The current European Championship is being played across 11 different cities. The semi-finals and
finals will be held at Wembley, in London, and some cities are clearly more involved than others,
but this is the first truly pan-continental tournament in the competition’s history.
So, should it be the last, or the first of many in the future?
The strongest supporting argument for this format is that it’s good to share.
With eleven cities involved, a broader range of fans have the chance to go to games – or,
at least, to have first-hand experiences at fan parks, or in attendance at team training sessions.
Euro 2020 will also have shared the economic benefits of hosting.
The actual value of staging a major sporting event will always be subject to debate,
particularly over the long term, but at a basic, easy to understand level,
an influx of supporters into a city provides an obvious boost to the local tourism industry.
Fans need hotel rooms, restaurants and cafes, and they spend money in shops and attractions.
In 2016, it was estimated that the competition brought more than a €1bn into the French economy
and spreading that wealth is the right thing to do. In addition to which, a multi-country format
also lessens the cost of hosting, which can be prohibitive to all but the biggest footballing
nations and far greater to those without a prior history of staging major events.
For many years, the European Championship was a big event only in status. As recently as 1992
for instance, only 8 teams took part. In that ’92 edition only four stadiums and four host
cities were needed, with eight hotels and eight training bases for the participating countries.
8 teams would become 16 in 1996, and is now 24 in the present day,
with the consequence that there are more stadiums and facilities involved.
For some countries, that makes little differences. Their domestic leagues are full of stadiums and
training grounds which already meet UEFA standards. For others, a successful bid
involves major construction or renovation projects to achieve those standards, but also significant
investment in other areas. UEFA requires that each hosting venue must be supported by
“high-quality public transport network that links each site to the city centre, the airport,
railway stations and other transportation links” and that’s often where the hidden costs can lie.
In 2012, for instance, Poland modernised eight airports ahead of co-hosting the
tournament with Ukraine. And between the two countries, nearly €30m was spent on improving
rail and road networks. In principle, that’s of benefit to the native population,
but it still a major undertaking which can involve diverting public funds away from other areas.
It’s easy to argue that it’s one which is better shared, particularly because not doing
so privileges either the bigger countries, such as Germany, France and Italy, or those where the
national football leagues are most developed, like England. Of the 17 tournaments that will
have taken place by 2024, eight will have been held in one of those four countries. On three
of the occasions when it hasn’t been, UEFA has needed to appoint joint-hosts to make it feasible.
The case which supports single-nation is more
complicated – and tends to be built out of more intangible factors.
There are some footballing reasons, such as that format involving smaller distances
for players to travel, no time-difference and no mid-tournament changes in climate.
For supporters, following their team through an entire tournament
is less likely to involve multiple costly flights, too, and difficult logistics.
Aesthetically, there are also benefits.
Staging a tournament in a single country or region gives that competition its own identity
and distinguishes it from the continental competitions found in club football.
The traditional format can also spread the economic benefits around a country.
At Euro96, for instance, games were held in eight different cities.
Conversely, at the current tournament only London will see a material benefit and that’s typical as
a whole. Of the 11 cities staging games, 7 are national capitals and it seems unlikely that
areas beyond those economic hubs would feel the effect of the competition, either in the form
of tourism or the kind of infrastructural improvements which serve the long-term.
It’s a complicated issue, but as football grows and the appetite for larger and longer tournaments
increases, the conflicting factors on both sides are only likely to become more dramatic.