leffe186 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 My suspicion is that they'll go with West Ham, then a couple of years down the line - when the layout hasn't worked - they'll rip up the track anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 My suspicion is that they'll go with West Ham, then a couple of years down the line - when the layout hasn't worked - they'll rip up the track anyway. That's probably the best outcome TBH, try the track for a few years and reconsider if it really is terrible. Spread the cost of changes to the stadium as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 “Alongside Tottenham Hotspur FC, we have some exciting and innovative plans for the stadium and surrounding area that would ensure an amazing visitor experience all year round," McGuigan. "Crucially, our plans will stand the test of time and require no public subsidy." McGuigan cited the example of London's AEG-operated O2 arena, the busiest sports and entertainment arena in the world. "Just take a look at The O2 [operated by AEG], along with our other venues across the world, and you get a sense of the variety and scale of what we are proposing, from international sports, music and X-Games to Expos, theatre and heritage festivals," she said. "We would bring this excitement to the Olympic Park and help ensure it becomes a vibrant and sustainable place to live and visit, not just for a year or two, but for the long-term." There are loads of places for Expos and shows in London, most of which don't involve going somewhere as horrible as Stratford. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
binnsy Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Apparently Manchester United have joined the race to get the Olympic stadium. A spokesman for the club said it would be good to move there from Old Trafford as they would be nearer their core fan base. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leffe186 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 My suspicion is that they'll go with West Ham, then a couple of years down the line - when the layout hasn't worked - they'll rip up the track anyway. That's probably the best outcome TBH, try the track for a few years and reconsider if it really is terrible. Spread the cost of changes to the stadium as well. Would be a bit rough on Spurs, basically saying we were right all along. I'm a bit miffed by some of the stick Spurs have been getting - not on here but from people like Coe and several journalists. It's not as if we made the promises about an athletics legacy ourselves, or designed the bloody thing in the first place. We've just said we're interested, this is our plan and we reckon it's the most viable one (though we would say that). I'm backing the mighty O's. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 i'm not and have no intention of following this in detail but won't the initial public expenditure on building the stadium be covered by revenue from the Olympics? that being the case whoever owns it (?) essentially has an asset on their hands it's tory britain boys and girls, should go to the highest fucking bidder for me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucaAltieri Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 If it's public money that built it then it should remain a public asset, hand it over to the sport and culture secretary, have that department manage events taking place there... primarily as a venue for sporting events... but any revenue from gigs etc held there should go back into UK sport facilities. If the stadium could make a profit for a private company, no reason we couldn't keep it as a public asset and have it pay for itself. We paid to build the fucker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Lol Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 My suspicion is that they'll go with West Ham, then a couple of years down the line - when the layout hasn't worked - they'll rip up the track anyway. That's probably the best outcome TBH, try the track for a few years and reconsider if it really is terrible. Spread the cost of changes to the stadium as well. Would be a bit rough on Spurs, basically saying we were right all along. I'm a bit miffed by some of the stick Spurs have been getting - not on here but from people like Coe and several journalists. It's not as if we made the promises about an athletics legacy ourselves, or designed the bloody thing in the first place. We've just said we're interested, this is our plan and we reckon it's the most viable one (though we would say that). I'm backing the mighty O's. It annoys me intensely when Coe says the athletics legacy will be lost when Spurs' proposal is to try to resolve an utter shambles and make Crystal Palace, athletics spiritual home, into a world class venue. That said, this is all about what happens to the Olympic stadium, not Crystal Palace, and I hope Orient get a 25000 seater OS. They're the natural tenants geographically. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 No Olypic Stadium has ever been a post Game success without massive reconstruction Depends what your definition of "success" is, but Sydney's Olympic Stadium (renamed Telstra Stadium) is still used for a variety of events. After the Games it was reduced from 110,000 to 85,000, but I wouldn't describe that as "massive reconstruction" as those extra 25,000 seats were designed as temporary Olympic seating that were always going to be removed after the Games... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 Give it to Spurs. I'd love to see any atmosphere they hav just totally destroyed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 Would also give them even bigger financial clout. