The Olympic Stadium [2010 Poll]

A selection of the very best posts and/or most memorable threads on KUMB since the current Forum launched in 2002.

Moderator: Gnome

Post Reply

Do you support the proposed move to an Olympic Stadium with a running track, post-2012 games?

Poll ended at Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:48 am

Yes
75
18%
No
299
73%
Undecided
36
9%
 
Total votes: 410

User avatar
Hammer110
Posts: 2537
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:56 pm
Location: Dreaming 父 父

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by Hammer110 »

sicknote wrote:i'd be inclined to bet on neither gets it, 6/4
The way things are going you may be right we appear to be tearing ourselves to pieces and spurs bid seems to falling to pieces, how people can think spurs are in the lead when Palace have put a roadblock in the way of their unwanted legacy plans who knows!
User avatar
JonG86
Posts: 6072
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 4:35 pm
Has liked: 11 likes
Total likes: 77 likes

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by JonG86 »

Hammer110 wrote:
Bit of an exaggeration that, it won't kill West Ham, the club has been in existence for over 100 years and will still be around in another 100, weakened many be but still here.

Next to nothing it will cost them all of their claimed £250 million plus the money from selling WHL.
Is it an exaggeration?

They will have a purpose built football stadium with rail access to the Jubilee, Central and DLR underground lines as well as International rail and Southeast rail extending right into our normal catchment area

Compared with building their stadium where they want to in Tottenham and the OS and what they would get there in terms of infrastructure it would be cheap. It would be the most accessible stadium in London and with Spurs in and around the top 5, playing Champions league football there or there abouts. We would become Charlton.
User avatar
Hammer110
Posts: 2537
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:56 pm
Location: Dreaming 父 父

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by Hammer110 »

. We would become Charlton.
Rather proves my point, becoming one of the other clubs in London rather than the fourth is hardly the death of the club as some predict. Spurs coming to the O/S won't result in fans deserting West Ham in droves, it will merely mean we will gain less of the future generations with little or no ties to the club.
Don't get me wrong I don't want spurs at the O/S and I do believe it would impact on our future support if they dp
User avatar
e1hammer
Posts: 1453
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:47 pm
Location: drinking tea with the taste of the Thames
Total likes: 3 likes

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by e1hammer »

Interesting bit of historical context - http://greatwenlondon.wordpress.com/201 ... ve-looked/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; :think:
User avatar
brownout
Posts: 10299
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 8:26 pm
Has liked: 91 likes
Total likes: 174 likes

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by brownout »

Everton seem to survive being less than a mile from Anfield.
User avatar
The Rebirth
It's all about the confidence
Posts: 6704
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 11:59 am
Location: Always censored, never quiet

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by The Rebirth »

brownout wrote:Everton seem to survive being less than a mile from Anfield.
Survive? Have you seen the problems with Everton? No money and debt?

Yeah Survive is the key word there but you're forgeting 'barely'

Everton could well be one of the next clubs to suffer lack of fresh investment and fall down the leagues.

They are lucky they've had Moyes to be honest!
User avatar
taffhammer
Posts: 2736
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 6:37 pm
Location: from the wick of hackney to the seaside
Total likes: 5 likes

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by taffhammer »

brownout wrote:Everton seem to survive being less than a mile from Anfield.
Good point, but as the success of Liverpool in the last 40 years had no effect on the local support of Everton you only have to be at Anfield pre match to see all the coaches that come from all over the country with "liverpool" supporters to realise that another more succesfull club than us with excellent transport links on our doorstep will draw in all the future support from areas that could have been our future support.
It won't be the death of West Ham but it will have an effect.
User avatar
Paddy O'Hammer
Posts: 11132
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 10:57 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Has liked: 508 likes
Total likes: 162 likes
Contact:

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by Paddy O'Hammer »

If there was anything glorious and masterful that should have been knocked down after it's 5 minutes of fame - it should have been the Millennium Dome.....but no way were the politicians going to swallow that!

There is no way possible that any politician will allow something like this to happen or be associated with the flattening of the OS - no politician in any country would be that mad.

Apart from the IMF gobaloon lovers we have over here.
MEM
Posts: 593
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:41 pm

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by MEM »

Paddy O'Hammer wrote:If there was anything glorious and masterful that should have been knocked down after it's 5 minutes of fame - it should have been the Millennium Dome.....but no way were the politicians going to swallow that!

