Translation:The famous football player plays football in that modern stadium.
I think it would be reasonable to leave out the second "football" and simply say that the football player plays in that modern stadium. It just seems a little repetitive using the word twice since "football player" kind of implies what they would be playing in the stadium.
Any thoughts anyone would like to add? ^_^
It is just that "football" in English can't be used as a verb (yet). Why is that btw? A rare exception. I can book, I can even f--book, I can pen, I can up, I can floor, I can can, and I can't football? Seriously?
Anyway, so we are stuck with "play football". At least it is not "play the football", like with musical instruments.
Hungarian takes care of this one in a much simpler way: "focizik". So it is not a big deal to repeat that one short word in Hungarian. But it is in English.
So, sure, why not, let the English drop the second "football" and make it just "play" instead.
And we can even match this change in Hungarian:
"A híres focista abban a modern stadionban játszik."
I mean, Calvin and Hobbes proved that anything can be used as a verb in English, and I'm sure people would understand you if you were to say "Let's go soccer" - you'd just get some weird looks. :)
In German, also, I think you can omit the verb sometimes if it's assumed what verb you're going to use and it's therefore redundant to state it, e.g. Ich kann Deutsch is translated as "I can speak German", but in fact only means "I can German".
A football player is more normally, at least in UK English, a footballer, and can't we assume that it is football that he or she plays in that modern stadium? So I feel that my answer - the famous footballer plays in that modern stadium - should be accepted.