wednesday's gossip 9th march includes west ham updated

[hammerjohn]

That's dreadful, Grimsby must be so skint that they don't employ cleaners.

Lots of good news today CH... thanks mate.
hammer no#1 is just ...... aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhh sigh !!

Cheers boys.

[cockney hammer]

Grand old White Hart Lane may be anticipating a magical European night but Tottenham Hotspur's chairman, Daniel Levy, remains sore about losing the bid to move to the Olympic site and is still giving serious consideration to challenging the decision. Spurs' lawyers are understood to be poring over the circumstances that led to West Ham United being handed the Stratford stadium, to advise whether there is a case for legally contesting the decision by judicial review.

Spurs are declining to comment on their thinking now, but a challenge is understood to be still possible. Levy warned persistently before the Olympic Park Legacy Company finally plumped for West Ham, who committed to keeping the athletics track permanently in a 60,000-seat stadium, that he would mount a challenge if advised the process had not been genuinely objective. In particular Levy told the Guardian in advance of the decision that the OPLC had to consider only "objective criteria" and it "shouldn't be a political decision".

To succeed with a challenge Spurs would have to show the "appearance of bias" in the process followed by the OPLC or by Boris Johnson and the government, who approved it. Those public authorities have insisted the decision was made solely on five objective criteria set out by the OPLC, but Spurs will weigh whether it was influenced by emotion, or political considerations to do with retaining the running track or having West Ham, the local East End club, as the occupant.

The intervention by Lord Coe, who had no responsibility for the outcome, undoubtedly had an influence with the public when he supported West Ham as the OPLC was deliberating, arguing London had a "moral obligation" to keep the track. A question for Spurs is whether Coe, a former Conservative MP highly influential with the government and in London politics particularly over the Olympics, influenced either the OPLC or Johnson.

Spurs will also examine statements Johnson made last Wednesday after approving the OPLC's recommendation, when he effervesced about the track and keeping the stadium's "iconic design", neither of which were in the five criteria. Coe and his fellow former members of the Olympic board commissioned the stadium to be 80,000 seats for the games in 2012, then to be reduced to 25,000 seats, with no roof, and no tenant, after the Games. Johnson described that legacy, whose design has cost £490m of public money, as "a dust bowl staging occasional athletics events".

Spurs argued that keeping the track permanently was unsuitable for football and athletics, which is unlikely ever again to attract anything approaching 60,000 spectators, so planned to in-fill Coe's "dust-bowl", build a new stadium with multi-sport and community use, and refurbish Crystal Palace for athletics.

The OPLC, knowing throughout it was vulnerable to a legal challenge by whichever Premier League club, hungry for the site, ultimately lost, says it was meticulous about the objectivity of the process. It was clear that the five criteria – producing a "viable long‑term solution"; securing a partner; re-opening the stadium as quickly as possible after the games; remaining "a distinctive physical symbol"; and "allowing flexible usage"– were not ranked in priority.

The OPLC stated repeatedly their decision would be made by taking the five criteria "in the round". However in Johnson's official decision approving the OPLC's recommendation, the five criteria are listed "in order of importance". Spurs may consider whether that contributes to an "appearance of bias", with Johnson not weighing the criteria "in the round".

The club will not reveal what factors it is examining, and there is a mountain of detail that the public never saw. Johnson's office declined to comment on Tuesday. An OPLC spokesman said: "We ran a robust, fair and meticulous process. We have no concerns about any potential challenge."

Spurs, though, under Levy and their Bahamas-based owner, the currency trader Joe Lewis, are desperate for a move. White Hart Lane, home for 112 years, has a 36,534 capacity, similar to Highbury, which their north London rivals Arsenal left for the 60,00-seat Emirates Stadium in 2006. Last year Arsenal's turnover, £380m, boosted by sales of flats in redeveloped Highbury, dwarfed that of Spurs, who made £120m.

Spurs invested heavily to build Harry Redknapp a squad capable of Champions League dazzle, spending £64m net in 2008‑09, a net £24m in 2009-10 and a further £18m last summer, with Rafael van der Vaart the stand-out signing. That has bought nights such as tonight but at a cost – a £23m profit in 2008‑09 became last year a £7m loss.

In November 2008 Levy first presented plans for a new 60,000‑seat stadium close to White Hart Lane, with housing and retail, describing the Northumberland development project as "a world‑class scheme". Remaining at Spurs' "spiritual home in Tottenham" was, he said "the fans' favourite", which it probably still is. Levy said it was chosen following "an extensive review of suitable sites and viable alternatives".

Levy argues the Northumberland project has now become "unviable" at a cost of £450m. Without a viable alternative, then, it is little surprise Levy is spending a relatively small amount of further money on lawyer's fees, to inspect forensically the Stratford process, before giving up all possibility of moving there. Without a larger stadium, which would enable Spurs to keep up with the neighbours, Levy knows nights such as tonight will remain floodlit treats, not regular Champions League outings

[cockney hammer]

Another nail in the Spurs & Orient schemers

Government and London mayor back bid to stage 2017 World Athletics Championships at Olympic Stadium

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/others ... adium.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Meanwhile......

Margaret Ford, the OPLC chair, said that following last week's decision by the government and the London mayor, Boris Johnson, to rubberstamp the decision to award the stadium to West Ham and Newham council after the Games it was "pressing on with that as fast as we can".

She added: "There's nothing that will stop us moving as quickly as we can to get to a financial close there. I'm not expecting anything from the Newham or West Ham side that doesn't allow us to press right on."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/ma ... generation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;