I think things would have been somewhat different. For a joint stadium, Spurs would probably have been the owners post Olympics, and athletics land would be merely beneficiaries of the track facilities and events thereof. A PLC like THFC would not lightly let themselves become tenants of what is effectively the key asset of a football club : its home stadium. And T&Cs would ensure the football club could not do the dirty on athletics land. And with ENIC involvement in Spurs, no doubt further capability (concerts etc) would have also been planned in. But anyway, all moot now. If comments that Athletics UK have a 250 yr lease on the track, there are no corporate/ hospitality facilities to market there, and 30,000 of the OS seats are "temporary" (they have no long-term lifetime) , then WHU are welcome to it. Any Levy mischief via a JR that gets our bid costs back, puts the NPD online again as per its original costings (lest politniks are exposed as a result of the JR - and consequences thereof) , is fine by me.
Couldn't they have made a plan that suited more people by just moving Orient and West Ham into the OS, making it a dedicated football stadium and taking the Boleyn and Brisbane Road as payment? Redevelop one as a dedicated athletics venue and turn the other into something money making, to pay for the Olympic athletics legacy? Too sensible?
Going one step further, why do UK Athletics feel that the National Sports Centre isn't worthy of them anymore? Whenever you see any athletics meeting there, and you can see they can't fill the 24,000 seats in the place, yet they feel entitled to a much larger, publicly funded stadium that will be even more empty whenever it is used. It's as if they don't want to put their hands in their pocket to redevelop Crystal Palace, yet are happy to have the British public fund a white elephant for them...
Maybe West Ham and UK Athletics are planning on holding simultaneous events, with a game going on while track events proceed around the running track and a few field events at half-time? That way they might actually fill the thing occasionally!
LDL, We cannot foist everything on Coe. No, some time ago there was probably an opportunity to design a superb stadium that could accommodate both football and athletics, and get a significant proportion of it paid for by a PLC in the private sector (Spurs) . Arrogance, vanity etc, much like talk, is cheap. We don't see much of it when those exhibiting it have to pay for their actions. And to be honest now, I am concerned that WHU could end up with a *smaller* capacity ground and worse viewing experience than Upton Park, solely because they cannot possibly afford the redevelopment costs of the "temporary" sections. That would make the hubris of Coe etc look like immense modesty.
Has anybody explained yet how first class cricket, athletics, rugby and (championship) football are going to played on the Spammers' pitch, should they take possession? As far as I know, groundsmen throughout the land have a fit if you look at their beloved pitch wrong, let alone give it this kind of abuse. I imagine the cricket square will be roped off in the centre circle!
And to be fair, as they do their work on the track, they will be far easier to see than the dire fare served up by Allerdyce and co.
You've just worked out why West Ham have picked Allardyce as their new manager, Chirpy. With the state of the centre circle at Stratford, they'll want a manager who builds his teams in a way that would absolutely minimize the chances of the ball ever having to go near it! HOOF!
We think Wigan's ground is bad. Wait 'til teams are passing the ball through shot put and Javelin divots and fishing out high heels and Take That T-shirts from the mud... I mean pitch.
You're right Ens. I forgot the drunken middle aged plus-sized Take That fans who will be fighting with the bouncers (in more ways than one) at the "New Boleyn."
It's hard to know how well athletic tickets sell. Had a look at finding the attendance for last years London Grand Prix event and they don't seem to record it (probably because it is scarily low). But for this one event only, Crystal Palace usually sells out (about 15,500 if it hasn't been extended). So even if you take the maximum that they think they could sell (apparently.....finding info on athletics attendances is extremely difficult) then that is about 34,000. Can anybody really justify a 60,000 capacity stadium for one event a year that might (and let's be generous here) get 2/3 full? That can only be used 14 days of the year...... If Wet Spam allow it? Or would you prefer a proper full-time stadium which is a lot smaller but can be used at any time you want. And won't look ****e as it will be full with a good atmosphere for the athletes. http://www.insidethegames.biz/olymp...e-facelift-qincredibly-thinq-say-uk-athletics
Panic over, everyone. According to JA 606 Spurs "Mini Holte" : <quote> West Ham are planning to spend £100m to redevelop the OS once the games are over. Or so I believe. But it will be quite different after 2012. </quote> I think there is now a new dimension of delusion in the universe. It may have even been predicted by General relativity theory.
