WHY SPURS WERE TURNED DOWN FOR THE OLYMPIC STADIUM...

They basically said NO to sharing a football ground with an Athletics stadium and
sooner than have 'temporary' seating to bring the crowd closer to the pitch they had
planned to knock the whole thing down pretty much, rebuild it, and (just like Cardiff)
build the joggers a new stadium. But from the outset, Seb Coe said no chance, that
the Olympic Stadium was an Athletics legacy, and MUST be maintained as agreed
for use by The British Athletics Board.

West Ham did not have the financial clout to radically change ANYTHING, so accepted
pretty much all Newham Councils stipulations. Including making the Council a shareholder
at the Club, ready to cash in on merchandising or any future sale of the Club.

Sam Allardyce is already on record as saying that without serious investment in the team
the move WILL NOT WORK.

Yes... we have a bogging rebrand right now. But my God we are in a better position than
West Ham are. We have got rid of the Eggers, we own our own ground and we still play
out games within a stones throw of our old traditional drinking haunts

Spot on with this (as usual) Taffapple

I would be fuming if I was a West Ham fan.

I remember Sir Alan Sugar was ripping Brady apart about this last year.

I agree dave.

They basically said NO to sharing a football ground with an Athletics stadium and
sooner than have 'temporary' seating to bring the crowd closer to the pitch they had
planned to knock the whole thing down pretty much, rebuild it, and (just like Cardiff)
build the joggers a new stadium. But from the outset, Seb Coe said no chance, that
the Olympic Stadium was an Athletics legacy, and MUST be maintained as agreed
for use by The British Athletics Board.

West Ham did not have the financial clout to radically change ANYTHING, so accepted
pretty much all Newham Councils stipulations. Including making the Council a shareholder
at the Club, ready to cash in on merchandising or any future sale of the Club.

Sam Allardyce is already on record as saying that without serious investment in the team
the move WILL NOT WORK.

Yes... we have a bogging rebrand right now. But my God we are in a better position than
West Ham are. We have got rid of the Eggers, we own our own ground and we still play
out games within a stones throw of our old traditional drinking haunts

The Spurs option now makes the most sense for the long term success of that site. The Olympic commitee made the first huge mistake by not making the stadium easily convertable into a football stadium and then building a smaller athletics stadium next door. There was plenty of land to do this. Everyone acknowledges that we won the bid on the strength of the promise of a stadium legacy for athletics, but I fail to see that Britain would have renaged on that promise, if a smaller stadium was built as a replacement. The second huge mistake, is that they will move West Ham in there, into a huge stadium with and athletics track and no atmosphere to keep a stadium that will be half empty on the odd occassion that it holds athletics events. West Ham get relegated, which is quite likely and you have crowds of 20 odd thousand in a massive stadium. A huge feck up is loomimg.

You're not trying to bait anyone out with this are you?

I agree dave.

You're not trying to bait anyone out with this are you?

I RESENT THE FACT THAT YOU EVEN THINK THAT!!!!














He's here somewhere, lying in his own piss soiled pants singing Yeovil songs

They basically said NO to sharing a football ground with an Athletics stadium and
sooner than have 'temporary' seating to bring the crowd closer to the pitch they had
planned to knock the whole thing down pretty much, rebuild it, and (just like Cardiff)
build the joggers a new stadium. But from the outset, Seb Coe said no chance, that
the Olympic Stadium was an Athletics legacy, and MUST be maintained as agreed
for use by The British Athletics Board.

West Ham did not have the financial clout to radically change ANYTHING, so accepted
pretty much all Newham Councils stipulations. Including making the Council a shareholder
at the Club, ready to cash in on merchandising or any future sale of the Club.

Sam Allardyce is already on record as saying that without serious investment in the team
the move WILL NOT WORK.

Yes... we have a bogging rebrand right now. But my God we are in a better position than
West Ham are. We have got rid of the Eggers, we own our own ground and we still play
out games within a stones throw of our old traditional drinking haunts

The Spurs option now makes the most sense for the long term success of that site. The Olympic commitee made the first huge mistake by not making the stadium easily convertable into a football stadium and then building a smaller athletics stadium next door. There was plenty of land to do this. Everyone acknowledges that we won the bid on the strength of the promise of a stadium legacy for athletics, but I fail to see that Britain would have renaged on that promise, if a smaller stadium was built as a replacement. The second huge mistake, is that they will move West Ham in there, into a huge stadium with and athletics track and no atmosphere to keep a stadium that will be half empty on the odd occassion that it holds athletics events. West Ham get relegated, which is quite likely and you have crowds of 20 odd thousand in a massive stadium. A huge feck up is loomimg.

The logistics of a Club who historically have never ever had a crowd higher than 42,000
suddenly finding another 18,000 supporters by moving further NorthWest towards Londons
biggest Clubs just does not add up.

As Allardyce has stated, without huge investment in the team, without West Ham making
a serious assault on the top 4, where are these new fans going to come from? Because
without these new fans, that ground is going to be terrible. Some berk on here likened
the West Ham move to that of Manchester City moving to EastLands... But Manchester
City have a huge fan base all over Manchester, and once had 84,000 fans watch them
play at home. Man City are a very big Club, but obviously were always in the shadow of
United!!

My other worry would be that Newham Council (good old Boris ) are funding most of
the restructuring work themselves in return for a percentage of profits, so the Council
are in effect CHARGING West Ham for restructuring AND charging them a ground rent
of around £9m a year...AND.... Should Gold and Sullivan find that buyer at the end of
the rainbow...Yes, you guessed it... The Council will also get a percentage of THAT sale.

West Ham were a shoe-in for redevelopment work to be ratified at the Boleyn ground
and outline planning permission had already been granted.. Why go to all that
trouble then to hear Gold say "it'll never work"

But surprise surprise... redevelop that site into Des-Res accommodation or some such
money-making scheme.... Guess who pockets the money... NO, DONT BE SILLY...the
profits will NOT go towards paying off the rather large and 'forever and a day' Council
tax bill for the new ground....

It goes to the Porn Barons