# If You Were to Choose ONE 2022 FIFA WC Stadium to Remain at Its Initial Capacity, Which Would It Be?



## Jim856796 (Jun 1, 2006)

(A spinoff thread from the main 2022 FIFA World Cup thread.)

Qatar is developing seven new venues for this year's highly-anticipated FIFA World Cup. All of the _six*_ newly-constructed venues for this WC will have their capacities cut in half, and I once remarked on the main 2022 WC thread that the semi-temporary nature of those venues will make it feel like Qatar _never_ hosted the WC at all. Also, there are concerns about how quickly and effectively the potential new floorspace initially occupied by those temporary seats at those stadiums will be filled after the WC.

With the size and population of Qatar, keeping such stadiums as Lusail and Al Bayt at their full initial all-seater capcacities after this year's World Cup would not be realistic. But, sooner or later, somebody at SkyscraperCity has to ask: If you were to choose ONE, and ONLY ONE, of the six new stadiums being developed for the 2022 FIFA World Cup to remain at its initial capacity after the tournament ends, which would it be?

(* Stadium 974 it is an entirely temporary venue, and thus, it is not being listed in this poll.)


----------



## Ramanaramana (Mar 24, 2021)

Lusail Iconic because it looks on par with the greats of the world. If it wasn't getting downsized, I'd have it among the most aesthetically beautiful stadiums in the world. 



> I once remarked on the main 2022 WC thread that the semi-temporary nature of those venues will make it feel like Qatar _never_ hosted the WC at all.


No one was watching the Qatari league prior to the World Cup, and no one will be watching after it. Qatar's stadiums will be out of sight, out of mind whether downsized or at original capacity.


----------



## ElvisBC (Feb 21, 2011)

I would level all of them, to have nothing left of this disgrace


----------



## Urmstoniain (Mar 23, 2015)

Jim856796 said:


> (A spinoff thread from the main 2022 FIFA World Cup thread.)
> 
> Qatar is developing seven new venues for this year's *highly-anticipated* FIFA World Cup. All of the _six*_ newly-constructed venues for this WC will have their capacities cut in half, and I once remarked on the main 2022 WC thread that the semi-temporary nature of those venues will make it feel like Qatar _never_ hosted the WC at all. Also, there are concerns about how quickly and effectively the potential new floorspace initially occupied by those temporary seats at those stadiums will be filled after the WC.
> 
> ...


Not by anyone I know...


----------



## Ramanaramana (Mar 24, 2021)

Urmstoniain said:


> Not by anyone I know...


Can't wait to see whether 15m people watch England's first match or 14.9m, such will be the force of the backlash and indignation.....


----------



## Urmstoniain (Mar 23, 2015)

Ramanaramana said:


> Can't wait to see whether 15m people watch England's first match or 14.9m, such will be the force of the backlash and indignation.....


I don't doubt that once it gets going, there will be interest - but (where I am at least) there's absolutely no anticipation that you would normally have with a major tournament.

Insofar as people care about international football at all - which most don't - there's no wallcharts up in the office, there's no flags on cars... You just wouldn't know that the World Cup starts next week.

I can honestly say, I don't think I've had so much as a conversation about who will/should/might win it - and believe me, I talk about football a lot


----------



## Ramanaramana (Mar 24, 2021)

Urmstoniain said:


> I don't doubt that once it gets going, there will be interest - but (where I am at least) there's absolutely no anticipation that you would normally have with a major tournament.
> 
> Insofar as people care about international football at all - which most don't - there's no wallcharts up in the office, there's no flags on cars... You just wouldn't know that the World Cup starts next week.
> 
> I can honestly say, I don't think I've had so much as a conversation about who will/should/might win it - and believe me, I talk about football a lot


If that's how it is with you, no arguments here. But generally I don't think for most people that's down to Qatar being the host. It wouldn't be any different if USA was hosting, and that's due to the abnormal scheduling. 

United Fulham finished up a day ago, less than a week prior to the WC starting. Clubs have been playing every 3 days since the last international break, which has sucked up all the attention. That's not a typical situation. The closest thing is when the Champions League final is a few weeks before the WC, but that only concerns two fanbases in Europe. The league ends in mid-May typically, so most people have a month-long break between their club finishing up and the WC starting. There's time for build-up. On this occasion, the WC is struggling to keep Ronnie off the back pages following his latest set of antics just days out from kick-off. There's been no time to let the WC carve out its own space, and it appears it only will once it actually gets underway. 

For me I'd say more people care about international football than the club game because that's when the casuals come out in force at major tournaments in their many millions. There are nowhere near 25 million hardcore fans in England and yet you'll those figures watching a knockout tie. Most fans may prefer their club over their country, but nothing can touch the fandom of a national team at a major tournament. 

I would say, in England at least judging from the outside, both the last Euros and the women's WC had fairly tame lead-ins. Once they got underway and England started playing (and winning), it quickly ratcheted up. 

I'd put any blame on apathy squarely on the club game finishing up a little over 24 hours ago.


----------

