List of "national stadiums" and which ones are your favorite?

On a related note why does the US not have a national team stadium ? Canadas' is in Edmonton, right

 

Many of the major countries in world football do not have specific stadiums where they play home games. They play all over the country. Germany played all their WCQ games on different stadiums, Spain and Italy also spread them around and also England after Wembley was closed. I think it's a good idea for a country the size of USA to play at different venues instead of picking one stadium. The national soccer team is after all supposed to be the people's team.

 

The new stadium in LA is going to be the HQ of the US FA, but the USA plays a lot of matches at RFK in the nations capital.

 

I know that USSF has said that HDNTC will be the HQ for US soccer, but I have a feeling that most of that was just lip service to get the funding through. Sure, they'll have more NATs games there and some camps, but I expect that they will continue to spread things around, based on where they can get a good crowd, a HOME crowd, and other factors. It will be interesting to see how they handle the WC qualifiers. Sure they can pack the place for US-Mex, but Gillette or RFK might be a better option for that one. Also, the travel distance for European players will be that much furthur. Not only would they have to cross the Atlantic, but then they have to cross the country.

 

US's home field is probably either Gillette Stadium or Crew Stadium. I think Bruce once said he didn't like RFK because they weren't getting a pro-US crowd.

 

The US is way too big for a national stadium. England can have one, since the country is small enough to where one stadium can be easily accessed by the entire country. Same with France, Italy, Spain, although italy doesn't have one and I don't believe spain does either, im just saying, they could.

 

I don't know - you can fly from one side of the US to the other just as quickly as you can get a train from Manchester to London. With rail prices the US flight might even be cheaper too.

 

I went to the Maracana in 1998 to see my beloved Brazil against Argentina. Nearly 100,000 and................... Brazil were crap!! Well worth a visit to perhaps the real home of futebol. Also went in 1994 to the Arruda stadium in Recife when a certain Ronaldo made his debut in the yellow shirt. A tremendous atmosphere that night with the stadium seemingly over full. Memories memories!!

 

because the usa is physically enormous and the thought of having the majority of the matches in one place is inane as it would basically give all the soccer to a particular region while the rest of the country starved.

 

The only decent stadium (ie grass, more than 15,000) is in Edmonton. We haven't had a men's home game since November 2000 (in TO) and since June 2000 in Edmonton. The women's U19 WC is the only games I can think of that were played in Edmonton during the past 2 years.

 

Even in Holland they travel around. Doesn't really matter though since it's mostly the same people that visit those matches.

 

I think it's right that a national team travels it's country. It means more people can get to matches and the local area benifits financialy from the extra people a big game brings. I would never of went to the England Albania game in 2001 if it hadn't of been practicaly on my doorstep.

 

Ditto for me with England V Finland (Anfield) and England V Sweden (Old Trafford).

I don't want to get up at 6am to spend 4 1/2 hours driving down to London and then have to fight my way through the London traffic to watch a match and I really don't want to be fighting my way out again and getting home at around 1am-ish.

 

why? I can't think why anyone would have to miss a few club matches, and certainly not an entire season, to watch the national side.

 

but a big point is...i would much prefur to watch england play in front of 90000 people at wembley, than infront under 50000 anround the country(cept manu/newcastle). Even tho i am glad they are going to play nearer to me i would still be happier to go to wembley. And especially for games such as fa cup finals we need a national stadium, although cardiff is good and all, its in wales :/ .

 

Cardiff is right pain to get in and out of, even by public transport (British Rail ran out of trains when Reading went there - they had to cancel every single normal service to west of England/wales to lay on trains for us). The accoustics are poor and the sightlines from the lower tier are almost subterrainean. Losing the play-off final might have clouded my recollections of the place, but I was not impressed. I know people who took 5 hours to get home for a 100 mile journey.

 

i once went to a match and it took me 4 hours to get home for a 10 mile journey. that was some crazy junk. it was the first and only time i've ever seen someone punch a horse in the face.

 

Azadi Stadium in Tehran with 120,000 capacity. Just the memories in that stadium and the records it holds for attendence make it my favorite.

 

Wow, these stadiums look just like the Tripod logo!