Race to host Champions League final down to TWO stadiums after San Siro stripped of event as fans say ‘please not again’

THE stadiums in contention to host the 2027 Champions League final have been announced.

A social media post from UEFA today confirmed that two member associations have declared an interest in hosting the showpiece event.

ReutersThe cities in contention to host the 2027 Champions League final have been announced[/caption]

GettyAtletico Madrid’s Metropolitano Stadium is in contention[/caption]

ReutersThe Olympic Stadium in Baku is also in the frame[/caption]

Baku and Madrid are the remaining cities in contention for the men’s Champions League final.

The San Siro in Milan was initially penned in to host the match but rights were revoked due to the ongoing uncertainty around the stadium’s renovation.

Instead, the Stadio Olimpico in Rome was put forward for the bidding process.

However, it recently withdrew from the race.

Baku, the capital city of Azerbaijan, played host to the 2019 Europa League final between Chelsea and Arsenal.

But many fans are hoping the 2027 finale will not be held at the 69,870-seater Olympic Stadium.

One person took to social media to write: “Please, no Baku again.”

Another said: “Madrid or riot.”

FOOTBALL FREE BETS AND SIGN UP DEALS

While a third joked: “Baku? May start travelling now then.”

Meanwhile, the Estadio Metropolitano – Atletico Madrid‘s home – last held the Champions League final that same year.

Next year’s final will take place at the Allianz Arena in Munich, Germany.

And the event in 2026 is to be held at the Puskas Arena in Budapest, Hungary.

The contenders to host the 2027 Women’s Champions League final have also been announced.

Warsaw, Barcelona, Basel and Cardiff are in the frame.

New Champions League format is a snorefest

By Dan King

UEFA sold the idea of expanding the Champions League from 32 to 36 teams, with each playing eight games instead of six in the opening phase, as a way of creating more competitiveness and excitement.

The biggest clubs would have two matches against their peers, rather than having to wait until the knockout stage to meet.

The smaller clubs would meet teams of a similar level twice and have a chance of tasting victory that was so hard to achieve if you were the bottom seed in a group of four.

Ignoring for a moment the fact that the real motivation was the simple equation of more games = more money, the theory itself already looks flawed.

None of the matches between European giants has delivered a compelling contest yet.

And why would they? At the start of the long season with more matches in it, why would any team with ambitions to win things in the spring, go out all guns blazing in the autumn?

Especially when they know they have six games NOT against big sides to make sure they accrue enough points to qualify at least for the play-off round (and even more games).

There is even less jeopardy than before.

Read the full column on the Champions League format fail and why everyone – including YOU – needs a rethink.