Some of the figures are out of date. Straumer (or Iceland as the bank is bankrupt) now own 35%. Gold and Sullivan own 61.2% and the rest,3.8%, is owned by minority interest including Terrence Brown who under his influence the rot set in paying himself and his managing directors huge salaries. The mystery sacking of Harry Redknapp, out of time for the tax authorities now to continue his work at Portsmouth with one of West Ham's old managing directors and then to Southampton. Before the sale of West Ham to the much maligned Icelandics the managing director increased his shareholding from 900 to 55900 shares (it's all in the accounts on West Ham's website), never to be seen again except in the food hall of Lakeside. Some of the highest paid players contracts end this summer. Upson Gabbidon, Dyer. Green and Parker still have a resale value so I expect the figures will look a lot better this year with two cup runs and Gold and Sullivan guaranteeing the loans which the OLPC must have looked at.

Some of the figures are out of date. Straumer (or Iceland as the bank is bankrupt) now own 35%. Gold and Sullivan own 61.2% and the rest,3.8%, is owned by minority interest including Terrence Brown who under his influence the rot set in paying himself and his managing directors huge salaries. The mystery sacking of Harry Redknapp, out of time for the tax authorities now to continue his work at Portsmouth with one of West Ham's old managing directors and then to Southampton. Before the sale of West Ham to the much maligned Icelandics the managing director increased his shareholding from 900 to 55900 shares (it's all in the accounts on West Ham's website), never to be seen again except in the food hall of Lakeside. Some of the highest paid players contracts end this summer. Upson Gabbidon, Dyer. Green and Parker still have a resale value so I expect the figures will look a lot better this year with two cup runs and Gold and Sullivan guaranteeing the loans which the OLPC must have looked at.

Those players re-sale values wont come close to offsetting the debt load IMO, and they will have to re-invest something if they do sell them. And the risk of NPower next year, it dont look good. Anyway that all aside, Ive said all along that I still dont believe that they can sustain a break even football model in the coming years with this move, regardless of all the "cheap tickets" BS that keeps being referenced as the way forward... IMO it simply wont work..There is a big difference in rescuing, developing & sustaining a solid football club with the problems that WH have to servicing a sex industry where stars are paid peanuts to perform things that WH players will never be able to do..And they speak about creating a family friendly environment for WH. Hypocrites! The club is run be sleezy, exploiting deviants... When the two Dave's are involved someone always gets F***ed...Literally.. This time its the fans...:ohno:

http://i763.photobucket.com/albums/xx276/afiqnadzir/5467576575_c89b945621_b.jpg
http://i763.photobucket.com/albums/xx276/afiqnadzir/5468173376_080dcd764d_b.jpg
http://i763.photobucket.com/albums/xx276/afiqnadzir/5467576969_aca05b56e8_b.jpg

http://i763.photobucket.com/albums/xx276/afiqnadzir/5468173376_080dcd764d_b.jpg


Epic pictures :cheers:

But it looks like some of the seating has still not been placed ^^

But it looks like some of the seating has still not been placed ^^

Tell me about it, I'm trying to draw a model of the stadium on SketchUp. I've been sitting for ages trying to figure out the pattern.

Given the location of the seats (the finish line) I guess they will be big softer versions for richer people with harder arses.

Those players re-sale values wont come close to offsetting the debt load IMO, and they will have to re-invest something if they do sell them. And the risk of NPower next year, it dont look good. Anyway that all aside, Ive said all along that I still dont believe that they can sustain a break even football model in the coming years with this move, regardless of all the "cheap tickets" BS that keeps being referenced as the way forward... IMO it simply wont work..There is a big difference in rescuing, developing & sustaining a solid football club with the problems that WH have to servicing a sex industry where stars are paid peanuts to perform things that WH players will never be able to do..And they speak about creating a family friendly environment for WH. Hypocrites! The club is run be sleezy, exploiting deviants... When the two Dave's are involved someone always gets F***ed...Literally.. This time its the fans...:ohno:

Blimey!

I didn't know that Mary Whitehouse was alive and well and posting on SSC!! ;)

Gold and Sullivan's chosen field of business is irrelevant. All that matters is their record as businessmen. And it bears scrutiny.

There are plenty of Premier League owners and shareholders with far shadier backgrounds and / or far less common, business sense.

Blimey!

I didn't know that Mary Whitehouse was alive and well and posting on SSC!! ;)

Gold and Sullivan's chosen field of business is irrelevant. All that matters is their record as businessmen. And it bears scrutiny.

There are plenty of Premier League owners and shareholders with far shadier backgrounds and / or far less common, business sense.

About as much as i would have expected...Im not a prude and i like to joke about etc about stuff, but i dont like what these pair stand for. They are pure slime! Time will tell how good a business men they are. Perhaps their past should not come into it, but they have a history of exploiting other for self gain, so there's the comparison to the fans as I have said all along they dont care about that.. My view, not shared by all.. but i think im correct..
And I do like the sex pistols... if you can catch my drift?
I found your comment quite funny fyi!

A couple of photos guy4versa4 didn't post above, also released today:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5058/5468173458_010f3a0c3c_b.jpg

Also this one with the beginnings of the park in shot:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5251/5468174258_194b3dbc89_b.jpg

A couple of photos guy4versa4 didn't post above, also released today:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5058/5468173458_010f3a0c3c_b.jpg

Also this one with the beginnings of the park in shot:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5251/5468174258_194b3dbc89_b.jpg

^^ Nice progress....:banana:

Tell me about it, I'm trying to draw a model of the stadium on SketchUp. I've been sitting for ages trying to figure out the pattern.

Given the location of the seats (the finish line) I guess they will be big softer versions for richer people with harder arses.

Or possibly the media section? i.e. for photographers for the end of the races.

Or possibly the media section? i.e. for photographers for the end of the races.

I presume that's the section directly at the end of the track, as well as the pits dug in to the ground. For the photographers anyway. The section in the stands that does not yet have seats will probably contain the expensive seats and yeah, probably some press seats.

I presume that's the section directly at the end of the track, as well as the pits dug in to the ground. For the photographers anyway. The section in the stands that does not yet have seats will probably contain the expensive seats and yeah, probably some press seats.

Ahh yes I see the section you mean now, yes it definitely looks like executive seating! Although perhaps not the top tier?

Ahh yes I see the section you mean now, yes it definitely looks like executive seating! Although perhaps not the top tier?

Been having a gander at Beijing and Athens Olympic stadia, and I reckon they might be press seats. It looks alot, but the press sections at Beijing and Athens took up similar sized sections in the same area.

http://c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000Fz5ud1AJLjo/s/900/080524-Pictobank-Bird-Nest-14.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/93/Athens_2004_Main_Olympic_Stadium.jpg/800px-Athens_2004_Main_Olympic_Stadium.jpg

Very close too completion??

Also, looking at those pictures I posted of Athens and Beijing, London is going to be the best looking out of those with regards to the inside. For what the Bird's Nest is outside, there's not much going on inside.

Also, looking at those pictures I posted of Athens and Beijing, London is going to be the best looking out of those with regards to the inside. For what the Bird's Nest is outside, there's not much going on inside.

That's an obscene amount of space around the pitch in Beijing. Then again, the summer games have become an insanely bloated spectacle anyway. In some ways, this stadium configuration might well usher in a new appreciation for Leyton Orient.

Stadiums like this have a standard cycle of fan reaction. Decent crowds come in at the outset, mainly due to curiosity, to drive up optimism. Then, the numbers dwindle ('like West Ham, they fade away') as it becomes obvious the match-day experience isn't worth the bother or expense. Better views on the telly, cheaper beer in the fridge, quicker run to the toilet.

West Ham's fans:hammer::hammer::hammer: will not need long to sort that out. Away fans will probably come in once, out of curiousity to see the place, then stay away in droves the following seasons.

Maybe Karren Brady will organize the few loyal fans who remain to take up a morale-boosting arts and crafts project - weaving laurel wreaths for Seb Coe, Tess Jowell and Ken Livingstone and the legacy board out of the tumbleweeds blowing around the grounds.

That's an obscene amount of space around the pitch in Beijing. Then again, the summer games have become an insanely bloated spectacle anyway. In some ways, this stadium configuration might well usher in a new appreciation for Leyton Orient.

Stadiums like this have a standard cycle of fan reaction. Decent crowds come in at the outset, mainly due to curiosity, to drive up optimism. Then, the numbers dwindle ('like West Ham, they fade away') as it becomes obvious the match-day experience isn't worth the bother or expense. Better views on the telly, cheaper beer in the fridge, quicker run to the toilet.

West Ham's fans:hammer::hammer::hammer: will not need long to sort that out. Away fans will probably come in once, out of curiousity to see the place, then stay away in droves the following seasons.

Maybe Karren Brady will organize the few loyal fans who remain to take up a morale-boosting arts and crafts project - weaving laurel wreaths for Seb Coe, Tess Jowell and Ken Livingstone and the legacy board out of the tumbleweeds blowing around the grounds.

tbh, in my case, i wouldn't really care about if there was a space between the pitch and the stadium, i go to watch football because i want to support my team in person, and see all the players. Im sure die hard fans would't care about the space, because they would just want to see the team play, but thats just me :lol:

Also, looking at those pictures I posted of Athens and Beijing, London is going to be the best looking out of those with regards to the inside. For what the Bird's Nest is outside, there's not much going on inside.

That I agree with..

That's an obscene amount of space around the pitch in Beijing. Then again, the summer games have become an insanely bloated spectacle anyway. In some ways, this stadium configuration might well usher in a new appreciation for Leyton Orient.

Stadiums like this have a standard cycle of fan reaction. Decent crowds come in at the outset, mainly due to curiosity, to drive up optimism. Then, the numbers dwindle ('like West Ham, they fade away') as it becomes obvious the match-day experience isn't worth the bother or expense. Better views on the telly, cheaper beer in the fridge, quicker run to the toilet.

West Ham's fans:hammer::hammer::hammer: will not need long to sort that out. Away fans will probably come in once, out of curiousity to see the place, then stay away in droves the following seasons.

Maybe Karren Brady will organize the few loyal fans who remain to take up a morale-boosting arts and crafts project - weaving laurel wreaths for Seb Coe, Tess Jowell and Ken Livingstone and the legacy board out of the tumbleweeds blowing around the grounds.
And I agree with this too. Echoes my opinion and its been proven to be the case also..

tbh, in my case, i wouldn't really care about if there was a space between the pitch and the stadium, i go to watch football because i want to support my team in person, and see all the players. Im sure die hard fans would't care about the space, because they would just want to see the team play, but thats just me :lol:

Have you ever been to a match with a track around the pitch? If no, wait and then see how you feel (if you intend to go)... I agree with your comments to a certain extent, But Only the die hard fans will still go.. Just a guess I would say that about 50% of current season ticket holders (just a guess guys..) are die hard, the rest enjoy the team / experience. And with both its gonna be bad...So I think season tickets will drop / walk ins (at a cheap price) will increase, but ad hoc, but revenue wont increase much. And a club cannot easily survive and invest on this basis... IMO. The idiots on the board (and thats my view) havent done a feasibility study to really understand what ticket sales they will get. Its all being risked by doing the marketing work on the back end, not on the front end. This is a massive risk to the club, which may result in disaster. Its like saying "lets just get it and worry about filling it later". Why do you think lots of new stadium projects are not solely being built for large capacity? because they think about the past attendances, fans experience - which sells tickets and creates exclusive demand, and operating costs... I dont see how WH have checked any of these boxes really. Operating costs are ok to consider, but if you dont know realistically what you revenue will be... well I dont need to say any more..Its obvious..

And I agree with this too. Echoes my opinion and its been proven to be the case also..

I dont get it, how has it been proven?

I dont get it, how has it been proven?

How many teams or stadiums do i need to quote that have either knocked down olympic style stadiums or the teams are desperate to move away...

Juve- delle alpi -
Juve now in Olympic - Moving away

Basically all of Seria A wants to (plans - including Lazio, Roma, Udinese, Fiorintina)

Bayern Munich - now Allinanz
Schalke - now Velstins
Stuttgart - merc benz arena conversion

THey have all knocked down, moved away or removed tracks from these types of stadium. The list goes on.
Fortunately in england and Spain the problem doesnt exist.

So why does WH think they can make it work for the the good, when all examples suggest otherwise? Maybe the the 2 Dave's think they are smarter than all these other clubs combined? or they just want a stadium on the cheap, at the cost to fans & risk club future..
It really doesnt take too much intelligence to work it out (unless someone is biased).. :ohno:

How many teams or stadiums do i need to quote that have either knocked down olympic style stadiums or the teams are desperate to move away...

Juve- delle alpi -
Juve now in Olympic - Moving away

Basically all of Seria A wants to (plans - including Lazio, Roma, Udinese, Fiorintina)

Bayern Munich - now Allinanz
Schalke - now Velstins
Stuttgart - merc benz arena conversion

THey have all knocked down, moved away or removed tracks from these types of stadium. The list goes on.
Fortunately in england and Spain the problem doesnt exist.

