Please Register to access the whole of the site and to post on the forums.
Discussion in 'The New Stadium' started by spursgirls, Feb 8, 2011.
Whilst is claims to retain the athletics legacy, it is definitely not superior in every way.
On paper I'd imagine it is, the problem is is what they've proposed realistic?
I genuinely hope the OPLC think it is.
Let me rephrase that. Hopefully the decision makers see it as superior in every way so we don't have to change our name to East London Hotspur.
Ugh, our only hope now rests with the OPLC. That's depressing, but hopefully they come through, because ENIC and Levy fucking well aren't. I've been a staunch supporter of ENICs regime. When people make comments questioning their commitment to the team, slandering the way they target players and criticising their treatment of managers, I've always stood up for ENIC and Levy especially, because I've always believed that they had us at heart, behind the money, and I've always believed that we were progressing with them and would continue to. I still do in actual fact, and I will still go loyally even if we are in East London, but it will not be the same and I will not be a supporter of ENIC any more. This entire escapade has shown me that they really don't care, and as far as I'm concerned Levy has lost what I always believed set him apart from the majority of other Prem Chairmen, because I believed he was one of us.
I'll be completely honest, I would far prefer to stay at WHL at any cost, even if it means residing in our beautiful little stadium till the end of time. It wasn't too small a stadium to see us demolish the champions of Europe, or beat our two London rivals twice in the space of a few days. It wasn't too small for Berbatov to put four past Reading or Defoe to put five past Wigan. It certainly wasn't two small for Robbie Keane to score a century of goals in our shirt, or for Ginola to give me three years of pure unadulterated joy. The only thing White Hart Lane is too small for is Levy's ego, which if he put it to one side for just a moment he'd realise that the pain and suffering he'd cause so many fans of the club he's meant to himself love is just not worth it. I do get that the Eastward move will be immensely cheaper, and in fact probably free given the amount of Land in Tottenham we have acquired and will be able to sell. Hell, we might even spin a profit. I understand all that, but for me it's just not right. Fine, NLD is too expensive, the council aren't helping. Then just stay as you are and be happy in what is already the greatest stadium in England, the world famous home of the Spurs!
Moving out of North London would be nothing short of staggeringly obnoxious. There are so many fans opposed to this. To say 99% of us are supportive of the move is staggering. Ridiculous. Absolutely down right rude.
Why would we have to do that?
SS57 I think you'll find when Spurs sell all the land in Tottenham there will be significant redevelopment there. And not living close to a football stadium will increase house prices by 5% on average
But more will follow the club. There are a vocal minority that are N17 or nowhere. Most would prefer N17 but will still go to the OS
You really don't have the first clue, do you?
I'm assuming you actually know who Matthew Collecott is.
That's kind of missing the point, kind of like most people are opposed to the government raising tuition fees to £9,000, but most students will still go to university.
Just because people do something doesn't mean they agree with it.
Exactly BT. There's a difference between acceptance of something and actually supporting it, people fail to realise this. Think of it this way: Most car users still put petrol in their car so they can get to work, go see friends, travel here there and everywhere, but I doubt any support the fact that petrol has risen to 130p/L from 80p in 2004.
I don't see that we can move out of Tottenham with all the downside we will cause to N17 and the surrounding area while still misrepresenting ourselves as Tottenham Hotspur. As I have said hopefully we will lose the OS bid so that won't be a issue.
We may well lose the OS and still leave N17, hopefully.
West Ham: Stadium decision is about promise made in Queen's name
David Sullivan, West Ham co-owner
What is an Olympic Park without an Olympic Stadium? Do we need the debate to go any further than that?
West Ham are the only ones proposing to stay true to the Olympic legacy with a running track in the stadium - and we know it will work.
I keep reading about 'white elephants' but the only elephant in the room is the one that suggests it is okay to rip up the track and bulldoze the Olympic Stadium to the ground - and in its place build a run-of-the-mill football stadium for a club that is over 10 miles away from the East End. Now, that would be crazy.
Spurs claimed the other day that the decision should not be based on emotion. I disagree.
I know as well as anyone that business is about the bottom line, the numbers and how they stack up - but when you have all that in place in a strong, secure and sound bid as we do, it still has to feel right.
Good financial sense must sit side by side with honest sentiment.
In fact, emotion can often drive a financial plan forward. The legacy of the Olympic Stadium affects us all. We have paid our taxes and have a vested interest in what happens after 2012.
When David Gold and I came home to West Ham United after taking Birmingham City from the third tier of football to become an established Premier League name, we made the Olympic Stadium our priority.
Initially, I didn't know if it could work but our due diligence, fans and the experts we have consulted at every step soon convinced me.
Everything adds up and we are all now together on the starting line of a fantastic adventure. There is real excitement in the air and we just want to get going.
It is right that we have a proposal that will make it possible for a multi-sports venue to be at the heart of the Olympic Park. Anything else simply won't be the Olympic Stadium.
Anything else runs the risk of damaging the nation's reputation around the world and affecting the commercial viability of the wider legacy vision.
