Spurs to demolish......
Printed From: You Boys in Green
Category: International
Forum Name: Rest of The World
Forum Description: All football chat from around the globe
URL: https://forum.ybig.ie/forum_posts.asp?TID=26698
Printed Date: 18 May 2024 at 8:47am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.00 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Spurs to demolish......
Posted By: Vivakenbarlow
Subject: Spurs to demolish......
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2011 at 7:10am
Olympic stadium and build a new 60k seater on the site if their bid is succesful 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12173663 This makes absolutely no sense ------------- It took City 44 years to win the league and 10 months to lose it |
Replies:
Posted By: Stoked Up
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2011 at 7:37am
|
I see West Ham are proposing something similar should they win the bid too.
Surely some London club would be happy with the stadium as it was intended or just with the removal of the running track as Man City did when they inherited the Commonwealth games stadium? ETA: Just re-read the article. The big difference between the Olympic stadium and the Manchester stadium is the capacity at the London one would have to reduced, whereas City expanded theirs by removing the running track. Neither West Ham nor Spurs would need an 80,000 seater stadium. |
Posted By: colemanY2K
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2011 at 7:43am
|
west ham intend to keep the running track therefore the athletics gang are happy with their proposal ------------- "One of the dominant facts in English life during the past three quarters of a century has been the decay of ability in the ruling class." Orwell, 1942. |
Posted By: Stoked Up
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2011 at 7:46am
| I suppose the danger is the stadium going the same way as http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/weekinreview/07wines.html - China's Birds nest Olympic stadium which is now used as a winter theme park or for the odd concert. |
Posted By: AntrimMan
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2011 at 7:57am
|
The London Olympic stadium is meant to be a semi permanent structure - the top tiers are essestinal temporary and come down to leave a 25 odd thousand stadium ( think its roughly that size anyway). Doesn't seem that suitable either way for either party. ------------- @AntrimMan85 |
Posted By: Justice No. 1
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2011 at 9:24am
|
West Ham should get this as the stadium is in East London where they're from. Spurs has planning permission to build a stadium next door to their current one in north london. While both areas are kips most Spurs fans I've spoken to would prefer to remain a north london club. |
Posted By: Vivakenbarlow
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2011 at 9:37am
|
If i was living in england paying tax towards an 80k seater olympic stadium in the height of a recession i wouldnt be too happy with spurs knocking it down straight after the games ------------- It took City 44 years to win the league and 10 months to lose it |
Posted By: seaniemac
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2011 at 9:48am
Think Spurs are just using it to force Haringey Council into a better deal on building a new ground beside WHL.
|
Vivakenbarlow wrote:Posted By: ScruffyR
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2011 at 10:28am
Stupid decision if it go's ahead 
------------- "Football isn't a matter of life or death, it's much more important than that." |