So why does WH think they can make it work for the the good, when all examples suggest otherwise? Maybe the the 2 Dave's think they are smarter than all these other clubs combined? or they just want a stadium on the cheap, at the cost to fans & risk club future..
It really doesnt take too much intelligence to work it out (unless someone is biased).. :ohno:

I wasn't disputing you, i just didn't know that that many teams want to move away from stadiums with athletic tracks in it :lol:

Aren't West Ham looking into retractable seating though?

I wasn't disputing you, i just didn't know that that many teams want to move away from stadiums with athletic tracks in it :lol:

Aren't West Ham looking into retractable seating though?

Ok soz. I didnt think you was. It's just really tiring trying to get a fact based point across to some users..
Who knows.. I think SSc users are more promoting this concept than anything from WH.. And it really doesnt solve the problem really IMO. They would need to decrease more of the upper level to compensate for adding more seats, the angle of the seating next to pitch would suck (its very shallow 1st tier as it is). So i cant see WH wanting to do it or adding the extra cost to re-vamp... I think its throwing good money after bad, for minimal viewing benefits...

How many teams or stadiums do i need to quote that have either knocked down olympic style stadiums or the teams are desperate to move away...

Juve- delle alpi -
Juve now in Olympic - Moving away

Basically all of Seria A wants to (plans - including Lazio, Roma, Udinese, Fiorintina)

Bayern Munich - now Allinanz
Schalke - now Velstins
Stuttgart - merc benz arena conversion

THey have all knocked down, moved away or removed tracks from these types of stadium. The list goes on.
Fortunately in england and Spain the problem doesnt exist.

So why does WH think they can make it work for the the good, when all examples suggest otherwise? Maybe the the 2 Dave's think they are smarter than all these other clubs combined? or they just want a stadium on the cheap, at the cost to fans & risk club future..
It really doesnt take too much intelligence to work it out (unless someone is biased).. :ohno:
Also in Spain for example Espanyol went away from Montjuïc, Olympic Stadim, to new Cornella el Prat, an english style stadium.
Also Porto in 2004 went to Dragao from das Antas (which had track). Also Galatasaray last month...
Also new Moskow stadiums (CSKA, Spartak, Dinamo...) will be without track.

West Ham will be the first team to do the inverse way. :ohno:

West Ham wanted a stadium on the cheap, they've got one. The track is the price they pay for this. That seems more than fair enough.

There's not much more to debate than that as far as I'm concerned. West Ham are doing the opposite of other European clubs because it's MUCH cheaper for them than building anew.

I think that every club would make his stadium like a friendly and hospitable home for supporters.
Olympic Stadium couldn't be for WH fans...you will see that fans go away from stadium and team. They will prefer watching matches on TV.
I speak in this way because I know the trend of italian stadia. Teams who have stadium with track, are less followed...while stadium like Cesena, Parma, Genova, Milan without track, are usually full of people.

West Ham wanted a stadium on the cheap, they've got one. The track is the price they pay for this. That seems more than fair enough.

There's not much more to debate than that as far as I'm concerned. West Ham are doing the opposite of other European clubs because it's MUCH cheaper for them than building anew.

Spot on.. as you say..not much else to say for now unless someone chimes in and suggests all other clubs are wrong and WH are right..

Spot on.. as you say..not much else to say for now unless someone chimes in and suggests all other clubs are wrong and WH are right..
Well there are examples of succesfull clubs in stadia with an athletics track.
But there are also examples of sucessful clubs with old and to small stadia.
And there are eamples of clubs that built new stadia and got int financial problems leading into or nearly into bankruptcy.

The question here is probably if West Ham will really benefit from moving into the Olympic Stadium and keeping the running track. Will attendancies really rise enough when moving into a stadium that has been designed for athletics?
And what modifications can and will they do? And what are the cost, what are the benefits.

Is it really certain that it will be a good move for sure?

Can someone please explain to me further, why does west ham want to move from their current stadium? It looks big enough and good enough for a team of WH's caliber. Maybe redeveloping the main grand stand will surely up the capacity into the 45 thousand mark (if taking the facing grandstand as reference). And i am sure it won't cost anywhere near 100 milion. Can anyone rectify my dilema?

Is this a sure success for WHU? Hardly, but the owners clearly feel the potential highs and returns from this investment are greater than what they can achieve at Upton Park, which obviously has it's limitations. The new venue obviously has it's shortcomings as a football venue, but it's larger, in an attractive spot and featuring all the modern amenities at arguably a much cheaper cost than renovations to the home ground. Let's face it, some clubs and national teams have survived such configurations, and if WHU ever packs the ground than they might be the last ones laughing.

Put another way, ManoWar implied Upton Park is "big enough and good enough for a team of WH's caliber," but the owners are clearly dreaming of something bigger and to that end saw Upton as more of an obstacle.

Heck, South Americans have practically made a culture out of being distant from the pitch, so there is a precedent! ;)

One man's thoughts, anyway.

Dreaming being the operative word, GJ. They want to sell Upton Park to alleviate their 100m pound debt worries. If they had money, upgrading Upton Park to 40,000 would give them an excellent, atmospheric home ground, albeit one that would have trouble attracting any significant fees for a stadium naming rights sponsor.

Problem there is, it's really a working-class club that doesn't attract massive corporate sponsorship. Past success has been built on drawing large numbers in at comparitively low ticket prices and relying on great atmosphere to push the team on. Nowadays, despite even deeper discounting on ticket prices, they still can't fill their ground.

Once clubs move or complete planned renovations, the only club amongst Europe's top 100 clubs, based on attendance, that will be playing on a football pitch surrounded by an athletics track will be Nuremberg, of Germany. Their stadium is rather suitably entitled the Frankenstadion. BTW, when you reach the 100 mark, average attendances are just over 20,000 per game.

In South America, if throwing batteries or bags of urine become any more popular, those nations will be pushing to have them added to the Olympic curriculum.

You can add the Los Angeles and Montreal Olympic stadiums to the growing list of failed, track-encircled venues. L.A has had two professional NFL teams - the Rams and Raiders - abandon the out-of-date Coliseum. Montreal has seen both Canadian gridiron - Alouettes - and professional baseball - the Expos - leave its debt-plagued stadium, or The Big Owe, as it's locally known.

Can someone please explain to me further, why does west ham want to move from their current stadium? It looks big enough and good enough for a team of WH's caliber. Maybe redeveloping the main grand stand will surely up the capacity into the 45 thousand mark (if taking the facing grandstand as reference). And i am sure it won't cost anywhere near 100 milion. Can anyone rectify my dilema?

As a West Ham fan I am pretty much against the move, but I will try to answer your question.

The original plan was to build a new East Stand raising the capacity to around 40,000. This plan is still evident when you see the large gap between the current East Stand and the pitch. This gap was created when they built the new Main Stand. However there is a limit on the size this East Stand could be, as there is a road that leads straight to a bus station right behind the stand. West Ham would not get planning permission to build over the road due to the proximity of the residential buildings.

The current Main Stand, (West Stand), is reputed to be the largest single structure stand in London. The two end stands could not be extended as there is no space behind.

However, the biggest problem with expanding to 40,000 is the transport links. Even at a capacity of 35,000, it is still a chore getting away from the stadium.

As RobH said, the sad truth in regards to the move is that West Ham get a new 60k stadium, (with superior transport links), on the cheap.

Corrections: the plan for the East side is a stand that does overhang half of Priory Rd It consists of a smaller version of the west stand (same goalpost construction) but with no boxes therfore not so high. It consists of 23 rows on the lower tier seating 5625 (the west lower tier seats 8690) The upper tier consists of 23 rows (the last 6 over Priory RD) seating 4779 (West upper 7115). Total 10404 (West 15805). Some seats would be lost in the south and north stands in the corners where it joins the new stand. total capacity would be 40,350 (includes 213 wheelchairs.

Also I thought flashman must be a spurs supporter but he must reresent all the ticket touts that stand between the station and the main entrance that might lose out with a bigger stadium.

Once clubs move or complete planned renovations, the only club amongst Europe's top 100 clubs, based on attendance, that will be playing on a football pitch surrounded by an athletics track will be Nuremberg, of Germany. Their stadium is rather suitably entitled the Frankenstadion. BTW, when you reach the 100 mark, average attendances are just over 20,000 per game.

Just for completion:
Don't forget Hertha BSC Berlin playing in the Olympic stadium in Berlin ;)

And one might also at least keep in mind that the TSV 1860 München seriously considered (and even still considers it fairly seriously) moving out of the Allianz Arena back into the Olympic Stadium in Munich. But that's a special case and mostly because of financial reasons and within the fan baser partially emotional reasons, not wanting to share a stadium with the big local rival FC Bayern and paying them such high rent.

So there is more than one example and Hertha BSC playing in the Olympic stadium is probably a far better example than Nürnberg, because they have pretty high attendancies even though they're currently only playing in league two this season (about to advance back up again).

Just for completion:
Don't forget Hertha BSC Berlin playing in the Olympic stadium in Berlin ;)

And one might also at least keep in mind that the TSV 1860 München seriously considered (and even still considers it fairly seriously) moving out of the Allianz Arena back into the Olympic Stadium in Munich. But that's a special case and mostly because of financial reasons and within the fan baser partially emotional reasons, not wanting to share a stadium with the big local rival FC Bayern and paying them such high rent.

So there is more than one example and Hertha BSC playing in the Olympic stadium is probably a far better example than Nürnberg, because they have pretty high attendancies even though they're currently only playing in league two this season (about to advance back up again).

There is the odd exception... I know this anyway. Didnt they renovate the stadium while keeping the track? And really Hertha didnt have much choice but to play in this? If not they would have had to build their own ground... So they opted to remain on the cheap... I cant see this example of a worthy push back to all europe..

Dreaming being the operative word, GJ. They want to sell Upton Park to alleviate their 100m pound debt worries. If they had money, upgrading Upton Park to 40,000 would give them an excellent, atmospheric home ground, albeit one that would have trouble attracting any significant fees for a stadium naming rights sponsor.

Problem there is, it's really a working-class club that doesn't attract massive corporate sponsorship. Past success has been built on drawing large numbers in at comparitively low ticket prices and relying on great atmosphere to push the team on. Nowadays, despite even deeper discounting on ticket prices, they still can't fill their ground.

Once clubs move or complete planned renovations, the only club amongst Europe's top 100 clubs, based on attendance, that will be playing on a football pitch surrounded by an athletics track will be Nuremberg, of Germany. Their stadium is rather suitably entitled the Frankenstadion. BTW, when you reach the 100 mark, average attendances are just over 20,000 per game.

In South America, if throwing batteries or bags of urine become any more popular, those nations will be pushing to have them added to the Olympic curriculum.

You can add the Los Angeles and Montreal Olympic stadiums to the growing list of failed, track-encircled venues. L.A has had two professional NFL teams - the Rams and Raiders - abandon the out-of-date Coliseum. Montreal has seen both Canadian gridiron - Alouettes - and professional baseball - the Expos - leave its debt-plagued stadium, or The Big Owe, as it's locally known.

The sale of Upton Park will only raise £20 million. Reconfiguring the Olympic stadium will cost £95 million.

So moving to Stratford has nothing to do with alleviating West Ham's current debt - at least, in the short term. In fact, the move will add £40 million to West Ham's debt.

The intention, however, is that the move to the new stadium will realise a significant increase in revenues and therefore an enhanced ability to service and repay the debt.

The intention, however, is that the move to the new stadium will realise a significant increase in revenues and therefore an enhanced ability to service and repay the debt.

For once i agree Jim. That's their plan. Although wishes and reality are different. And although I am 95% confident it will fail, I dont know for sure.. That's half the debate now really..

Didnt they renovate the stadium while keeping the track? And really Hertha didnt have much choice but to play in this? If not they would have had to build their own ground... So they opted to remain on the cheap... I cant see this example of a worthy push back to all europe..

Hertha had nothing to do with the renovation, it was paied by the bundesland berlin. hertha only paid the blue running track - a thing that was often criticized.

they also have another choice, the jahnstadion which was used several times by hertha.

but I think that your argument that football clubs want lo leave stadiums with track is valid.

although hertha gets a stadium al low cost they are unhappy and they are thinking about a new football stadium.

you also forgot bremen weserstadion, köln mungensdorfer stadion, düsseldorf esprit arena, dresden - rudolf harbig stadion etc ....

For once i agree Jim. That's their plan. Although wishes and reality are different. And although I am 95% confident it will fail, I dont know for sure.. That's half the debate now really..

