2020 Euro's

[dickie mint]

13 Cities will all host games in the 2020 finals with possibly Istanbul hosting the Final,looks like Michel Platini's idea is the one they've backed.

[Col5times]

Be a nightmare that won't it for fans? Could end up having to travel to numerous different countries if ya team get far? Very expensive.

[Teflon Don]

Be a nightmare that won't it for fans? Could end up having to travel to numerous different countries if ya team get far? Very expensive.

 

UEFA have already thought of that....

 

Euro 2012: Uefa president Michel Platini reveals plans to stage Euro 2020 all over the continent - Telegraph

 

As for the long-suffering fans, Platini added: “There are low-cost airlines and it’s easier to go from London to Paris or Berlin, then Kharkov to Gdansk.’’

[Furmedge]

And these low cost airlines will charge a fortune on those dates. EasyJet etc will be rubbing their hands together with this news.

 

Yet again the working mans game gets further away.

[xerxes]

I think it is a great idea which will work well.Most fans only make one or two games anyway and the opportunity to visit europes greatest stadia to watch the best national teams is mouthwatering.

[DooooodekNo5]

I think it is a great idea which will work well.Most fans only make one or two games anyway and the opportunity to visit europes greatest stadia to watch the best national teams is mouthwatering.

 

Please admit you're taking the piss.

[Trumo]

It might not be the best solution, it certainly takes away the whole 'tournament' vibe, and UEFA will no doubt see a money-spinner in taking the event around Europe, but it's getting to the stage where something like is almost necessary now. The way football's governing bodies look at tournament hosting these days, there is little to be gained politically or economically by staging these events in countries which already have the main infrastructure in place. On the flip side, it's become too expensive and too complicated to have lesser developed countries as hosts because the legacy will be non-viable. These countries have been given the hosting rights to major competitions recently, and it has been a nightmare to ensure that everything will be ready on time. Even if the stadiums get built, there is way too much faffing about and red tape involved in getting transport and logistics up to speed.

[xerxes]

Please admit you're taking the piss.

 

 

 

I am 100% serious. I am amazed by how conservative and retro some fans are on this.

 

The European Championship is the most competitive international tournament in the world in the group stages, although that will change when the finals numbers increase. But the logistics have descended into farce, the Ukraine/Poland tournament a perfect example. Flight times were long and arduous, with tertiary venues given a one time boost, then to be long forgotten. Very few people are able to stay for the duration of a tournament anyway. The unemployed cannot afford it, ordinary working people cannot take that length of time off.

 

France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Russia, England and Portugal are pretty much the only sovereign countries able to comfortably host the tournament on their own now, that effectively disenfranchises an awful lot of football fans in many other countries who would love to see top flight international football. This is a rarity, a good idea from UEFA.

 

The prospect of seeing the great clashes, in the best stadia around Europe is mouth watering. The Olympic Stadium in Athens, Croke Park in Eire,the Friends Arena in Stockholm and the Amsterdam Arena all are worthy venues for the top games. But equally a tournament that can offer England v Spain at the Stade de France, Germany v Italy at the Nou Camp, France v Russia at the San Siro will be special indeed, with many more tickets available as a result of the larger stadia capacities.

 

Some people are only happy when they are moaning, looking backwards, or both.

[shanks69]

i'm sure i heard that semi's and final will be in the same stadium.

[Scott_M]

I think it's a decent idea & having 1-3 days in a city won't be much more expensive than staying 2/3 weeks somewhere. Also, you can drive most places in mainland Europe.

 

I expect Wembley to be stiffed out of the final even though its the biggest capacity, has 4 airports, the best indestructure & has hosted the most profitable C/L Final ever.

 

Some back handers will see it in Turkey or see somewhere.

[xerxes]

The idea of making two of the three group games “home” fixtures also ensures that more home fans can watch their international side in a competitive tournament- a great idea. Currently only when your country hosts do you get to see your team competing on home soil in a competitive tournament. Under these proposals the wins are considerable.

 

 

1. Travelling ( expense) for fans of qualifying countries is reduced by having two home games.

 

2. Glamour/ rarely visited destinations for the other games are made available for their third game and knockout game

 

3. Fans in countries who could never host a full tournament get to see major games

 

4. Great stadia can be used more fully

 

5. More fans can attend games because of the larger capacities available.

 

6. More fans get the chance to support their home country on home soil than ever before.

 

What is not to like from the above?

[Red_or_Dead]

It's a shit idea and it's only done to make more money.

 

Xerxes you really are an ultraspack.

