Good, now kindly stop posting irrelevent pictures.

This isn't our national stadium and it's been designed so two thirds of it can be removed after the Games. Of course it's not going to look the same as the Bird's Nest or other nations' national stadiums.

If you want to compare any stadium with your CWGs stadium, it ought to be our national stadium. I shan't post pictures of Wembley because they're not relevent, and I don't want to embarrass you as you're new here.

I want to post pictures of Cape Town Stadium....can I? can I?

I want to post pictures of Cape Town Stadium....can I? can I?
If it's a picture of Cape Towns Stadium set in front of the London Olympic Stadium, then yes. ;)


:cheers:

Going well, i think is excellent that they put the gardening that are sorrounding the stadium from now, For the 2012 games it will looks beautiful.

Going well, i think is excellent that they put the gardening that are sorrounding the stadium from now, For the 2012 games it will looks beautiful.

I agree. Beijing hosted amazing games and we will never foget them but sometimes it felt too overworked to me. A factory, gray feeling...I don't know..I just think London games will be more colorful and "human". And Rio will definetly host the happiest, sexiest, warm felling and most tropical games ever. Can't wait :cheers:

Each Games has its own unique feeling, its own style, and each can be spectacular in its own way. London is sending a message to the world with a new way to host the Olympics and I think it is going to resonate for years to come. This venue looks spectacular, and I think that's the way a lot of people are going to feel by the time things wrap up a little more than two years from now.

I think the biggest factor for the IOC is that this is actually being built ON TIME and ON BUDGET!

It seems a few have sour grapes also because this is by far the best and most organised Olympic Park in history.

I agree. Beijing hosted amazing games and we will never foget them but sometimes it felt too overworked to me. A factory, gray feeling...I don't know..I just think London games will be more colorful and "human". And Rio will definetly host the happiest, sexiest, warm felling and most tropical games ever. Can't wait :cheers:

Totally agree, each country are showing their culture and their essence, i think London will do a good job, i have to say that at the beginning i didn't like this Olympic complex, but now i think is an excellent space for the games, it looks better than the render.

here's a really big picture from london2012.com. Notice the seat design is starting to incorporate the 2012 logo.


http://i31.tinypic.com/2uj409u.jpg

When will be Olympic staidium wil be ready

Here's another one from london2012.com.

http://i28.tinypic.com/5ztf.jpg

after the olympic games the stadium was become demolish to build a new football stadium?

We don't know yet. We'll find out in the new year who has won the right to occupy it after the Games.

When will be Olympic staidium wil be ready

Summer 2011.

after the olympic games the stadium was become demolish to build a new football stadium?Demolished? Not exactly. Unless some other owner or football club assumes ownership the stadium will be downsized to about 25k for athletics, with the excess stands being disassembled and distributed to various other venues across the country.

So it will most likely be smaller but it's not like they're going to simply "demolish" the thing.

I made a similar coment in the British forum, but I think that the London games are going to be the Olympic version of the 2006 German World Cup. Why is that?

Because Germany did not put the biggest or most expensive stadiums (still Allianz Arena and Berlin Olympic are world class), but they hosted a very human event, with the introduction of the Fan Zones, very colorfull, amazing transport, organized, on budget, etc. Something similar I am waiting from London 2012, there are even rumors, that not all of the openning ceremony will take place in the stadium itself, so more people can be part of it.

Looks than London will be almost ready to host the games in 2011.

Do someone now what are AEG's plan for this stadium...? I assume they'd try to keep the 80k for concerts and shows...

Do someone now what are AEG's plan for this stadium...? I assume they'd try to keep the 80k for concerts and shows...

Couldn't find any more detail about this. Last we heard was this, back in May:

Details of how AEG, which owns a number of big stadiums and venues in the United States, including the Staples Center in Los Angeles, plans to use the venue are not yet clear.

Talks with the Olympic Park Legacy Company are at a very early stage but an AEG spokesperson told the BBC: "AEG has expressed an initial interest in the future of the Olympic Park and, as the world's leading sports venue owner and operator, it makes total sense for us to explore potential ideas for its future success.

There's some interesting activity going on on the ground in the stadium. I suspect this is the temporary section of track laid for the two years to go celebrations:

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs080.snc4/35355_425872092960_792617960_4595048_7929598_n.jpg

"We'll see some top athletes in action in the 2012 arenas with highlights including a bike whizzing round the track at the Velodrome - and the first sprint on a track within the main stadium. Indeed, we can confirm that the man performing there will be Michael Johnson - the gold medal hero of the Atlanta Games and BBC Sport's top athletics pundit."

BBC's plans for two year countdown (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/rogermosey/2010/07/how_does_one_of_the.html)

^^Even if it's used for the two year countdown celebration, they are probably starting the pitch work too.

The actual track will be blue. I think this is temporary

I like blue tracks, should look nice.

The stadium looks an a simple structure, one could say that it is ready, now comes the complicated, placing the seats, put the track and the field, Stadium details, put the gardening sorrounding the stadium.

If the track will be blue, it will looks nice, so i don't understand the reason for a temporary track.

I have to say that this stadium is turning out nicer than I thought it would.

I have to say that this stadium is turning out nicer than I thought it would.

Same here, when i first saw the design, i thought it was ugly and plain, but its turning out to be a beautiful stadium




Has anyone got any plans of what the stadium would look like when they make it into a smaller stadium?

Concerts should be held here after the Olympics instead of at Wembley

So the Wembley Pitch could be just used for football

The old Wembley hosted a lot of things other than football and had a superb pitch. There's no reason why it shouldn't be able to host music and football.

The Olympic stadium will be in competition with Wembley (and the O2) for big concerts if the future tennant/owner decides to use it for that purpouse. The FA aren't going to stop that revenue stream at their stadium.

RobH, yes you do have a point, Wembley wont stop the concerts etc, seeing how much money they make

are they replacing the black seats by grey one?

I think B and W looks so elegant and fit perfectly on the london brand....

I think they are black, just covered, not sure.

Here's another one from london2012.com.

http://i28.tinypic.com/5ztf.jpg

Amazing stadium!!!!!!

The old Wembley hosted a lot of things other than football and had a superb pitch. There's no reason why it shouldn't be able to host music and football.

The Olympic stadium will be in competition with Wembley (and the O2) for big concerts if the future tennant/owner decides to use it for that purpouse. The FA aren't going to stop that revenue stream at their stadium.

Last time I heard Wembley had problems with the pitch, some say because of concerts, others because of the big roof...

funny isn't it, Wenbley's roof could be the problem, but guess what they designed it to be retractable, to let more light in, has anyone seen the roof open since the stadium was completed, i haven't

mmmmmmmm wonder why?

are they replacing the black seats by grey one?

I think B and W looks so elegant and fit perfectly on the london brand....

there just putting covers on them, they aren't going to be used for another 2 years, so putting covers on will be better than having to clean the seats all the time!

funny isn't it, Wenbley's roof could be the problem, but guess what they designed it to be retractable, to let more light in, has anyone seen the roof open since the stadium was completed, i haven't

mmmmmmmm wonder why?

I have actually. To clarify, the roof at Wembley is partially retractable, the roof sections over each end and the front of the south roof are retractable. Most of the time these are open to allow more light onto the pitch and then closed for events. For the England vs Mexico game however, the south section of the roof was left open.

Here it is how it appears normally, see the top of the photo:
http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/8712/image003nu.jpg

This is how it appeared for the England vs Mexico game. Not the front edge is now retracted:
http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/7007/24052010092.jpg

Also here is another image with the ends also retracted:
http://www.stevenageborofc.com/newsimages/201004071605530.wembley.jpg

Sorry for the off topic. To those asking for renders of the stadium in legacy mode, we are yet to see any. I assume that is because it is still unclear as to who will operate the stadium after the games. I did see some plans showing the stadium in the original legacy mode which are buried in this thread somewhere. I shall go and look for them at some point.

If West Ham do win their bid to take on the stadium, would the roof require additional work? From the looks of the photo's the roof only really covers the top tier which should be fine for the olympics given that they are schedule for summer but I can't imagine this will be much good on a cold wet Saturday in December if they're playing a match. Would another ring further inside the current roof be the solution to lengthen it? And if so, would the floodlights be affected given the larger roof area?

We shall see when West Ham submit their bid (or have they?) what they intend to do. Either way it will be expensive to reconfigure a designed and built two-thirds temporary stadium into a permanent structure, which completely makes a mockery of the notion that this should be offered to someone who intends not to downsize it as it has always intended to be.

cc:me
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4076/4830813741_bef6728a00_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4150/4831426678_93e57f1f55_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4085/4830815055_40a0d0157d_b.jpg

looks finished from that last photo..
the whole park is going up so fast !

what a beautiful sadium,,,,please also visit delhi commonwealth games page.

bbc news breakfast show are live from the stadium this morning because it 2 years today when the games open...

boris johnson has just been on,vocally supporting that the stadium should stay at the 80,000 capacity...how right he is too...cos it looks stunning

The stadium looks tiny from the inside. It really doesn't seem like 80,000 stadium with the roof so low.

I was underwhelmed and still am a little but they've done an incredible job thus far. The atmosphere in this stadium should be amazing. I can't even imagine how crazy loud it will be during the opening ceremony.

The stadium looks tiny from the inside. It really doesn't seem like 80,000 stadium with the roof so low.

I was underwhelmed and still am a little but they've done an incredible job thus far. The atmosphere in this stadium should be amazing. I can't even imagine how crazy loud it will be during the opening ceremony.

Agreed. It doesn't look anything like an 80K stadium on the inside. Maybe that will change once the seats are all in and the track is down?