Two things you have to factor in over and above whether or not the stadium will prove sufficiently popular with hard core West Ham fans:

1. Naming rights at the new stadium will give West Ham additional revenue that they cannot currently exploit.

2. They will earn far more from corporate sales than they could ever hope to earn at Upton Park.

Two things you have to factor in over and above whether or not the stadium will prove sufficiently popular with hard core West Ham fans:

1. Naming rights at the new stadium will give West Ham additional revenue that they cannot currently exploit.

2. They will earn far more from corporate sales than they could ever hope to earn at Upton Park.

This is true but the existing Olympic Stadium five ring hospitality area on the west side might not accomodate the existing 50/60 boxholders and other hospitality areas within Upton Park. Looking at the cross section of the stadium on the east side it would be possible to dismantle the lower tier and move the rear half forward and the front half replace with retractable seats over the long jump pits. This would free up a space beneath the upper tier and lower tier which is just a circulating area at the moment.

This is true but the existing Olympic Stadium five ring hospitality area on the west side might not accomodate the existing 50/60 boxholders and other hospitality areas within Upton Park. Looking at the cross section of the stadium on the east side it would be possible to dismantle the lower tier and move the rear half forward and the front half replace with retractable seats over the long jump pits. This would free up a space beneath the upper tier and lower tier which is just a circulating area at the moment.

Isn't part of the £95 million reconfiguration budget earmarked for an increased corporate hospitality seating capacity?

Hertha had nothing to do with the renovation, it was paied by the bundesland berlin. hertha only paid the blue running track - a thing that was often criticized.

they also have another choice, the jahnstadion which was used several times by hertha.

but I think that your argument that football clubs want lo leave stadiums with track is valid.

although hertha gets a stadium al low cost they are unhappy and they are thinking about a new football stadium.

you also forgot bremen weserstadion, köln mungensdorfer stadion, düsseldorf esprit arena, dresden - rudolf harbig stadion etc ....
There was simply too many to mention. But yes you further validate my view.
What i was trying to say about hertha is that they had a new stadium available to them at low cost so it would have been difficult to avoid using it at that time / play at the temporary stadium..

Two things you have to factor in over and above whether or not the stadium will prove sufficiently popular with hard core West Ham fans:

1. Naming rights at the new stadium will give West Ham additional revenue that they cannot currently exploit.

2. They will earn far more from corporate sales than they could ever hope to earn at Upton Park.

Thats true. Again i agree. We are on a roll here... But i still dont think that will offset the debt burden / renovation costs and the required revenue to operate without huge risk. I explained why a few weeks ago, providing estimates of revenue comparisons, financial load / interest typical charges. Etc all IMO, so i wont re-hash it all out..
The corp sales is an interesting one. If they can offset the loss of season tickets (IMO) by corp boxes etc than it may just be enough.. but of course the atmos will decline further without fans / walks in ad hoc which makes business investment very risky or not possible... Business men are not fans really..

I don't see why fans should necessarily decrease. I don't support West Ham but as a tottenham supporter I would like to see perhaps an away game or even another top flight team play WH.

The point is that the stadium is in a friendly neighborhood and I could see people leaving say their loved ones who don't like football to go shopping or swimming etc. You have created an area where people are either watching sport or playing it - if you could call shopping a sport that is :)

I feel the beautiful setting of the park stadium will also encourage a more family friendly and bigger fan base. I have stopped going to WHL because of the poor transport network and the shitehole that surrounds the stadium. I would prefer to watch a football game and come out into nice surrounding and do other things instead of wondering how the hell to get out.

Also, keeping it in East Ham would in my opinion, not be good for corporate clients as its an unglamorous area in an unfashionable club.

The transportation links are a huge plus for West Ham. They will be on two underground lines and the Docklands light rail. They will also be serviced by both the domestic and international rail stations. Also, it will be fairly easy to drive there (considering it is in London) and there is likely to be a lot of parking spaces. I think that if you were able to count up the number of people living or working within half-an-hour's commute of the Olympic Stadium, that number would be higher than any other English club's stadium.

I don't see why fans should necessarily decrease. I don't support West Ham but as a tottenham supporter I would like to see perhaps an away game or even another top flight team play WH.

The point is that the stadium is in a friendly neighborhood and I could see people leaving say their loved ones who don't like football to go shopping or swimming etc. You have created an area where people are either watching sport or playing it - if you could call shopping a sport that is :)

I feel the beautiful setting of the park stadium will also encourage a more family friendly and bigger fan base. I have stopped going to WHL because of the poor transport network and the shitehole that surrounds the stadium. I would prefer to watch a football game and come out into nice surrounding and do other things instead of wondering how the hell to get out.

Also, keeping it in East Ham would in my opinion, not be good for corporate clients as its an unglamorous area in an unfashionable club.

That and transport links are I'd say the biggest factors, not only if this going to give WH a ground with much nicer surrounding but it could well change the image of the club. For decades they've been seen as a second level club in London compaired to Arsenals, Spurs and Chelsea and that obviously costs them potential fanbase.

I wonder just how much of an increase in revenue West Ham will actually see. They're talking about regularly giving away many thousands of seats, or selling at deeply discounted prices.

That's often a dangerous business practice, one that only goes in one direction. Once fans get used to free or subsidized prices, they are hard to get back on track spending for regular ticket prices. Eventually, the club pays a heavy price in trying to restore normal sales pricing.

Plus they'll totally soften up the demand for season's tickets, so those numbers will likely drop. Away fans will come once out of curiosity, see the vast new stadium and the acres of space that will remain void of atmosphere and rarely return, if at all. It will become the most missable stadium in Britain.

Naming rights will not match what a new stadium project would fetch. Too hard to overcome the original identity in the public vernacular, therefore a hard sell to a potential sponsoring firm.

And West Ham enjoy major corporate support? That's even harder to grasp. The club that once had Doc Martin's bovver boots as a jersey sponsor? I can easily imagine some major business execs concerned about a negative effect to their corporate images if they were seen hob-nobbing with an unseemly pair of porn barons or, heaven forbid, Danny Dyer-type fans?

West Ham are the 'Anti-Arsenal', all meat pies and jellied eels. Hardly what the 'Prawn Sandwich Brigade' would want. Their image is all wrong. Fulham would probably do better under similar circumstances.

If Upton Park would only fetch 20mil, that's cause for concern. I'd seen estimates it might fetch double that. Plus the estimated 95mil renovation costs are just that - estimated. Bet it comes in much higher, closer to 150mil. Who's paying to service that additional debt?

Tapered revenue expectations mixed with broadened anticipated expenses and a struggling football club won't produce any growth in net revenue. I suppose the key consideration for now is whether the Avram Grant Relegation Express reaches its destination.

I wonder just how much of an increase in revenue West Ham will actually see. They're talking about regularly giving away many thousands of seats, or selling at deeply discounted prices.

That's often a dangerous business practice, one that only goes in one direction. Once fans get used to free or subsidized prices, they are hard to get back on track spending for regular ticket prices. Eventually, the club pays a heavy price in trying to restore normal sales pricing.

Plus they'll totally soften up the demand for season's tickets, so those numbers will likely drop. Away fans will come once out of curiosity, see the vast new stadium and the acres of space that will remain void of atmosphere and rarely return, if at all. It will become the most missable stadium in Britain.

Naming rights will not match what a new stadium project would fetch. Too hard to overcome the original identity in the public vernacular, therefore a hard sell to a potential sponsoring firm.

And West Ham enjoy major corporate support? That's even harder to grasp. The club that once had Doc Martin's bovver boots as a jersey sponsor? I can easily imagine some major business execs concerned about a negative effect to their corporate images if they were seen hob-nobbing with an unseemly pair of porn barons or, heaven forbid, Danny Dyer-type fans?

West Ham are the 'Anti-Arsenal', all meat pies and jellied eels. Hardly what the 'Prawn Sandwich Brigade' would want. Their image is all wrong. Fulham would probably do better under similar circumstances.

If Upton Park would only fetch 20mil, that's cause for concern. I'd seen estimates it might fetch double that. Plus the estimated 95mil renovation costs are just that - estimated. Bet it comes in much higher, closer to 150mil. Who's paying to service that additional debt?

Tapered revenue expectations mixed with broadened anticipated expenses and a struggling football club won't produce any growth in net revenue. I suppose the key consideration for now is whether the Avram Grant Relegation Express reaches its destination.
Very fair concerns and observations IMO. I agree with most of this, no actually all of this and have also made such comments... The problem is that its like flogging a dead horse....

And West Ham enjoy major corporate support? That's even harder to grasp. The club that once had Doc Martin's bovver boots as a jersey sponsor? I can easily imagine some major business execs concerned about a negative effect to their corporate images if they were seen hob-nobbing with an unseemly pair of porn barons or, heaven forbid, Danny Dyer-type fans?

West Ham are the 'Anti-Arsenal', all meat pies and jellied eels. Hardly what the 'Prawn Sandwich Brigade' would want. Their image is all wrong. Fulham would probably do better under similar circumstances.

Again that seems like another reason for the move, WH at Upton Park have likely had trouble attracting corperate business with the "weasel fighting" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNmBAUyy7Go) image but moving into the Olympic Park should do a far bit to improve that.

HaHaHa. Absolutely, right, moreorless. Maybe this clip shows what potential corporate sponsors can look forward to when hooking up with David Sullivan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZAnj1pEcuw&NR=1

Sullivan's true views on the viability of the running track are expressed just after the two minute mark in this clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4scyoqf1eVE&feature=fvwrel

By the way, in assessing West Ham's revenue generating schemes, I neglected to mention the potential gold mine they've created and just recently implemented - a sit down meal for 10 with director Karren Brady and the directors or top execs of the visiting opponents in a private stadium dining room for 10,000 pounds.

As I said I'd guess part of the thinking behind this move is to change the image of the club. Mr Otogawa might not be interested in being taken for a visit to Upton Park but would most likely be more interested in the Olympic stadium in a newly generated area.

I'd guess thats also part of the reason Levy was so keen to get Spurs to Statford, the location and assoication with the games is going to help boost the profile of any club who move there.

HaHaHa. Absolutely, right, moreorless. Maybe this clip shows what potential corporate sponsors can look forward to when hooking up with David Sullivan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZAnj1pEcuw&NR=1

Sullivan's true views on the viability of the running track are expressed just after the two minute mark in this clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4scyoqf1eVE&feature=fvwrel

By the way, in assessing West Ham's revenue generating schemes, I neglected to mention the potential gold mine they've created and just recently implemented - a sit down meal for 10 with director Karren Brady and the directors or top execs of the visiting opponents in a private stadium dining room for 10,000 pounds.

Says it all really dont it! Sullivan - total lack of understanding to make those comments..oh course up to the bid he'd been coached to say otherwise... Utter joke. It almost gets boring when my views are continuously proved correct...

I want to know what the £95 million will go on. The bulk turning a summer stadium into a winter stadium. Extending the roof will probably take the bulk. A new wrap, maybe sponsored. Undersoil heating. More cover at the outside food pods (at least they will be able to sell chips and burgers forbidden by fire regulations at Upton Park). Conversion of Olympic hospitality areas. The toilets under 2/3rds of the upper tier consist of 23 female blocks containing 18 cubicles and only 6 gents blocks containing 5 cubicles and about 20 urinals. The inbalance will have to be sorted hopefully not as at the millenium stadium where they designate Female toilets Male for the day. Segregation of supporters will be another cost although if away supporters are restricted to the lower bowl it should be easy to do. I expect once the decision is ratified we will know because Gold and Sullivan are going to organise tours although the Bond Holders may organise their own first.

Says it all really dont it! Sullivan - total lack of understanding to make those comments..oh course up to the bid he'd been coached to say otherwise... Utter joke. It almost gets boring when my views are continuously proved correct...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_8CgZn7SSp9g/STjHermF-1I/AAAAAAAAAZM/G9kSGOR-hnY/s400/broken+record.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_8CgZn7SSp9g/STjHermF-1I/AAAAAAAAAZM/G9kSGOR-hnY/s400/broken+record.jpg

http://piloseo.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/beating_a_dead_horse2.jpg

http://piloseo.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/beating_a_dead_horse2.jpg

In what way does displaying animal cruelty relate to the Olympic Stadium? :ohno:

In what way does displaying animal cruelty relate to the Olympic Stadium? :ohno:

Broken record.

Flogging a dead horse.

http://hub.tv-ark.org.uk/images/itvsouth/tvs_images/programmes/catchphrase05011991bl.jpg

RIIIIIIIIIIGHT!

Time for the Bonus Catchphrase Jim...select a square from the board....

http://hub.tv-ark.org.uk/images/itvsouth/tvs_images/programmes/catchphrase05011991bl.jpg

RIIIIIIIIIIGHT!

Time for the Bonus Catchphrase Jim...select a square from the board....

....and say what you see.

http://piloseo.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/beating_a_dead_horse2.jpg
bad shoop job
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ec6_1187579158

[/off-topic]

More and more this stadium fiasco begins to resemble a big, mucky pig's foot. Sorry, no images.

