Clearly you didn't or you wouldn't have been crushed 14-0. I don't believe the track will be going anywhere. The venue will be multi sports and through Newham the government stand to make some serious money.
Being beaten 14-0 clearly shows a West Ham bias within the OPLC and that Spurs were merely being used to get more favourable terms from West Ham. Why else were we encouraged to bid. The whole thing stinks. I'm sure that in a few years time the porno brothers will demand the track be ripped up because their fans aren't prepared to sit miles away from the action and would rather watch on tv.
Typical bully boy tactics this - which ignore the fact that every other time the UK has bid for the event, it's been as humiliating a defeat as...well, the bids for England to host the proper World Cup in 2006 and 2018. Besides, dropping the bid for the convenience of the Government Milk Monitor is laughable, especially when he talks about an economic boost of £100m for hosting the event. Perhaps if the whole process wasn't an obvious sham from start to finish, we wouldn't be taking action in the first place. See my signature... You know the ultimate reason Quatar got it ahead of the US, South Korea, Japan and Australia? Not only did they offer to build the infastructure of football in places like Thailand (whilst England just offered a friendly, which would've been played just after the recent Switzerland match, and likely feature the second string), but most importantly because there's less chance of constant bleating from English fans that the games would be on in the early morning (which they were in 2002) or the middle of the night (as they were in 1994) In other words, Quatar is more convenient for the TV schedules than any other bid was.
I very much doubt the FIFA delegates had any concern about English fans when they made their decision
Yeah, they were also considering the millions of fans/viewers in Spain, Italy, Portugal, Germany, France, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Greece, Turkey, Poland, Russia, Ukraine and every other country in the similar timezone who would benefit. As for the talk of bribery, the whistleblower has dropped their story and signed an affadavit saying they were making it up. But that didn't get much coverage, strangely...
And what would have stopped them from paying off the whistleblower? Regardless of any suggestions of impropriety from anyone within the organization, the whole thing didn't make any sense and the locality wasn't even given any consideration. Things like the heat and time of year were still being talked about long after the bid had been won, which is ridiculous.
Both the USA and Japan happen to be ridiculously hot in June-July, but that wasn't ever mentioned in reference to their bids for the 2022 tournament - even though in the 1994 World Cup players were keeling over from heat exposure and dehydration in some games. Anyway, back to the topic in hand - trying to pin the likely failure of the UK's bid on us is pathetic, even for a low-ranking Tory scumbag like Hugh Robertson, and is on the same level as Karren Brady's fraudulent claims that we'd bulldoze the whole stadium, and comparing this to bulldozing a dozen primary schools in a manner usually associated with trolls on political message boards. Also, if you pick up the current issue of Private Eye, it does mention on page one the mutual backscratching between West Ham and Newham COuncil goes back many years, long before they went 50/50 on the company West Ham pay rent on the stadium to...
Looks like the clubs Independent Investigation has concluded though, perhaps the fun and games will start now? http://www.whufc.com/articles/20110803/west-ham-united-statement_2236884_2408810
What a load of old bollocks. West Ham hire lawyers, who find that West Ham have done nothing wrong? Well, that's a surprise, isn't it? Independent, my arse. Anyone ever been to Blackstone Chambers? Prestigious, true, but knackered.
Well it does slightly, because it's handed to the OPLC and they use it in their investigation. I suppose Spurs will be performing own work and creating their own dossier on why they think the bidding process was flawed and in part due to the relationship of these two, then use a national paper and some PI's to prove it possibly illegaly.
Yes very interesting. Perhaps the new owners decided the previous company didn't perform as well as they could have regarding Tevezgate, or that Chambers must be something special in order for us to end up paying 25 big ones when nobody else would touch it after repeated tries from SUFC? Still at least it shows they kept an open mind.
They've got an open wallet. They're lawyers. The process was obviously flawed from the start. Anyone with half a brain can see that. West Ham's Olympic Project Director was living with the one of the OPLC's executives, who was also working for West Ham and who used to work for Newham Council as their Head of Procurement. How much more do you need to investigate?
Well if it is that corrupt and Spurs have been that hard done by, then why are they finding it so hard to prove it even when using other methods such as PI's and phone tapping?
How do you investigate something that would clearly be covered up, without using a professional investigator? Did you want Levy to follow Gold & Sullivan around himself? Phone tapping? Prove it. Why would any of this be a problem if West Ham, the OPLC and Newham Council had done nothing wrong?
Phone tapping, prove it? I am sure if it has occured by PI, hired by Spurs and/or The Sunday Times then it will be proved. Nothing wrong - Because Spurs are still wondering how they lost by 14-0 even though they wanted a football stadium rather than all purpose