It looks really intimate (massive contrast to the cavernous Bird's Nest) which, as you say, should make for a great atmosphere in London.

saying that though did you notice who small the pitch in the middle looked??

The mostly-white seating bowl will have triangles patterened on it?

The mostly-white seating bowl will have triangles patterened on it?

Well, that's what the latest render in The Sun newspaper shows. To be honest, I think the seating pattern looks a mess in the render. The track is also the normal red colour, but the surrounding area around the track is black. At least that part looks smart.

^^ i thought that the track was going to be blue??

^^ i thought that the track was going to be blue??

I also thought that, but the latest render shows the track to be the traditional red one:

http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/6838/33cu5p2.jpg

guys i diidnt like the stadium at all eventhough v should not compare with beijings nest

but this stadium looks like metals hanging here and there

velodrome is faar better olympic stadium


good news they r on track hope fully with out any obstacle they can do btter olympics but china did best olympics its tough meet tat standard

guys i diidnt like the stadium at all eventhough v should not compare with beijings nest

but this stadium looks like metals hanging here and there

velodrome is faar better olympic stadium


good news they r on track hope fully with out any obstacle they can do btter olympics but china did best olympics its tough meet tat standard

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/54/pope_face_palm.jpg

guys i diidnt like the stadium at all eventhough v should not compare with beijings nest

but this stadium looks like metals hanging here and there

velodrome is faar better olympic stadium


good news they r on track hope fully with out any obstacle they can do btter olympics but china did best olympics its tough meet tat standard

Beijing built some iconic sporting venues. That is all.

Best Olympics? Never. The atmosphere was too sterile and soulless.

London will be far more fun and far more inclusive.

And let's not talk about what the Chinese had to do to build the Olympic Park...

I also thought that, but the latest render shows the track to be the traditional red one:

http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/6838/33cu5p2.jpg

^^ oh ok i havent seen that render before, the red red and black together looks good:)

^^ Would look way better with blue and black though...

I did not like it! And the seats looks very weird..

I like the render :dunno:

I'm fairly indifferent to the seating design but they are going to be full of people most of the time anyway. So for all i care they could write rude phrases in the seats...........suggestions welcome obviously

Beijing built some iconic sporting venues. That is all.

Best Olympics? Never. The atmosphere was too sterile and soulless.

London will be far more fun and far more inclusive.


u cant say atmosphere china being soulless cmon it was awesome there

but im afraid wats london is plannin for opening ceremony

u cant say atmosphere china being soulless cmon it was awesome there

but im afraid wats london is plannin for opening ceremony

Atmosphere in Beijing wasn't awesome at all.

The stadiums were surrounded by acres of desolate concrete. Local Chinese who didn't have tickets for the Games were kept away from the venues. The media were tightly controlled and not allowed freedom to report on whatever they liked. There was no sense of there being a widespread celebration. If you strayed from the areas that the Chinese government wanted you to see, you found that the ordinary people of Beijing didn't get to participate.

Everything in Beijing was magnificently organized - but in a typically totalitarian way. The Games lacked the human touch.

As to London's opening ceremony, I dare say that it will be very different to Beijing's. But London does know a thing or two about putting on a show, after all. It is one of the most creative and inventive cities on earth. It has a performing arts scene that won't be bettered anywhere in the world. It is home to many of the world's greatest theatre, ballet and opera companies. And the music scene in London is legendary.

Besides, I've always thought that opening and closing ceremonies are hugely overrated. They are only the bookends of a two week celebration. What happens in between is far more important.

Its horrible i hate those type of stadiums

And to think, it cost more than the beijing stadium. You can get 60k seaters that look huge, then stadiums like this that are pathetic.

I love how sky sports said "its dominating the skylines"

Ha... its not dominating anything. Surely that could of taken some lower seats from wembley or emirates stadium and used them. But oh no, they have to build this embarresing disaster.

What are the people going to be thinking "that isn't big at all" "its tiny"

pathetic

Right, i can't wait to see some responses to that^^

Who wants to field the 'Why not use Wembley/Emirates' bit??

I haven't got time to write it all now so i'll slate him for the rest later, can't wait;)

Its horrible i hate those type of stadiums

And to think, it cost more than the beijing stadium. You can get 60k seaters that look huge, then stadiums like this that are pathetic.

I love how sky sports said "its dominating the skylines"

Ha... its not dominating anything. Surely that could of taken some lower seats from wembley or emirates stadium and used them. But oh no, they have to build this embarresing disaster.

What are the people going to be thinking "that isn't big at all" "its tiny"

pathetic

The only thing pathetic dude is that this is your first post, very poor tut tut!

Its horrible i hate those type of stadiums

And to think, it cost more than the beijing stadium. You can get 60k seaters that look huge, then stadiums like this that are pathetic.

I love how sky sports said "its dominating the skylines"

Ha... its not dominating anything. Surely that could of taken some lower seats from wembley or emirates stadium and used them. But oh no, they have to build this embarresing disaster.

What are the people going to be thinking "that isn't big at all" "its tiny"

pathetic

Tiny?

It will seat 80,000. Not the biggest, perhaps, but bigger than plenty of other Olympic stadiums before it - in recent years, Athens (capacity 71,000) and Barcelona (capacity 70,000).

So what if it doesn't "look huge"? What purpose does "looking huge" serve? Perhaps you're under the mistaken impression that this is a dick measuring contest?

It's much more important, in fact, that the stadium doesn't look huge. Unlike the dark and cavernous interior of the "huge" Bird's Nest, the London Olympic stadium will be intimate and bright and airy. It will have a fantastic atmosphere. It will be much better for both the athletes and the spectators.

It will be much better for both the athletes and the spectators.

Better in some ways but not much better.

Beijing prob kept more of the noise inside the stadium, provided more roof cover(assuming it might rain in London), and I'm sure was great for athletes.

Less roof actually means more interference of wind for athletes.

Architecturally the venues are of course different. I'm not a big fan of the Bird's Nest, but I do appreciate the engineering feat in getting the mesh in place.

Did a quick sketchup comparison and spectators are closer to the action in London in terms of intimacy, since the entire London stadium bowl seems to fit into the first two tiers of the Birds Nest.

The first tier is steeper in London and smaller meaning the entire second tier which is also steeper is even closer.

Did a quick sketchup comparison and spectators are closer to the action in London in terms of intimacy, since the entire London stadium bowl seems to fit into the first two tiers of the Birds Nest.

The first tier is steeper in London and smaller meaning the entire second tier which is also steeper is even closer.

Interesting. Good work, Mo!

I also thought that, but the latest render shows the track to be the traditional red one:

http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/6838/33cu5p2.jpg

i dunno whats their concepr of the stadium.... very messy for me..... but very unique...^^:banana:

Yip - great first post, eh? NOT!

The stadium is an embarresment.

Look at the state of it


There is nothing spectacular about it. Its a complete waste of money. The design is disgusting.

I love how people are emotionally attatched to this. Getting angry because im saying what i think. The stadium is a complete and utter disgrace to england and the whole world.

It holds the same as stade de france. Look at the difference. Even with that stadium they had a running track.

Atleast they wembley being used for football, so we can watch england lose again...lol.. This new "olympic" stadium is almost as embarressing as the football team.

The stadium is an embarresment.

Look at the state of it


There is nothing spectacular about it. Its a complete waste of money. The design is disgusting.

I love how people are emotionally attatched to this. Getting angry because im saying what i think. The stadium is a complete and utter disgrace to england and the whole world.

It holds the same as stade de france. Look at the difference. Even with that stadium they had a running track.

Atleast they wembley being used for football, so we can watch england lose again...lol.. This new "olympic" stadium is almost as embarressing as the football team.

i totally agree with u

they could hav gone for better design

I love how people are emotionally attatched to this. Getting angry because im saying what i think. The stadium is a complete and utter disgrace to england and the whole world.

No point getting angry. The only person being melodramatic and emotional is yourself gerad. You don't like it, fine.

cc:me

cc:me http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4122/4849730076_61feb35fe9_b.jpg

Hardly an embarrassment Gerad, its quite beautiful and the setting is awsome.:bash:

http://i31.tinypic.com/2uj409u.jpg[/QUOTE]

Ha... its not dominating anything. Surely that could of taken some lower seats from wembley or emirates stadium and used them. But oh no, they have to build this embarresing disaster.c

They could have done that. One small drawback would be that the people in the seats wouldn't be able to see the track on the side nearest to them, but I guess it depends of you think that's a problem or not.


I think the design of the Olympic Stadium very much had Wembley, and its huge overruns in cost, in mind.

What we've got is a stadium which is light and simple, and will no doubt do its job very well, even if it doesn't have the "wow!" factor of other olympic stadiums.

I think it actually looks a lot better now than when I first saw the plans.

The fantastic Island location is the wow factor and when the planting is finished it will look like no other Stadium ever built. The build of the olympic park has been the most environmentally sustainable a true 'green games'.
The Beijing stadium was interesting but surrounded by a car park ?

Exactly. Let's not foget either, it's not finished yet. All the seats, the track, the field and the colourful wrap have yet to be put in place. It's not been "coloured in" yet, only drawn.

It holds the same as stade de france. Look at the difference. Even with that stadium they had a running track.

The difference? The main difference is that the Olympic Stadium has ideal sightlines for athletics, whereas Stade de France most certainly does not. Although a secondary consideration, the Olympic Stadium looks a lot better in athetics configuration too.

The stadium is an embarresment.

Look at the state of it


There is nothing spectacular about it. Its a complete waste of money. The design is disgusting.

I love how people are emotionally attatched to this. Getting angry because im saying what i think. The stadium is a complete and utter disgrace to england and the whole world.

