EURO 2020 - 12 host Cities?!!

Benimar

According to various respected journos on Twitter, Michel Platini has raised the possibility of EURO 2020 being held in a number of different countries..possibly as many as 12.

Apparently this has the support of UEFA Exco and will be voted on in Jan/Feb 2013.

I find this idea absolutely bonkers. Logistically, it is an absolute nightmare for fans in particular. It won't be so much a tournament as it will be a travelling roadshow.

What do people think? Are the Turkish and Celtic bids so bad that UEFA has to resort to this nonsense? Or has Platini finally proved himself an able successor to Sepp ' 50 ideas a day and 51 of them are bad' Blatter?

mike65

Just heard it - "could be 12 cities in one country or 1 city in 12 countries"

Nuts, imagine the logistics for fans!

Richard Hillman

Benimar wrote: »

According to various respected journos on Twitter, Michel Platini has raised the possibility of EURO 2020 being held in a number of different countries..possibly as many as 12.

Apparently this has the support of UEFE Exco and will be voted on in Jan/Feb 2013.

I find this idea absolutely bonkers. Logistically, it is an absolute nightmare for fans in particular. It won't be so much a tournament as it will be a travelling roadshow.

What do people think? Are the Turkish and Celtic bids so bad that UEFA has to resort to this nonsense? Or has Platini finally proved himself an able successor to Sepp ' 50 ideas a day and 51 of them are bad' Blatter?

Yes they are. Turkey is a kip full of stabby people, Ireland/Scotland/Wales bid is non existant and dont get me started about Azerbaijan/Georgia.

aindriu80

If the cities are too far apart then it might be crap.

There is no reason why Ireland/Scotland/Wales cant put together a decent bid providing they were willing to build a few stadia.

RayCon

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Turkey is a kip full of stabby people, .

mike65

A Celtic Fringe Euro will never happen, the numbers would be an issue for transport and accommodation infrastructure I doubt they would want a tournament which required travelling across a body of water as well.

Eirebear

mike65 wrote: »

A Celtic Fringe Euro will never happen, the numbers would be an issue for transport and accommodation infrastructure I doubt they would want a tournament which required travelling across a body of water as well.

What...like Japan & Korea?

CiaranC

Perfectly doable in Northern Europe.

mike65

Eirebear wrote: »

What...like Japan & Korea?

Grrrrrrrrrrrr! Accommodation/Infrastructure would still be an issue here I think, unless it was hosting only games of one group and nothing after that.

carlop

It's doable, and in many ways is much more practical, but I think it would be a great shame and would take away a lot from the essence of an international tournament.

kitakyushu

I'm sure when the "joint hosting" first appeared it raised a few eyebrows. Now it's practically the norm the Euros (3 of the past 4 tournaments). Logical extensions of this idea will mean UEFA can take advantage of smaller countries that have one or two markets for football but not enough to even be half-host.

Stupid idea from a fan pov (I loved the idea of "the host country") but I wouldn't be surprised if it happening nonetheless. Perhaps in generations to come the Euros will be nothing more than a formula one style roadshow with established cities in different countries getting the matches every tournament and there being no longer any need for a particular host country anymore.

adamski8

ahhhh stop ruining the best football tournament uefa!!!!!

carlop

The real blow will be when Euro 2024 is given to the UAE.

darragh16

Can see the Nordic countries putting something together that would suit Platini's idea, especially if the Turkish and Celtic bids are that bad

Ant11

Madness. Platini out.

adamski8

its about time germany or spain held a euros, why didnt they put in a bid i wonder
ah because madrid is going for olympics too.

JPA

mike65 wrote: »

A Celtic Fringe Euro will never happen, the numbers would be an issue for transport and accommodation infrastructure I doubt they would want a tournament which required travelling across a body of water as well.

It's no different, in fact much easier, than traveling between say Donestk and Krakow.

greendom

In terms of distance travelled would it be any worse than this one? The distance between Gdansk and Donetsk is almost 2000k and the transport infrastructure would be better in almost any other part of Europe.

i'm sure it would be done in clusters too where group matches would all be held in small geographical areas.

It would be a good opportunity for smaller European countries to host part of the European Championships.

UpTheSlashers

adamski8 wrote: »

its about time germany or spain held a euros, why didnt they put in a bid i wonder
ah because madrid is going for olympics too.

Spain haven't hosted a major tournament since 1982. Would like to see them go for Euro 2020 if they dont get the olympics, or would it be too late at that stage?

