Euro 2016

where should it take place ?

the leading contenders seem to be

France

and

Italy

also in the running

Turkey

BUT

is Turkey really part of Europe ?

anyway

Euro 2012 will take place in Poland and maybe also in the Ukraine

a Cup that really constitutes a HUGE risk

nobody knows whether the venues , hotels, airports, roads... will be ready in time

Italy would also be a gamble considering the current infrastructure

should it therefore go to the Frog-eaters ?

the DFB is said to support the French because they, in turn, supported the German Women's 2011 World Cup bid

so

WHITHER Euro 2016 ?

Italy. Longer since Italia 90 than France 98

Turkey, would be awesome to make a trip there.

Italy for sure. Turkey is a bit to close to the terroists...france had one recently.

debaser wrote:Italy. Longer since Italia 90 than France 98

That's a criteria I always take into account.

From the countryside/stadiums and everything, all three could host nice tournaments imo. I am not to hot on turkey but if Poland can do it they can as well.

Scotland

EM La Liga wrote:Scotland

Why?

Kimbo wrote:

EM La Liga wrote:Scotland

Why?

They never been hosts before or have they?

they have good stadiums i.e Hampden,Celtic,Ibrox,Tynecastle

Tynecastle is tiny.

EM La Liga wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

EM La Liga wrote:Scotland

Why?

They never been hosts before or have they?

they have good stadiums i.e Hampden,Celtic,Ibrox,Tynecastle

Scotland could only really do it jointly - they were talking of Scotland/Wales/Ireland one time, but that has its own problems.

Three of those stadia are in Glasgow & as Kimbo said Tynecastle is too small. They could knock something up in Edinburgh, Dundee and Aberdeen I guess, but after that they'd be struggling.

It will be Turkey sure but it does not belong in Europe, besides only pikeys go there on holiday cause it costs the half what Spain costs.

debaser wrote:

EM La Liga wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

EM La Liga wrote:Scotland

Why?

They never been hosts before or have they?

they have good stadiums i.e Hampden,Celtic,Ibrox,Tynecastle

Scotland could only really do it jointly - they were talking of Scotland/Wales/Ireland one time, but that has its own problems.

Three of those stadia are in Glasgow & as Kimbo said Tynecastle is too small. They could knock something up in Edinburgh, Dundee and Aberdeen I guess, but after that they'd be struggling.

They can use St James's as well its quite local to Scotland #just sayin

EM La Liga wrote:

debaser wrote:

EM La Liga wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

EM La Liga wrote:Scotland

Why?

They never been hosts before or have they?

they have good stadiums i.e Hampden,Celtic,Ibrox,Tynecastle

Scotland could only really do it jointly - they were talking of Scotland/Wales/Ireland one time, but that has its own problems.

Three of those stadia are in Glasgow & as Kimbo said Tynecastle is too small. They could knock something up in Edinburgh, Dundee and Aberdeen I guess, but after that they'd be struggling.

They can use St James's as well its quite local to Scotland #just sayin

Sure. If they pay us a huge amount.

Kimbo, do the scots see you lot as southern poofs that shit in bags?

Egypt

I would have thought a Scandinavian country would host one sooner or later. I guess Sweden had it in '92 but what about Norway? Or Denmark? Not enough stadia?

Italy, they need it to improve their shitty stadiums.

Argentina, could help find jobs for unemployed teenage kids...

Jaime wrote:I would have thought a Scandinavian country would host one sooner or later. I guess Sweden had it in '92 but what about Norway? Or Denmark? Not enough stadia?

They (Norway and Sweden joined bids) withdraw from their bid. Don't remember why though.

Fey wrote:Kimbo, do the scots see you lot as southern poofs that shit in bags?

Also, whilst big I don't think Celtic's ground is particularly rated - UEFA have a way of grading them don't they ?

You can't hold the final of a UEFA tournie at Celtic but you can at Hampden or Ibrox.


I agree with those that said Italy - its longer since they had a tournie than France.

Spain or Russia would be good.

debaser wrote:Italy. Longer since Italia 90 than France 98

I want Italy or Turkey to get it. Italy because it would give them a chance to rebuild their stadiums. Also it would provide an excuse for handling ultras. But Turkey is a football mad country and I think the atmosphere would be great(at least for Turkey's games).

Jaime wrote:I would have thought a Scandinavian country would host one sooner or later. I guess Sweden had it in '92 but what about Norway? Or Denmark? Not enough stadia?

Our stadiums aren't quite big enough me thinks. There was inital plans with Sweden and Norway but Denmark opted out early on I think. Can't remember the reasons why.

Also agree with those that say Scotland or at least one of the other British countries. Would like to see Scotland/Ireland hold a cup. Don't think they should include Wales because it would be across borders and then they might as well include England.

Fey wrote:Kimbo, do the scots see you lot as southern poofs that shit in bags?

No we don't. We see them just like everybody else

Will you be voting SNP at the election scotch?

No way, they are a bunch of socialist numpties.

It must be choosen Turkey because We will be really modern and pretty stadiums to play. Our society love football so the tickets will have sold off for every match.

I realized that something some mates in the forum worry about is that Turkey is close war territories but they should know that Turkey has a powerful army. However, None of matchs will be played at the East part of Turkey not to occur any problem with it.