It holds the same as stade de france. Look at the difference. Even with that stadium they had a running track.

Atleast they wembley being used for football, so we can watch england lose again...lol.. This new "olympic" stadium is almost as embarressing as the football team.

I bet everyone who has worked on the stadium are absolutely gutted that gerad from the skyscraper forums doesn't approve. Maybe if you changed your tone and asked them nicely they would change it up to suit your tastes.

I bet everyone who has worked on the stadium are absolutely gutted that gerad from the skyscraper forums doesn't approve. Maybe if you changed your tone and asked them nicely they would change it up to suit your tastes.



You guys didn't build it... stop getting upset..

I agree with the post above... it does have a good view

If i choose to verbally bash an object because i think its a shambles thats no reason for you guys to turn the anger you have because of that onto me. THAT.. is pathetic

The fantastic Island location is the wow factor and when the planting is finished it will look like no other Stadium ever built. The build of the olympic park has been the most environmentally sustainable a true 'green games'.
The Beijing stadium was interesting but surrounded by a car park ?

Totally agree, just a green games and will be an example for our times and the next Olympics.
not need to spend much in a stadium for some great games, i think London games will surprise all of us.

You guys didn't build it... stop getting upset..

I agree with the post above... it does have a good view

If i choose to verbally bash an object because i think its a shambles thats no reason for you guys to turn the anger you have because of that onto me. THAT.. is pathetic

Most people gave fairly reasonable explanations as to why they disagreed with you actually and, to be fair, it's hard to take an opinion on aesthetic quality seriously when it resorts to hyperbole like "it's a disgrace to the whole world". :lol: Especially when it's someone's first or second post on a forum.

Bull in a china shop comes to mind. We have enough problems with trolls in this forum and when people who have been discussing this stadium for three years see a post from a newly registered member with such hyperbole, we're not inclined to give it much time. If people then react against you personally, it's wrong, but it's a perfectly understandable reaction given that people are bored with going over old ground over and over again.

If everyone gave their opinion on every project being discussed on this forum and contributed nothing of substance to the thread, this forum would be a mess of opinions and nothing more.

The fantastic Island location is the wow factor and when the planting is finished it will look like no other Stadium ever built. The build of the olympic park has been the most environmentally sustainable a true 'green games'.
The Beijing stadium was interesting but surrounded by a car park ?

Yes, the areas surrounding London's venues will be far more beautiful than the previous two Olympics which had surroundings of concrete (http://2modern.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/02/15/watercube2.jpg) and dust (http://www.airphotos.gr/photo5/5990.jpg) respectively (the latter understandable given their climate). This will be a refreshing aspect of London's Games.


But London isn't inventing the wheel here, it's simply returning to the best of the past like Sydney (http://image28.webshots.com/29/7/67/38/262776738YGZrqw_fs.jpg) and Munich (http://www.europeancastlestours.com/tours/imperial/gallery/olympic-parkb800.jpg)

Most people gave fairly reasonable explanations as to why they disagreed with you actually and, to be fair, it's hard to take an opinion on aesthetic quality seriously when it resorts to hyperbole like "it's a disgrace to the whole world". :lol: Especially when it's someone's first or second post on a forum.

Bull in a china shop comes to mind. We have enough problems with trolls in this forum and when people who have been discussing this stadium for three years see a post from a newly registered member with such hyperbole, we're not inclined to give it much time. If people then react against you personally, it's wrong, but it's a perfectly understandable reaction given that people are bored with going over old ground over and over again.

If everyone gave their opinion on every project being discussed on this forum and contributed nothing of substance to the thread, this forum would be a mess of opinions and nothing more.


A troll forum is actually where im from. But my love for stadiums has brought me here. I dont want to hurt peoples feelings..im just dissapointed. If i were up to me and i could get hold of the money. I would build venues that the English people deserve. A bigger wembley would be 1. Mabie i would make the olympic stadium taller and add a more arty feel to it. But i dont really care for people who want to bash me for my opinions. Like i said, its not like they built it.

self deleted

The Bird's Nest is a relic of energy inefficiency, it does not consider natural light and natural ventilation. Its architectural style is supposed to overwhelm but is this good? Living in Denver I can compare the Invesco Field (Bronco stadium) with the Bird's Nest and the Olympics stadium more akin to the Coors Field. Essentially the Invesco Field has no soul it stands as an icon all to itself where as the Coors Field invites housing, businesses and a host of other human activities. Because its architectural style is complementary (yet enhancing) to the city's personality, Coors Field has energized downtown Denver. Similarly the 2012 Olympics stadium, I feel, involves modern concepts of energy saving and a style that is supposed to resemble the British royal crown. Additionally white color is traditional to British sporting history. Its the traditional color for cricket and old school track and field and soccer. London should be proud of this architectural marvel and hopefully it will be dedicated to the rapidly popularizing sport of twenty20 cricket after the games.

Who is going to use this stadium afterwards?? White Elephant!

Most likely West Ham and UK athletics, but as I've said many times already in this thread - if you bother going back two or three pages rather than screaming white elephant like a tourettes child - the Olympic Legacy Company will announce the winning tender early next year.

@Denverfan: It'd be interesting to know whether it could fit cricket inside. Certainly, if the expected bid for the stadium wins, it'll be dedicated to football a lot of the time, with athletics occupying it during the Summer months. London already has Lords and the Oval, but it doesn't possess a world class athletics venue, which is why this stadium was built. Whether one off exhibition matches in front of bigger crowds could be played there is a different matter.

Yes, the areas surrounding London's venues will be far more beautiful than the previous two Olympics which had surroundings of concrete (http://2modern.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/02/15/watercube2.jpg) and dust (http://www.airphotos.gr/photo5/5990.jpg) respectively (the latter understandable given their climate). This will be a refreshing aspect of London's Games.


But London isn't inventing the wheel here, it's simply returning to the best of the past like Sydney (http://image28.webshots.com/29/7/67/38/262776738YGZrqw_fs.jpg) and Munich (http://www.europeancastlestours.com/tours/imperial/gallery/olympic-parkb800.jpg)


It is actually marble tiles mosaic and clay. And it is traditional Mediterranean, and therefore perfect, I can't understand why people think green lawn should apply everywhere, it doesn't rain like London 24/7 and the
"The best" is a matter of taste, not to mention respect to each unique environment and culture. If you cover it with concrete like Beijing, that is another story.

I didn't say otherwise, although rereading it came across harsher than I intended. Athens' landscape fitted its Games perfectly, and perhaps it looks smarter on the ground than it does from the aerial shots. :)

But it will be nice to see some parkland again, just from a personal perspective.

Does it make sense have two giant olympic structures i.e. that monstrosity and the olympic cauldron...?

Are you talking about Boris' tower?

What Olympic cauldron, when did they reveal it?

First I want to say that I like the design of the Olympic stadium but I find it funny people talking about green Olympics when this complex is being built on toxic waste site.:lol:

First I want to say that I like the design of the Olympic stadium but I find it funny people talking about green Olympics when this complex is being built on toxic waste site.:lol:

I agree with that... why is it they built the stadium near at some canals? Maybe they just gonna clean it and I hope it will be clean during games.:ohno:

First I want to say that I like the design of the Olympic stadium but I find it funny people talking about green Olympics when this complex is being built on toxic waste site.:lol:

A previously toxic and contaminated site, now cleaned, decontaminated and valuable public space in a dense city like London.

They diffinetly shouldn't be using black rubber for the field. It will heat up rapidly and make it very unpleasant for the athletes.

First I want to say that I like the design of the Olympic stadium but I find it funny people talking about green Olympics when this complex is being built on toxic waste site.:lol:

It's called building on a brownfield site and is better for the environment... :lol:

The difference? The main difference is that the Olympic Stadium has ideal sightlines for athletics, whereas Stade de France most certainly does not. Although a secondary consideration, the Olympic Stadium looks a lot better in athetics configuration too.

No it doesnt.

Oh goody, are we going to have a "yes it does", "no it doesn't" argument now?

Oh goody, are we going to have a "yes it does", "no it doesn't" argument now?

Even though it was actually mentioned during the bid (and London got into hot water for saying it) that the Stade de France didn't have good sightlines for athletics, whereas the newly built London stadium would.

No it doesnt.

...in denial... :cheers:

Most likely West Ham and UK athletics, but as I've said many times already in this thread - if you bother going back two or three pages rather than screaming white elephant like a tourettes child - the Olympic Legacy Company will announce the winning tender early next year.

@Denverfan: It'd be interesting to know whether it could fit cricket inside. Certainly, if the expected bid for the stadium wins, it'll be dedicated to football a lot of the time, with athletics occupying it during the Summer months. London already has Lords and the Oval, but it doesn't possess a world class athletics venue, which is why this stadium was built. Whether one off exhibition matches in front of bigger crowds could be played there is a different matter.

Long time lurker posting for the first time here so be gentle:lol:.

A cricket field will fit just fine inside the Olympic stadium; Essex CCC were actually part of the joint West Ham and UKA bid. Essex are interested in playing some of their T20 games in the stadium, should their bid succeed, as they can pack a lot of extra fans into seats into the Olympic stadium that just aren't available at their usual home ground. West Ham have just said recently that they have been talking to international cricket bodies about staging cricket at the stadium as well. To add to that, the ECB has said that test matches against the likes of Australia and India could easily sell Lords out twice over; could you imagine test cricket in front of 60,000+ fans in England? It would be awesome and a big stadium in England that can accomodate cricket it is long overdue in the eyes of many, including me. The prospect of cricket finding a home for a handful of games a year in the Olympic stadium post-Olmypics is a very exciting one, IMO. Assuming West Ham and it's partners succeed with their bid, I think if the initial Essex stint in the stadium is successful, it is only natural to start to wonder when England will start playing one-day versions of the game or Test cricket there. I really hope West Ham et al win the bid as it's a tantalising possibility.