Below, a link to a Daily Melee article about Barry Hearn's intent to sue the Premier League over the decision to award West Ham the Olympic Sty-dium. In it, it says"

"The main concern for Orient's board is that West Ham's plan to sell tickets at drastically low prices will lure fans away from Brisbane Road and seriously jeopardise the long-term future of the club."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/olympics/article-1362251/Leyton-Orient-threaten-legal-action-West-Ham-move.html

But apparently, Orient would have been OK with Spurs getting the grounds because their higher ticket prices wouldn't have been viewed as a direct competitor to Orient's lower-priced audience.

This is great. I hope Hearn gets stuck in. Much more fun to watch than the games will ever be and no worrying about drug cheats.

He has every right to protect his club of course, and the original agreed legacy plans of a small, modern stadium for UK Athletes wouldn't have had the same impact. I do wonder about the Premier League's rules though. Given how bunched up clubs are in particular urban areas (London, the North East, Manchester), it puts huge restrictions on how far some clubs can move if they're enforced to the letter. I mean, West Ham are moving within the same borough! I believe the rules were really written to prevent another MK Dons rather than to stop a club like West Ham moving just a couple of miles away from where they currently are.

BTW, Flashman, your schadenfreude is getting really tiresome.

He has every right to protect his club of course, and the original agreed legacy plans of a small, modern stadium for UK Athletes wouldn't have had the same impact. I do wonder about the Premier League's rules though. Given how bunched up clubs are in particular urban areas (London, the North East, Manchester), it puts huge restrictions on how far some clubs can move if they're enforced to the letter. I mean, West Ham are moving within the same borough! I believe the rules were really written to prevent another MK Dons rather than to stop a club like West Ham moving just a couple of miles away from where they currently are.

BTW, Flashman, your schadenfreude is getting really tiresome.

I really can't see what the Key argument of the threat:
The main concern for Orient's board is that West Ham's plan to sell tickets at drastically low prices will lure fans away from Brisbane Road and seriously jeopardise the long-term future of the club.

has to do with a move into the Olympic stadium, or West Ham staying wherever they are. ;)

Does the premier League have any restrictions on a clubs ticket pricing?

BTW, Flashman, your schadenfreude is getting really tiresome.

I wish I could say the same about watching England fumble, bumble and stumble over another stadium project. But that wouldn't be true. For giving us so much to work with -

http://www.creativedrunks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Oktoberfest-Beer.jpg

DANKE! Cheersh.

As West Ham have been confirmed as tenant, perhaps the talk will return to the stadium design and how to turn a summer stadium into a winter stadium.

The Premier League has told Barry Hearn that they will not reopen the decision. They say that he sent them a letter before hand in which he did not object and the impact on Orient was considered.

http://www.premierleague.com/page/Headlines/0,,12306~2306665,00.html

^^

Premier League statement
The Premier League Board has released a statement regarding a decision on the Olympic Stadium and Leyton Orient.
*

At the request of Tottenham Hotspur and West Ham United the Premier League Board considered whether a prospective move to the Olympic Stadium, should either club be granted use of the site by the Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC), would be compliant with Premier League Rules.
In reaching its decision the Board took into account the relevant factors set out in Rule I.6.
The Board came to the decision that on balance it would be unreasonable to prevent either Tottenham Hotspur or West Ham United from moving to the Olympic Site as long as they satisfied all of the relevant criteria stipulated by appropriate Olympic and statutory authorities.
DUE CONSIDERATION
With particular reference to Leyton Orient, full consideration was given to a letter written by its Chairman, Barry Hearn, to the Premier League prior to the Board meeting at which the decision was taken. In the letter Mr. Hearn accepted that either Tottenham Hotspur or West Ham United would inevitably move into the Olympic Stadium while outlining his preference for Tottenham Hotspur. Mr. Hearn enclosed a copy of a separate letter written to the Tottenham Hotspur Chairman in which he wished him 'all success for the prospective move.'
After the Board had met and reached its decision the Premier League General Secretary wrote to Mr. Hearn informing him of its decision, the reasoning behind it and thanking him for his correspondence.
It is regrettable that Mr. Hearn is now claiming that Leyton Orient had no input into the Board's decision making process when their views, as expressed in writing at the time by Mr. Hearn, were given due consideration. Clearly the position currently being articulated by Mr. Hearn in the media is at odds with his original submission.
The League has no view on the comparative merits of Tottenham Hotspur or West Ham United's bids. It was ultimately the responsibility of the OPLC to decide how the site would be used following the 2012 Olympic Games.
With all this in mind there is absolutely no question of the Board's decision being reviewed.
*

Mahhrrvellllousss. So that leaves us with a dog's dinner design of a stadium with a poverty-stricken mongrel of a football club for a principal tenant and 20 days of witless, breaffless, bwrainless arfletics enfusiasts running about a big, windblown expanse of a track wif nob'dy wartchin'.

Let's all lahff at London
Let's all lahff at London
la la la la
la la la la

^^
Those West Ham fans must have given you one hell of a good beating.
Did the vicious attack take place just outside the Olympic stadium or
somewhere else in the Pudding Mill Lane area?
Go easy on the SSC posts because nurses tend to take a dim view of patients using laptops in hospitals, especially in A & E.


Perhaps the talk will return to the stadium design and how to turn a football season stadium into a summer athletics/cricket stadium and vice versa.

Mahhrrvellllousss. So that leaves us with a dog's dinner design of a stadium with a poverty-stricken mongrel of a football club for a principal tenant and 20 days of witless, breaffless, bwrainless arfletics enfusiasts running about a big, windblown expanse of a track wif nob'dy wartchin'.

Let's all lahff at London
Let's all lahff at London
la la la la
la la la la

Oh dear, someone has not had their nappy changed today

''Perhaps the talk will return to the stadium design and how to turn a football season stadium into a summer athletics/cricket stadium and vice versa.''

Agreed oxo.

It would be nice to now see some renders/plans, both internal and external of how this will eventually look. So far the pics released by WHU have looked rather lame and dare I say it 'photoshopped' for maximum effect.

I think the only accurate image post olympics was the stadium in concert mode. I think the talk of the price for naming right is greatly exaggerated. If the going rate was in the hundreds of millions Arsenal would have paid off their stadium costs. I'll go for the Westfield Olympic Stadium. It has a relevence, Westfield nearby, West of the site. As long as they don't try to change West Ham to Westfield United but you never know.

The reason that we have seen no concrete plans yet is because they don't exist. They have engaged Populous as the architects to come up with the plans. They recently announced that they hope to put temporary or retractable seats behind each goal. That will radically change the look of the stadium so any rendering that doesn't include that, or shows it looking different to the final plan, will be innacurate. The renderings they have released do not give great detail.

From West Ham's public statements, it appears that they will not make any structural changes to the lower tier, so the space between the track and the stands on the sides will remain, at least until they get the funds to reconfigure the lower bowl. There will be a wrap around the stadium, a new roof and, likely, temporary stands behind each goal. The rest of the changes will largely be upgrading the interior including putting in boxes and making the toilets permanent. The plan to replace the seats seems to have been shelved due to budget constraints.

The WHU internal bowl render showed passion filled supporters standing waving flags and roaring their team on... the iorony of course being they woyuld be told to sit down by the stewards for Health and Safety reasons, and their flag pioles are against the standard entry requirements of the EPL and Cup competitions due to the fact they can be used as weapons. :/

Anyway - some renders of the WH stadium in various sport guises would be good - I wonder if thatchampions of motorsport event that used to be at Wembley could be done here?

I wonder if by the use of temporary stands behind the goal it will be reminiscent of the stadium in Cagliari Italy.

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/ITA/Sant_Elia.html

I wonder if by the use of temporary stands behind the goal it will be reminiscent of the stadium in Cagliari Italy.

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/ITA/Sant_Elia.html

Good Lord I hope not! Cagliari is a bloody eyesore. Haven't looked at the links but I know Cagliari to look at. You loose every corner too. Im not sure what, but there must be something better than this temp style seating.. I'd prefer to leave it as is and at least keep the aesthetics of the inside looking ok, because its ok from inside for a athletics stadium..

Cagliari will leave Sant'Elia, building a new stadium ready in 2012/2013: this one is actually very crumbling, horrible and old.
I hope WH 'll find another solution for the Olympic.

They will almost certainly need to put temporary stands behind the goals à la Sant Elia, but I can't help wondering what effect that will have on the upper tier.

Does anybody have a section view of the Olympic Stadium, side-on to the pitch?

There's almost certainly one in amongst the planning docs:

http://planning.london2012.com/publicaccess/tdc/DcApplication/application_detailview.aspx?caseno=K0LTMFSZK0000

They will almost certainly need to put temporary stands behind the goals à la Sant Elia, but I can't help wondering what effect that will have on the upper tier.

Does anybody have a section view of the Olympic Stadium, side-on to the pitch?

If they put temp stands behind the goals.. Thats it.. Thats the "ends" of the stadium.. no end upper tier etc.. wont matter.. And basically the sides (not corners will only be used because of viewing restrictions caused by the temps...It will look awful... Leave it as is for what it is..thats my view now the debate of who's gonna get it is over... Save the money of shite temp stands that will make the stadium look like a fairground circus and accept it for what has been bid on.. WH need to suck it up IMO..

the latest I have heard is they will take away the seats above the big screens and remove some of the last rows of seats in the upper tier so a bigger roof can be propped up. Also apparently the upper tier needs strengthening, maybe to do with the roof but as an Olympic spectator you hope it is strong enough now and will not fall down when full. No tempoary seats behind goals as they would have to be covered.

the latest I have heard is they will take away the seats above the big screens and remove some of the last rows of seats in the upper tier so a bigger roof can be propped up. Also apparently the upper tier needs strengthening, maybe to do with the roof but as an Olympic spectator you hope it is strong enough now and will not fall down when full. No tempoary seats behind goals as they would have to be covered.

sounds somewhat sensible considering the limitations...

the latest I have heard is they will take away the seats above the big screens and remove some of the last rows of seats in the upper tier so a bigger roof can be propped up. Also apparently the upper tier needs strengthening, maybe to do with the roof but as an Olympic spectator you hope it is strong enough now and will not fall down when full. No tempoary seats behind goals as they would have to be covered.

The strengthening, I would have thought, is likely to do with the new roof, and possibly also because the upper tier wasn't never meant to be permanent. It may be the strengthening has to be done to increase its longevity.

The strengthening, I would have thought, is likely to do with the new roof, and possibly also because the upper tier wasn't ever meant to be permanent. It may be the strengthening has to be done to increase its longevity.

Common sense isnt it? IS temporary with no roof...To Be.. permanent with roof structure weighing on it...

That's not to say it can't be done and done well. Many people said when the stands were going up they looked very robust for temporary stands. Perhaps they engineered in the option to retain them with only a bit of stengthening needed.

That's not to say it can't be done and done well. Many people said when the stands were going up they looked very robust for temporary stands. Perhaps they engineered in the option to retain them with only a bit of stengthening needed.

Rob,
I think thats exactly what they did.. Its mostly strong enough now, but it was designed to be easily dismantled (does not mean it is weak).. Some ballasts or simple counter balances attached to the base of the exterior would easily and quickly do it.
I never said this before (because i didnt want confuse my unsupportive opinion of hating this project concept / and football use with that of the construction element), but look at Juve old stadium. The exterior engineering is not that different from Olympic - Steelwork, exposed underside of tier etc..The stadiums are similar in size and capacity, Juve simply anker the roof balance to ground.. That would be dead easy and cheap IMO

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3473/3209787940_7707e2c2d9.jpg

As I'v said before I think Westham's #1 aim shouldnt be improving the view from the lower teir but rather retaining as much of the upper teir as possible. The best thing this stadium has going for it as a football ground compaired to many big athletics stadiums is that over 2/3rds of the seats are in a steeper upper teir with decent viewing angles.

It would look unconvention I admit but to me the best option behind the goals would be to demolish part of the lower teir and have the big screens there instead. That would allow you to fill in the gaps that are present now in the upper teir adding an extra couple of thousand seats with decent views at the expense of seats below with bad views.

bla bla bla, fotos??????????????????????? :bash:

maybe tomorow spanish boy

the latest I have heard is they will take away the seats above the big screens and remove some of the last rows of seats in the upper tier so a bigger roof can be propped up. Also apparently the upper tier needs strengthening, maybe to do with the roof but as an Olympic spectator you hope it is strong enough now and will not fall down when full. No tempoary seats behind goals as they would have to be covered.

Is the roof not fully supported by the white supporting structure? I thought it lay separate from the actual stand structure.

Is the roof not fully supported by the white supporting structure? I thought it lay separate from the actual stand structure.

Yes.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2658/3933989551_e9e535948a_b.jpg

Is the roof not fully supported by the white supporting structure? I thought it lay separate from the actual stand structure.

