Popular Posts

Friday, 21 January 2011

Who Should Get the Olympic Stadium?







Credit; here







It's all the rage at the moment, who should get the Olympic Stadium after it's been used for the 2012 Olympic Games.

Whatever the committee decide, we are sure to find out over the next few days.

Today signals the day when both West Ham United and Tottenham Hotspur will both finalise plans to move into the 60,000 seater stadium.

The chief of the Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC), Andrew Altman, will have the final say on which London club, if any, will be allowed to move in after the summer of 2012.

The bids are fairly contrasting, with West Ham vowing to keep the athletics track which is being purpose built into the stadium, and Tottenham saying they want to get rid of it.

The proposal, initiated by Spurs chairman, Daniel Levy, intends to reduce the distance supporters would be away from the pitch from 45 metres to only 8, but the bids have been criticised, as the arena is being built with athletics in mind.

He has written an interesting open letter to supporters explaining the current situation and that can be read here.

Perhaps an athletics track in the capital of England would benefit UK athletics more so than moving a football stadium 15 miles, in West Ham's case, or 23 in Spurs'.






West Ham's captain, Scott Parker has said that the move would be perfect, even geographically for West Ham to lead the club onwards and upwards.





Credit; here



It would seem more logical that West Ham were to move, given the problems with moving Spurs out of Tottenham and having to change their name, but there are still concerns as to how they could even fill three quarters of the super stadium.






Spurs fans haven't all taken to the proposed move lightly.

Credit; here




Tottenham would certainly have no problem in that aspect, despite the club having only a 36,000 seater stadium, as they have a 15,000 strong waiting list for season tickets alone.

Their argument is that it would benefit the club, who are currently in the Champions League, and would put them in a bigger club bracket.

Lamine Diack, a member of the International Athletics committee, in an interview with the BBC, spoke of how huge disappointment would follow if the organisations failed to honour their commitment to leave an athletics track in central London, but other high profile figures, including Pele, have stepped forward in the last few days supporting the Spurs bid.

Harry Redknapp has also had his say, suggesting that a move from West Ham, who he used to manage, could see an economic downfall of a club who already sit bottom of the Premier League, but it looks like the most stable bid could be successful.

The real question might be whether a stadium that big could only be used as a training facility for the UK's top athletes, with it being empty for maybe half a year, or whether a football stadium would boost the economy in the West Ham area of London.



Flip a coin, roll a dice, who knows what the decision could be.


Credit; here




I'm glad I'm not deciding because it's one tough decision but maybe, given both football clubs already have sufficient facilities, Athletics, for once, should take priority.

What will happen to the Olympics Stadium? Will both football bids be declined? Please discuss below.

No comments:

Post a Comment