As an aside, I love the London Olympic stadium design. I think it's very unique and I think credit and praise should to the organisers, achitects, developers, et al for not building some huge pretentious piece of junk with no soul that will not find a use after the games. That said, everyone is entitled to an opinion; if people think this stadium is shit, others shouldn't berate them for thinking or saying so, IMO.

Also, I regularly look at this thread and many others and I never thank people for taking the time for sharing information, pictures or media that they have. Thank you, hombres:cheers:. I shall now disappear into obscurity once again:).

Please don't, that was a good post, one of the much better ones in this thread.

Given that athletics and cricket are both summer sports I do worry slightly that if West Ham are getting Essex CCC involved in their bid, athletics could be pushed aside. It would be such a travesty if, after the dissapointments the IAAF suffered with both Wembley and Picketts Lock, the UK were to squeeze athletics from the Olympic stadium because of scheduling rather than architectural concerns.

That said, a test match of the like you see in Australia with tens of thousands would be a fantastic event. If there's room and time for both athletics and cricket, certainly that'd be great. But I would like to see athletics prioritised and cricket worked around it rather than the other way around.

Incidentally, it's almost been glossed over in this thread, but London has bid for the 2015 World Athletics Championships. The winning bid will be announced in November. Its competitors are Chorzów in Poland and Beijing.

All this goes to show that, far from being a white elephant, this stadium could be overbooked at certain times of the year!! That'd be fantastic in many ways :)

As an aside, I love the London Olympic stadium design. I think it's very unique and I think credit and praise should to the organisers, achitects, developers, et al for not building some huge pretentious piece of junk with no soul that will not find a use after the games. That said, everyone is entitled to an opinion; if people think this stadium is shit, others shouldn't berate them for thinking or saying so, IMO

Yes but this stadium still costed a fortune, for that kind of money an architect could had built a way better looking temporary stadium.

I do like the bowl design, but the roof and the lightling, and the facade, for that kind f money the architect could had come up with something better.


By the way in my oppinion Stade de france looks better, I didnt say its more practical.

As an aside, I love the London Olympic stadium design. I think it's very unique and I think credit and praise should to the organisers, achitects, developers, et al for not building some huge pretentious piece of junk with no soul that will not find a use after the games. That said, everyone is entitled to an opinion; if people think this stadium is shit, others shouldn't berate them for thinking or saying so, IMO

Yes but this stadium still costed a fortune, for that kind of money an architect could had built a way better looking temporary stadium.

I do like the bowl design, but the roof and the lightling, and the facade, for that kind f money the architect could had come up with something better.
---------------------------------------------

By the way in my oppinion Stade de france looks better, I didnt say its more practical.

Yes but this stadium still costed a fortune, for that kind of money an architect could had built a way better looking temporary stadium.

I do slightly agree. The problem with this stadium for me is that my opinions vary drastically from what angle I view it from. From the shots taken from the air it looks majestic, resembling a crown that reflects the fact the United Kingdom is governed by a constitutional monarchy. Pictures from within the stadium too prove to be spectacular.

However when this stadium is viewed from the outside at ground level, the lighting towers create a less harmonious sight. I am also confused as to the purpose of the smaller triangular structures that are positioned on the roof truss between the lighting towers. In 'my opinion' I do not think they add visually to the stadiums appearance and if they are there purely for an aesthetic purpose, it sort of goes against the values of efficiency that the 2012 Olympics is meant to be all about.

Again, I don't hate this stadium though its far spectacular, at least visually. I am pleased to say the Velodrome and the Aquatic Centre are the structures that making me excited about the Olympic development. :)

^^ I almost entirely agree with this post; though I'd say it does look much more spectacular than I was expecting. I particularly agree that it looks superb from the air and from inside and that from side on on it looks a little messy.

The little triangular structures aren't superfluous by the way. Attached to them will be the ceremony guidewires, which will then attach to a central rig in the centre of the stadium. The ceremony guidewires are to hold up spotlights and speakers in the centre of the stadium as well as having the possibility of being used by performers in the ceremony itself.

Here's a render showing what I mean:

http://www.squintopera.com/#/architectural-communications/projects/showcase/olympic-stadium/

The video on the above page shows very clearly how this will work as well.

RobH, Them renders on that site just look amazing

Stade de France does have good sightlines, but as per the IAAF report of the 2003 champs there are some seats which do not have perfect sightlines, but I suppose people do like making a mountain out of a molehill...or something like that.

Stade de France is sensational.

I do slightly agree. The problem with this stadium for me is that my opinions vary drastically from what angle I view it from. From the shots taken from the air it looks majestic, resembling a crown that reflects the fact the United Kingdom is governed by a constitutional monarchy. Pictures from within the stadium too prove to be spectacular.

However when this stadium is viewed from the outside at ground level, the lighting towers create a less harmonious sight. I am also confused as to the purpose of the smaller triangular structures that are positioned on the roof truss between the lighting towers. In 'my opinion' I do not think they add visually to the stadiums appearance and if they are there purely for an aesthetic purpose, it sort of goes against the values of efficiency that the 2012 Olympics is meant to be all about.

Again, I don't hate this stadium though its far spectacular, at least visually. I am pleased to say the Velodrome and the Aquatic Centre are the structures that making me excited about the Olympic development. :)

I just realised something, the only non temporary part of the stadium is infact the roof and the metal facade around the stadium, and the lower bowl.

Now this is where the architect could had expressed him self. Without really adding any extra cost to the stadium and expanding the stadiums life span.

http://www.sbp.de/en/fla/photo_hi/1562.jpg
Just look at this, a simple cheap facade. Which looks nice and asthetlicly pleasing.

ceremony guidewires can bee attached to the outter ring of the stadium roof.


This is a good conversation. We learn from past mistakes of others. Which is really good for some of us, who want to become architects in the future.

Why would West Ham use this?? This just upgraded upton park? And the name is so boring, London Olympic stadium??WTF!

Why would West Ham use this?? This just upgraded upton park? And the name is so boring, London Olympic stadium??WTF!

The stadium has be built on the former Knobshill Road, perhaps we should call it the Knobshill Stadium.

http://i33.tinypic.com/2youzqg.png

Why would West Ham use this?? This just upgraded upton park? And the name is so boring, London Olympic stadium??WTF!

Greater capacity. Simples. Their new owners are pushing very hard to move in there. The name is fine, though I do wonder whether naming rights will be sought.

BobbyKSmooth on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4096/4858899580_0b8505ecb8_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4119/4858905550_250d6c82f8_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4858902786_b0754f29cf_b.jpg

And from Martin Deutsch on Flickr (also with Aquatics Centre)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4137/4849909009_fecd032fd9_b.jpg

Here's a render showing what I mean:

http://www.squintopera.com/#/architectural-communications/projects/showcase/olympic-stadium/

The video on the above page shows very clearly how this will work as well.

Haha well thank you RobH, those renders alone have raised my expectations :lol: However the renders appear to demonstrate the exterior 'wrap' being a television display of some type. I know this was being considered but has it been confirmed?

Oh and those colourful pods that will be situated on the island also look rather... sexy?

I think the end of that video is artistic license and nothing more. The video wrap idea may have been considered but it's not happening. What we'll get will be the airy, triangular, "sliced" wrap shown in the rest of the video.

The latest developments on this wrap were published in Populous' (HOK's) magazine a month or so ago. I've posted the (pretty large) image showing this already earlier in the thread so I won't post it again, but here's a link to it Alex

Early glimse of 2012 wrap (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_AQSoFSh8m08/S-kvwNuSlyI/AAAAAAAAAOU/p1oRh7SOofw/s1600/olypic+arena.jpg)

RobH them pictures what you have just posted, are magnificent,

All these people who are complaining about why can it not stay as a 80,0000 seater stadium at the end and its a ugly design etc:

Well, first of all we dont need another 80,000 plus stadium in London, We already have Wembley and Twickenham, and for the simple design, I like it


I would like to see the stadium go to West Ham, have the capacity lowered to about 50,000. That way, it will be used week in, week out during August to May for West ham's Premier League games, and in the summer, it could be used for concerts or some other kind of an event

ugly stadium :sly:

Why is it a ugly stadium?, to me, its a simple but an effective design.

This thread's been thrown off topic too many times by moronic one line opinions like the above.

I suggest we look up the threads such people normally contribute to and post banal, unconstrcutive, provocative one line opinions in their threads. Let's see how many threads we can throw off topic and into arguments...sound like a plan?

In addition I really think a gigantic overbearing stadium would make a mockery of the park setting.

imagine plonking a giganto monster stadium in the middle of munich olympic park!

Wow, London is building a great stadium, I can't wait for London olimpic. Beside I think there will be the greatest olimpic that have ever been.. :O :))

This thread's been thrown off topic too many times by moronic one line opinions like the above.

I suggest we look up the threads such people normally contribute to and post banal, unconstrcutive, provocative one line opinions in their threads. Let's see how many threads we can throw off topic and into arguments...sound like a plan?

Are you talking to me? or solchante

ugly stadium :sly:

Thanks for the indepth insight, you must work on the stadium to have that kind knowledge. Do you have any other wise words?

To be honest, i dont exactly know why some people are saying the stadium is ugly lol, its not even finished yet

This is why I disagree with the concept that all opinions are equal. Everyone may have the right to an opinion however I'm going to value those on here who justify there statements and arguments and whom are knowledgeable on the subject being discussed.

