Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Does exactly what it says on the tin - the forum for football-related discussion.

Moderators: bristolhammerfc, sicknote, -DL-, Rio, Gnome, chalks, the pink palermo

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby Doc H Ball on Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:05 am

I understand through my student kids that Liverpool University Football Industries course has quite a lot about West Ham in its syllabus including HMRC issues and how not to move stadium.

Might be interesting to read anything published. Dave Junior should give a lecture!
User avatar
Doc H Ball
 
Posts: 8644
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: in nick

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby Thekorean on Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:44 am

I don’t know about the club but moving to London Stadium seem to work out for the owners.
Thekorean
 
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 10:36 am
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby Wembley1966 on Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:30 am

Doc H Ball wrote:I understand through my student kids that Liverpool University Football Industries course has quite a lot about West Ham in its syllabus including HMRC issues and how not to move stadium.

Might be interesting to read anything published. Dave Junior should give a lecture!

Kieran Maguire is the football finance expert at the University.

He regularly tweets about football finance issues:
https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire

writes a blog - including this from last month:
http://priceoffootball.com/west-ham-and-the-london-stadium-flares-n-slippers/

or through the Univeristy website - after the HMRC raids:
https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2017/04/27/football-raids-murky-world-posing-family-entertainment/
User avatar
Wembley1966
 
Posts: 5285
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:48 pm

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby Corney Beal on Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:48 am

Those comments from Bill Kenwright must hurt Karren Brady, with him being one of her best buddies in football.
Probably won't though.
User avatar
Corney Beal
 
Posts: 1203
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 11:36 pm
Location: Way over yonder in the minor key

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby sanchoz on Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:46 am

Corney Beal wrote:Those comments from Bill Kenwright must hurt Karren Brady, with him being one of her best buddies in football.
Probably won't though.


Expect a snide response in this Saturdays Sun.
User avatar
sanchoz
 
Posts: 10612
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 3:41 am
Location: Founder of the Carlton Cole Fan Club - Rainham & Guildford Branch

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby Doc H Ball on Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:40 am

Wembley1966 wrote:
Kieran Maguire is the football finance expert at the University.


Cheers, he's a good read.
User avatar
Doc H Ball
 
Posts: 8644
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: in nick

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby wildkard on Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:27 pm

Corney Beal wrote:Those comments from Bill Kenwright must hurt Karren Brady, with him being one of her best buddies in football.
Probably won't though.


What comments?
wildkard
 
Posts: 1647
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:55 pm

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby sanchoz on Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:38 pm

Corney Beal wrote:Those comments from Bill Kenwright must hurt Karren Brady, with him being one of her best buddies in football.
Probably won't though.


wildkard wrote:
What comments?


'Will new ground be like West Ham's?'

A fan from New Brighton who is excited because he lives opposite where the new stadium will be, asks that Bramley Moore Dock won’t be like West Ham’s ground.

Elstone replies...

"We want that fortress, for the fans to be as close to the pitch as possible. That’s our number one priority. Our primary focus."

Kenwright says

"Being sat at West Ham was the worst experience ever."


http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/fo ... d-14133197
User avatar
sanchoz
 
Posts: 10612
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 3:41 am
Location: Founder of the Carlton Cole Fan Club - Rainham & Guildford Branch

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby sanchoz on Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:39 pm

“What is legacy? Can it even be measured?” On the failings of London’s Olympic Stadium

The recent publication of consultancy Moore Stephens’ report into London’s Olympic Stadium has reasserted the importance of the concept of legacy in London’s post-Olympic landscape.

In 169 pages, the report meticulously outlines the various failings in the conversion of the London Stadium from an Olympic venue to West Ham United FC’s Premier-League new home. A sizeable proportion reads as a direct criticism of mayor Sadiq Khan’s predecessor, Boris Johnson, and his questionable decisions about the bidding process to occupy the stadium.

When West Ham were awarded tenancy in the London Stadium (for the second time), it was championed as a great success by organisers who had secured a legacy for the iconic venue. However, we seem to have reached a rather embarrassing point in this ‘secured legacy’. Its publicly owned operator, E20, is losing money with each game played; and West Ham have been granted a very favourable deal at the expense of the British taxpayer. As well as this, West Ham’s first season was marred by fan violence, security issues, and poor performances on the pitch. While this may not officially be a white elephant, it is at least a claret-and-blue one.

The recent revelations concerning the London Stadium have brought the broader problems of Olympic legacy into sharp focus. What is legacy? Can it be measured? Whose legacy are we talking about it? Who is entitled to claim the success or failure of legacy?

From the get-go, the London 2012 bid was oriented around this notion of legacy, and although the promises were subtly realigned over the years, two pillars stood firm throughout. First, was to encourage and increase participation in sport. Second, was the widespread regeneration of a previously “under-developed”, post-industrial part of east London, Stratford.

