Jump to content
IGNORED

Olympic stadium/queen Elizabeth park


brizzlelou

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, roylegalatyeo said:

Odd place the new Hammers ground.Also think that West ham given an unfair advantage over the rest of the clubs,£2 million a year for 90 years in rent.No outlay in building costs plus any profit from selling Upton Park.The whole deal stinks.Hope this back fires on them.

Why? They were offered/negotiated a great deal and they took it. Blame the powers that be for giving them that deal but not West Ham.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a privilege for a club to play where they've always played, rather than in a Glorified Uni hall of residence or supermarket on the outskirts of town.

Those houses behind the Atyeo aren't just a nuisance stopping us rebuilding - they're part of the roots of the club. And it's great to walk through the city, the docks and the park past real houses to get to a game.

Stuff anonymous stadia whose names change every six months - here's to Ashton Gate!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The deal that's taken West Ham to that stadium stinks- as tax payers, we're all funding West Ham joining the 'silly money' ranks and the advantage it gives them over similar sized clubs is awful. The whole thing is immoral and while it's more the fault of the Olympic Legacy committee than the club, the soft spot I used to have for them has completely gone now. Just another money-grabbing Premier League club who doesn't give a **** so long as they're signing expensive foreign players and raking in the TV money

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I, for one, think its a TOTAL DISGRACE.

The olympic stadium should have been roofed-over and turned into a reception centre for refugees.

This should have be paid for by a tax on stupid working people.

As for calling it after a symbol of the Empire, this is also a TOTAL DISGRACE. It should be the Bin Laden centre.

It's about time we bucked up our ideas in this shit country, and started being more inclusive.

"Think on your sins".

:bruce_h4h:

 

Uncle TFR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like an athletics stadium...because that's what it is. From what I've seen on Twitter, the view if you're in the upper tier, and certainly if behind the goal, isn't great. The pitch seems miles away. Will be interesting to see what their fans make of it after a few home games. To be honest though, they're not really in a position to complain. A predominantly taxpayer funded stadium gifted to a Premiership football club. Pretty outrageous. But so was the Commonwealth Stadium becoming Man City's home. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Fat Cigar said:

Looks like an athletics stadium...because that's what it is. From what I've seen on Twitter, the view if you're in the upper tier, and certainly if behind the goal, isn't great. The pitch seems miles away. Will be interesting to see what their fans make of it after a few home games. To be honest though, they're not really in a position to complain. A predominantly taxpayer funded stadium gifted to a Premiership football club. Pretty outrageous. But so was the Commonwealth Stadium becoming Man City's home. 

Do you mean in the same way Sainsbury's looks like a 'supermarket'?

Please clarify.

 

Uncle TFR
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, chipdawg said:

The deal that's taken West Ham to that stadium stinks- as tax payers, we're all funding West Ham joining the 'silly money' ranks and the advantage it gives them over similar sized clubs is awful. The whole thing is immoral and while it's more the fault of the Olympic Legacy committee than the club, the soft spot I used to have for them has completely gone now. Just another money-grabbing Premier League club who doesn't give a **** so long as they're signing expensive foreign players and raking in the TV money

So money grabbing that they slashed ST prices to make their club more affordable to Londoners. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chipdawg said:

The deal that's taken West Ham to that stadium stinks- as tax payers, we're all funding West Ham joining the 'silly money' ranks and the advantage it gives them over similar sized clubs is awful. The whole thing is immoral and while it's more the fault of the Olympic Legacy committee than the club, the soft spot I used to have for them has completely gone now. Just another money-grabbing Premier League club who doesn't give a **** so long as they're signing expensive foreign players and raking in the TV money

the deal does stink but I don't blame west ham one bit, blame Boris Johnson, he's the one who basically gave it away

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went to the game last night and were on the side between the halfway line and 18 yard box. 33 rows up so had not a bad view but there are so many poor seats in that ground. The picture above sums it up for me it is like everything is bodged so it is suitable for a football team. Food outlets had no food 30 mins before kickoff, stewards had no idea where anything was and people after the game were just walking in all directions trying to get out. Hopefully after a few games it will improve but can see a few fixtures there next year being chaos especially when you have the pre-xmas rush at the shopping centre. 

Can't blame West Ham for moving there after getting such a great deal, all blame for me is on the organisers of the Olympics for building such a vast stadium with no thoughts of what it will be used for afterwards. If you consider how much money has been spent to build and revamp the ground they could have built a much better stadium in the first place if the end user had been considered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, wesco said:

I went to the game last night and were on the side between the halfway line and 18 yard box. 33 rows up so had not a bad view but there are so many poor seats in that ground. The picture above sums it up for me it is like everything is bodged so it is suitable for a football team. Food outlets had no food 30 mins before kickoff, stewards had no idea where anything was and people after the game were just walking in all directions trying to get out. Hopefully after a few games it will improve but can see a few fixtures there next year being chaos especially when you have the pre-xmas rush at the shopping centre. 

Can't blame West Ham for moving there after getting such a great deal, all blame for me is on the organisers of the Olympics for building such a vast stadium with no thoughts of what it will be used for afterwards. If you consider how much money has been spent to build and revamp the ground they could have built a much better stadium in the first place if the end user had been considered.

The plan from the beginning (And what it was built to do) was for the top tier to be taken off and it to be turned into a dedicated athletics stadium of 25,000 seats.

 Screen Shot 2016-08-05 at 14.53.40.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, brizzlelou said:

Not great really

image.jpeg

Must admit I was expecting a more impressive conversion into a football stadium. I thought there would be a neat solution where the football seats near the front slide away for Athletics events, but from what I've read on Twitter the conversion takes weeks! The scaffolding looks awful. Curious that they've made the seats behind West Ham colours, whereas most of the visible ones are white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Welcome To The Jungle said:

So money grabbing that they slashed ST prices to make their club more affordable to Londoners. 

I don't think this was a philanthropic gesture.

The last thing the owners want is for Wham to be playing in a half full stadium and because they have been given such a phenomenal financial deal on the stadium they can afford to discount ticket prices ( and have been justified because of season ticket sales) to ensure a full Olympic stadium. They can do this in the safe knowledge that a full house will boost revenue with match day sales of food and drink and merchandising.

Their stadium deal has given them a potentially huge financial advantage over their rivals. They pay £2m a year for a 50,000 seater stadium, whereas Spurs and Chelsea will have to pay over £500m to build their new stadia.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always understood that the main reason we managed to win the Olympic bid for 2012, was because the Arena would become ( afterwards) a top class Athletics arena. The plan was to take the upper tiers away and leave a ( approx) 30,000 seater Athletic arena.

I still think the owners of West Ham ( the porn brothers and that horrible cow Brady) were able to sweeten up Cameron and his government, and enable them to get everything on the cheap, personally I think the whole deal stinks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...