers Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 Councillors whole-heartedly back Derby's World Cup campaign Amazingly - not everybody who pays tax in Derby does.
Guest Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 Nottingham has pulled out. We are actually bigger than Nottingham not that they're going for it. Someone should tell them in Nottingham; they still have the banners all over the place!!
Finchy Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 And how are cities like Leicester, Derby or Milton Keynes ever going to improve if they never bid for and get events like the world cup?Half the cities you cite as the biggest and best were industrial waste grounds in decades not so distance, but government investment has pulled them out of this. Now its time cities like Leicester got investment for things like a world cup (in football as well as rugby) so that we as the people of Leicester can hold our head high and not be continually derided by people for being 'awful'. Fair play to everyone (and particularly the council and bid organisers) for fighting for a better future for Leicester and for those those who really imply our city is 'awful' you are only holding us back so go and live somewhere else. Rant over. Exactly.
Daggers Posted 7 November 2009 Posted 7 November 2009 Does it really matter where some over-priced matches will probably not be played?
Webbo Posted 7 November 2009 Posted 7 November 2009 CITY councillors last night unanimously supported proposals to underwrite Derby's £15m bid to become a World Cup host city.The authority also agreed to continue discussions with Derby County FC over a possible £26m extension to Pride Park, which would be required if the stadium was to stage World Cup matches. You have to wonder whether it's worth it if it's going to cost that much to extend the stadium when we're only likely to fill it just the once.
Daggers Posted 7 November 2009 Posted 7 November 2009 I wonder quite how much council tax money is going to be frittered on shite marketing executives across the country, as each tinpot councillor attempts to outdo his equal and opposite in another town? Useless tits.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.