a question comment off the football on BBC3

Should Country's build all these big stadiums for world cup?

 

Why not?

 

Because they don't get used afterwords.

I think it's wrong.

They listed some of the teams that are going to play in these 50k plus stadiums. Some don't get 10k

 

Only if there is a plan put them to a good use after World Cup before they're built. Pointless spending hundreds if millions for them to sit empty after being used for 3 weeks

 

agree and this isn't just a football thing.
I also don't think they should get any money from Fifa for the stadiums.

Not just bigging England up but i think us and spain could host a tournament tomorrow and i think there the country's that should get it.

 

Depends how much money the country is going to make from hosting the world cup.

I presume, as everyone fights to host it, that it is a great money spinner for the hosting nations economy. I have no idea on these things, but if it is I guess that half empty stadiums for league matches for years to come is a small price to pay. . . . .

 

This is why they are protesting isn't it?

The country can't afford it and ,as you say ,they can't see a use for them afterwards.

You need to let developing countries stage these tournaments to get the game more popular (attendances shot up after Euro 96 if I remember correctly)and you can't just have the same country hosting every time.

Having said that there's a fine line between investing in new stadia to improve a countrys world image and spending so much that it ruins any positives that it may bring.

 

Ok Hemsy, you and Jedstar have had a go at German football. Look at the crowds these clubs get through reasonable priced tickets. Build the stadia but make it cheap enough to get in.

 

I don't see why they can't turn them in to accommodation afterwards. That would certainly help the nation.

 

I'm not sure.
As i say earlier they do it in other sports. Cricket stadiums in the Caribbean that they are never going to fill miles away from any towns or cities.

It's strange for us in this country because most sports are very well used apart from Olympics are that's because we haven't been able to use them yet.
But Football, Rugby, cricket there's always people in these stadiums at international level at least.

 

I'm not sure.
As i say earlier they do it in other sports. Cricket stadiums in the Caribbean that they are never going to fill miles away from any towns or cities.

It's strange for us in this country because most sports are very well used apart from Olympics are that's because we haven't been able to use them yet.
But Football, Rugby, cricket there's always people in these stadiums at international level at least.

We don't need to have ago at Germany. We have great crowds in this county especially at the highest level.

 

Strictly speaking, no. In countries with considerable destitution, illiteracy, lack of public health, that money is better spent on those things, only in countries which are already first world does it make sense to spend money on events like the World Cup and the Olympics - the happiness that they generate to a nations overall sense of wellbeing is money well spent, in order to generate the same happiness from other sources, such as Tax cuts you would have to spend much more money, ergo its probably money well spent.

 

The bottom clubs also have full grounds, just like Wigan Sunderland reading et al. I went to Frankfurt 2 years ago, they were practically relegated and there were 43,000 there.

 

But the country doesn't make any money, it all goes back to thiefa and their gravy train of bribes and largess. If you look at tourism, the number of extra tourists is offset by those who don't go because there's a world cup on, and those that do go don't spend much money - many fly in watch a couple of games and bugger off, maybe a few extra meals here and there and some booze, but not a great boost to any economy. The cost of the stadiums, the cost of policing, the cost of bribing and paying Thiefa and the general disruption provides zero tangable economic benefit.

 

and there's less clubs and theres 17,000,000. Yes that's right Seventeen Million more people in Germany. And that's the difference between united kingdom and Germany. it would be twenty million plus between England and Germany.

Which is the difference between uk and Kenya say. Big difference.

also there's 7 teams that AVG less than 10K in there second division.

 

So by your calculation, China and USA have the biggest supported football league, conversation done i'm off

 

We are talking about both country's number one sports.
China and the USA aren't Football majority country's yet.

 

I honestly think if England had built state of art stadiums in birmingham 40'000 seats liverpool 65'000 seats and sheffield 40'000 and got both teams from all 3 citys to ground share after we would have got the world cup, thats what fifa are all about

 

Next question, should barnsley have a big stadium just for the premier league???? Should barnsley have a good academy to produce one player every 15 years??

Sure i heard these questions leave sherhansens mouth.

 

You can understand why the Brazilian people aren't happy. They were told that the stadiums would be built using private money when in fact public money has been used. The cost of living is ridiculously high compared when compared with wages yet the government decides to build numerous stadia that won't be used after the world cup when it can't afford them.

International tournaments need to be held in countries where stadia will be used on a regular basis after the tournaments. As far as I know, the Premier League has the highest attendances as percentage of capacity at 95%. The Bundesliga is at 88%.