Oh right, I thought he was under the impression that clubs should police the streets with private militiaNever. Which is what he is saying.

Oh right, I thought he was under the impression that clubs should police the streets with private militiaNever. Which is what he is saying.

Their fans have already started helping out in that respect.http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37828905
There is definitely some merit in knocking down the stadium, but I see no point in re-building it
!
I believe there was already a plan to knock down the stadium and rebuild it as a purpose-built football stadium. But apparently that was not allowed. On the other hand, since WetSpam can do pretty much anything they want - and get the taxpayers to pay for it - perhaps they'll get lots more government money to do some kind of further conversion. I also expect they are happy to identify trouble makers inside the stadium so that if they are banned they can create as much trouble as they like outside and it won't be WetSpam's responsibility (like everything else).
We wait to see whether relegation is their fate, and if Spurs will be granted the
chance to deliver the fatal blow.![]()

I just hope it is resolved soon because I am dreading the weekend of May 6th when we play there.
Knowing the authorities, nothing will be done and then that weekend they will blame us and deduct points from us costing us a record points total for a Premier League winner
Fixed it for ya mate.Nothing's The Spammers responsibility. Not the behaviour of their supporters in 'their' great success of a stadium, nor the appointment of totally untrained stewards who are paid minimum wage to try and keep the peace, nor the lack of a communications system to allow the police to do their job properly within the stadium or the complete **** up of seating the old style supporter with those who can watch a football match without threatening others, throwing missiles or starting a fight.
It's all someone else's fault. Given what happened to the United coach just before the move and a general mood of discontent from their traditional support and that support's history of violence, one would have expected that the club's approach to the safety of persons and property in and around the stadium would have been a very high priority, both to protect the fans and the reputation of the club. It seems to have been the opposite. No acceptable means of segregating fans approaching and leaving the stadium has been found to date. That is going to lead to people getting hurt if it isn't solved. That may not be the club's legal responsibility but they have a moral duty to those attending matches and they should have exhausted themselves in working with others to find ways to ensure that duty be best discharged. They haven't. I presume it will take someone being badly hurt for them to start pointing out again from whose budget comes the cost of protecting people's safety and to recommence the finger pointing as to whose fault that failing is.
They will have known of the need for a communications system to be installed into the stadium to allow the police to enter it, irrespective of who paid for it. That should have been a priority for them and their landlords. It wasn't and the club's wretched response was that the police, or in other words the taxpayer, should pay for the necessary costs. That a legal responsibility doesn't rest with an organisation, doesn't stop that organisation from working with the relevant parties to protect all concerned, particularly the paying customer as they will see them. There's no sign of any such thought or action from Brady, Sullivan, Gold or anyone else. They only open their mouths to lie about the success of it all and to blame others.
The thing is that it didn't take long to reveal the company they;re leasing it from is a partnership between Newham Council and...West Scam United.Regarding extra costs they'll just claim that they are tenants and those costs should be borne by the landlord. Not a bad rental agreement though where the landlord pays all your bills!
On a related matter, I heard that WetSpam have naming rights to the stadium. Is this right? I just don't get how tenants can have that right (mind you, not sure how Citeh got away with it as well). If WHU ask for such rights the reply should be "you're tenants, you don't have that right", perhaps pointing to the fact when they've used the tenant argument to their own advantage. But of course that is unlikely to be the case!
seem to remember reading that WHam got a set amount i.e. £4m p,a, and everything above went to the legacy organisation. Though might be the other way round knowing my memoryRegarding extra costs they'll just claim that they are tenants and those costs should be borne by the landlord. Not a bad rental agreement though where the landlord pays all your bills!
On a related matter, I heard that WetSpam have naming rights to the stadium. Is this right? I just don't get how tenants can have that right (mind you, not sure how Citeh got away with it as well). If WHU ask for such rights the reply should be "you're tenants, you don't have that right", perhaps pointing to the fact when they've used the tenant argument to their own advantage. But of course that is unlikely to be the case!

Fekking Twatenberg is the ref v the scum, god help us.

I have that reaction towards any ref these days to be honest. At least Dier should be able to get away with hacking down as many scum players as he likes without receiving a red though if our game against Chelsea last season is anything to go by![]()
Yet he certainly packed a lot into those 85 daysDe Boer sacked after 85 days in charge of Inter... Maybe if the Inter board realised their players are either bang average or past their best rather than thinking their managers aren't up to the task (Mancini & de Boer) they might start looking at the right type of personnel to be dismissing.
Yet he certainly packed a lot into those 85 daysDe Boer sacked after 85 days in charge of Inter... Maybe if the Inter board realised their players are either bang average or past their best rather than thinking their managers aren't up to the task (Mancini & de Boer) they might start looking at the right type of personnel to be dismissing.
Where do they go now? Who'd want to risk taking over, considering the potential damage to their reputation?De Boer sacked after 85 days in charge of Inter... Maybe if the Inter board realised their players are either bang average or past their best rather than thinking their managers aren't up to the task (Mancini & de Boer) they might start looking at the right type of personnel to be dismissing.

You must log in or register to see media