[Furmedge]

Is that the agreement? That teams get to play games in their own country in a tournament? I can't see that happening. So let's say England go all the way to the final, as far fetched as it is. They play the group games in Holland and England, then the first knockout game in Turkey, jump on the plane to Russia for the semi and then back over to Portugal for the final. How does that benefit the fans or the players? It lines the pockets of UEFA and the companies that sponsor the tournament. MasterCard will see a shit load more activity from the supporters who are gullible enough to try and get to see all the games and airlines will make more money in a month than they will in the rest of the year put together.

[Newport]

Given how UEFA and FIFA usually operate travels probably will be limited to one disgracefully expensive company.

[Steve]

The idea of making two of the three group games “home” fixtures also ensures that more home fans can watch their international side in a competitive tournament- a great idea. ?

 

Given that the host cities are going to be in France/Italy/Germany/Spain/England it also virtually guarantees that the big countries will make it through the group stages by finishing top and then get straight forward games in the knockouts against best third placed qualifiers. It reduces the scenario that happened last year, with groups of death and Holland getting eliminated early. With the tournament increasing to 24 teams, there's a far greater chance in a tournament in 1 country that the smaller less fashionable countries may sneak through and they end up with an unmarketable semi final.

[Steve]

Given how UEFA and FIFA usually operate travels probably will be limited to one disgracefully expensive company.

 

UEFA are contradicting themselves all the time, as on the one hand they are saying it's easier to fly London-Berlin than travel within Poland or Ukraine, but then stipulating that all host cities have airports with two terminals to keep rival fans apart, as they envisage most coming in by charters. Remember the 2008 Champions League final when Platini was asked about the lack of affordable accommodation in Moscow, his response was that fans should be on day charters and not be worried about accommodation.

The 2 terminal airport thing means Cardiff is unlikely to get any games, when really speaking having a tournament in this way should mean it gets spread between cities in smaller countries that have one good big stadium but would have no chance of hosting a whole tournament alone due to a lack of stadiums of suitable size - Scotland, Ireland, Romania, Sweden, Denmark are examples.

[Harry Squatter]

An ok idea in theory in respect that one country doesn't have to spend mega bucks updating 4 or 5 grounds or having a fixture like England V Holland in a small town where loads of knobheads will go to cause shit.

 

All the robbing cunt travel agencies will snaffle all the tickets up and only sell them as part of packages costing a few hundred quid. As soon as the draw is made Ryanair and Easyjet will put up the prices five times what they will cost normally. A mate of mine wanted to go to a Champions league away tie and was looking at all the possible routes of the teams we could draw, when we drew Barcelona he got back onto Easyjets website to book but the price had literally quadrupled less than 5 minutes after the draw.

[Saucepan]

This whole thing is madness.

FIFA and UEFA has well and truely jumped the shark on this one.

Edited January 29, 2013 by Saucepan

[Kozel9]

I love how UEFA works. With things that makes endless amount of money and publicity they work quick and effective, as an organistation should.

 

But when it comes to develop the game, (FFP, cameras etc) they are slow as fuck, and haven't got the balls to do shit.

 

I look forward to the day when UEFA gets a leader who actually cares about the game, as much as the money.

 

EDIT: But to be honest, i can see both pros and cons about this idea, and i think it is too early to judge if this is a good or bad idea, and maybe it would work. If i had a say in it though i hate changes and this is a huge one, so i hope it fails and everything will be back to normal after Euro2020.

[Trumo]

I love how UEFA works. With things that makes endless amount of money and publicity they work quick and effective, as an organistation should.

 

But when it comes to develop the game, (FFP, cameras etc) they are slow as fuck, and haven't got the balls to do shit.

 

I look forward to the day when UEFA gets a leader who actually cares about the game, as much as the money.

 

You've got your organisations mixed up, as changes to the game have to be ratified by IFAB (International Football Associations Board) as they are the ones who are actually tasked with setting the rules and regulations of the game itself. Bodies like FIFA oversee the implementation of those rules globally whereas bodies like UEFA oversee things at continental level.

[Kozel9]

You've got your organisations mixed up, as changes to the game have to be ratified by IFAB (International Football Associations Board) as they are the ones who are actually tasked with setting the rules and regulations of the game itself. Bodies like FIFA oversee the implementation of those rules globally whereas bodies like UEFA oversee things at continental level.

 

But wasn't FFP UEFAs and Platinis idea?

[Trumo]

But wasn't FFP UEFAs and Platinis idea?

 

FFP is about off-field operational management. The rules and regulations I'm talking about include things like video technology, the offside rule, the number of referees involves in matches, the number of subs allowed and that sort of thing, which all directly affect how the game is played and officiated.