London’s success in winning the bid over competitors such as Paris lay in its optimistic teleology. Put simply, it explained, legitimated, and planned the 16-day spectacle as a function of its legacy. London was adamant that it would not repeat the failures of preceding games. It would not become a desolate wasteland littered with white elephants, but instead would become a “new piece of the city” stitched into its regenerating surroundings.

Legacy is an immensely powerful concept in Olympic urbanism, but is also incredibly vague. Both its breadth and its haziness explain its allure. It offers up visions of a future city, yet sits uncomfortably with the rest of the Olympic project.

Olympic time is characterised by a rigid linearity. The achievements of its athletes are measured against the clock, all events take place within a 16-day period, and the games run in cycles of four years. So a tension exists between the ephemerality of the games themselves, and the permanence of their effects. The pre-game phase is characterised by planning, deadlines, and most importantly, the date of the opening ceremony. Time is a fixed entity with an immovable end point. The most important consideration for the host city is to deliver the games on time. Compare this to after the games have moved on, where time exists in a much more fluid and uncertain way.

There are also interesting differences between “legacy” and “impact”. Whilst impacts are generally short-term and measurable, legacy is framed as a longer-term issue. The Olympics clearly have impacts on the city, but legacy is an abstract idea, a discourse used to justify hosting the Games.

In 2007, the Greater London Authority named its five legacy promises: increasing opportunities for Londoners to become involved in sport; ensuring Londoners benefit from new jobs, businesses and volunteering opportunities; transforming the heart of East London; delivering a sustainable games and developing sustainable communities; and, showcasing London as a diverse, creative and welcoming city.

Taking the third of these promises – transforming the heart of East London – it becomes clear how vague legacy is. That statement begs a number of questions. What does transformation mean, and how is it measured? Where is the heart of east London? Who decides how east London is spatially defined?

Or, take “developing sustainable communities”. What does a sustainable community mean? Does this imply that previous communities were unsustainable? What does this say about how local people are viewed in relation to the construction of the Olympic spectacle?

How, then, should we begin to analyse or interpret London’s Olympic legacy? Can legacy ever be achieved and come to an end? If so, when can it be fairly interpreted? Considering the London Stadium as either a successful securing of legacy, or as a pyrrhic victory in the battle against white elephant-ism, nevertheless assumes a fixed point in time. Even if at this specific moment the London Stadium seems to be an embarrassment of failings, this situation may change now it has been taken back under mayoral control.

Any discussion of London’s urban Olympic legacy must consider that it does not exist in a vacuum, but must be contextualised by broader urban histories and contexts. Outcomes and impacts linked to processes beyond the Games become classified as purely Olympic-led urban phenomenon, massively simplifying the ways in which urban space develops.

Because legacy is such a multifaceted concept, how can it be fairly unpacked and re-assembled to make an informed decision about whether hosting the Olympics was “worth it”? Is it even possible to measure legacy?

So should the overall legacy of the games be judged on the recent stadium report? Or should it be measured in line with the stadium’s recent Instagram post, celebrating the fact that the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park is the UK’s fourth-most instagrammed sports location this year? Sadly, the latter increasingly seems like a desirable metric by which urban regeneration schemes should be assessed.

While legacy was originally championed to get hesitant members of the public onside and promise them vague visions of a future over which they have now control, legacy discourse now serves to legitimate significant decisions and smooth-over failures in planning large-scale urban regeneration projects.

So far, if 2012 has taught us anything about Olympic legacy, perhaps it is how flawed the idea of promising legacy is. What begins as a vague discourse inevitably becomes transformed by political cycles, and in this instance, the 2008 financial crash and subsequent years of austerity.

Despite the problematic nature of this legacy discourse, this does not mean that east London would have been better off had it not hosted the Games. However, regeneration could certainly have been managed far better to channel the benefits of Olympic urbanism to those impacted most by the games.

This positive-negative legacy dynamic pervades most areas of Olympic urbanism, and makes it very difficult to decide whether hosting the Olympics is positive or negative for cities. All in all, the opaque nature of Olympic legacy adds to its mythic nature and enduring urban appeal.

