World Cup In NZ

World Cup In NZ

Maybe Auckland haven't realize the football centre has MOVED south to Wellington the home of the Wellington Phoenix FC and the mighty Hurricanes, NZF needs to jack it's ideas up and wake up, have you not learnt from the recent World Cup and LA Galaxy, play off here at Westpac Stadium and not cake tin as the Aucklanders like to call it, you do try very hard to put down the only true Stadium in this country, and not unlike a mish-mash rugby ground called the "flower garden" ie eden park, which has rugby stands stuck willy nilly on a piece garden turf

Have you not noticed most rugby and soccer plus other sports television adverts use "WESTPAC STADIUM" because it has 360� degree of totally un-interrupyed spectator view of any games, unlike "eden garden" which has so many stanchions obscuring spectator view (sic)

Hori C

Totally off topic but,


What does that mean?  Always see it but never worked it out.

Pretty sure a ground has to be 40k for World Cup hosting.  The Ring of Fire isn't. Hard News2009-11-29 13:47:53

They should play at North Harbour Stadium.

This is an unbelievable crap coming out of people who ought to know better: "Football officials", "Oceania Football Confederation general secretary", "New Zealand Football chairman".

As I gaze out of my window, I see a flock of flying pigs...

There is no way the Aussies will let us get in on the action should they get to host the WC, thinking otherwise is just fantasy......

Of course we would get a couple of teams training here, and maybe the odd freindly - but thats it.

Not going to happen (but if it did, Eden Park - or maybe Lancaster Park- are the only grounds big enough to be allowed to host it)

Sic means thus in Latin. It's sometimes used in parentheses when directly citing from other texts, usually when there's an error of some sort (spelling, grammatical, etc) to indicate that the error occurred in the original, and not the author's, text. If that makes any sense.

Journo obviously has little idea if they are quoting Tai Nicholas. Australia isn't an OFC nation and the OFC would have nothing to do with it. If it theoretically could happen, which it basically can't, then it would surely be between FFA and NZF.

I am fairly sure the best NZ will get is a few teams here for training before the World Cup.

But with the difference in weather between Oz and here, I am sure it would be short stints of friendly games... and sightseeing tours :)

 

Difference between Auckland, Wellington, Melbourne and Adelaide in June/July is fairly negligible

Here's some lovely little chickens, oh wait there still in their eggs

The fact that Australia is AFC nation and NZ is OFC nation is the main reason.

Why would different confederations really matter?  Other than maybe the fact that FIFA have said they want to spread World Cups around the confederations and this wouldn't solely be an Asian tournament.

A positive of this would be Oceania would have hosted part of a FIFA World Cup, so that would be all the confederations having had a go at hosting.

Get your point but I'm not sure on FIFA's stance on 2 diff confed's hosting at same time. Again, politics getting in the way! Oceania seriously needs to be resolved one way or another...

FIFA have said no more to 2 countries holding the WC let alone 2 confederations

Well that effectively wipes out any holland/belgium joint bids in the foreseeable future. . . .

They got cold on the idea after Korea and Japan in 2002 from memory...

1.HN is right, grounds have to be 40k.

If it's good enough for the Wharf, it's good enough for Brazil.

Well is just so happens that the 2010 FINA Water Polo World Cup is being held in Wellington...

(We're also hosting the 2010 FINA Diving World Cup. Obvious joke is obvious.)

If Australia does get a WC, and we qualify, would be an epic road trip based on share numbers we could bring across.

Rustenburg has an athletics track around it



both NZ and Aussie will be playing here
valeo2009-12-05 23:00:42

We've already played there in the Confederations Cup.

True - I'll have to dig out the wording. It may be a recommendation rather than a rule. Or my IIRC may just be wrong!

The Maracana in Brazil is round. I've yet to see the actual requirements for this rule about the 'rectangular' thing. Not dissing your comments, but I'm yet to see solid evidence to counter the argument.

In the pdf that FIFA release on stadium requirements and recommendations, pages 200 to 235 cover the requirements for hosting WC games. I thought there was something covering maxiumum distance of closest seats from the pitch, not shape itself. However, it says there is a minimum distance of 8.5m for closest spectator seats to pitch at tunnel, 10m at goal side and opposite tunnel....

Good find, can you post a link to it?

No problem. The document can be found at:

Thanks mate, appreciated.