And I answered your simple question, so what's the problem? So PNP goes around calling people "pricks" and your smart answer is that the insult is valid based on who you are referring to, not the actual insult itself? I actually said.... "Levy is clutching at straws and he has got in to bed with Murdoch, not a good thing in my book, if Spurs hired these PI's then they are just as responsible as the people that carried out the dirty work, anyone thinking anything else is clearly either stupid, thick or in denial, perhaps all three?" Please don't get on the moral high ground, hardly in PNP's "class" was it? First off you ask if I had read the thread, which I had Secondly you perform the usual trait of someone who has nothing left and was an art form held over from the original 606 "you must be a wum" Lastly you bring up my membership on this site, can't see what this has to do with this particular debate? I presented a piece in defense of WHU's situation, sorry if that causes an argument on a site intended for debate!!! I think you'll find it's part of forming an opinion, if WHU (or anyone else involved) have done anything wrong with regards the bid process, you won't find me condoning it one bit. Anything else, interlectual perhaps?
You also said: And when I gave a perfectly civil reply, you added: And: If you act like a prick, then I'll call you a prick.
"Stop insulting everyone" (fantastic comment) "Anti-Spurs rhetoric" (another belter, can't see too much anti-WHU from you) "empty stadium"?? Bold prediction that The Boleyn will be empty next season, history says a drop to the second tier still manages to get enough punters through the gates. The fact is, this is a sorry state of affairs between our clubs, which is only getting worse by Spurs/Levy insistence to drag it on and on and the latest tactics have certainly not helped, he may in fact be doing this all for the greater good of Spurs and you getting NDP back off the ground, forcing someone's arm etc,etc but the way he and your club are going about it doesn't and never will look good. You can justify their actions all you like, but I don't think it will do you any good. Oh and I didn't have to get abusive. I see Shelfside is a moderator..................that is another "cracker"
Continue? (you mean abusive as in thick and stupid?) Show me where in either of my posts today I was abusive? In fact show me any of my posts where I was AS abusive as what I received? Accusing a section of people of crying warrants calling someone a prick? Would you like me to get you another shovel as you seem to have worn that one out. Now back to the matter in hand and Spurs refusal to let the OS bid loss lie. Some history....... 1) The bidding process for the OS is not new and did not start with G&S taking control of WHU. 2) When the Golfer owned us (well before his downfall) and london first got the Olympics, he sat down with the original organising committee to discuss the main stadium and put forwards the following proposals: A) WHU would take over the running of the stadium but retain the athletics facilities (including the track) as the nominated 'owner' in partnership with the other stakeholders, for this committment WHU would fund in full the installation of movable seating of the lower tier (the permanent section), which would be used to cover the running track when other events (football, rugby etc.) were played. OR B) WHU would take possession of the O/S to convert to a footbal only stadium and in return fund the refurbishment and increased transport links to Crystal Palace. Both of these were rejected by the Olympics bods (led by Seb Coe), at the time Spurs also expresses an interest in taking over the O/S but upon learning of the refusals regarding the WHU plans they walked away from it - so you can hardly claim they did not understand the condidtions attached to moving to the O/S. I think one thing we can agree on is that Seb & Co (no pun intended) have been instremental in the way this has panned out, they caused their own issues by not planning for post 2012 correctly. We already had the answer years ago (see above) and you already knew the response then.
Correcting this guy's errors and general idiocy would take more time than it's worth. please log in to view this image I'm oot.
So you don't think that coming onto the Spurs board, which anyone with something decent to contribute or a modicum of politeness is welcome to do, and insinuating that Spurs fans were thick, foolish and crying over losing out on the Olympic stadium is provocative? You don't think that replying to perfectly reasonable posts with tedious attacks, suggestions of paranoia and absolutely no attempt to address the issues that they raise deserves scorn? Then you're a prick. I'm sticking with that now, as I think it's to the point. You're right about Coe and the whole planning for the stadium's post-Olympic use being a farce, but you're ignoring the fact that Spurs were invited to enter the bidding, despite the knowledge that our bid wouldn't include a running track. If we would automatically lose any bid before we'd even started, then why invite the bid in the first place? You're also ignoring the whole Dionne Knight farce and the way that it looks. Why hire somebody that was shagging West Ham's Olympic Project Director, especially when she's the former Head of Procurement at Newham Council? When she also goes on to work for West Ham directly, while the bid is still in progress, any suggestion of impropriety looks accurate before you even start to discuss it.
