|All you need to know about West Ham United FC's potential move to Stratford.
Is retractable seating at the OS still a possibility, or is it a non-starter?
Can it not be incorporated into the cost of renovating the OS after the olympic games?
Does anyone have an insight into this issue?
Sorry for posing so many questions, but I can't understand why retractable seating is not top of the agenda with regards to the conversion of the OS after the games.
I think people get confused with retractable and temporary seating. Looking at the budget the Porn Twins have stated we have, I truly believe retractable seating is not on the cards. It would require the demolition of the lower tier, (either just at the ends or all round), the building of a fairly complex hydrolic or similar system to actually retract the seats, and the possible extension of the roof. I would imagine any solution they have to the distance issue would involve some sort of temporary seating structure in front of the main structure. Below is an extreme version of this:
If we are to honour our promise to the Olympic Development bods, and fit the work in our budgetary constraints, I can only see temporary seating being the option at the moment.
Would like to see Temporary Standing around every side of the pitch and the upper tier still able to see from above
Although I don't think Terracing will be allowed back in England, It would certainly solve the problem of being closer to the pitch and could possibly get a cracking atmosphere going
If we even get the Olympic Stadium, lets hope they don't come up with a system like that above at cagliari.
Awful solution... I would rather they just totally shut both ends behind the goals.
Atleast we could go for a cheaper roof option then..
http://www.daegu2011.org/do/front/page/ ... um?lang=en
I sort of always liked the idea of removing the upper tier at both ends. Many US stadiums, especially baseball stadiums, make great use of featuring their respective city's landscape. Looking at the orientation of the OS, we could have quite a dramatic backdrop featuring Canary Wharf. This would look quite decent, especially when the Docklands is lit up during night games, and would give us a real East London identity,
It looks a mess and we will be a laughing stock if that is the permanent arrangement for the stadium once we took over. The alternative is equally bad and involves sitting so far away that you can't tell whether Cole or Sears is on the ball. I want the move to be a success as much as anyone but I honestly can't see a scenario where we will have a nice football ground.
Who cares if it looks a mess, aesthetics shouldn't come into it. I don wonder though what seating like this would do to the overall capacity? If the O/S is gonna be 50,000 as a bowl, I would imagine the set up like the above would knock a fair number off that, maybe as much as 10,000? Might as well stay & redevelop put if thats the case....
It does matter to me. I want a home for the club for the next 100 years to be proud of and I don't want to visit other premier league clubs with great purpose build stadia if ours looks a mess. On the plus side we should be able to sell an additional 15,000 tickets assuming premier football so that will help finances and of course the transport links will be much better. I want to be excited about the move but I'm struggling to find reasons to be.
The 'old' Boleyn was a bit of a mess but the atmosphere and closeness of the crowd to the players made it a great place to watch football. What it looks like makes no difference. Getting West Ham fans closer to the players should be our main concern.
Hopefully the penny is starting to drop with those that only objected because of spurs bid that this stadium is not fit for football.
The club have already said there will be no retractable seating like in Paris,they are only considering temporary seating behind the goals.
Spurs even with their JR don't want the stadium, this is just a bargaining chip in the effort of getting cash for tott high rd. Their belief that if west ham are getting state funding for their stadium they want some for theirs.
And they are going to get it too.
They've played a blinder. A purpose built football stadium with significant amounts of I and your money used to build it.
As a confirmed 'against' mywhufc what do you make of the pic above ^ as a rather 'house that Jack built' solution? Might make for a better atmosphere, although not sure I'd fancy a seat there on a Tuesday night in December with no roof?
Looking at that picture above, IF we end up at Stratford that would be better than leaving the stadium roughly as it is, which is what the club are basically going to do, imagine that stadium with a roof on it you wouldn't notice too much but what it would do is look nothing like the Olympic stadium which I believe the club are after. If west ham did copy that though the only existing piece of seating that would be used would be the upper tiers along the side I would imagine that would bring the capacity down to prob 50,000 max may b lower which again would defeat the object of the owners wanting to move in there, plus with the temp seating shown would block out the big screens the club are planning.
Remember west ham plans are to keep 74,000 seats in the ground, only using 60,000 maximum.they will lose seats with the installation of corporate boxes which I would imagine would be more than they have now these will be down the sides so no temp seating will be put there.
If worse come to worse then a seating like in above stadium if put into Stratford with a roof would be better than so far shown in that picture released in febuary, just can't see why we would leave here just to do that.
Pic below is of the same stadium.
Last edited by mywhufc on Mon Aug 29, 2011 8:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Looking at that picture above I'm a little underchuffed at the thought of that on a wet tuesday night (admitted it is a long way from Shanghai to get there for a tuesday night game these days). It's almost like a case of the Emperor's New Clothes, where it just needs someone with a bit of influence to look at it and say "actually chaps that looks a bit crap'.
I am very much opposed to us moving to the OS, and the picture I posted from Cagliari was to highlight my point about the difference between temporary and retractable seating. I believe with our budget, we will be going for the former. My Cagliari post was not a suggestion, more a sad reflection on what is most likely to happen.
Just wanted to clarify that
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests