What are the chances of a successful Nottingham host bid for 2018?
Well, firstly, what is there in Nottingham? The oldest football league club and former European club winners, of course! And a first-class cricket club, and the East Midlands airport, and, ahem……Hooters. The list is endless. Compared to some of the other host cities that have bid, some would say Nottingham is less attractive than London, Manchester, or others.
However, not only has Nottingham hosted league football since the league began, it has also played host to many other pinnacles of sport. The Ashes came to Trent Bridge in 2005, and last year it held Twenty20 finals’ day, where nearly 20,000 fans came to town. If its’ hosting experience the World Cup organisers are looking for, Nottingham has it in abundance.
With Notts Countys’ Meadow Lane having a capacity of 20300, and their arch-rivals Forests’ City Ground having a capacity of 30602, it may not be big enough to hold bigger matches involving England, Germany, Brazil, etc. But grounds are still needed to host ‘less important’ matches, such as Togo vs South Korea. I mean, what’s the point in playing that match in a half-empty Wembley? And, with a new impressive all-seater stadium set to be named after the legendary Brian Clough ready to be built- providing it is a World Cup host city, Nottingham will have more than enough stadia to fill the requirements.
Meadow Lane
The benefits wouldn’t end there though. With the financial upturn currently ongoing, and no set date as to when it will end, the outcome money-wise will be vital to the cities shops, hotels, and restaurants. The World Cup would give the local economy a much needed boost, and also create many jobs in this tough economic time. However, with regulations stating that only one host can have more than one stadium, which is almost certain to be London, the hosting committee would have to choose.
Whilst the new stadium would be the obvious choice, rumours are stating that Forest are keen to move soon, so nobody should rule out the City Ground or Meadow Lane just yet. Meadow Lane, in my view has the edge in look, with its’ traditional stands and great views from all over the ground. The City Ground, however, has a claustrophobic feel to it, but a good atmosphere can easily be produced. In terms of location, there is no difference, with the two grounds being separated by a mere 200 yards.
Even if the new stadium was chosen, there would still be a small matter of a fan park. These were a massive success in Germany 2006, and FIFA are reportedly keen to have these again to epitomise the fans’ experience of England 2018. If I was on the committee, I would personally choose The City Ground, but Trent Bridge could also be a possibility with its’ snug feel.
Trent Bridge – Good enough to be a fan park??
Before being chosen however, both grounds would have to upgrade their capacity. With the regulations stating it must be at least 40,000, Nottingham Forest have already put plans in place for their upgrade, but Notts County don’t seem to have even crossed this topic as of yet.
All in all, Nottingham has a good chance of being chosen. Better than Bristol, Hull, and Portsmouth, but the question is, are their plans good enough?
Search
If you are going to write an article, please do a little research first. The Nottingham Forest ground is called the CITY ground, not the County ground. Swindon play at the county ground & that’s a long way from Nottingham city centre.
Why would Notts County want a 40,000 seater stadium ? Forest will struggle to fill it, County wouldn’t stand a chance.
I’m sorry, but I thought that the whole point of doing articles like this was to improve our sports writing, not to be patronised. Have you never made a mistake? You are being over-harsh in the tone of your comment, and in my opinion, Notts County may want a 40,000 seater stadium in the future. Names like Sven will draw people in, and with rumours floating that they were looking to sign Benjani, Ljungberg and Kanu, I doubt it will be long before they start to move up the leagues. Like I said, it is my opinion, so don’t go telling me that it’s wrong.
The FA will include an East midlands city,for sure. Forest hosted games during euro 96 and its a great city with a great sporting tradition, everybody knows who Nottingham Forest are, everyone. What will happen is simple – all of a sudden Notts County have alot of money and interest and so they will share a stadium with Forest in Gamston. Leicster and Derby are fine places but as a city Nottingham is better than either
That’s a good article and yes Nottingham would be a perfect place to host some world cup games because of the new stadium and the other smaller stadiums, a great city centre with 2 great shopping centres and many places to eat out. We have great transport links with the tram and its 2 new lines 1 of which will be going to 2 minutes world from where the proposed new stadium will be as well as nearby eastmidlands airport and great train links to major cities such as London and Birmingham. Lastly in Nottingham there are lot’s of nice hotels and accomadation for people to use!
Work quite regularly in both Nottingham and Leicester, it seems to me that Leicesters bid is the better option at this time.
They have some cracking training facilities such as the Loguhborough Uni (one of the finest sporting facilities I have ever seen)
They will more than likely be hosting the Rugby world cup 3 years prior to this one, and they have a stadium that as far as I’m aware can be easily upgraded.
I also feel the council and people seem more enthusiastic about the scheme.
Good luck to both, but Leicester get’s my bid at the moment.
Oh and Derby is just too small in my opinion.
Given Loughborough is as close to Nottingham as it is to Leicester it is a Gold star for both. Nottingham is also the only East Midlands “Urban Area” that sits as one of Englands 5 largest, so by “catchment” alone should be the peoples choice.
In marketing terms there are few other “historic” cities for the bid to Choose from, only London has as long a history as Nottingham as a city, lets not forget all the others are modern creations of the industrial revolution. If England want to show case then not having Nottingham would be a very odd decision (who in the world has not heard of Robin Hood, Nottingham Forest, Brian Clough?). Nice though they are international recognition for Leicester, Derby, Milton keynes, Hull, Sunderland are low – and it would suprise the organisers to chose them above Nottingham. Remember London got the Olympics, Birmingham and Manchester failed because internationally their profile was low.