yep then ppl all over the country would go watch England matches
not only the Londoners
man u fan
2007-03-20 20:21:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Frihah Anti-Milanist 4lyf! 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Firstly the English National stadium in most country's is in the capital.This also gives fans an excuse to travel to London and have a good time afterwards.Cardiff is not central to wales but it is the capital.Stade de France is not central and so you can go on.
Secondly the national stadium is replacing the old existing Wembley with all its history and glory and that just happens to be in London.Being the capital also has the benefit of the resources it can offer in terms of funding and other activities that can take place there which a smaller city could not support.
Sure it will mean a bit more travelling on average for most people but as a Newcastle united fan if I was going to the FA Cup final Birmingham just would'nt be the same.
Roll on the next FA CUP Final!
2007-03-20 10:34:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by Roman H 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
We are at the beginning of a similar problem here in N Ireland. All internationals are played in Windsor Park, Belfast and that stadium is in need of updating but the Gov. want to build the new one on the site of the old Long Kesh prison near Lisburn. That is about 12 miles from Belfast and much more 'central' to all of the six counties of NI. There is a big debate going on at present with most of the city supporters in favour of staying in Belfast, but all the country folk prefer Long Kesh.
Watch this space! The decision will be taken very soon.
2007-03-20 10:37:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by The Shadow 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hell, no. National stadium = Capital City. Remember, it'll be used for a lot more than hosting the FA Cup final!
I don't really think it matters, being in London. Most of the train lines there are really quick. I lived in York until recently and that's only two hours away.
I'm a Liverpool fan, too. =)
2007-03-20 10:30:59
·
answer #4
·
answered by Zerg Proletariat 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Don`t really need one. Letting the Prem` clubs take their turn to stage England games seemed to work well and the supporters liked the idea also.
All that money for the Stadium - somebody certainly lined their pockets and is now probably living it rich abroad in sunny climes.
But anyway it`s built now - so no good crying over spilt milk.
Will it make England play any better?
Somehow I very much doubt it........they should win the next match, shouldn`t they???
2007-03-20 10:36:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is plenty of barren land in mid england !
if an olympic city was built there, and used as such for the duration of the games, then afterwards the city could have been used as a "newtown" development to ease the housing burden on the government !
A very short sighted state of affairs, methinks !
2007-03-20 10:31:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Depends whether you mean geographically or in terms of population distribution. In which case it should probably have been built around the Milton Keynes area I think? But then, noone willingly wants to go to MK.
2007-03-20 10:27:18
·
answer #7
·
answered by theearlof87 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No you are not........Its ridiculous to have it in London when a large number of cup finals contain at least one team from the North West (Man Utd or Liverpool)
2007-03-21 01:44:24
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
i agree with you (man u fan) Liverpool and birmingham are both known for culture, manchester is famous and great for tourism It should be built in the centre near all three. Also london is full of foreigners who don't care about footie like us northeners do!
2007-03-20 11:07:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by manc.lass 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
Yes i totally agree with you, its already been proved how popular it is with the fans when they play anywhere but London. Why the hell do we want to have the hassle of going down there and pay mega prices ?
2007-03-20 10:31:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by villavillain 3
·
1⤊
0⤋