There is no way possible that any politician will allow something like this to happen or be associated with the flattening of the OS - no politician in any country would be that mad.

Apart from the IMF gobaloon lovers we have over here.

Paddy only problem with that argument is that 60% of the capacity was planned to be knocked down anyway ~ I think the pretty flat 25,000 seater planned to be left behind will look nothing like the high rise 80,000 there now So knocking all or some of it down is less of an issue
User avatar
StiffUpper
Posts: 1696
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 10:41 pm
Location: Billericay
Total likes: 1 like

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by StiffUpper »

I see our bid as an opportunity and also, since Spurs have come in the lesser of two evils. A large part of me now wishes we’d never won the Olympics.
I’m bricking it about Tottenham and agree that our bid should emphasise the fact that stadium is in West Ham.

But taking a step back, looking at the political perspective, surely it’s clear cut for us?

Spurs will presumably chuck more money in up front, but the amounts involved aren’t that great for a national govt.

If WHU get its great for athletics and cricket is also brought to that central location.

If Spurs get it they’d have to deal with adverse international publicity in the lead up to the games, during the games and as it’s demolished.
They’d much rather bask in the reflected glow of a fine Olympic Games.

Also, while it’s true that they can make decisions by blaming the situation on Labour – there’s also Seb Coe.
As an Athletics man he’s going to favour our bid surely, he already has in an underwhelming way – publically at least.
Seb Coe is quite a senior figure in the Tory party, he was an MP and is now a Lord.
He is probably lobbying quite hard against Spurs.

Spurs argument that an Athletic stadium is a crap place to watch football (while true IMO) is neither here nor there when deciding which club gets it. Smacks of clutching at straws to me.
User avatar
taffhammer
Posts: 2736
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 6:37 pm
Location: from the wick of hackney to the seaside
Total likes: 5 likes

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by taffhammer »

MEM wrote:
Paddy only problem with that argument is that 60% of the capacity was planned to be knocked down anyway ~ I think the pretty flat 25,000 seater planned to be left behind will look nothing like the high rise 80,000 there now So knocking all or some of it down is less of an issue
The top tier is only temporary in the sense it could be dismantled and move to another location if someone bought it. It would be permanent where it was moved to therefore it can be permanent where it is.If there is no buyer it they won't be "knocking it down".

Has anyone thought that maybe it could be worse for sp*rs if we get it than it would be for us if they get it and maybe why they are trying to throw a spanner in the works.
Last edited by taffhammer on Tue Jan 18, 2011 10:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Aceface
Posts: 16360
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:01 am
Location: Blighty
Has liked: 358 likes
Total likes: 1446 likes

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by Aceface »

Even though Sp*rs have all the momentum, I really can't see anything but a result for us in the end.

The future headaches the decision-makers will be opening up for themselves if they award it to Tottenham are endless.

Lawyers will pepper the FA about their own relocation rules, the IOC will demand to know why London has reneged on one of the key parts of it's bid package, Boris will be accused of ripping the heart out of an already deprived borough, every article about the progress of the Olympics between now and 2012 will make mention of the fact that the stadium will be destroyed as soon as it's finished, Sp*rs fans will go apeshit, famous Olympians will criticise the decision just as they gear up to start selling Olympic tickets next month....

It won't be generosity of spirit, but their own self-interest, that sees this get decided in our favour.
User avatar
Puff Daddy
Gone for a Burton
Posts: 42250
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Westham Way
Has liked: 248 likes
Total likes: 1160 likes

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by Puff Daddy »

brownout wrote:Everton seem to survive being less than a mile from Anfield.
.... but there are only two clubs in Liverpoool, whereas there are there are 9 in London, 10 if you include Watford
User avatar
Aceface
Posts: 16360
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:01 am
Location: Blighty
Has liked: 358 likes
Total likes: 1446 likes

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by Aceface »

Paddy only problem with that argument is that 60% of the capacity was planned to be knocked down anyway ~ I think the pretty flat 25,000 seater planned to be left behind will look nothing like the high rise 80,000 there now So knocking all or some of it down is less of an issue
Slightly off topic, but does anyone know how the decision to remake it with 60,000 seats was arrived at? It seems to me that for a football stadium and athletics venue, 50,000 would be more than adequate for purpose, and would have quelled some of the accusations about empty seats etc.
User avatar
Arch Dandy
Posts: 9334
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 2:58 pm
Location: Bringing you the boos since 1980
Has liked: 3 likes
Total likes: 50 likes

