BBC Home

Explore the BBC


user rating: 3 star

West Ham dealt Olympic Stadium blow

Premier League West Ham United
by Lucas (U2666583) 17 February 2010
comment on the article

Tessa Jowell and the 2012 team are still hot on keeping the Olympic Stadium for athletics:

For one, I don't know why. I'm annoyed and I'm not even a Hammer.

Worrying about legacies and so forth, this can be achieved simply by:

- Redeveloping Upton Park post 2012 for athletics
- Redeveloping Olympic Stadium post 2012 for West Ham

Provided that West Ham will pay the costs of the redevelopments.

The "legacy" would then be achieved, surely.

Why not give West Ham the Olympic Stadium and just redevelop Upton Park for athletics?

Beggars belief! Thoughts?

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own

posted Feb 22, 2010

As a Hammers fan I personally think the move could be a good idea. If anyone actually takes this club seriously then they will realize that to become a larger club a move is necessary. The thing I am concerned about is why we shouldn't get it. Like an athletics event is really going to get 80 thousand people to show up unless it is the olympics. It is completely unrealistic and blind sighted of say Tessa Jowell to think this is a viable idea. If you ask me, if the stadium is left remain an athletics stadium it will merely end up as another Millenium Dome now the 02 Arena.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 22, 2010

Why should a club who have racked up 100m + worth of debt be given a brand new stadium? Leyton Orient are 2.4m in the black due to sound financial management and currently play their football less than one mile away from the Olympic Stadium. It is they who coud truly benefit, taking their club to the next level, and deserved too.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 22, 2010

OK first facts:

We NEED an athletics stadium in London that can host the Grand Prix each year (it is the biggest on the circuit and is now two days and always sells out Crystal Palace 17,000 capacity).
The legacy was to reduce to 25,000 seats to accomodate that. However we should bid for an Athletics World champs in future (they gave us one without a stadium so we won't have a problem getting one once we have one). Also before that an Athletics European Champs - we would get that pretty much at a drop of a hat as we are the premier European Athletics nation and I don't believe we have EVER held it.
Now it makese sense to use the brand new facility. The other alternative would be to develop Crystal Palace to 30,000 odd but that wouldn't suffice for the world champs AND all the infrastructure has gone into Stratford.
Gold's comment to develop a smaller athletics stadia "Not as an Olympic athletics stadium but a regional stadium with seating facility commensurate to their requirements which would be about 5,000." is absolute *!*!* The requirement is there for a 25,000 seater plus. Yes it needs to be more than one frand-prix so host other things there. The annual NFL game, Hockey champs indeed any field sport. it took ages to work out that the Millenium Dome was an entertainment and sports venue, it shouldn't take as long here. Also as a stadium it could host concerts etc and will have better infrastructure to get there than Wembley and surrounding facilities. It CAN be a viable venue. I am not against West Ham moving in BUT it must retain the track, must host the annual Grand Prix (which is in the football close season) and must be written in their lease that they will need to stay out in August when we host the European champs and the World Champs (they'll just have to play their first six games away). Football may be the NATIONAL sport but it is not the ONLY one. By the way I am not a West Ham fan as such but they have always been my second club and it would appear they have been taken over by a couple of chancers

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by sconned (U7926289)

posted Feb 22, 2010

I think moving WHU to an 80k seater stadium would be a mistake. Currently they only fill their ground to a capacity of less than 50% of that on about 5 or 6 occasions per season. It would be a quiet and lonely place to be on a Saturday afternoon at home to someone like Bolton. I also think that it may even affect the players' confidence if they continually run out to a half empty stadium every other week

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Tree (U4514327)

posted Feb 22, 2010

The way I see it is that neither party in this debate really wants to budge - Lord Coe is, after all, an ex-athlete, and not an ex-footballer, and therefore, he's going to inevitably want better facilities for UK athletics in London. It makes logical sense.

However, the thing about it is that it's not in line with the idea of sustainability, because it's simply not sustainable to have a stadium that vast for the sole purpose of a handful of athletics meets every year, even if you do reduce the size.

What I'd suggest would be to use it like Berlin uses its renovated Olympic stadium - it's essentially a multi-purpose arena, which hosts both athletics and football, as well as a range of other activities, even including the Firework Display World Championships. It's the home of Hertha BSC football club, but when big non-footballing events are on during the season, they just make sure that they book them on a Hertha away day.

I reckon that the people behind London 2012 could also do this for their Olympic stadium too - have a multi-purpose stadium, and that way, everyone's happy, and it ensures the sustainability of the stadium for years to come.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 22, 2010

I wish all of you commenting on the size of the stadium and use by clubs in the lower leagues would bother to check out some of the facts first.

1) It WILL be reduced to 25k post Olympics in line with its orignal design. To make it back up to 50-55K will require a redesign and rebuilding.

2) If a football club takes posession of the stadium and all the contractual running costs (which is the deal), it will have to guaruntee a minimum home attendance of 26K to meet those running costs - which rules out most (if not all) London clubs from the championship down.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 22, 2010

"Provided that West Ham will pay the costs of the redevelopments"

Never gonna happen like that! It will be a case of the owners (as landlords) having to make the necessary redevelopments for West Ham (as tenants) to rent the ground, like Man City does with the old Commonwealth Games stadium.

"Too small a club to take over an 80k stadium."

That won't be an option for West Ham. The stadium has been designed and is currently well under construction. The upper tier is essentially a temporary structure and it is going to be torn down after only three-weeks of use, leaving a capacity of only 25,000. To change that now will require some very immediate decision-making from the powers-that-be and for someone to stump up a very large amount of money to make the neccessary alterations. In the current climate of bickering and posturing, that seems very unlikely to happen.

At this rate, by the time the Olympic Committee realises they are going to have a big, fat, financially unsustainable white elephant in the east end of London for 5,000 athletics fans once or twice a year, it will be too late for it to be attractive to West Ham anymore. We are not going to leave Upton Park for 25,000-seater, however pretty it looks!

Tessa Jowell & Seb Coe need to get their heads out of their behinds, and start comparing say Athens with Manchester, and make some realistic decisions about what will happen with that very expensive, very attractive stadium in the heart of West Ham United territory.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 22, 2010

hammer 44 <ok> well said

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 22, 2010

why not just let west ham move to the olympic stadium and just convert upton park into an athletics venue?!

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.


Rate Breakdown

  • 5 50.00%
    2 votes
  • 4
    0 votes
  • 3
    0 votes
  • 2
    0 votes
  • 1 50.00%
    2 votes

average rating:
3.00 from 4 votes