Rather irrelevant now, as WHU will better our record attendance at every single league game next season, in fact they may well have the second highest attendances in English football.
I suspect a few of the new season passes will become available again, West Ham have said they'll ban for life anyone who threw things at the coach and there's hundreds of photos of the offenders up online.
BanTheBand @BanEnglandBand Unbelievable scenes at Upton Park. Makes you proud not to support West Ham.
By all accounts Mark Knoble's obliged with a real captain's performance tonight. Eh? Our old ground> WHU's old ground. End of chat.
Their attendances piss all over ours and next season their average attendance will exceed our record attendance, the comparison is laughable.
Got to say I cannot think of a more fitting tribute to the end of Upton Park than a bunch of knuckle dragger fans shaming the club like they did last night. Always been a **** hole ground with some particularly **** fans too. It may just be my long memory fading, but I don't recall seeing the same level of emotional outpouring and coverage when other teams left their grounds in recent times, like Man City, Arsenal, us etc. Only a shame that Man U couldn't have spannered them really.
I pretty much disagree with everything you've put there. That ground had character and history, its sad to see it go to be replaced by another soulless corporate bowl of a stadium. There was plenty of fuss made for Man City and especially Arsenal, not so much for us but that's par for the course if you're a 4th division side that most people couldn't point to on a map.
Do you even read the contents of the posts on here ffs? We're talking past grounds. Boothferry v Boleyn.
And I pretty much disagree with everything you've put there. When Arsenal and Man City left "genuine football cathedrals" (Joey Barton) for pastures new there was nothing like the fuss on Sky or the Standard - SIX ****ING PAGES WORTH - for leaving this ****-hole into a new tax payer funded entity.
There was plenty of fuss, I don't know what motive you have to pretend there wasn't but you're just wrong, simple as. Pretty sure Man City moved into a 'new tax payer funded entity' as well but I don't recall them getting as much grief for it.
I'm pretty sure they paid for the conversion to a football stadium, hence the difference. And we'll just have to disagree here, for me there was nowhere near this level of misty eyed sentiment rammed down the nation's throats..
It cost £42m to convert the stadium, the council paid £22m and Man City paid the balance £20m. Though the club have subsequently spent a small fortune developing the land around the ground.
I'm not sure what you're saying, are you saying the taxpayers have effectively had their £22m back because Man City spent a small fortune around the ground? Most of that small fortune was on their own ground development and training facilities, though they did bung in about £12m towards the £40m cost of the community projects (none of which were likely to have happened without Man City moving in there).
No, you said Manchester council paid £22m towards the conversion therefore the UK taxpayer hasnt paid for it, Manchester council tax payers have. In the same way the UK taxpayer isnt paying for the new Hull arena.