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by Arch Dandy »

Aceface wrote:Boris will be accused of ripping the heart out of an already deprived borough
That’ll be the killer, not only does it rip out Tottenhams biggest private employer but it also rips out the regeneration of Newham. With our bid they get a great community resource, an athletic solution and the football club. Spurs is just the football stadium.
User avatar
GeorgeParris'Pet
Posts: 4970
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 8:03 pm
Location: The Garden of England

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by GeorgeParris'Pet »

Puff Daddy wrote:.... but there are only two clubs in Liverpoool, whereas there are there are 9 in London, 10 if you include Watford
If you're going to include all London clubs like Orient & Brentford then you have to take into account Tranmere when comparing to Liverpool. Plus, you do realise Watford is over 30 miles from Upton Park? Wigan, Bolton, Man Utd, Man City, Stockport, Bury, Rochdale, etc are all as close to Liverpool as Watford are to West Ham.
User avatar
Heysel76
Posts: 6289
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 12:11 pm
Location: 父 父 Lincolnshire Wolds, (formerly Hornchurch) 父 父
Has liked: 213 likes
Total likes: 105 likes

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by Heysel76 »

GeorgeParris'Pet wrote: If you're going to include all London clubs like Orient & Brentford then you have to take into account Tranmere when comparing to Liverpool. Plus, you do realise Watford is over 30 miles from Upton Park? Wigan, Bolton, Man Utd, Man City, Stockport, Bury, Rochdale, etc are all as close to Liverpool as Watford are to West Ham.
The BIG difference being, that they are clubs that have all been established in that area for probably around 100 years or more!


I'm sure some stato will pick this apart!
User avatar
Aceface
Posts: 16360
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:01 am
Location: Blighty
Has liked: 358 likes
Total likes: 1446 likes

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by Aceface »

Arch Dandy wrote:Boris will be accused of ripping the heart out of an already deprived borough

That’ll be the killer, not only does it rip out Tottenhams biggest private employer but it also rips out the regeneration of Newham. With our bid they get a great community resource, an athletic solution and the football club. Sp*rs is just the football stadium.
It's the main reason I still think we'll get it. If Sp*rs get told they can't have it, they'll mourn for 5 minutes and then go back and spend the money in Tottenham, while the refitting of the Olympic stadium by our owners regenerates the area around Stratford,. It's two for the price of one, as opposed to the other option, which basically would wreck Tottenham, while stripping the Stratford area of a community facility.
User avatar
GeorgeParris'Pet
Posts: 4970
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 8:03 pm
Location: The Garden of England

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by GeorgeParris'Pet »

Heysel76 wrote: The BIG difference being, that they are clubs that have all been established in that area for probably around 100 years or more!

I'm sure some stato will pick this apart!
Both WHU and THFC have been established 100 years or more. WHU have survived with WHL only 8 miles away - yet if they move 5 miles closer suddenly WHU will disappear?

I don't think so.
User avatar
James P
Posts: 16265
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:55 pm
Location: Romford
Has liked: 28 likes
Total likes: 171 likes

Re: The Olympic Stadium

Post by James P »

StiffUpper wrote:Sp*rs argument that an Athletic stadium is a crap place to watch football (while true IMO) is neither here nor there when deciding which club gets it. Smacks of clutching at straws to me.
The key point Spurs made though was that if the football in an athletics stadium idea doesn't work, there's a very big chance we might not be able to live up to our commitments when we take on the stadium. They said it in a rather clumsy way which allowed everyone to jump up and down saying "They're calling us a failing club" (which they weren't) (even though we are!)

That's not clutching at straws but is a very, very good argument for them. The last thing anybody involved would want is for five years down the line, West Ham turning around and saying "This really isn't working for us, we need to renegotiate." or in layman's terms, "We need a bail out!"

There is a chance West Ham could make a success of the OS. There is also a chance of it being an absolute disaster. IMO Spurs' bid is far less volatile and they are simple pressing that point.
Post Reply