...What I'm trying to say is, you may have the right to an opinion Solchante, though neither I, Sir Peter Cook, Buro Happold, Populous or anyone else in this forum value it when its unjustified, unexplained and irrelevant. :)

Tour of the stadium.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgLB0A-LZ3A

This stadium just doesn't have the wow factor. Whenever I look at this stadium my mind always forces me to compare it with the design of the JLN stadium in Delhi and this stadium just never matches up to the expectations of an Olympic stadium.Perhaps it would look good when they drape it but in all honesty wembley stadium looks better than this one.

True, Wembley does look better than this stadium, however I like the fact that the games as a whole will be taken into context as opposed to the stadium alone. Beijing seemed to put too much emphasis on the Birds Nest instead of the games itself. As a local i'd rather stroll around the park and watch the sport casually in a relaxed environment instead of being in the shadow of a single venue.

I prefer it to JLN, but there you go. In future, anyone making the Wembley comparison is obliged by SSC law to post, with diagrams, annotations and extensive footnotes, the method by which future tenants could remove portions of the upper tiers so as to optimise capacity were the Olympic stadium built to the same specification as our national stadium.

Ashwa, you're first up....Good luck. :lol:

True, Wembley does look better than this stadium, .

From the inside yes. Not from the outside.

If England gets the FIFA then the Olympic stadium will host some Game so Olympic Stadium 2011-2018

Not necessarily. It's in the shortlist of stadiums provided to FIFA, but there ought to be four stadiums in London more suited to football than the Olympic Stadium with capcities greater than 55,000 by 2018. We don't know whether it will be chosen yet, and even if England wins it'll take a while to whittle down the shortlist to the final list of host stadiums.

^^ Chances is it won't because it'll be shit for football.

It'll be better than many stadiums with tracks, but it obviously won't be anywhere near as good as Wembley, the Emirates, the New White Hart Lane or even Twickenham. I can see why it's shortlisted, because it's a big existing stadium, but if there are better options it shouldn't be chosen ahead of them.

The stadium looks like crap. It could easily have been designed in the 1950s with that Festival of Britain theming of exposed poles and triangular motifs that echo the geometric patterns in mid-century modernism. Those light standards would look quite at home at New York's Idlewild Airport circa 1958. The round seating design echos that noxious primary geometry theme and presents an image of backward-looking functionality. The roofline is reminiscent of the Barbican Centre. London's compulsive obsession with bad regurgitated modernist styles seems never ending...

http://i28.tinypic.com/140x56w.jpghttp://i31.tinypic.com/2uj409u.jpghttp://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/01tS8Z6eWrcW8/900x.jpghttp://farm5.static.flickr.com/4076/4830813741_bef6728a00_b.jpg

guys which one u pick

I'll decide when London is finished.

The round seating design echos that noxious primary geometry theme and presents an image of backward-looking functionality.

What shape would you like it to be given that it's got to fit around an athletics track?

londons vs jln stadium delhi (ppermanenet vision of londons o..s)

We already did that, let's not take this thread off topic again:

Link (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:eKvamkoOwroJ:www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php%3Fp%3D46264367+%22More+up-to-date+renders+of+London%27s+stadium:%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a)

A reminder for all:

Basic Guidelines

These apply to all forumers including mods in this section. These rules/guidelines will grow over time.

The most basic guideline would be to calm down, relax, chill out and enjoy the magnificent sporting arenas around the world. There are magic words that exist ...."Lets agree to disagree..."


1. Any form of trolling will be stopped/dealt with, especially when the intention is to provoke forumers in every second thread by referring to their city or stadium as "pathetic" etc. Opinions always allowed but when you've stated "horrible" stadium in 40 threads to get some reaction, you're going to get an infraction.

2. Minimize the use of foul language(preferably no foul language) Everybody gets emotional, but try to keep it clean. Instead of F@#$$ rather use "oh no" OR "jeez" OR "jeepers" ...etc

3. Please keep the discussions relevant. Where things go a bit off the track, try to move on back on topic without a mod having to delete posts. An off topic comment is always allowed, but do not let these dictate the direction of the discussion. I have been guilt of this too e.g. "Arsenal sucks", in a thread about White Hart Lane.

4. Limit personal references or remarks unless you know the individual in reality e.g. "you yank", "you are uneducated". Get your point across without being personal.

5. Please try and follow the guidelines with regards to thread titles.

6. If you are offended by a post or remark, simply PM one of the mods or report the post using the relevant button.

7. If you are about to post 3000 high res images perhaps provide some warning to forumers or simply post low res images with links to high res images.

8. Please reference as much as possible when using images e.g. from flickr.com. Provide a link to the photographers photostream etc.

9. Please limit spam e.g. advertising your blog in every thread to get more readers.

10. If you're going to make a new thread, please try to make it interesting with precise information, data and photos if possible (with proper credit where due). Mediocre threads will be deleted/modified, or one of us will ask you to embellish it and may result in an infraction.

11. Threads or posts of a political nature will be deleted/closed and result in an infraction. Posts of a political nature are strongly advised against, particularly if they may lead to political discussions that may offend one or many forumers. __________________
__________________

What shape would you like it to be given that it's got to fit around an athletics track?

I think there's quite an inventory of stadium designs that deal with the track and sightline issues effectively without being round. I understand we're not allowed to criticize but I just don't think this was an effective solution nor is it very uplifting and stimulating. Even though it was intended to be temporary, the design in the hands of an architect like Thom Mayne at Morphosis, would have been both economical with materials and budgets and also very 21st century. This thing just harkens back to the mid 20th century.

Nobody is debating that, I don't think.

This is not the best temporary design or the best in temporary stadium design and it does not justice to modular architecture.

Modular architecture is anything but "safe" and "bland" which this stadium was from the first renders.

Stadia must be designed from the inside out. Fit the stadium bowl as close to the track as possible, which is achieved, and enhanced with the large second tier.

Well, it's the lightest stadium in Olympic history by some margin using less than a quarter of the materials Beijing used so I'm not sure how much more economical you want to be.

I also wonder whether, given the restraints of the "island" setting (http://i31.tinypic.com/2uj409u.jpg) whether it was thought this configuration was the best for getting the maximum amount of people in the minimal space and still leaving areas outside for people to mill about in. It's a very small area for an 80,000 seat stadium. The original concept drawing shown to the IOC, for example - aside from the problems with acoustics and wind flows which would have ensued from the open stands - overflowed into the rivers and canals and really bulged out of the land it was on, leaving little room surrounding it. That had a non-standard (non-round) seating configuration and was the worse for it.

By the way, I don't know whether you were being literal when you said "round", but that's something of a trick of the eye from above: it's actually a tight oval (http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/6739/olympicstadiumupper.gif), something which gives this stadium its intimacy (as well as being half the height of Beijing's from the track to the highest seat). It's not round like the Maracana or old multipurpouse American stadiums. Furthermore (and I wonder whether there is a difference in mindset here), in this country we've never had round or even oval stadiums, or tried to fit square pegs into round holes like baseball in huge round stadiums as was the fashion in the USA for a while. So the notion that they're necessarily outdated and dysfunctional is not held here as it is in the US: it's a pretty unique design for a UK stadium, which are traditionally four-sided, following Leitch's lead.

What other configurations were you thinking of specifically?

Constructuve criticism is fine. There are, however, too many people saying ridiculosly retarded things like "why doesn't it look like Wembley?" etc in this thread and they're going to get an earful back from myself and other posters who've already explained that several times. :lol:

That said, it can be improved affordably with a lot of colorful elements weaving in and out of the posts and rigging. It needn't be so bland and colorless. IMO this was a huge missed opportunity.

Well, it's the lightest stadium in Olympic history by some margin using less than a quarter of the materials Beijing used so I'm not sure how much more economical you want to be.

Yeesh, almost anything would be lighter than the Bird's Nest. But mere lightness wasn't my point. I think any number of architects could have struck an exciting, stimulating balance between the lightness requirement and cool design.

I also wonder whether, given the restraints of the "island" setting (http://i31.tinypic.com/2uj409u.jpg) whether it was thought this configuration was the best for getting the maximum amount of people in the minimal space and still leaving areas outside for people to mill about in. It's a very small area for an 80,000 seat stadium. The design shown to the IOC - aside from the problems with acoustics and wind flows which would have ensued from the open stands - overflowed into the rivers and canals and really bulged out of the land it was on, leaving little room surrounding it. By the way, I don't know whether you were being literal when you said "round", but that's something of a trick of the eye from above: it's actually a tight oval (http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/6739/olympicstadiumupper.gif), something which gives this stadium its intimacy (as well as being half the height of Beijing's from the track to the highest seat)

The intimacy is the best part of this design. I think that intimacy could have been accomplished with a better design as well.

What other configurations were you thinking of specifically?

Too many to mention really. The classic ovoid form used in so many new stadiums is a starting point. How an architect elaborates on that would indeed depend on budgets, and other requirements of the program.

Criticism is fine. There are, however, too many people saying ridiculosly retarded things like "why doesn't it look like Wembley?" etc in this thread and they're going to get an earful back from myself and other posters who've already explained that several times. :lol:

That's kinda why I showed up, to echo some of the other forumers' opinions but to attempt to explain my views. (without churning out a dissertation on stadium design ;) ) I understand the dissatisfaction out there and there's no denying that London 2012 would be different from Beijing but the design compromises for some of these venues are just extreme. they remind me of LA '84 where dull old venues were tarted up in a bid for profitability. The good news is that the Aquatics Centre is a world champ design-wise and some of the other facilities are very good as well. Which, in their way, amplify the disappointment over the main stadium.