Benedict Vigers is a postgraduate student at the University of Cambridge, currently studying an MPhil in architecture & urban studies.


https://www.citymetric.com/fabric/what- ... adium-3589
User avatar
sanchoz
 
Posts: 10612
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 3:41 am
Location: Founder of the Carlton Cole Fan Club - Rainham & Guildford Branch

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby goa127 on Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:42 pm

Perhaps Bill Kenright's worst experience ever last season was watching Everton playing so badly that they were happy to get a 0-0 against an injury hit West Ham. Even then their keeper was their best player. I'm used to Everton coming to us and really giving us a difficult game, in fact I dread their visits usually. Last season was an eerie foretaste of what was coming in August for both teams.
goa127
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 8:38 pm

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby Lovejoy2 on Wed Jan 10, 2018 5:08 pm

I'm glad when opposition board members, players, fans etc. come to our stadium and dislike it, that's how it should be, the more people dread coming the better no matter what reason it's for, just a shame we can't intimidate the opposition like we could in the chicken run!
User avatar
Lovejoy2
 
Posts: 717
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 10:44 pm
Location: In a world of my own

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby Big George on Wed Jan 10, 2018 5:12 pm

Lovejoy2 wrote:I'm glad when opposition board members, players, fans etc. come to our stadium and dislike it, that's how it should be, the more people dread coming the better no matter what reason it's for, just a shame we can't intimidate the opposition like we could in the chicken run!


It's one thing disliking it because of an intimating, hostile atmosphere, it's quite another to dislike because it's an unfit for purpose toilet than is as miserable for the home fans as it is for the away.

The only thing hostile about that stadium is the broad's hostility towards their own fans.
User avatar
Big George
 
Posts: 9893
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 2:59 pm
Location: http://www.whuisa.org/

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby Happyhammer52 on Wed Jan 10, 2018 5:33 pm

Big George wrote:
It's one thing disliking it because of an intimating, hostile atmosphere, it's quite another to dislike because it's an unfit for purpose toilet than is as miserable for the home fans as it is for the away.

The only thing hostile about that stadium is the broad's hostility towards their own fans.


Exactly, entirely different scenario. People do not like our ground because it is not a football stadium.
User avatar
Happyhammer52
 
Posts: 3199
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2004 7:52 pm
Location: WS

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby Beavis Danzig on Wed Jan 10, 2018 5:41 pm

Lovejoy2 wrote:I'm glad when opposition board members, players, fans etc. come to our stadium and dislike it, that's how it should be, the more people dread coming the better no matter what reason it's for, just a shame we can't intimidate the opposition like we could in the chicken run!


there's a difference between disliking going to a dead end boozer that's known for getting a bit tasty and disliking going for a drink in a sterile airport departure lounge.
User avatar
Beavis Danzig
 
Posts: 4086
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2014 9:12 pm
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby Kialos on Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:03 pm

Lovejoy2 wrote:I'm glad when opposition board members, players, fans etc. come to our stadium and dislike it, that's how it should be, the more people dread coming the better no matter what reason it's for, just a shame we can't intimidate the opposition like we could in the chicken run!



I think you are little warped in your logic as shown with the irony of your last comment.
Kialos
 
Posts: 7060
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:11 pm

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby 61dicksey on Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:26 pm

Our stadium reminds me of Brighton at the dog track only we are on a bit bigger scale .
User avatar
61dicksey
 
Posts: 8531
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:48 am
Location: Hampshire

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby goa127 on Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:09 pm

Kenwright is a good PR man. When the Everton stadium eventually appears it won't be anything like he describes. Although they'll probably be spared a running track there's no way it'll be a new version of Goodison. They'll be demands for 'multi-use opportunities' and the need for 'a safe buffer zone' etc etc. It will be like all the new stadiums, efficient but lacking real feel. It's not really a criticism, it's just a statement of fact. I loved the chicken run in the 70s, but then I quite enjoyed everything in the 70s. Times change not necessarily for the better,but in the future you probably won't leave your house but be part of a virtual crowd. Fortunately I'll be dead!
goa127
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 8:38 pm

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby Doc H Ball on Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:26 pm

Not so sure goa.

Goodison is one of the grand old stadiums. I love it personally, the last of Archibald Leitch's masterpieces.

I'd hoped that they stay, but if they do move then I trust Kenwright to get it done much better than our mob. It is a great site not a typical out of town retail park cum stadium. They will part own a football stadium whilst we do neither.

Everton were the Next Level. Ho hum.
User avatar
Doc H Ball
 
Posts: 8644
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: in nick

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby johnnyb on Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:38 pm

First of all, I for one couldn't give a flying **** what any non-West Ham fan thinks about the London Stadium. However, I do accept that a lot of West Ham fans are very unhappy about it. As far as I can see though, nothing much of significance will happen at the stadium whilst the current owners are in place. Even new owners might not want to change much on that score either or be capable of it anyway. It's all a guessing game as far as the future is concerned.
johnnyb
 
Posts: 926
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 4:20 pm

Re: Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

Postby Claret&Blue,Thru& on Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:47 pm

61dicksey wrote:Our stadium reminds me of Brighton at the dog track only we are on a bit bigger scale .


Because of the poo?
Claret&Blue,Thru&
 
Posts: 947
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 12:17 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 61dicksey, dodger, HammerMan2004, Jumby, MB, ogtec, petergj, Pob!, Polaroid, uptonparkhurst and 55 guests