By my reasoning little old Hull City and their Boothferry Crescent ground was 13,000 places bigger than the legendary world-famous stadium Boleyn Park. West Ham = proper old football club. Admitted to the Football League some 14 years after 'no history' Hal.
And how early do you think they should get there? Allowing for earthquakes, meteor strikes, terroristbattacks, plagues of locusts and other eventualities?
And The Valley has had 15,000 more there than BP. Bolton and Huddersfield with populations half of Hull's had crowds 8,000 and 12,000 more. West Ham after 4 years in the league got promoted to the top flight and appeared in the first Wembley Final. That was as much history as we managed on over 100 years. Compare West Ham's crowds down the years. I don't what you are trying to achieve other than make yourself look daft.
And 'I don't what you are trying to achieve' either. Shall I make it simple for you? The fantastic Boleyn Park stadium is/was much smaller than BP. City were playing League football many years before WHU were. We have a longer League history. PS Don't bother replying with a list of clubs who have a longer league history than us or clubs who have a bigger record attendance than us despite having a smaller population.
How come 50% of the time West Ham's ground is now referred to as the Bolyen Ground? Maybe it's always had this alternative name but it was always Upton Park decades back when I started watching football.
It's based on the amount of usage. Bolyen is lower, with Upton top ranking. ..in mi khaki suit an ting. Coat on.....
The 1st time i heard it called the Boleyn was 3 years ago. Growing up and past it was always called Upton Park. Big Sam said when he was manager " qoute "when did they change the name of Upton Park "
What does the size of a stadium have to do with anything? City have indeed been in the league longer than West Ham. And achieved far less in that longer time.