If you believe in something, you will work harder and for longer to make it a success. You have to care. Lord Coe cares. He was emotional and full of sentiment when delivering the Olympic legacy promise which resulted in us winning the 2012 Games, against the odds. He cares as much as us about honouring that promise. Demolishing a feat of engineering and expertise that cost half-a-billion pounds and then knocking up a plain football ground in its place is about as cold and clinical as it gets. And, by the way, doesn't make financial sense.
No wonder those who propose that option want the emotion stripped away and instead are choosing to patronise the tens of thousands of loyal Hammers fans who know a thing or two about atmosphere.
We will be able to answer their desire for affordable tickets and better access at a world-class stadium that is fitting for a club that produced three World Cup winners.
The fact we will be staying in our borough to do so just makes the case even more compelling.
After £90million of conversion, we'll have great sightlines - no seat will have a worse view of the pitch than Wembley Stadium - and a new roof designed to create intimacy. I have no doubt that this stadium will succeed.
The opportunity this country has to take a massive long jump forward will only come round once in two or three generations.
I am a father of two boys and we owe it to young people across London to preserve the integrity of an iconic venue that would be the focus for the aspirations of many.
It won't just be about sport but about education and culture. Are we really going to drive a bulldozer through all of that?
Spurs chairman Daniel Levy said: "All I care about is moving the club forward". I think we all know that is his sole motivation.
Living and working locally, I make no secret of wanting the best for West Ham United but to do that while helping UK Athletics, Essex Cricket, the hundreds of schools that we are already working with and an area that so desperately needs regeneration is a great opportunity. That is what I care about.
Sure I want it to be a financial success because the more it is, the more money will go straight back into the community and to the public purse.
That's why we are equal partners with Newham Council.
This isn't some private plan with offshore banks and tax exile investors waiting in the wings to profit from the UK taxpayer like myself. We all have our own sporting story. My dad, Wing Commander Eddie Sullivan, devoted his life to English amateur boxing and refereed internationally. Made an MBE, he was proud of being given a royal honour for something that he loved doing every single day.
In a way, we as a nation have all been given a royal honour.
With the Games entrusted to this country in Her Majesty's name - the Olympic Stadium at the heart of the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park is a medal for us all.
It would lead to money being ploughed in locally while providing a vibrant global destination.
That's why 12 Olympic boroughs and dozens of MPs across all political parties are publicly supporting our bid. They know the importance of matching our financial clout with their desire
to care for their communities is a win-win.
At the same time, my club would grow in a way that our fans - we have 700,000 supporters on our database and a 17,000 season-ticket waiting list - and worldwide name deserves, and national sports like athletics and cricket would get a major lift. This is fundamentally about what it would do to kick-start five regeneration projects in four boroughs. It is all about London.
I spent my formative years in Forest Gate and Stratford and did my economics degree in Mile End. Everywhere you go - now as it was back then - there are people striving to better themselves against all the odds.
People who want to take the emotion out of the East End clearly need a history lesson or two.
We have our field of dreams at last and no one should be allowed to take it away
Based purely on the respective Evening Standard articles, Levy would win.
Sorry guys but the summantics of accpetance and agreement are a bit of a smokescreen. It seems to me from SC and the numbers at the protests at WHL that the only fans who seem truly bothered by moving to the OS are from or live in Haringey. Everybody else thinks it's progress and an opportunity too good to miss.
I thought that DL's column in the Standard was excellent. A very well written and structured argument that mentioned the scaremongering about waste up front to hold the attention of perhaps the neutral reader who might have flipped page.
Regarding the press coverage in general, it would be very hard to claim that it has been biased. As somebody else said it's mostly a product of the number of 'faces' who have come out of the woodwork to have a go. When Pele, former players, Harry and others have commented they've received equal treatment and been quoted in full.
The only thing that you might say is that there should have been a little more research and use of editorial discretion in the quality papers regarding the £80m vs £500m, Permanent vs Temporary structure i.e. adding a line after the Brady crap such as 'Spurs point out that only £80m worth of the original development will be affected, that dismantled structure will be recycled and that the stadium was, in any case, always intended to be temporary when outlined in the bid'
If the Spammers get it, will the good old east end boys sell up.
Just read the Spammer article. Absolutely desperate, amateurish twaddle. He sounds very, very scared. There is virtually no detail on their bid whatsoever. Just trying to forge the opinion that Spurs are some giant corporation whereas they are patriots, with his dad being a Wing Commander, WHU having 3 world cup winners, and the Queen, well, being the monarch etc.
As I said above it's been dissapointing that quality newspapers haven't commented on allegations that they know to be untrue but this is verging on libellous. The ES know full well that our bid only affects £80m and they have allowed West Ham to suggest not only that it's £500m but further that DL and Spurs are 'emotionless' because of it. Terrible journalism at best, libellous at worst. Wouldn't be surpised to see some legal action
Anyway, as Matty says, based on the two articles we would win hands down. And considering that the majority of the panel are intelligent, professionals who have worked in high profile, private sector businesses then the only way we can lose this is politics.
More childish articles like this should play into our hands really
I'm sure Wing Commander Eddie Sullivan is very proud of his porn baron son David!
Makes you wonder whether West Ham actually have a bid that comes anywhere near ours. If it was that great, surely he'd want to talk about it a bit.
Also, not surprised that the ES let his £500m comment slide - they are banned from White Hart Lane after all.
Separate names with a comma.