|
Post by Northy on Feb 11, 2011 13:02:09 GMT
it's now official, think Barry Hearn will have a say in things soon.
|
|
|
Post by goodjobson on Feb 11, 2011 13:06:33 GMT
Stadiums with running tracks are notorious for shite atmospheres.
|
|
|
Post by hanleytramp on Feb 11, 2011 13:11:19 GMT
1) Why should West Ham be given a stadium that the taxpayer who support other clubs have paid for?
2) Does this mean that the away supporting taxpayer gets free admission to the stadium on matchday, afterall, we all paid for it, why should West Ham profit?
3) Every other club has to fund their own stadium.
|
|
|
Post by dicanio10 on Feb 11, 2011 13:19:31 GMT
I told you we would get it.But know you insisted wih your info *sniggers* that spurs would get it. I never get bored of being right on this forum 1,I said we would get the stadium we did. 2,I told you march you spout bullshit about WHU like daveviews claiming we have big problems.I said we didn't no key players sold and net spenders for the 3rd window running just like I said we would. 3,I said Parker Noble Cole wouldn't join Stoke they didn't. 4,Last season you lot said we were going down I said we wouldn't. So to sum up I am constantly right you are wrong stick to Stoke you might actually get something right. ;D This is great news RE stadium we have one of the biggest fan bases in the country whole of the east end plus Essex and Kent have big population of hammers fans.This Stadium will make a lot of money hence Spurs wanting it Levy is gutted ;D I expect this to be quoted by coggy with that lame pic he always puts up as he cannot debate with me properly as he knows I am always right about stuff. I also expect the fuck off back to your own forum comments fom various other posters. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 11, 2011 13:22:07 GMT
1) Why should West Ham be given a stadium that the taxpayer who support other clubs have paid for? 2) Does this mean that the away supporting taxpayer gets free admission to the stadium on matchday, afterall, we all paid for it, why should West Ham profit? 3) Every other club has to fund their own stadium. It isn't THAT different to Man Citeh taking over what was the Commonwealth games stadium. The big difference is that Citeh were involved with the plans from the outset and din't have to keep the running track. I blame the Olympic Bid committee - it was fairly obvious that the eventual outcome would be for a football club to take it over. This should have been discussed before the plans were drawn up. If it had been, then the angles of the seating could have been arranged so that (like the Stade de France) the lowest rows of seats could cover the track for football and be removed for athletics. Typcal bad planning - nothing new!
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Feb 11, 2011 13:23:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Feb 11, 2011 13:23:33 GMT
I told you we would get it.But know you insisted wih your info *sniggers* that spurs would get it. I never get bored of being right on this forum 1,I said we would get the stadium we did. 2,I told you march you spout bullshit about WHU like daveviews claiming we have big problems.I said we didn't no key players sold and net spenders for the 3rd window running just like I said we would. 3,I said Parker Noble Cole wouldn't join Stoke they didn't. 4,Last season you lot said we were going down I said we wouldn't. So to sum up I am constantly right you are wrong stick to Stoke you might actually get something right. ;D This is great news RE stadium we have one of the biggest fan bases in the country whole of the east end plus Essex and Kent have big population of hammers fans.This Stadium will make a lot of money hence Spurs wanting it Levy is gutted ;D Good luck to you with your new stadium. Serious question though, given you don't sell out for every game now do you honestly think you will sell out a much bigger stadium, week in, week out? It's all very well having a decent size fan base (although I suspect it's not as big as you make out) but are they prepared to commit to going to every home game?
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 11, 2011 13:23:54 GMT
1) Why should West Ham be given a stadium that the taxpayer who support other clubs have paid for? 2) Does this mean that the away supporting taxpayer gets free admission to the stadium on matchday, afterall, we all paid for it, why should West Ham profit? 3) Every other club has to fund their own stadium. aren't they going to be tenants and not owners?