This is true but as it has to be extended to three times the length to cover the two thirds of seats not covered for a summer olympics it will need extra support. They must be praying for no rain next July/August or the spectators will need umbrellas and pacamacs. Then there will be complaints about the view and the steam rising from 40,000 soaked bodies.

This is true but as it has to be extended to three times the length to cover the two thirds of seats not covered for a summer olympics it will need extra support.

But West Ham are removing the lighting towers. Surely the extra roof would weigh less than the towers.

But West Ham are removing the lighting towers. Surely the extra roof would weigh less than the towers.

Looking at that picture above. Imagine that material three times as long covered in a layer of snow. Rooves have always the most expensive part of a stadium. And football still needs floodlights.

How can u say Barcelona was a disappointment? Atlanta was the worst.

I would put Barcelona in the top 5.

now this is not just because I am Catalan, but if u look at the stadium... it looks like palace. the surroundings r beautiful and the location? situated on top on Montjuic mountain.

Inside it is average... but it has the historic clock tower. and most inportantly, it has seats, and a track and the pitch.

1. Beijing
2. Munich
3. Barcelona
4. Sydney
5. Athens

London? well its just a poor effort!

How can u say Barcelona was a disappointment? Atlanta was the worst.

I would put Barcelona in the top 5.

now this is not just because I am Catalan, but if u look at the stadium... it looks like palace. the surroundings r beautiful and the location? situated on top on Montjuic mountain.

Inside it is average... but it has the historic clock tower. and most inportantly, it has seats, and a track and the pitch.

1. Beijing
2. Munich
3. Barcelona
4. Sydney
5. Athens

London? well its just a poor effort!

I am British, and although I do like the stadium, i'm not going to talk nonsense about how its the best, because it isnt.

But to say that Barcelona's stadium was, architecturally the 3rd greatest stadium of the Olympics is just plain silly :lol:

barcelona for me it`s one of the better stadiums it's facade it's just beautiful!!

How can u say Barcelona was a disappointment? Atlanta was the worst.

I would put Barcelona in the top 5.

now this is not just because I am Catalan, but if u look at the stadium... it looks like palace. the surroundings r beautiful and the location? situated on top on Montjuic mountain.

Inside it is average... but it has the historic clock tower. and most inportantly, it has seats, and a track and the pitch.

1. Beijing
2. Munich
3. Barcelona
4. Sydney
5. Athens

London? well its just a poor effort!

Can't argue about the beauty of the beauty of the Montjuic stadium. Just a shame they couldn't make football work in this configuration or modify it - lower the pitch and add retractable seats? - to create better sightlines.

http://dominguero69.iespana.es/barcelona_montjuic.jpe

Which is understandable, given that Espanyol used to play in this wonderful bandbox of a stadium, site of the greatest ever World Cup game, Italy 3 - Brazil 2, in 1982.

http://www.fuerzaperica.com/media/wiki/37/7/3/7/6/b_20091205213248_estadio_del_rcd_espanyol_estadio_sarria.jpg

For me, a stadium needs to have the right combination of architectural beauty plus the practical design inside to make it work for fans. Some would argue that the most striking Olympic stadium design was Montreal's. But it's a monstrously large space inside and professional baseball and football have failed because of the poor sightlines.

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/north_america/canada/quebec/montreal_olympic1.jpg

You can also debate that the Olympic stadium in Beijing is a thing of beauty but, like Montreal, has such a huge interior that it takes away from watching football or other events on the playing field.

To my mind, what Sydney and Atlanta did was very admirable. Admitting that athletics were not going to work and setting out with the original design to make the stadium adaptable to other, money-making sports.

While London had the right idea to begin with - a design that could be dismantled - some big egos have since intervened and this compromise leaves us with neither architectural beauty on the outside nor practical design for the interior. Plus the very real possibility of financial fiasco.

Driving past today i saw that they have installed 6-8 pieces of the wrap now. Looked pretty good but alas it was tricky to take a picture whilst navigating the London traffic at unruly speeds

Driving past today i saw that they have installed 6-8 pieces of the wrap now. Looked pretty good but alas it was tricky to take a picture whilst navigating the London traffic at unruly speeds

This is good news.

By making the long "tour" all the way from the first page to this point of the thread, I can tell the it's been a big progress, it's still 2011 and it seems to be almost finished, despiting the wrap isn't fully installed.

The stadium is gorgeous.

Greetings.

Driving past today i saw that they have installed 6-8 pieces of the wrap now. Looked pretty good but alas it was tricky to take a picture whilst navigating the London traffic at unruly speeds

Haven't driven in London for a while, but typically speeds mean you can ignore a photo and do an oil painting instead.

sUbeoMeWJO4

^^ 85,000 seats? :eek: Seb Coe getting the capacity wrong, or did they actually add an extra 5,000 seats?

The guy he's been interviewed all the time, he probably got it wrong, but give him a break. :lol:

Haven't driven in London for a while, but typically speeds mean you can ignore a photo and do an oil painting instead.Well, an impressionist version, anyway.

:cheers:

Haven't driven in London for a while, but typically speeds mean you can ignore a photo and do an oil painting instead.


Sadly i had left my easel and brushes at home after my life drawing class. The mistake will not be made twice

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5059/5532889500_7b80ff7525_b.jpg

^^ 85,000 seats? :eek: Seb Coe getting the capacity wrong, or did they actually add an extra 5,000 seats?

Have we ever had an "offical" capacity? 80K has obviously been thrown around but rarely do you get a stadium with such an exact capacity, espeically when you'd expect that theres no reason to limate it due to access.

I'd guess a few hundred over 80K is the most likely but 82-83K might not be impossible.

What an ugly ass stadium

what ruins this stadium from outside is projectors :ohno:

the general shape itself is not the main problem.

am i the only person who actually quite likes this stadium? it does look bad without the wrap... but it will look good

am i the only person who actually quite likes this stadium? it does look bad without the wrap... but it will look good

The wrap will actually go ahead, they have been testing it.

am i the only person who actually quite likes this stadium? it does look bad without the wrap... but it will look good

Alot of the "hate" is I'd say a reaction to Athens and Beijings stadiums that looked to make grand statements. You go back further and is it any worse looking than say Sydney? personally I think its somewhat better with more external style and a design that highlights its size.

That really shows you just how overstated the importance of stadium design is aswell, Sydney is still acknowledged by many/most as the best games of recent decades and it was notebley lacking in "iconic" venues, the city itself(espeically the habour bridge) provided the visual character of those games and the same is likely to be true in London.

We're not having this argument again.

Isn't the whole point of this stadium that it is economical and functional and won't become the debt riddled abandoned stadiums that are the legacy of previous olympic games?

It looks okay, and is in many ways leading the way technologically with regards what olympic stadiums should be IMO and will probably be in the future unless there is a demand for a stadium of such size such as in Atlanta (which was also criticised) and unlike Athens or Beijing (which seem to get praise???).

oobrien on flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5018/5539337131_d1268d3e06_b.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5292/5539336885_6570bc154f_b.jpg

They've started to lay the grass on the pitch area. Webcam link:

http://www.london2012.com/webcams/olympic-stadium-camera-2.php

what ruins this stadium from outside is projectors :ohno: Are you referring to the lighting? If so I can understand your thinking, as I'm less than enamored with them as well. I love the simplicity of the form compared to Beijing - It's quite the beautiful contrast both architecturally and socially. However I often wish the general size and ratio of the bottom triangles were incorporated into the upper half of the frame, including the lighting extensions. That to me is where the form was dictated solely by efficiency and not by art.

Granted the perspectives of the geometry may play out better up close and in person.
am i the only person who actually quite likes this stadium? it does look bad without the wrap... but it will look goodNo, I'm with you. I really like this stadium. I just wish the seating at athletic venues didn't have to be so d*** far removed from the track. What ever happedn to the days when the seats were within a few metres of the track?
We're not having this argument again.Killjoy! :tongue2:

They've started to lay the grass on the pitch area. Webcam link:

http://www.london2012.com/webcams/olympic-stadium-camera-2.php

Yep, looks like that'll be done in a few days. They've done a quarter of it today :D

Will that be the actual size of the football pitch after the games? It seems really small but I can't figure it out properly given the angle and the overall circular shape of the floor level

A standard 105m x 68m pitch would just about fit as shown in this indicative diagram from the OPLC:

http://anmblog.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c565553ef01310fdb7738970c-pi

A standard 105m x 68m pitch would just about fit as shown in this indicative diagram from the OPLC:

yes, it just looks relatively small, because the distances between the pitch and stands are so large.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5059/5532889500_7b80ff7525_b.jpg

Is THIS what I'm going to see when I travel to London next week?:ohno:

You don't have to come.

http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/4460/stadiumgrass.jpg

Yep, looks like that'll be done in a few days. They've done a quarter of it today :D

Sooner than that, I reckon.

They're already more than two thirds finished. Could finish by the end of the day.

this has been said i think, but the pitch looks really small there compared to other stadiums with running tracks, is this just the camera angle or something?
I do really like this stadium btw :tongue2:

I want a grey track so much...

You don't have to come.

I have a business trip to London next week, and I was thinking about checking out how the Olympic Park is coming along.

Are there any restricted areas that people aren't allowed in?

Pardon me if this question is saturated, but I do not follow the thread.

I can not understand why Tottenham Hot Spur want to play their games at this stadium. Check out these athletic tracks.

And look at the White Hart Lane, so close to the field and with a much warmer atmosphere.

Can anyone clarify for me? What are the benefits of Tottenham Hot Spur with this change?

http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/4460/stadiumgrass.jpg

:nuts: Are those seats coloured in winter camouflage?
Will they be green, olive and brown then in summer?

I mean, isn't it a bit strange and awkward for an Olympic Stadium to have an interior design that's resembling some weird, almost militaristic kind of camouflage style?
Or am I the only one who thinks of camouflage when looking at these strange colour paterns?

:nuts: Are those seats coloured in winter camouflage?
Will they be green, olive and brown then in summer?

I mean, isn't it a bit strange and awkward for an Olympic Stadium to have an interior design that's resembling some weird, almost militaristic kind of camouflage style?
Or am I the only one who thinks of camouflage when looking at these strange colour paterns?

The seats have plastic covering them at the moment, in order to keep them in pristine condition for 2012.

When uncovered, they are black and white and in a pattern which kind of complements the London 2012 logo.

The seats have plastic covering them at the moment, in order to keep them in pristine condition for 2012.

When uncovered, they are black and white and in a pattern which kind of complements the London 2012 logo.

So all these strange grey looking shapes will be dark black then and the brighter ones will stay white?

Yes

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01145/snf1608a-682l_1145166a.jpg

Not that it matters, you won't see a lot of the seats during 2012! :D

For anyone who's interested by the way (UK peeps), Lloyds TSB have free ticket guides which you can pick up from their branches. Even if you order them online it's nice to have a book to flick through to see what's available, and will be quite a nice keepsake after the Games.

Pardon me if this question is saturated, but I do not follow the thread.

I can not understand why Tottenham Hot Spur want to play their games at this stadium. Check out these athletic tracks.

And look at the White Hart Lane, so close to the field and with a much warmer atmosphere.

Can anyone clarify for me? What are the benefits of Tottenham Hot Spur with this change?

Tottenham Hotspur fans didn't want to move to the Olympic stadium. The clubs directors did.

But even if Spurs had moved to the Olympic site, they would have knocked the existing stadium down and replaced it with this proper football stadium, with seats close to the pitch:

http://www.insidethegames.biz/images/stories/thumbnails/images-stories-Olympic_Stadium_in_Tottenham_mode_February_2011-550x370.jpg

Anyway, it doesn't matter now since Tottenham lost the bid to move to the Olympic stadium.

So you'd do better to ask why West Ham want to move to the Olympic stadium. Unlike Tottenham, they plan to keep the existing stadium.

^^

Thank you. I had heard about both clubs, and confuse me.

At least the Spurs wanted to build a proper and new stadium.

And what are the intentions of West Ham? The same of the Spurs (new stadium)? Only the increase in capacity, since the Upton Park is relatively limited?

West Ham will keep the Olympic Stadium pretty much as it is.

^^

Thank you. I had heard about both clubs, and confuse me.

At least the Spurs wanted to build a proper and new stadium.

And what are the intentions of West Ham? The same of the Spurs (new stadium)? Only the increase in capacity, since the Upton Park is relatively limited?

They will be moving to a much better location - with far better transport links. And they will also be increasing capacity from 35K at Upton Park to 60K at the Olympic stadium (scaled down from its current 80K) comparatively cheaply.

They don't, at the moment, need anything like a 60,000 seat stadium. But I suspect that they hope that they will gain new supporters (especially corporate customers from the nearby business and finance districts of The City and Canary Wharf) as a result of moving to a more desirable location.