Lol let the haters hate.:lol:

The stadium looks very good in my opinion. I can't wait to see the finished result!
http://i29.tinypic.com/mvt16o.jpg

This stadium has grown on me. Though I'm not too impressed with it yet. The park is wonderful for the locals, but designers could have done a better job with the stadium for being on such an international stage. The majority of people won't be at the site to enjoy the park or amenities, if you want a memorable games (aside from the athletes creating that) venues are a great way to make a statement. Many don't like the protruding bird's nest but it sticks in their head.

That said, it can be improved affordably with a lot of colorful elements
weaving in and out of the posts and rigging. It needn't be so bland and colorless.
IMO this was a huge missed opportunity.

Like this fabric wrap, which will be added to it next year:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_AQSoFSh8m08/S-kvwNuSlyI/AAAAAAAAAOU/p1oRh7SOofw/s1600/olypic+arena.jpg

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/pictures/636x441fitpad%5B237%5D/5/2/4/1626524_Stadium_9_WEB.jpg

One thing it won't be is colourless :)

^^

That will look much better. :)

^^ that fabric wrap looks amazing, if it turns out like that render it could be up there with (dare i say it) the birds nest :D

the design has grown on me and I actually like its being simple and very structural in appearance. That wrap will look amazing I agree but I think something more graphical like a mosaic or montage of images will look way better. It looks a bit too simplistic and I think its true beauty will only come out at night when aided with the lighting effects. If only the video warp concept was approved. But what the hey, I still like this stadium. London will host a great Olympics...

guys wait until the project is over to get full result

even when dehi jln stadium started every body thought its not goood at all

but when its finished every body praised it and started comparing with other stadiums in good manner


so sure londons o.s will also b good when its completed

I think its true beauty will only come out at night when aided with the lighting effects.

The stadium will hardly be seen at night actually. The idea of the wrap is that it'll be colourful enough during the day without huge amounts of extraneous lighting. Even the ceremonies, which will start at 8PM, will start when it's still pretty light light; although they'll finish in the dark. That's not to say it won't be lit up at night, and surely they'll make sure the lighting is good for the end of the ceremonies and towards the end of a day's competition, but it' designed to look good mainly in daylight.

guys wait until the project is over to get full result

Wise words. And this is, indeed, the big problem with this stadium - or at least with judging it. Even the big picture above is only indicitive of how the wrap will look, and yet that's THE main aesthetic element of this stadium. Its final success or otherwise will depend on the wrap, yet we (us plebs) don't know how that will look yet. I can't think of any other stadium project in the world where this is the case so late into the construction. I'll trust the ODA on this one and hope the indicitive image above is close to what we'll end up getting!

Plus the pods and the how the podium level is lit will also be a determining factor. The wow factor is erroneous, in fact I think London has put to bed the notion of the Olympics being about flashy architecture and more about leaving behind good solid pieces of architecture after the Games for the local community and host city, whilst creating a more festival 'rigged up' temporary nature for the Games, which is what I feel Rio and future hosts will latch on to if the Olympics is to have an affordable and confident future.

From the inside yes. Not from the outside.

Lets agree to disagree on this one mate

Furthermore (and I wonder whether there is a difference in mindset here), in this country we've never had round or even oval stadiums, or tried to fit square pegs into round holes like baseball in huge round stadiums as was the fashion in the USA for a while. So the notion that they're necessarily outdated and dysfunctional is not held here as it is in the US: it's a pretty unique design for a UK stadium, which are traditionally four-sided, following Leitch's lead.

That's not entirely accurate. While rare overall, Villa Park, Stamford Bridge, Wolves' Molyneux, Celtic Park, Ibrox (a Leitch design), Wembley Stadium, Wigan's old stadium and rather obviously "The Oval" cricket ground are/were all ovals at some stage. In fact about 1/3 of the clubs in the Scottish League played in grounds that are/were ovals.

While we also have a lesser record of shoe-horning other sports into our grounds, Sheffield United's Brammall Lane used to be a regular venue for Yorkshire County Cricket matches until 1973, meaning a pitch far wider than it was long, with spectators watching football from only three sides. Northampton also shared with Northampton CCC until moving out in the 1990s.

Many oval stadiums, including Wembley, used their shape to allow greyhound racing, or even speedway, but the lack of municipally built stadiums tended to mean each sport in a town had its own stadium, rather than being encouraged to share.

What you didn't ever seem to get in the UK were football grounds in stadiums with running tracks (Gateshead and temporarily, Brighton and Rotherham, are exceptions) but possibly the main reason you didn't ever seem to get large oval stadiums being built here since Wembley in 1923 was that nobody could afford to build one.

Until Scunthorpe moved to a new stadium in the late 1980s, there had only been two new football grounds since WWII, at Southend and Port Vale. Clubs just couldn't afford the cost of building new stadiums. Even building a new main stand would stretch any club's finances (in fact Port Vale never finished their main stand in the 1950s, waited around 50 years to try again, and ran out of money again the second time too.)


There has traditionally been a strong opposition in England to watching football across a track, particularly as the ends of grounds, where support is at its strongest, would be most affected by the increased distances. So while stadiums with a track wouldn't been seen as outdated here, they would be very unpopular as a design. There was a huge amount of opposition to the idea of the new Wembley having a running track, after all.

I prefer it to JLN, but there you go. In future, anyone making the Wembley comparison is obliged by SSC law to post, with diagrams, annotations and extensive footnotes, the method by which future tenants could remove portions of the upper tiers so as to optimise capacity were the Olympic stadium built to the same specification as our national stadium.

Ashwa, you're first up....Good luck. :lol:

See that's the only thing which makes me want to like the stadium apart from that it is just ordinary.

Like this fabric wrap, which will be added to it next year:

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/pictures/636x441fitpad%5B237%5D/5/2/4/1626524_Stadium_9_WEB.jpg

One thing it won't be is colourless :)

Could this be the most camp Olympic stadium ever? ;)

The stadium looks beautiful. I think those people who have reservations regarding the looks of the stadium should have some patience. The stadium is still under construction and once completed will look amazing and stunning.:)

Fingers crossed eh? The wrap will make it or break it!

When do we expect to see the wrap starting to assembled?

When do we expect to see the wrap starting to assembled?

I assume once the planning application has gone through and CABA have had their say.

I think it will be a reserved matters application, but if its temporary it might be another type.

Olympic stadium

Warm up Track (http://planning.london2012.com/publicaccess/tdc/DcApplication/application_detailview.aspx?caseno=L5JCTMSZK0000)

Full Planning Permission for:

- Warm-up Track and throwing field, including fill, topography, surface water drainage,soft and hard landscaping and inner fence;
- Warm-up Track Access Road from Pudding Mill Lane, including alignment, SWD, surfacing, signage and lighting;
- Western Entrance Road from the Accreditation Checking Area in PDZ14, including alignment, SWD, surfacing, signage and lighting;
- Bridge F14 southern ramp earthworks;
- Outer perimeter security fence on Greenway adjacent to F14 Bridge;
- Post Games completion of Greenway landscaping within the footprint of F14.

Outline Approval for:

- Bridge F14 (indicative alignment and height parameters provided).

Final Cost:

550m pounds Olympic Stadium
180m pounds conversion

Which begs the question?.....

Where has the 550m pounds gone?
730m pounds for a 60,000 seat stadium.

As pro London 2012 as I am, I am also not blind.

As wonderful as it will be when West Ham take over and the venue is well used, this is daylight robbery.

550m pounds Olympic Stadium

:crazy:

Fingers crossed eh? The wrap will make it or break it!I'd hate to think this is truly the case. While the cladding/wrap will be a critical element, hopefully people will see the entire structure. Especially the people actually attending events at the venue.

The Bird's Nest sought to engage visitors through a dynamic and playful form that masked the structural intricacy. It was ironically trying to be about the views through the membrane and not about the design.

Here it's deliberately about the design. They're not hiding the simplicity and transient nature of the design, but are in fact celebrating it! Visitors will have a chance to truly see how the structure comes together, and they'll see it's designed for a sporting purpose, rather than for the ceremonial spectacles a la Beijing.

My only lament is that, from pictures, the structural steel form could be more engaging and dynamic. For instance, I'll be curious to see if the final construct reveals anything playful or noteworthy at the joints and crowns. I might've tried having some ties or other elements also reaching outward from the basic frame, to allow visitors to grasp the structure rather than simply pass through it.
Final Cost:

550m pounds Olympic Stadium
180m pounds conversion

Which begs the question?.....

Where has the 550m pounds gone?
730m pounds for a 60,000 seat stadium.Unless I'm mistaken the 550M is going into what you're seeing now, and is essentially the cost for getting millions of visitors come to your city. The 180M will be realized when this venue is renovated and elements are delivered to their distant homes.
As wonderful as it will be when West Ham take over and the venue is well used, this is daylight robbery.Did I miss something?! When did West Ham confirm a ground move to the Olympic Stadium?

The £180m is how much it will cost to convert to West Ham's plans, and they are the frontrunner for becoming the main tennants after the Games at the moment.

Wise words. And this is, indeed, the big problem with this stadium - or at least with judging it. Even the big picture above is only indicitive of how the wrap will look, and yet that's THE main aesthetic element of this stadium. Its final success or otherwise will depend on the wrap, yet we (us plebs) don't know how that will look yet. I can't think of any other stadium project in the world where this is the case so late into the construction. I'll trust the ODA on this one and hope the indicitive image above is close to what we'll end up getting!


I knew from the moment the steelwork began that the Bird's Nest in Beijing would be spectacular. If anything, the opening ceremonies detracted from the monumental sweep of that stadium. This one looked disappointing from the start. It's not horrible but it falls far short of what architects in Britain are capable of. I imagine the opening ceremonies and the events will overshadow those feelings and leave only good memories of these Olympics.