|
|
|
Post by SuperRickyFuller on Feb 11, 2011 13:25:09 GMT
I told you we would get it.But know you insisted wih your info *sniggers* that spurs would get it. I never get bored of being right on this forum 1,I said we would get the stadium we did. 2,I told you march you spout bullshit about WHU like daveviews claiming we have big problems.I said we didn't no key players sold and net spenders for the 3rd window running just like I said we would. 3,I said Parker Noble Cole wouldn't join Stoke they didn't. 4,Last season you lot said we were going down I said we wouldn't. So to sum up I am constantly right you are wrong stick to Stoke you might actually get something right. ;D This is great news RE stadium we have one of the biggest fan bases in the country whole of the east end plus Essex and Kent have big population of hammers fans.This Stadium will make a lot of money hence Spurs wanting it Levy is gutted ;D What we are right about though is that the ground will have a fucking shit atmosphere, worse than the Highbury Library. If you think the Olympic Stadium will generate a phenomenal atmosphere then you really are dim "This stadium will make a lot of money hence Spurs wanting it Levy is gutted" Flawed thinking there. Spurs wanted to knock it down and build their own stadium because they knew the stadium wouldn't make money due to it being miles away from the pitch and being unable to create any footballing type atmosphere, no atmosphere + pisspoor view = less demand = less money = big empty stadium (in the long term). Only way Spurs would've made money is by selling the old stadium parts off and White Hart Lane, not having the stadium in its current state, like your lot will
|
|
|
Post by lancer on Feb 11, 2011 15:02:52 GMT
What the fuck are they going to fill that with? Baloons? Discontinued "Sensual Sullivan" blow-up dolls? ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by onlyonesirstan on Feb 11, 2011 15:09:40 GMT
I told you we would get it.But know you insisted wih your info *sniggers* that spurs would get it. I never get bored of being right on this forum 1,I said we would get the stadium we did. 2,I told you march you spout bullshit about WHU like daveviews claiming we have big problems.I said we didn't no key players sold and net spenders for the 3rd window running just like I said we would. 3,I said Parker Noble Cole wouldn't join Stoke they didn't. 4,Last season you lot said we were going down I said we wouldn't. So to sum up I am constantly right you are wrong stick to Stoke you might actually get something right. ;D This is great news RE stadium we have one of the biggest fan bases in the country whole of the east end plus Essex and Kent have big population of hammers fans.This Stadium will make a lot of money hence Spurs wanting it Levy is gutted ;D I expect this to be quoted by coggy with that lame pic he always puts up as he cannot debate with me properly as he knows I am always right about stuff. I also expect the fuck off back to your own forum comments fom various other posters. ;D Is the above some form of cockney language? I suggest you correct your grammar and spelling before coming back onto this website
|
|
|
Post by scottyrocket on Feb 11, 2011 15:31:40 GMT
That's Leyton Orient up the shit creek then. Don't be so silly, they have there fans we have ours. People don't goto to Orient for a day out anyway, they go and watch Premier League games. Orient will be fine, no worse off than they are now.
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Feb 11, 2011 15:35:19 GMT
That's Leyton Orient up the shit creek then. Don't be so silly, they have there fans we have ours. People don't goto to Orient for a day out anyway, they go and watch Premier League games. Orient will be fine, no worse off than they are now. That may not be true though judging from some of the stories in the press. There's talk of West Ham giving away thousands of tickets to schools in the area and that could hinder the fan base of Orient in the future. If there was nothing to worry about the rules about moving into other clubs areas wouldn't exist would they?
|
|
|
Post by scottyrocket on Feb 11, 2011 15:38:59 GMT
We have moved very close to our original home the Memorial Ground, What would you prefer the stadium used by orient?, the correct decision has been made, it will be used and now not become a white elephant.
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Feb 11, 2011 15:40:30 GMT
We have moved very close to our original home the Memorial Ground, What would you prefer the stadium used by orient?, the correct decision has been made, it will be used and now not become a white elephant. I really couldn't give two fucks about who uses it but that wasn't my point. You said Orient wouldn't be affected and the general consensus is they could well be.
|
|
|
Post by scottyrocket on Feb 11, 2011 15:42:38 GMT
I don't think it will make any difference to them personally, how many kids these days would choose Orient as there team?, supporters get passed on through family tradition. We are more likely to steal Arsenal and Tottenham fans if anything.
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Feb 11, 2011 15:45:12 GMT
I don't think it will make any difference to them personally, how many kids these days would choose Orient as there team?, supporters get passed on through family tradition. We are more likely to steal Arsenal and Tottenham fans if anything. We'll agree to disagree especially if you think you'll get Spurs or Arsenal fans more than Orient. Good luck with the stadium and your new signing, Chris Boardman.
|
|
|
Post by scottyrocket on Feb 11, 2011 15:45:13 GMT
Orient is 1.7miles from Stratford, Our original home The Memorial Ground is 1.4 miles away.
|
|
|
Post by mistersausage on Feb 11, 2011 15:45:50 GMT
It's a joke that West Ham, as well as getting the stadium, would then expect 40 million in government loans too. It's even more a joke that any club who got the stadium could sell their own and keep the money. BY the way did you hear the West Ham fans on the radio saying that they [Londoners] had paid for the stadium in taxes, so they should have it? Ignorant cunters .... Last I checked it was costing EVERY tax payer in this shithole of a country £70 each I don't even want to see the Olympics, it's shit with hoops.
|
|
|
Post by Not_Nick_H on Feb 11, 2011 15:53:00 GMT
1) Why should West Ham be given a stadium that the taxpayer who support other clubs have paid for? 2) Does this mean that the away supporting taxpayer gets free admission to the stadium on matchday, afterall, we all paid for it, why should West Ham profit? 3) Every other club has to fund their own stadium. It isn't THAT different to Man Citeh taking over what was the Commonwealth games stadium. The big difference is that Citeh were involved with the plans from the outset and din't have to keep the running track. I blame the Olympic Bid committee - it was fairly obvious that the eventual outcome would be for a football club to take it over. This should have been discussed before the plans were drawn up. If it had been, then the angles of the seating could have been arranged so that (like the Stade de France) the lowest rows of seats could cover the track for football and be removed for athletics. Typcal bad planning - nothing new! That clears up something that has been puzzling me LP. The Commonwealth games are a "track and field" event, so how come the C of M stadium is perfectly fine to watch footie at (and concerts)? Answer - you get the interested parties sorted out BEFORE the event. Problem is, I suspect the IOC wil have been naiively insistent on any legacy being athtletic-friendly (in a football worshipping country like England - yeah right). The bid committee will have nodded and smiled at the time and now the current mess occurs with the future owners of the stadium being prepared to accept something which will not really be fit for purpose. If it's not a daft question, why couldn't the stadium be left as an athletics stadium for err, athletics types and the footie clubs involved just build their own?