^^

Thank you. I had heard about both clubs, and confuse me.

At least the Spurs wanted to build a proper and new stadium.

And what are the intentions of West Ham? The same of the Spurs (new stadium)? Only the increase in capacity, since the Upton Park is relatively limited?

To provide comic relief.

That's quite a picture, isn't it. What a gift to football this is going to be. Might as well be watching from orbit.

http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/4460/stadiumgrass.jpg

Spurs have to be comforted somewhat that they're not saddled with having to look at that twisty red monstrosity outside the stadium every match day.

Other than those unrealistic artist impressions, have West Ham released any detailed artwork of their intended reconfiguration?

No wonder the OPLC want to get cracking on a re-fit the minute the games are over. After a winter with so much snow, that cloth roof that's being used for the games doesn't look winter-worthy.

What a gift to football this is going to be.

They've got a stadium very much on the cheap, and that's the sacrifice they'll make for getting it. I don't know why that point needs constantly repeating.

Actually, I do, it's because every time someone posts a picture of the interior of this ATHLETICS STADIUM some bright spark pipes up and says "wow, that'll be good for football" and we go round in circles.

They've got a stadium very much on the cheap, and that's the sacrifice they'll make for getting it. I don't know why that point needs constantly repeating.

Actually, I do, it's because every time someone posts a picture of the interior of this ATHLETICS STADIUM some bright spark pipes up and says "wow, that'll be good for football" and we go round in circles.

Ok, just because this viewdistances for soccer argument is indeed becoming a bit repetitive, allow me to be a little mean and provocatively sarcastic and let me slightly modify his post into:

"To provide comic relief.

That's quite a picture, isn't it. What a gift to athletics this is going to be. Might as well be watching from orbit."

That doesn't make sense.

Well, cute line, A-fan, but no one really gives a flying frig about athletics. The stadium's future and financial underpinnings are all down to hosting football.

As new views come on stream showing how ridiculously bad this place will be for football fans, further criticism on it is more than fair game.

You'd prefer to sing it's praises, do you Rob?

Looking at Seb Coe's Folly, the first tune that springs to mind has words that go something like:

"There's a hole in (your) neighbourhood
Down which these days
You cannot help but fall..."

From the Boleyn Ground to 'Grounds For Divorce'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL4mywCOJXA

Yes, you might not see many seats during the summer of 2012. You and your pals will be able to put your feet up on the many empty ones by 2014.

from bbc
http://i52.************/9karo1.png

Well, cute line, A-fan, but no one really gives a flying frig about athletics. The stadium's future and financial underpinnings are all down to hosting football.

As new views come on stream showing how ridiculously bad this place will be for football fans, further criticism on it is more than fair game.

You'd prefer to sing it's praises, do you Rob?

Looking at Seb Coe's Folly, the first tune that springs to mind has words that go something like:

"There's a hole in (your) neighbourhood
Down which these days
You cannot help but fall..."

From the Boleyn Ground to 'Grounds For Divorce'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL4mywCOJXA

Yes, you might not see many seats during the summer of 2012. You and your pals will be able to put your feet up on the many empty ones by 2014.

Your contribution to this thread in terms of substance and new information like photos has been ZERO and to keep posting "haha, this won't be very good for football" along with smug and shit-filled posts like the above is nothing short of trolling.

We know it's not ideal for football, because it's not a football stadium and was never meant to be one. We know it will rarely be full for athletics, because the original plan was not a 60k seat athletics stadium but a small one which would be filled more regularly. This has been gone through a hundred times in this thread already. YOU DO NOT NEED TO REITERATE THIS POINT EVERY TIME A NEW PHOTO IS POSTED, ESPECIALLY NOT IN THE SARCASTIC KNOW-IT-ALL MANNER YOU CHOOSE TO USE.

from bbc
http://i52.************/9karo1.png

During dusk and in the evening, it looks pretty good even without the wrap actually. Nice photo.

Is there some kind of rule that states that the track must be that red/clay colour for the Olympics, or is it just a case of continuing the tradition?

It would have looked brilliant in blue, a la Berlin's Olympic Stadium.

Is there some kind of rule that states that the track must be that red/clay colour for the Olympics, or is it just a case of continuing the tradition?

It would have looked brilliant in blue, a la Berlin's Olympic Stadium.

Aha! Welcome to the forum Alan.

No, there's no rule, and in fact we already know Rio 2016's athletics track will be blue, like in Berlin 2009.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=351647&page=2

London is also breaking the tradion of red/clay tracks. The track colour for London 2012 is described as "Tango" and you can see a render of how that will look on the previous page (post #3137).

The track will in fact be the same spec as the one laid in Beijing, just in a completely different colour.

More info about the specification of the track can be found here...

http://www.mondoworldwide.com/prodotto_anteprima.cfm?uid_contenuto=64C6B606-1321-B4D8-BC1905C1BC0C1231&id_sub_root=419&id_applicazione=9

Your contribution to this thread in terms of substance and new information like photos has been ZERO and to keep posting "haha, this won't be very good for football" along with smug and shit-filled posts like the above is nothing short of trolling.

We know it's not ideal for football, because it's not a football stadium and was never meant to be one. We know it will rarely be full for athletics, because the original plan was not a 60k seat athletics stadium but a small one which would be filled more regularly. This has been gone through a hundred times in this thread already. YOU DO NOT NEED TO REITERATE THIS POINT EVERY TIME A NEW PHOTO IS POSTED, ESPECIALLY NOT IN THE SARCASTIC KNOW-IT-ALL MANNER YOU CHOOSE TO USE.

:applause: always the voice of reason Rob.

People who don't have anything constructive to say but just like repeating the same thing without any substantial contribution just destroy threads such as these which the rest of us enjoy and like some meaningful, useful discussions and banter even. Besides it is currently the Olympic stadium awaiting to host the Athletics during the games, so the Athletic requirements are just as important if not more important at the moment. To completely disregard it is naive and ignorant.

The obsessive and constant reference by Flashman to the stadium being not fit for football purpose is getting strangely manic and a bit creepy.

However, I think some understanding is called for under the circumstances, because he could be a real mentalist, by that I mean clinically certified as being two football pitches short of an athletics track - posting his texts from a psychiatric hospital or a centre for the autistic. Who knows?

The obsessive and constant reference by Flashman to the stadium being not fit for football purpose is getting strangely manic and a bit creepy.

However, I think some understanding is called for under the circumstances, because he could be a real mentalist, by that I mean clinically certified as being two football pitches short of an athletics track - posting his texts from a psychiatric hospital or a centre for the autistic. Who knows?

I am new to this forum but I have noticed flashmans posts and they are a little disturbing. I guess he may well be a bitter spurs fan.

He fails to acknowledge the beauty of this stadium but he is still strangely drawn to this forum to comment negatively about it.

I am looking forward to the completion of this stadium, but I am more curious to see the conversion once the games are over.

All this about sightlines. Athletics fans want a good view as well. They want to see the track or the long jump from the other side of the stadium and I think they will get a good view from what observers inside the stadium have said. I shall certainly go on a tour when it includes the inside.

http://www.insidethegames.biz/images/stories/thumbnails/images-stories-Olympic_Stadium_in_Tottenham_mode_February_2011-550x370.jpg





Spurs have to be comforted somewhat that they're not saddled with having to look at that twisty red monstrosity outside the stadium every match day.



Did you refer to this sth on the left in this render? Is that the olympic torch?

No it's a tourist attraction for views over the Olympic Park (may be used for the flame)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5201/5328674300_c0b81e7395_b.jpg

All right. So it's not decided yet on the place for the flame?

It's very likely the flame will be just to the north of the stadium

Superb.
Can't wait till the wrap is done.

My family runs the length and breadth of Britain and are part of the taxpayers forking out to pay for this thing. That's where the rubber meets the road - having to pay for a big temporary playpen that some old boys have manipulated into a sop to their egos but something that clearly won't work.

Honestly, Rob, we don't know anyone who thinks this stadium concept is a good deal. And that includes some very stout West Ham fans.

The initial strategy to build a stadium that could be taken down was a sound one. It's not built to last, so why bother planning a long-term future for it. It's not pretty to look at, just a vast metal skeleton. The Olympic stadium planned in conjunction with Atletico Madrid showed far more practicality, forward thinking and innovation - to say nothing of architectural merit - than this jerry-rigged mongrel.

Sure, I can be a bit cheeky in tone when I comment. But look what I'm being given to work with.

It started out as a really good idea, but some pride-bound bureaucrats showed a very low panic point when they hastily approved it's design without fully thinking through how it's future usage would be sustained.

The egos of UKA, Lord Coe and others have helped to further warp the sound thinking that went into the original concept.

It's future stewardship is now in the hands of a football club whose top flight status is a constant mis-adventure, the owners of which are a pair of financially healthy porn barons who are grubby enough to put the squeeze on the public purse for risky loans.

The uncertainity created by the vast, expanded seating arrangements means no one can be certain West Ham will even grow the current fan base they struggle to maintain, let alone fill the stadium constantly in the future. And they're pinning their hopes for that on hugely discounted tickets.

There's no evidence that this stadium will somehow flourish with athletics events in future. The world athletics championships in past years have struggled to achieve daily crowds over 30,000. Here's a link to a story about the Berlin event in 2009, when a reported 30,000 watched Usain Bolt set a world-record 100m time in the 76,000 capacity Olympic stadium there:

http://www.morethanthegames.co.uk/athletics/205732-iaaf-defend-low-attendances-world-athletics-championship

How many more drug-cheat scandals can athletics sustain before people lose total interest altogether?

To it's credit, at least the Olympic stadium is not pissing money away like Wembley did. Mind you, those were the FA's funds, not the public purse. But who knows what's in store now that the BOA and LOCOG are squabbling like mad dogs over Olympic money and Leyton Orient are digging in for a grim legal battle and potentially time-and-money consuming judicial review? Can Spurs be far off in joining them for a follow-up pop at stealing back the site?

There is so much to be sceptical about with more very likely to come. Given the sycophantic spin being put on everything leading up to the games, it's an appropriate counter-view.

Never mind what colour the track is or what shade of grey the seat patterns will be. What bleeding shade of red will the accountants ink be in years to come?

West Ham are planning to extend the roof in order to meet Fifa rules about football grounds roofs covering all the seats. Will this mean that if they do add temporary seating over the track the roof will have to cover these also?
When are West Ham going to release full plans for their refit of the stadium?

^^ Think the plans will be made public will be later this year

West Ham are planning to extend the roof in order to meet Fifa rules about football grounds roofs covering all the seats. Will this mean that if they do add temporary seating over the track the roof will have to cover these also?
When are West Ham going to release full plans for their refit of the stadium?

I wasnt aware there were any FIFA rules with reguards to seats being covered outside of WC venues.

I wasnt aware there were any FIFA rules with reguards to seats being covered outside of WC venues.

I could well be wrong but I remember it being mentioned on KUMB (West Ham forum).

I could well be wrong but I remember it being mentioned on KUMB (West Ham forum).

You're probably thinking of UEFA regulations. Or regulations from the English FA. ;)

The FIFA only makes the regulations for Worldcups, the UEFA makes those for the championseague and the Euroleague and the FA those for England.
Often the regulations are pretty identical though.

You're probably thinking of UEFA regulations. Or regulations from the English FA. ;)

The FIFA only makes the regulations for Worldcups, the UEFA makes those for the championseague and the Euroleague and the FA those for England.
Often the regulations are pretty identical though.

OK UEFA or FA. But will the rules apply for temporary stands or is the design of the roof going to come out to the edge of the pitch anyway? I know we probably wont get a definitive answer until the designs come out, but was wondering if this could be an issue.

There was a short item on BBC's lunch time news today which said that the stadium is now complete.

The only thing remaining is the track and that won't be installed until later this year - after the various, major structural preparations for the opening / closing ceremony have been put in place. That will save the track from damage caused by cranes, heavy lifting equipment etc.

So we won't be seeing many (if any) changes over the coming months.

OK UEFA or FA. But will the rules apply for temporary stands or is the design of the roof going to come out to the edge of the pitch anyway? I know we probably wont get a definitive answer until the designs come out, but was wondering if this could be an issue.

I do not know where the talk of temporary stands come from but the only reconfiguration mentioned so far is the the taking out of seats behind the screens, ie the furthest from the pitch. Extending the roof may mean taking out seats at the rear of the upper stand to prop up an extended roof. 20,000 seats is a lot of seats to lose. That is almost the eqivalent of the entire lower tier.

There are 10 or so photos of the present state of the stadium and of the last piece of turf being laid here (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/olympics/picturegalleries/8413968/London-2012-Olympics-Olympic-Stadium-construction-complete-in-pictures.html) (if you can stomach the Torygraph ;)). Also a few snippets of info and trivia, which most people in this forum would most likely already know, but hey-ho!