Well 550k is still a HUUUGE sum of money, and as almost everybody said, it's not the best stadium in olympics... = S

I knew from the moment the steelwork began that the Bird's Nest in Beijing would be spectacular. If anything, the opening ceremonies detracted from the monumental sweep of that stadium. This one looked disappointing from the start. It's not horrible but it falls far short of what architects in Britain are capable of. I imagine the opening ceremonies and the events will overshadow those feelings and leave only good memories of these Olympics.

Just to be clear, the London Olympic stadium was designed by HOK (now Populous) - an American firm of architects.

That said, whatever the London Olympic stadium lacks in terms of wow factor by comparison to the Bird's Nest, it makes up by being a far more intimate yet far airier and brighter building. The Bird's Nest always seemed rather oppressive - on TV at least. I would far rather watch athletics at the London Olympic stadium.

In other words, while the Bird's Nest wins on "form", the London Olympic stadium wins on "function".

The £180m is how much it will cost to convert to West Ham's plans, and they are the frontrunner for becoming the main tennants after the Games at the moment.

and considering how very little West Ham actually get from the 550m pounds one must wonder where exactly the 550m pounds went.

The roof is dirt cheap, the upper tier is as basic as they come, the toilets are temporary, the concessions are temporary.

Just to be clear, the London Olympic stadium was designed by HOK (now Populous) - an American firm of architects.

That said, whatever the London Olympic stadium lacks in terms of wow factor by comparison to the Bird's Nest, it makes up by being a far more intimate yet far airier and brighter building. The Bird's Nest always seemed rather oppressive - on TV at least. I would far rather watch athletics at the London Olympic stadium.

In other words, while the Bird's Nest wins on "form", the London Olympic stadium wins on "function".

HOK is notorious for focusing only on the structural engineering basics and functionality of their stadiums. They usually team up with other architects that drive the look and the style of their buildings. If the London 2012 organizers only hired HOK by themselves, then that was a huge mistake. The crap HOK does by themselves in the States is breathtakingly bad. :ohno:

Mo Rush, do you mean all the stuff you are saying? or are you just saying it, because theirs loads of people criticising the stadium and you want to join in? lol

Mo Rush, do you mean all the stuff you are saying? or are you just saying it, because theirs loads of people criticising the stadium and you want to join in? lol

I do mean all the stuff. I have seen most of the planning documents, so I do wonder what exactly West Ham get after 550m pounds since most of the stadium is but a shell.

I like the stadium. Its exterior is better than Wembley.

This stadium should cost no more than 250m pounds considering the site works had its own budget.

Somebody is making a 250m pound profit.

I do mean all the stuff. I have seen most of the planning documents, so I do wonder what exactly West Ham get after 550m pounds since most of the stadium is but a shell.

I like the stadium. Its exterior is better than Wembley.

This stadium should cost no more than 250m pounds considering the site works had its own budget.

Somebody is making a 250m pound profit.

Oh right :)

oh boy how much I admire the architecture of you. I speak from Brazil and I can assure you that there's nothing like in Brazil. Here we host the World Cup soccer in 2014 and nothing so far in advance.

^ There are some good looking new stadiums on the cards for Brazil's world cup, and work seems to be underway. I wouldn't be worried :nuts:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11005965

London 2012 Olympic Games stadium bidding begins

The stadium's capacity is set to be reduced after the Games The formal bidding process to take over the Olympic Stadium after the London 2012 games has begun.

The Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC), which is overseeing the process, said there were more than 100 companies interested in the east London arena.

Any organisations wishing to take over the Stratford site now have six weeks to make their formal bid.

West Ham Football Club and AEG, which runs the O2 Arena, are both in the running, the BBC understands.

The OPLC has said the winning bidder must retain the stadium as a "distinctive physical symbol" and support the regeneration of the area.

Once the bidding period ends on 30 September, the OPLC will select a shortlist.

Margaret Ford, chairwoman of the OPLC, said: "The stadium is at the heart of the Olympic Park and securing the solution is crucial to our long-term aspirations for the area.

"We aim to have selected a tenant by the end of the financial year."

The stadium was designed to give future operators the option of reducing its capacity.

Well 550k is still a HUUUGE sum of money, and as almost everybody said, it's not the best stadium in olympics... = S

That more than anything else shows you why a real showpiece couldnt be built, something like the birds nest would have been pushing well past a billion. The only way they could be justifed is if it had been combined with either the new national football stadium which nobody wanted to have a track.

The factor I think people often ignore when looking at designs is the shear sense of scale you only get when somethings actually been built. Personally I think alot of artier designs fail to live up to there CGI renders/models where as simple big "clean" stadiums like this exceed them.

I still don't get why West Ham want to move into the stadium, having the track will just reduce the atmosphere and piss off the fans because of the awful sightlines.

I still don't get why West Ham want to move into the stadium, having the track will just reduce the atmosphere and piss off the fans because of the awful sightlines.

A 60K stadium for £150 million would be a bargin for them, to build one from scratch would likely cost 3 or 4 times more than that.

I still don't get why West Ham want to move into the stadium, having the track will just reduce the atmosphere and piss off the fans because of the awful sightlines.

An overwhelming 72% of West Ham fans are opposed to the move to the Olympic Stadium, according to a recent poll on an independent fan's website. The track being the major concern.

^^ Of course it is - it'll make the views shit!

A 60K stadium for £150 million would be a bargin for them, to build one from scratch would likely cost 3 or 4 times more than that.

£150 million plus annual rent, surely?

And three or four times more than £150 mill to build a 60K stadium? Seems a bit excessive. Arsenal's cost £220 million. Spurs' (which will be the best part of 60K) will probably cost between £250-350 million.

£150 million plus annual rent, surely?

And three or four times more than £150 mill to build a 60K stadium? Seems a bit excessive. Arsenal's cost £220 million. Spurs' (which will be the best part of 60K) will probably cost between £250-350 million.

Try 400 million pounds.

Try 400 million pounds.

No. The overall project cost £390 million - including the construction of a new waste and recycling centre, bridges and the relocation of local businesses and statutory services. The actual stadium cost £220 million.

An overwhelming 72% of West Ham fans are opposed to the move to the Olympic Stadium, according to a recent poll on an independent fan's website. The track being the major concern.


That may well be the case Gidea, but I have been following the forum thread that you refer most keenly and only 410 people have stuck their flags to the mast regarding the matter.
I agree that as a straw pole this does not look promising for the club. The main problem for the pole is that I see is that it has been conducted amongst some of the most negative band wagon jumping environment that unfortunately most internet forum seem to spawn.

The levels of mis-information that gets spouted on the matter and taken as gospel truth is breathtaking.

Any recent pics?

That may well be the case Gidea, but I have been following the forum thread that you refer most keenly and only 410 people have stuck their flags to the mast regarding the matter.
I agree that as a straw pole this does not look promising for the club. The main problem for the pole is that I see is that it has been conducted amongst some of the most negative band wagon jumping environment that unfortunately most internet forum seem to spawn.

The levels of mis-information that gets spouted on the matter and taken as gospel truth is breathtaking.

That 410 is a very large percentage of the active users. We can not gauge whether this is totally representative of West Ham fans as a whole as we do not know the demographic mix.

I admit that there is "bandwagon jumping" on both sides of an arguement, but it is a very emotive issue. There are several posters on that thread that have taken a lot of time to research the relevant issues, but I agree it has ended up a little confrontational. Emotions can run high when you see a club you love is planning to move from their historical homeland.

Perhaps I am a little bit older, but I remember the "Bond" protests at West Ham and Arsenal. These protests were against a percieved attempt to "dis-enfranchise" the fans. The protests were vitriolic, and nearly tore West Ham apart. At least now we can communicate our frustration in words, and hope someone listens..

If you think all the posts are ill-informed, then perhaps you should offer us the benefit of your immense wisdom.

No. The overall project cost £390 million - including the construction of a new waste and recycling centre, bridges and the relocation of local businesses and statutory services. The actual stadium cost £220 million.

Who's to say Westham wouldnt have many of the same extra costs?

Plus of course were talking over 5 years latter with construction costs continuing to rise.

Any recent pics?

Webcams -

http://www.london2012.com/webcams/index.php

From Prongle on Flickr, the "grey" seats are in fact black but currently have plastic covering obscuring them:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4073/4922302147_95c9b108bd_b.jpg

Its beautifull, Welldone England!

Nice bullfighting arena;).

Wild flowers add golden hue to London Olympics meadow

This riverbank meadow is the first of more than 10 football pitches worth of nectar-rich wild flower meadows in the Olympic Park, which will provide a colorful setting for the Games and be a habitat for wildlife for years to come.

The meadow includes cornflowers, marigolds, Californian poppies and prairie flowers, all especially chosen and sown so that they flower gold just in time for the London 2012 Opening Ceremony.

Olympic Delivery Authority Chief Executive David Higgins said: ‘The wild flower meadows, wetlands, woods and lawns in the Olympic Park will provide a green and colorful setting in 2012 and a new great park for people and wildlife after the Games.

‘With two years until the Games, the parklands are already taking shape. The site is going from brown to green with meadows blooming, hundreds of trees and thousands of wetland plants being planted. We are doing everything possible to ensure this is a great park for Games and legacy and a showcase for British park design.’

Link (http://www.london2012.com/press/media-releases/2010/08/first-olympic-park-golden-wild-flower-meadows-in-bloom.php)

http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/3055/100811odamdadp028hi.jpg

http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/3728/100811odamdadp022hi.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4078/4779442084_452653cf90_b.jpgLicense http://l.yimg.com/g/images/icon_all_rights.png All rights reserved by Ray Wise (http://www.flickr.com/photos/raymond0/)

Great pictures, i think that instead of the buildings being the focal point of the games like in Beijing, the landscape will be the focal point of London's games.....