|
|
|
Post by andystokie321111 on Feb 11, 2011 15:54:16 GMT
better than spurs getting it and tearing it down what a waste of money that would of been
|
|
|
Post by jen on Feb 11, 2011 15:55:31 GMT
It's a joke that West Ham, as well as getting the stadium, would then expect 40 million in government loans too. It's even more a joke that any club who got the stadium could sell their own and keep the money. They'll also be GIVEN an extra £35 million from the Olympic legacy fund - that's in additon to the loan. Now we know the real reason why the porn barons wanted to buy West Ham.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 11, 2011 16:46:59 GMT
It isn't THAT different to Man Citeh taking over what was the Commonwealth games stadium. The big difference is that Citeh were involved with the plans from the outset and din't have to keep the running track. I blame the Olympic Bid committee - it was fairly obvious that the eventual outcome would be for a football club to take it over. This should have been discussed before the plans were drawn up. If it had been, then the angles of the seating could have been arranged so that (like the Stade de France) the lowest rows of seats could cover the track for football and be removed for athletics. Typcal bad planning - nothing new! That clears up something that has been puzzling me LP. The Commonwealth games are a "track and field" event, so how come the C of M stadium is perfectly fine to watch footie at (and concerts)? Answer - you get the interested parties sorted out BEFORE the event. Problem is, I suspect the IOC wil have been naiively insistent on any legacy being athtletic-friendly (in a football worshipping country like England - yeah right). The bid committee will have nodded and smiled at the time and now the current mess occurs with the future owners of the stadium being prepared to accept something which will not really be fit for purpose. If it's not a daft question, why couldn't the stadium be left as an athletics stadium for err, athletics types and the footie clubs involved just build their own? NNH - the Commonwealth Stadium in Manchester actually had what is now the lower concrete tiers in place UNDER THE RUNNING TRACK whilst the games took place. Then, after the games the whole lower part of the stadium was dug out to reveal the concrete on which the seats were added. The only other thing in the design which was unusual was that the stand at one end of the stadium was temporary and was replaced with a new stand which was built much further forward to the edge of the new pitch as the stadium was converted for football. EDIT - the stadium is too big for athletics on a regular basis -other than for a world championships. Ideally they would have a 25,000 seater athletics stadium - which is what was originally planned for the Olympic Stadium by removing a load of seats and lowering the roof. But I expect someone then got cold feet at the thought of the cost of demolition/conversion. Like I said originally, the sensible solution would be like the Stade de France with removable seats over the track - but that would have needed to be planned for at the outset to get the sight lines right.
|
|
|
Post by hanleytramp on Feb 11, 2011 16:52:15 GMT
WHU allready in huge debt are borrowing another £45Million from the british tax payer, you couldn't make it up.
If they go down they won't need to get rid of the track, their fans will be on it, lol.
|
|
|
Post by hanleytramp on Feb 11, 2011 17:18:21 GMT
Talksport are laughing at Wet Ham, they just said if they want 60'000 attendances then they will have to have trhe athletics on the same time as the match.
Imagine that WHU playing on the pitch and a relay going on on the track, along with a high jump behind the goal, lmfao, this destined to be a big fucking cock up for a club ran by cocks.
|
|
|
Post by potterglen on Feb 11, 2011 18:17:47 GMT
;D just what there fans didn't want ! its terrible watching football from behind a running track Arrr didums. 100% improvement on the shit hole they have at the moment - if you don't like it, don't go!
|
|
|
Post by PoisonedDonkey on Feb 11, 2011 18:21:21 GMT
What the hell are Spurs going to do now?
|
|
|
Post by roby55 on Feb 11, 2011 18:24:42 GMT
'arry redknapp on sky sports
he seems to really love west ham he looks like hes gonna burst crying when hes talking about leaving upton park
|
|
|
Post by SuperRickyFuller on Feb 11, 2011 18:26:33 GMT
;D just what there fans didn't want ! its terrible watching football from behind a running track Arrr didums. 100% improvement on the shit hole they have at the moment - if you don't like it, don't go! Do you just post bollocks for the sake of it? Or are you really that dim?
|
|
|
Post by stokeramblers on Feb 11, 2011 18:33:04 GMT
Looks like West Ham have got themselves a new mascot too, bound to bring in a few extra quid on the merchandise front Fuck knows what a White Elephant has got to do with West Ham though!!
|
|