Actually, there is one other thing to be done that the reports haven't mentioned...

The video screens.

There was a short item on BBC's lunch time news today which said that the stadium is now complete.

The only thing remaining is the track and that won't be installed until later this year - after the various, major structural preparations for the opening / closing ceremony have been put in place. That will save the track from damage caused by cranes, heavy lifting equipment etc.

So we won't be seeing many (if any) changes over the coming months.

:banana2: awesomeness.

I wonder what Danny Boyle has planned. When you think of Danny Boyle and the opening ceremonies does anybody else automatically think the opening of trainspotting is half decent metaphor :naughty:

OK UEFA or FA. But will the rules apply for temporary stands or is the design of the roof going to come out to the edge of the pitch anyway? I know we probably wont get a definitive answer until the designs come out, but was wondering if this could be an issue.

The premier league rules simply state that the majority of seats must be covered.

"All Seater Grounds
7. Spectators admitted to a registered ground shall be offered only seated accommodation, the majority of which shall be covered, and there shall be no standing terraces."

http://www.premierleague.com/staticFiles/44/66/0,,12306~157252,00.pdf

The premier league rules simply state that the majority of seats must be covered.

"All Seater Grounds
7. Spectators admitted to a registered ground shall be offered only seated accommodation, the majority of which shall be covered, and there shall be no standing terraces."

http://www.premierleague.com/staticFiles/44/66/0,,12306~157252,00.pdf
It does seem a pretty pointless regulation. Other than Brighton and Rotherham, both temporarily playing in Athletics venues, there are no grounds at all where the seats aren't mostly covered.

There was a short item on BBC's lunch time news today which said that the stadium is now complete.

The only thing remaining is the track and that won't be installed until later this year - after the various, major structural preparations for the opening / closing ceremony have been put in place. That will save the track from damage caused by cranes, heavy lifting equipment etc.

So we won't be seeing many (if any) changes over the coming months.


Also I read in the paper that the track will be blue :D

Actually, there is one other thing to be done that the reports haven't mentioned...

The video screens.

And the stadium wrap? :dunno:

Previous reports suggested a Tango Orange running track, Populous/HOK's render was also shown to have this shade of track colour, but recent articles have changed to reports of a Blue athletics track.

Is Blue>Tango?

Nearly 400 rolls of turf, grown in S****horpe, are now in pride of place on the 9,000 square metre infield while a blue track, another Olympic first, will be laid later this year.

http://www.morethanthegames.co.uk/london-2012/2914272-london-2012-final-turf-laid-olympic-stadium

http://static.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/16228_1_olympic1.jpg

http://static.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/16228_2_olympic2.jpg

http://static.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/16228_3_ODA1.jpg

http://static.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/16228_4_ODA2.jpg

http://static.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/16228_5_ODA3.jpg

http://static.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/16228_6_ODA4.jpg
http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=16228

kool

I wasnt aware there were any FIFA rules with reguards to seats being covered outside of WC venues.

There are no rules at all!
There is only the requirement for the World Cup that majority of the seats must be covered, but even that can be skipped, as we saw last summer in Polokwane or Rustenburg for an example

finally this stadium seems better now.

But why they keep this awfu cuttedl space in the middle of tribunes for the giant screen?! Wembley uses it and it's awful!!

finally this stadium seems better now.

But why they keep this awfu cuttedl space in the middle of tribunes for the giant screen?! Wembley uses it and it's awful!!

It's where some of the worst seats would otherwise have been. Not a great loss to have a screen there instead.

Is Blue>Tango?

Definitely, IMO.

Orange is different, I suppose, but not sufficiently different to the standard terracotta colour. Blue, by contrast, is unmistakeably different.

And classier. I never really like the render with the Orange track. Too big a clash with the green of the pitch, the black of the remaining floor area and the black and white of the seating. Blue would fit in much more comfortably.

I'm going to have to disagree with you Jim {shock horror}!

I think it's a shame if true. I think the orange looked great and looking at the Mondo website and the render, would have looked significantly different to a normal track colour.

If it is going to be blue, my guess would be West Ham have had a word. An orange track would no doubt clash horribly with their claret and blue. An understandable decision if it's been made on legacy grounds though a bit of a shame imho.

The Daily Mail suggests the stadium has been completed ahead if schedule and £10,000,000 under budget - so they have enough left over to pay for a £7,000,000 wrap even if no commercial partner can be found I guess.

I'm going to have to disagree with you Jim {shock horror}!

I think it's a shame if true. I think the orange looked great and looking at the Mondo website and the render, would have looked significantly different to a normal track colour.

If it is going to be blue, my guess would be West Ham have had a word. An orange track would no doubt clash horribly with their claret and blue. An understandable decision if it's been made on legacy grounds though a bit of a shame imho.

Chacun à son goût!

Indeed

(thank God for Google)

http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/8530/2012j.png

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01145/snf1608a-682l_1145166a.jpg

Credit to RMB2007 for making/originally posting the blue track render.

i much prefer a blue track.. but the black in the surrounding area looks a bit weird, a bit too much black along with the seats

This will be the ugliest Olympic stadium of the 21st century

http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/8530/2012j.png

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01145/snf1608a-682l_1145166a.jpg

Credit to RMB2007 for making/originally posting the blue track render.

Good work there.

At a guess, and I have no insider info whatsoever, I would think the track would be a much lighter blue if they've decided on blue rather than orange.

Firstly, to match the brand (http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=london+2012+blue&um=1&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&biw=1024&bih=1146&tbm=isch&source=lnt&tbs=ic:specific,isc:teal&sa=X&ei=KJWTTbiwGYfIsgbJ68jNCA&ved=0CBsQpwU), and secondly to match West Ham's colours (http://www.google.co.uk/search?um=1&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&biw=1024&bih=1146&site=search&tbs=ic%3Aspecific%2Cisc%3Ateal&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=west+ham&aq=f&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=).

The stairs area looks amazing, the thin steel crossing the bands of colour is my favourite part. The inside is shaping up well also! I still think the seat pattern could have been better, less bulky and more thin lined, but hey ho!

Madderz collected these amazing pics from the Official webcams and i thought it would be a travesty to keep them to ourselves on the UK forums ;) enjoy:

Looking through the webcams tonight, and gotta say, the stadium is looking quite amazing...

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5021/5574759061_533bc10d01.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5138/5575345928_1b916b77ed.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5293/5574758897_488596cde2.jpg

honestly i have to recognize it looks better than in renders. it is surprising imo :eek:

Good work there.

At a guess, and I have no insider info whatsoever, I would think the track would be a much lighter blue if they've decided on blue rather than orange.

Firstly, to match the brand (http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=london+2012+blue&um=1&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&biw=1024&bih=1146&tbm=isch&source=lnt&tbs=ic:specific,isc:teal&sa=X&ei=KJWTTbiwGYfIsgbJ68jNCA&ved=0CBsQpwU), and secondly to match West Ham's colours (http://www.google.co.uk/search?um=1&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&biw=1024&bih=1146&site=search&tbs=ic%3Aspecific%2Cisc%3Ateal&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=west+ham&aq=f&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=).

Something like this? ;)

http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/824/20125.png

Surely when they say "work has finished," they must mean just on the inside of the stadium. What about the pods? And the wrap?

Something like this? ;)

http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/824/20125.png

Surely it would've been better to go with something like the colour below (my photoshopping skills aren't as good as yours, sorry!). Not only is it pretty close to the normal one for a running track, it's also basically West Ham's main colour of claret.

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/425/2012iy.jpg

Presumably they're not replacing the seats, so something in the stadium should reflect their identity a bit more.

Excuse me, but not beautiful stadium!

This will be the ugliest Olympic stadium of the 21st century

So, the third best looking then? :banana:

how to apply for the London Olympic Games Olympic stadium design reminiscent of a leaf, and all of this indicated that the rise but it was completely different, the authorities have designed a simpler form of the stadium, cheaper and fast to build and was something .... and how well I remember those games were supposed to be better than the previous and so will not.
It is a pity that Paris did not win but no one is the Lord God

Don't bother watching them then and don't bother coming back into this thread.

The exterior ain't anything special but I'll reserve judgement until it is completely finished.
Inside though I think it is at least as nice as Athens (which I actually liked), and much better than the Bird's Nest which looked gloomy and depressing in comparison.

how to apply for the London Olympic Games Olympic stadium design reminiscent of a leaf, and all of this indicated that the rise but it was completely different, the authorities have designed a simpler form of the stadium, cheaper and fast to build and was something .... and how well I remember those games were supposed to be better than the previous and so will not.
It is a pity that Paris did not win but no one is the Lord God

Are you French or something? London will put on a spectacular show, much more than what Paris could do, imo.

Granted, the external design isn't the most pioneering we have seen, but with out a doubt, the inside of the stadium is absolutely magnificent. It looks beautiful (even better if we get the tango orange track.)

I think its a little extreme to call this the worst stadium of the 21st century (there have only been 4 but what ever) I'm sure that once the wrap is up, the track is down, and the seats are uncovered you will change your mind.

Also, look at the other venues. The Aquatics center can only be beaten by Beijing on design, it out weights any other, and the Veledrome and Basket Ball Arena (when lit!) is the best I've seen to.

I think we were unlucky to get the games after the extravaganza that was Beijing, if we had got these games in 2008 and built the same venues as now, they wouldn't be criticized that much.

I don`t understand why the stands have to be so far away from the track (and the pitch). I`m talking about olimpic stadiums in general. It semes to me that sometimes they make big distances without an obvious reason. If it˙s for safety reasons they could simply chose not to use first couple of fows for the Olimpics and bring the stands as much as posilble.

I think people should just bide their time because with the wrap and screens, the uncovering of the seats and the landscaping, plus the sponsoring the stadium is going to look terrific.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5305/5573516475_5dbcabfe77_b.jpg

Are you French or something? London will put on a spectacular show, much more than what Paris could do, imo.

.

please no no!! don't start again!! :nono:

London is london

Paris is paris

Heres another great night shot from last night, Its starting to resemble a diamond at night :) :

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5135/5574754479_fa40a61795_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/awhisperer/5574754479/)London 2012 - Photography Project - Special (http://www.flickr.com/photos/awhisperer/5574754479/) by awhisperer (http://www.flickr.com/people/awhisperer/), on Flickr

Whats this guy smoking? http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/davidbond/2011/01/original_stadium_plan_not_an_o.html

Original stadium plan not an option

Post categories: Football, Olympics

David Bond | 10:02 UK time, Friday, 21 January 2011

This stark image is what the London Olympic Stadium would look like if the original legacy promise to turn it into an athletics-only arena after the Games was seen through.
Image of the Olympic Stadium if the original legacy plan went ahead

The BBC has obtained previously unseen designs for what the stadium would look like if the promise made in Singapore was kept
Gone are the distinctive triangular floodlights which are now such a feature of the east London skyline. Gone also is the Meccano-style steel structure which boosts the basic concrete bowl of 25,000 into the 80,000-seat Olympic Stadium for the Games.

Instead a tiny roof, which covers barely one 10th of the whole arena, is the only feature of an otherwise drab, characterless venue.

This is the reason why no sustainable legacy plan was developed by organisers and the Government in the two years after London's bid triumph in 2005.

Even UK Athletics, the sport's governing body in Britain, and its marketing partners Fast Track, were unable to find a way of making the stadium work in this mode after the Games.

When one sees this image it is easy to understand why no club - not even Leyton Orient - would have been prepared to move into the stadium promised to the IOC after the 2012 Olympics.


The London Olympic Stadium as of July 2010

London Olympic Stadium, July 2010. Photo: AP

All of this explains why Baroness Ford, chairman of the Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC), the body which must now choose between West Ham and Tottenham, realised there was no financially sustainable legacy for the venue without a Premier League club on board.

On Friday both clubs and their respective partners submit their final offers to the OPLC. Baroness Ford and her team, headed by American chief executive Andrew Altman, will then spend the weekend going through the fine print before deciding on Monday whether they have all the information they need to make a decision on a preferred bidder next Friday.

The extremely strong comments from the head of world athletics, Lamine Diack, in my interview with him on Thursday will only have increased the pressure on the decision-makers.

Whatever they decide must then be rubber-stamped by their own board before being signed off by the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, and the Government - represented by two ministers, Sports Minister Hugh Robertson and Bob Neill, a junior minister in the department for communities and local government.

If the OPLC doesn't have enough information, or its auditors Price Waterhouse Coopers have any more questions, then they may put the decision off for another week.

Before then, expect a step up in the already intense lobbying campaign by both sides.

On Friday morning, Sir Keith Mills, the deputy chairman of London 2012 (a body which has absolutely no direct role in the decision on the stadium's future) and director of Tottenham, went on BBC Radio 4's Today Programme to put Spurs' case.

It is the first time he has done so and his message was clear: Tottenham - and not West Ham - offer the only option which will guarantee the stadium doesn't add to the already high public cost of the Olympics.

