Pop Robson wrote:
Another professional reply then !!!!!!!!!
To be fair Orient have had this comming, they deserve a bit of a public bitch slapping in my opinoin.
|All you need to know about West Ham United FC's potential move to Stratford.
That's it then isn't it - End of discussion, there can be no groundshare as the interaction of premier league and football league rules prohibit it.
Both premier league and football league rules say that their member must have precedence over the other in the playing of their games.
It's an absolute impossibility for both parties to have precedence in the playing of their games.
I think the club response is fine. Honest reply. The comments from Hearn are a constant source of amusement. It was only about 4 weeks ago Hearn said to the BBC the stadium was unfit for football and basically digging at LLDC. Now Hearn is saying he wants to bid for the stadium himself.
As for the LLDC, frankly West Ham should not be bothered what they think of us. All we have ever done is work well with them. They should love us. If they don't its not our loss is it. I mean what are they going to do, fine us. Give the stadium to someone else cos we are cheeky little cockneys.
Like i said before, I have nothing at all against Orient as a club, wouldn't mind sending more of our youth players down there on loan to gain match practise. But as for Hearn I think he's realised that his ship has sailed. He won't get his hands on the OS, he won't get any money on the side and he won't get to sell Brisbane Road anytime soon.
And I don't see another legal route left he and his cronies might use to make a continued nuisance of themselves.
There will be an announcement at the end of the Olympics and that will be it...
Let's forget being professional - no-one else is behaving in a professional manner, and quite frankly it's getting on my t1ts now!
The legal profession and the legacy committee (whatever they're called) need to take a long hard look at themselves. The club entered into a legally binding bidding process at great expense only to have some bright-spark lawyer call foul and chuck his toys out! I think we should take a new approach:
1. Sue the legacy committee for the expenses incurred in their flawed bid system
2. Sue Hearne and Levy for loss of earnings
3. Spunk the lot on London Pride or a new East Stand
I don't see why Hearn would of contacted West Ham about ground sharing, if he spoke to anyone it would be the LLDC and now we know why the delay in announcing the tenants for the athletic stadium. A lot of people have taken it for granted the olympic bods want West Ham United as tenants, could just be the LLDC are touting about for new tenants other than West Ham. Orient would fit nicely into the original descaled down 25,000 seater stadium.
I think that we should enter into neogtiations with Clapton Orient with regard to ground sharing the Olympic Stadium. String them along up to the point where we have to make a financial commitment and then say "Sorry, we don't fancy it, Barry. It's all yours".
When the stadium company goes tits up, some years down the line, we'll step in and take it over. Adjust the track and install retractable stands and it might just be ok.
One problem is that this would not happen until after 2017. Another issue is that UK Athletics have already signed a 99 year lease and will want the stadium at 60,000 for potential future events. There may well be something in the lease that already states that the stadium will stay 60,000 after the games. Barry H is pissing in the wind.
Again, no one can force us to share the OS with another football club, or rugby club or cricket or whatever. The LLDC may look at all the applications and decide they want us, Orient, Essex Cricket, Saracens Rugby plus Madonna once a month.
If we don't approve we will pull out and then the big question is: Will the LLDC still give it to Orient, Essex Cricket, Saracens Rugby plus Madonna once a month and will it bring in enough money on a regular basis to make it all work ?
I think the answer to that is: You need a Premier League football team in there (like West Ham) as anchor tenant who can virtually guarantee at least 40.000 paying supporters in the ground for a minimum of 20 dates a year at least (cup matches also played there obviously). Orient with a bit of luck and goodwill may get around 10.000, so will Saracens Rugby and maybe even Essex Cricket, Madonna would get more, but then of course she wouldn't come over that often...
So I'd be VERY surprised if the final decision did not involve West Ham as anchor tenant...
I seriously wonder how the LLDC will take these comments Pop;
"We do not wish to comment on recent statements made by Barry Hearn not least because we can't keep up with his ever-changing position.
"They continue, however, to provide us with a constant source of amusement.'
Joking aside, it's not very professional as you said![/quote]
Talk about never being able to please some people!!
I'm sorry but I think it's a lovely put down, whether it's the correct thing to do or not.
Just what that Slimeball Hearn deserves, he has slagged our club and supporters off all the time while praising the Filth. COYI
I think it's about time we fought our corner. Spuds were putting our bid down and using illegal methods to obtain information. Hearn being the odious man he is using all his air time to mess up our bid. Neither concentrated on their own bids like we did.
It's about time we showed up Hearn for what he is. If we don't highlight what a joke he is people might start to actually believe his bullsh*t knowing how gullible a lot of people are...
And Hearn along with Spurs have acted in a professional manner from day one?!?!
Do me a favour! Thats almost as amusing as the clubs statement.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], noblecause and 8 guests