Kidchameleon

Would take away a ton of the prestige no doubt. What about automatic qualification? Would the 12 hosts be guaranteed a place?

Seaneh

I think it's a really good idea.
Think about it.

Dublin, London, Paris, Rome, Madrid, Lisbon, Berlin, Oslo, Stockholm, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Zagreb.

Make it so you can't be "based" in your home country for the group stage, each stadium will only host 4 games either way.

As for qualifications, all of the above countries, along with Russia, Poland, etc are pretty much certain to be there anyway because of the expansion to a 24 team tournament, or just have normal qualifiers, nobody is granted a buy for being the host, which is fairer really.

It makes a lot of sense financially and logistically too, which is why I think Platini has thrown it out there.

dreamers75

Does everyone hosting qualify ?

UserName 217

dreamers75 wrote: »

Does everyone hosting qualify ?

Yes, whoever is hosting will automatically get through to the group stages of the tournament.

DB21

I actually kind of like the idea.

ArmaniJeanss

He's clearly 'flying a kite' here to try to get more actual bids on the table.

They've already extended the initial bidding process which was supposed to end on May 31st this year.
Unfortunately there is only one real bid on the table (Turkey) which may have to withdraw dependent on the Olympics, and two nonsense bids from Georgia/Azerbeijan and the Celtic Nations.

The serious nations have held fire on 2020 bids as they know Turkey is long odds on for Euro 2020 (as Istanbul is the outsider of 3 in the Olympic betting).

Zebra3

adamski8 wrote: »

ahhhh stop ruining the best football tournament uefa!!!!!

Thank the FAI for pushing to have the tournament expanded to 24 teams.

I won't be watching the next one until the knockout stages.

Green Diesel

Zebra3 wrote: »

I won't be watching the next one until the knockout stages.

The group stages had most of the best games this time round IMO, should still be some good games in groups when there are 24 in tournament.

Zebra3

Green Diesel wrote: »

The group stages had most of the best games this time round IMO, should still be some good games in groups when there are 24 in tournament.

And the edge will be gone from the group stages next time round with 16 of the 24 qualifiers going through.

(Assuming they do what FIFA used to do with 24 teams).

The qualification process will become even more of a joke.

Kidchameleon

Zebra3 wrote: »

adamski8 wrote: »

ahhhh stop ruining the best football tournament uefa!!!!!

Thank the FAI for pushing to have the tournament expanded to 24 teams.

I won't be watching the next one until the knockout stages.

while your at it, thank he german, spanish, english, french, italian fa's for voting yes to it.

dsmythy

Combine qualification and the tournament. Massive group stages followed by knockout followed by final in neutral city. Every second year at a minimum you'd need a winner of course........

TaosHum

Considering the strength of European football, is this really necessary? You have countries such as Russia, England, Italy, Spain, Germany, Portugal (maybe), France and Turkey all capable of hosting the event of their own. Why not just rotate it between these countries every four years?

Its bad enough the quality of football will be diluted with 8 extra teams being allowed at the finals, but having 10-12 teams automatically qualifying is an absolute farce, makes a mockery of the qualification process.

ArmaniJeanss

TaosHum wrote: »

Its bad enough the quality of football will be diluted with 8 extra teams being allowed at the finals, but having 10-12 teams automatically qualifying is an absolute farce, makes a mockery of the qualification process.

As I understand the plan (which I don't think will happen) is that they will wait until after the draw to decide the hosts.

So lets say the draw is as follows
Group A is Germany, Poland, Greece, Bosnia.
Group B is Italy, Russia, Denmark, Armenia.
Group C is Spain, England, Serbia, Ireland.
.... etc.

The teams in each group would then 'bid' to host games using two cities.
So Group C would most logically be Barcelona and Madrid or alternatively England could bid using Wembley and Old Trafford.
Group B would likely be either Italy or Russia.
But Group A could possibly be shared, using one German city and Warsaw.

But I don't think theres any suggestion of 10 or 12 automatic qualifiers.

gnfnrhead

Do away with the automatic qualiying and instead make the host cities/countries a top seed for the qualifying stages. They get an advantage but will still have to earn a place in the actual tournament.

Bertser

It'd be a good idea as long as transport and accomodation prices won't be overly inflated (this will definitely happen).

jdooley28

maybe it could work the 12 host citiesw were grouped in 2's geographically.

For example Group A games played in Manchester/ Liverpool, Glasgow edinburgh, Brussels amsterdam or whatever.

Bit of a disaster if your group games are Moscow and Madrid or something.

Still prefer existing format