Mills made the point - highlighted by the image above - that the original legacy plan was not going to work. And he reiterated Tottenham's argument that football and athletics don't mix.

West Ham, of course, deny all this - along with criticisms of the sight lines for football in the Olympic stadium and claims that their numbers don't stack up. To try and prove the point, their £40m loan from joint bid partners Newham Council was approved at a meeting on Thursday night and they will on Friday announce a partnership with Westfield, who will be the consortium's design, construction and major development partners.

As I said in my previous blog, all this noise is unlikely to make a jot of difference to the OPLC and Baroness Ford who must make their decision based not only on community and multi-sport legacy plans but also on hard, cold economic reality.

The £5m annual running costs of the stadium need to be paid by someone other than the taxpayer. As you can see, the original plan, contained in the Singapore promise, really wasn't an option.

Is he confusing the Singapore bid concepts to actual much later architectural plans?
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3647/3470234961_512c83cd06.jpg

The exterior ain't anything special but I'll reserve judgement until it is completely finished.
Inside though I think it is at least as nice as Athens (which I actually liked), and much better than the Bird's Nest which looked gloomy and depressing in comparison.

Completely agree. The exterior is nothing special at the moment (unless you're seeing it from a helicopter in which case its great). Through we need to wait for the landscaping and wrap to be in place before we pass judgement on that.

Internally, it's light, airy and summery, just like Athens' was.

Why I typed all that I don't know. Your post sums up my thoughts well enough.

Heres another great night shot from last night, Its starting to resemble a diamond at night :) :

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5135/5574754479_fa40a61795_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/awhisperer/5574754479/)London 2012 - Photography Project - Special (http://www.flickr.com/photos/awhisperer/5574754479/) by awhisperer (http://www.flickr.com/people/awhisperer/), on Flickr

Stunning! Those lights are so powerful.

Now imagine the rainbow lights peering out from the wrap banners, lit up multicolored pods, and thousands of people walking around it.

Wow :cheers:

This stadium looks like it was under construction, is neither beautiful nor does it appear to the Olympic stadium, it's just wasted money

^^ Is this a spambot or a real person?:lol:

This stadium looks like it was under construction, is neither beautiful nor does it appear to the Olympic stadium, it's just wasted money

Of the construction stadium was a skyscraper being built it eould have just 'topped out.' Everything structural is finished, any job that needs completed is merey aesthetic.

I do not know if you realise, but a triangular wrap is (almost 100%) going to be installed later this year, which will cover up the stairwells, and the internal support struts which should not be seen! The wrap will be essential to the overall look of the stadium to outsiders, but when people see the multicoloured lights at night they will love it!

Obviously the track and surroundings will be getting put in later this year, and the inside seating bowl is comparable to the top stadiums in the world! A steep upper tier should create a good party atmosphere as well as good views for fans during the games.

The scoreboard/videoscreens will be installed between tiers at either end of the stadium.

And Olympic branding will cover the stadium to give it a unique 2012 feel. They'll cover the bare concrete between tiers with 2012 logos and colour, wrap flags around the edge of the roof.

http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/1897/2o12.jpg

So plenty to do, and when it's finished it will look great, and understated - but it doesn't matter - London is made, it's a global icon and doesn't need to show off to the world - same as Paris if they had won and used the Stad de France.

*No stealing my HQ rushed Paint diagram! :P

Wow thanx for that R K Teck, really loving the feel of it, almost like a carnival feel and the flags look great. The thing im looking forward to most is the installation of the 'Halo'-like light ring suspended above the centre of the staduim since i belive that will become quite a sight especially if the lines holding it up are hard to see :)

http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2011/03/dzn_London-Olympic-Stadium-11.jpg http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2011/03/dzn_London-Olympic-Stadium-2.jpg

http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2011/03/dzn_London-Olympic-Stadium-31.jpg

http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2011/03/dzn_London-Olympic-Stadium-71.jpg http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2011/03/dzn_London-Olympic-Stadium-101.jpg

http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2011/03/dzn_London-Olympic-Stadium-91.jpg http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2011/03/dzn_London-Olympic-Stadium-81.jpg

http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2011/03/dzn_London-Olympic-Stadium-51.jpg http://www.dezeen.com/2011/03/31/2012-london-olympic-stadium-by-populous/

http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2011/03/dzn_London-Olympic-Stadium-41.jpg

Of the construction stadium was a skyscraper being built it eould have just 'topped out.' Everything structural is finished, any job that needs completed is merey aesthetic.

I do not know if you realise, but a triangular wrap is (almost 100%) going to be installed later this year, which will cover up the stairwells, and the internal support struts which should not be seen! The wrap will be essential to the overall look of the stadium to outsiders, but when people see the multicoloured lights at night they will love it!

Obviously the track and surroundings will be getting put in later this year, and the inside seating bowl is comparable to the top stadiums in the world! A steep upper tier should create a good party atmosphere as well as good views for fans during the games.

The scoreboard/videoscreens will be installed between tiers at either end of the stadium.

And Olympic branding will cover the stadium to give it a unique 2012 feel. They'll cover the bare concrete between tiers with 2012 logos and colour, wrap flags around the edge of the roof.

http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/1897/2o12.jpg

So plenty to do, and when it's finished it will look great, and understated - but it doesn't matter - London is made, it's a global icon and doesn't need to show off to the world - same as Paris if they had won and used the Stad de France.

*No stealing my HQ rushed Paint diagram! :P

Scotland will finally have seceded from the UK by the time of the Olympics, I see. Yet the saltire will still be an integral part of the Union flag. ;)

Edit: I see that England will also have seceded from the UK!

Just Wales and Northern Ireland, then.........unless Ulster will finally have been reunited with the remainder of Ireland!

I have to say, the glass on the stairs looks fantastic.

This stadium looks like it was under construction, is neither beautiful nor does it appear to the Olympic stadium, it's just wasted money

Yawn. If you really dislike this stadium so much.....

....stop coming back to this thread and boring everyone else with your posts.

I think it looks brilliant.

The straight lines and weird shape of the floodlights pylons, along with the jagged seat design, really set it off. It's relatively basic design is a refreshing change from all the curve-infested stadiums that have sprung up everywhere since the turn of the Millennium.

Well done London 2012.

It looks much better than the glutted stadium in Beijing. This stadium has been kept simple and I like that.

i notice that a part of spectators are not sheltered in the case of rain :|

:uh: does London get rain even in the summer?

Of course, but not that much. Bring an umbrella and you'll be fine..

i notice that a part of spectators are not sheltered in the case of rain :|

You've noticed that like a thousand times...

You've noticed that like a thousand times...

He must have the memory of a goldfish.

:hilarious

i notice that a part of spectators are not sheltered in the case of rain :|

Is it like your thing to constantly comment on British weather on this forum? :lol: seriously, it's getting pretty embarrassing now, so leave it out.

On the other hand some great photos. The inside of the stadium is going to look great :)

it' was just a remark you know! You had the possibility to answer me in a pacific way but you search for battle word everytime :mad:

For example in the processus of redeployement of west ham in Statford you could give infos about the restructuration of roof etc...

If you are not able to be objective and take distance from your hate mood i can do nothing guy :dunno:

^^ but that just shows you were looking for an argument if u knew the roof was going to be extended when West Ham take it over. Please stop trying to cause an argument, though to be fair i dont think your as bad as you used to be. Its all really petty just end it please.

and p.s loads of people go to Wimbeldon to watch tennis on some courts that are not covered , its about the sport, not getting a tad wet. :)

If you are not able to be objective

Ehh... I might be out on a limb here but I find this a bit funny coming from you. ;)

I like this stadium by the way. It will be a great olympic stadium and it looks really good with the black skelet.

Mossy22-> i don't know for a roof extension that's why i ask.

U7d89Anzmdo

Man arrested in London Olympic Park in explosives probe

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/51971000/jpg/_51971829_111056055.jpg

A man has been arrested at the London Olympic Park site on suspicion of supplying an explosive substance.

The 61-year-old man was held as part of an ongoing investigation which saw two more arrests earlier in the week.

On Tuesday a 40-year-old female security guard was arrested near the Olympic Stadium in east London on suspicion of possessing explosives.

The man arrested on Friday evening has been taken to a police station in east London for questioning.

The Metropolitan Police said he was arrested by officers from the Olympic Site Support Unit at 1825 BST.

A 43-year-old man was arrested on Wednesday at his home in Wales on suspicion of possession of an explosive substance

Both he and the security guard arrested on Tuesday, who worked as a dog handler, have been released on bail until later this month.

Police previously said they did not believe the woman's arrest to be terror-related and said the Olympic site's safety had not been at risk.

Earlier this week building work was completed at the £486m Olympic Stadium, which will be the main venue for the games in the summer of 2012.

BBC ("http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12943592)

Anyone else notice that they start the wrap?? :D :D :D :cheers:

Orginally posted by "PortoNuts" http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/2404/110324odamdaac069hi.jpg

^^ Yeah, test pieces. ;) The Sophie Smallhorn proposal would look so good. Yep, please let it be her design for the actual stadium wrap. :)

I would like to know when the Astrovision screens will be installed.

Don't you think that red Orbit tower is kind of small? and its too close to the stadium too

no no no, not small enough. It looks like a haemorrhoid/ giant squid attack. It's been continuously slated in the British press and forums, notably too for Anish Kapoor's total sell-out to big business (lets use as much steel as possible from Lakshmi Mittal's companies, that are 'sponsoring' it).

Mossy22-> i don't know for a roof extension that's why i ask.

As far as the roof goes I think you need to consider that London is in many ways in the opposite position of somewhere like Athens. In hotter climates you want a roof for summer events to provide shade while its much less important in winter. In the UK though its rarely hot enough that shade is a big factor but getting rained on in the middle of winter obviously is.

no no no, not small enough. It looks like a haemorrhoid/ giant squid attack. It's been continuously slated in the British press and forums, notably too for Anish Kapoor's total sell-out to big business (lets use as much steel as possible from Lakshmi Mittal's companies, that are 'sponsoring' it).

Its not been continuously slated to be fair

As far as the roof goes I think you need to consider that London is in many ways in the opposite position of somewhere like Athens. In hotter climates you want a roof for summer events to provide shade while its much less important in winter. In the UK though its rarely hot enough that shade is a big factor but getting rained on in the middle of winter obviously is.

i don't share at all your view . Why then emirates and wembley shelter all spectators? they are in london too aren't they?

i don't share at all your view . Why then emirates and wembley shelter all spectators? they are in london too aren't they?

I guess the difference between Olympic Stadium and the other stadiums you have mentioned such as Emirate and Wembley is that Olympic stadium is only for temporary which is designed to host for Olympic moment. That's why they try to save as much money as possible IMO. I hope we will see more sophisticated design when the current one gets transformed into a new stadium :)

i don't share at all your view . Why then emirates and wembley shelter all spectators? they are in london too aren't they?

Wembley and Emirates primarily host events in the autumn, winter and spring months - the most likely seasons to experience precipitation.

The Olympics will be held in the summer.

That's not to say that it won't rain during Olympic athletics events. It almost certainly will at some point. But the probability of rain is greatly reduced in July.

Don't you think that red Orbit tower is kind of small? and its too close to the stadium too

It's not even halfway towards reaching its highest point yet.

Image from London2012.com (http://www.london2012.com)

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/9268/110324odamdaac106hi.jpg

I love this shot because you can see the city skyline as well :bow:


Image from London2012.com (http://www.london2012.com)

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/2249/110324odamdaac120hi.jpg

Amazing photo

Great city.

Not one of the world's great skylines, though.

Cool, you can see the Shard London Bridge in the background.
Will be Britain's tallest building.

Cool, you can see the Shard London Bridge in the background.
Will be Britain's tallest building.

Yes. Sort of.
London Bridge Tower, or 'The Shard' as we call it now, will become the UK's forst 300m+ supertall, and in doing so becomes the UK's tallest habitable building. The topped out core (as it is now) is taller than the 1 Canada Square tower at Canary Wharf area of London. It will become the tallest EU skyscraper for a short while (most likely until the completion of the twin towers in Paris - Hermitage Plaza, I beleive)

However, right now the Emley Moor TV Transmitter in the North of England is the tallest free standing building in the UK and it will remain taller than the completed Shard (330m as opposed to 310m).

Hmm, former gold medalist and staunch advocate for the stadium decision. Got her cake, now, like many, finding it unappetizing.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/olympics/article-1373770/Tessa-Sanderson-hits-London-2012-bosses.html

Anyone have any idea of how this will look reduced to 60k? Has it been mentioned which seating areas are being removed?

I mean, looking at this, I see West Ham riding it out for a few years before decide to completely reconfigure this thing. I was in favour of West Ham winning it, but Spurs idea seems far better now that the turf has been laid (assuming those are accurate dimensions of a football pitch).