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 If they move to the Olympic Stadium then Spurs should be made to drop the "Tottenham" part of their name. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuyP Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 so does the argument basically boil down to; West Ham v Spurs running track/lack of atmos. v Geography/lack of "athletic legacy"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 so does the argument basically boil down to; West Ham v Spurs running track/lack of atmos. v Geography/lack of "athletic legacy"? It's not so much lack of athletic legacy as they'll be redeveloping the Crystal Palace athletic park. I think a big part of the resentment regarding Spurs' proposal (apart from geography which you mentioned) is the colossal waste of demolishing a brand new stadium to build a brand new stadium. In this era of environmentalism, does the Spurs bid contain even a fig leaf re recycling building materials et al? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 hope orient get to have their day over this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Lol Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 so does the argument basically boil down to; West Ham v Spurs running track/lack of atmos. v Geography/lack of "athletic legacy"? It's not so much lack of athletic legacy as they'll be redeveloping the Crystal Palace athletic park. I think a big part of the resentment regarding Spurs' proposal (apart from geography which you mentioned) is the colossal waste of demolishing a brand new stadium to build a brand new stadium. In this era of environmentalism, does the Spurs bid contain even a fig leaf re recycling building materials et al? Not a fig leaf, most of it to be accurate. Speaking in an exclusive interview on the Alan Brazil Sports Breakfast on Tuesday Levy explained that the changes Spurs intend to make to the stadium have been greatly exaggerated. “The reality is that of the £500m that has been spent on that site we are demolishing approximately £80m and recycling and reusing most of that,” Levy said. “The rest of it is all being utilised. “With regards to the difference between the possible scheme at Tottenham and Stratford, I don’t want to go into too much detail here, because it’s a very complicated matter. All I would say is that Stratford is where we wsiteant to go and I’m determined to do whatever it takes to get us there.” The full interview is available on the Talksport website. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 Why can't you fuckers just keep it as an athletics only stadium? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Lol Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 Why can't you fuckers just keep it as an athletics only stadium? Neither of the proposals propose an athletics only stadium. That was the original offer made to UK Athletics and they declined to take up the option as they wanted the Government to provide £15/20m pa subsidy to maintain the stadium and that wasn't forthcoming. Very simply, UK Athletics are not in a financial position to take on the upkeep the Olympic Stadium legacy. The West Ham proposal offers athletics use of the stadium approximately 40 days a year, the Spurs proposal offers athletics a fully functional 25000 seater state of the art athletics stadium 365 days a year, that would be a fully refurbished Crystal Palace and not the Olympic Stadium. Spurs are also offering annual sponsorship for 20 elite athletes. I don't want the club to move to Stratford but it's very difficult to suggest that West Ham's athletics legacy is better than Spurs' alternative. 40 days against 365? Sponsorship or no sponsorship? No brainer imo even if it's not the option I want taken up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 think i want spurs to get it now, then the league to force them to change their names (if that's possible/likely) and for them to be hated by every fan in the country for selling their souls just like the MK Dons fingers crossed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maze Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 neither. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tdeans Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 Don't think Spurs should get it. Their a bloody North London Team, what the hell they gonna be doing in the East End. Arsenal wouldn't even be their rivals anymore. Stupid Idea,. West Ham should get it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 West Ham have it. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12412739 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 West Ham have it. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12412739 A good decision, now lets hope West Ham will have to pay some sort of rent. Also isn't it also an option for England's NFL team to be based?, if we ever get one that is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenham Mag Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 West Ham have it. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12412739 A good decision, now lets hope West Ham will have to pay some sort of rent. Also isn't it also an option for England's NFL team to be based?, if we ever get one that is. The London silly Nannies? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenham Mag Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 http://www.kumb.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=129153&sid=f18174babb0021c810fdfd206b2604cf They aren't taking it well On the other hand , Spurs are delighted: http://www.glory-glory.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=52825&sid=a6a6b6ed6cfec744ca73dc5cfef792f0 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now