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4078/4779442084_452653cf90_b.jpgLicense http://l.yimg.com/g/images/icon_all_rights.png All rights reserved by Ray Wise (http://www.flickr.com/photos/raymond0/)

awesome pic

nice one

http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/5504/4954644230d5194f2028b1.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36244018@N05/4954644230/sizes/l/in/photostream/

http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/5690/49617829680d32fe9d4bb1.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andywilkes/4961782968/sizes/l/in/photostream/

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x11/MartinLeRoy/London3style-1.jpg

http://www.london2012.com/transform/1965137/m700x/stadium-close.jpg

Is that area in the center smaller than a football pitch?

the feeling is it is like more a meeting stadium !
I insist but london was able to do better EVEN for a temporary stadium! i don't know which team will take this thing to transform it but the result won't be worse :lol:

You've made your opinion quite clear, stick to your own threads if you haven't anything constructive to say.

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x11/MartinLeRoy/London3style-1.jpg

Did you make this drawing? If not, where did you find it? :)

Robh-> are you an objective guy or just a fan? not a provocation but if you decided that nothing can be told on this thread except "it is beautiful " then i agree with you: i should stay on lille stadium thread :lol:

No, but this is about the 15th time you've come in this thread just to state you don't like this stadium; good, WE GET THE PICTURE. You never have anything interesting or constructive to say and more often than not your opinion ends up derailing the thread.

Two new aerial shots:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brzezinskinet/5022437909/sizes/l/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brzezinskinet/5022440067/sizes/l/in/photostream/

Excellent stadium.

great piece of architecture and design the future of 21st model for stadiums in the world.Does it suit you? :)

PS: Did you know that my favourite stadium in the world is Wembley, (the old and the new) then stop to see me like an anti londonian projects! :lol:

Robh-> are you an objective guy or just a fan? not a provocation but if you decided that nothing can be told on this thread except "it is beautiful " then i agree with you: i should stay on lille stadium thread :lol:

go away.

Mo rush please stop. i was a fan of South africa stadiums please don't agress me like that :)

Did you make this drawing? If not, where did you find it? :)

I drew it myself.

Is that area in the center smaller than a football pitch?

It'll be the grass area for the athletics. So yeah also where a football pitch will go. I think I saw them putting in the undersoil heating below the sand. I think it'll be about the size of a pitch. The fact the track ain't there yet is probably throwing the scale out a bit.

OMFG what a distance between stands and pitch... there's at least 70m behind "goals"...

anyway, great stadium, I only dont like this almost circle type... should be little more oval... but OK, my grade for this is 8/10

Lol

West Ham fans might need to buy a new set of binoculars.

the feeling is it is like more a meeting stadium !
I insist but london was able to do better EVEN for a temporary stadium! i don't know which team will take this thing to transform it but the result won't be worse :lol:

Still beat the Stade de France to the punch though didn't it?

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Still beat the Stade de France to the punch though didn't it?

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

seriously? :lol: you have a good sense of humour!

Merci mon pote, c'est domage que tu as perdu le tien.

i don't understand .

ce n'est pas grave moi non plus!

It'll be the grass area for the athletics. So yeah also where a football pitch will go. I think I saw them putting in the undersoil heating below the sand. I think it'll be about the size of a pitch. The fact the track ain't there yet is probably throwing the scale out a bit.

I'd be very surprised if that patch was intended to be the entire grassed area. It looks to be half the size of a football pitch.

And since we know that this stadium has been designed to be as intimate as possible for an athletics stadium, I think we can be quite confident that the distances between the stands and the pitch (in football mode) will be closer at the London Olympic stadium than at most other stadiums with athletics tracks.

I'd be very surprised if that patch was intended to be the entire grassed area. It looks to be half the size of a football pitch.

And since we know that this stadium has been designed to be as intimate as possible for an athletics stadium, I think we can be quite confident that the distances between the stands and the pitch (in football mode) will be closer at the London Olympic stadium than at most other stadiums with athletics tracks.

You'd be surprised, mate. I know that the picture is massive, but I don't know how to make it any smaller:

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

West Ham United's Olympic stadium move plans to receive Downing Street boost

West Ham’s plans to move into the London Olympic Stadium after the 2012 Games will receive a further boost with a Downing Street press call to launch their bid on Thursday, the deadline for proposals to be formally lodged with the Olympic Park Legacy Company.

The club, who are bidding in partnership with Newham Council, remain favourites to take on the stadium, and the Number 10 photocall can only enhance their chances.

Under the West Ham plan the capacity would be reduced to 60,000, the athletics track retained around the pitch, a prerequisite for any successful bid, and a warm-up track and other facilities made available for community use. The club have also been in talks with entertainment groups AEG, owners of the O2, and LiveNation, about helping them develop the new ground as a concert venue.

AEG has also expressed an interest in bidding for the stadium in its own right but last night could not confirm whether it would proceed with a formal bid.

Tottenham have also been linked with the stadium but any bid would be contingent on them failing to get planning permission for the redevelopment of White Hart Lane. A decision from Haringey Council’s planning committee is also expected to be made on Thursday.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/west-ham/8031249/West-Ham-Uniteds-Olympic-stadium-move-plans-to-receive-Downing-Street-boost.html

Tottenham have also been linked with the stadium but any bid would be contingent on them failing to get planning permission for the redevelopment of White Hart Lane. A decision from Haringey Council’s planning committee is also expected to be made on Thursday

Haringey Council planning committee voted unanimously tonight in favour of Spurs' application. So, even though Spurs moving to the Olympic stadium was never a genuine option, you can finally count them out of the equation!

i wish west ham would stay at upton park and expand their. i don't think apart from the big games west ham will sell 60,000 tickets their don't have a waiting list for season tickets and i think the atmosphere will be rubbish, i think the ground looks ugly.

i know spurs are building a new ground but i don't like the fact so many teams are building new grounds in ten years time none of the good old fashioned english grounds will be left

i have always liked upton park and if they made a new east stand and closed all the corners in i think it would be a intidimdating place to play, and surely increase capicity to 45-50k ish

Spurs still put a bid in...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/9050558.stm

..although from the language Levy is using it doesnt seem like this is their preffered option, perhaps just using it to put a bit of pressure on the council to cover more of the costs to keep them at WHL?

i know spurs are building a new ground but i don't like the fact so many teams are building new grounds in ten years time none of the good old fashioned english grounds will be left

Don't worry, with our board I can see Everton still being at Goodison in 10yrs time....

You'd be surprised, mate. I know that the picture is massive, but I don't know how to make it any smaller:

While there is still a sizeble gap between the fans and the pitch it looks smaller to my eye than something like the Ataturk or old Delle Alpi, closer to the Berlin Olympic stadium although a bit further away at the middle of the sides due to the curve.

While there is still a sizeble gap between the fans and the pitch it looks smaller to my eye than something like the Ataturk or old Delle Alpi, closer to the Berlin Olympic stadium although a bit further away at the middle of the sides due to the curve.

A comparison of simliar angles:

http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Photo/competitions/UCL/247372_BIGLANDSCAPE.jpg

http://www.supporter-boyz.de/grounds/photos/turin_delle_alpi_04_small.jpg

http://www.london2012.com/transform/1965137/m700x/stadium-close.jpg

I still think the pitch looks really far away, even in comparison with other similar-sized stadiums that you've mentioned. Personally, I think the stadium would be terrible for football fans to watch games in, but West Ham have undoubtedly put the best bid forward and I do hope they nail the stadium down permanently to ensure that it doesn't become a forgotten, sparingly-used relic.

As I've said before, I'm far more interested in what a successful West Ham bid means for cricket in this country. The Olympic stadium is crying out to be a future venue for Test and one-day forms of the game, IMO. West Ham seem very keen to promote the stadium as a huge cricket venue as well:cheers:.

A comparison of simliar angles:

http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Photo/competitions/UCL/247372_BIGLANDSCAPE.jpg

http://www.supporter-boyz.de/grounds/photos/turin_delle_alpi_04_small.jpg

http://www.london2012.com/transform/1965137/m700x/stadium-close.jpg

I still think the pitch looks really far away, even in comparison with other similar-sized stadiums that you've mentioned. Personally, I think the stadium would be terrible for football fans to watch games in, but West Ham have undoubtedly put the best bid forward and I do hope they nail the stadium down permanently to ensure that it doesn't become a forgotten, sparingly-used relic.

As I've said before, I'm far more interested in what a successful West Ham bid means for cricket in this country. The Olympic stadium is crying out to be a future venue for Test and one-day forms of the game, IMO. West Ham seem very keen to promote the stadium as a huge cricket venue as well:cheers:.

As has been said though that current smoothed out area isnt the size of a football pitch. Its hard to compair but looking at the design diagram posted above the gaps between the track and the stands look smaller in the London stadium. Actually to be more accurate they look as wide at the very middle of the side stands but smaller overall as London's is curved were as the Ataturk isnt.

I agree about cricket though, indeed I'd say the stadium could be adapted for cricket much more simpley since the seats don't all need to be covered so it would just be a case of adding a few more facilties. A stadium that size for one day matches and big tests would be a very boast to the sport IMHO.

A cricket/concert venue seems like the best combination to me, keeps the Wembley pitch at a higher stadnard aswell.

This stadium looks too similar to the one in India for the commonwealth games

You'd be surprised, mate. I know that the picture is massive, but I don't know how to make it any smaller:

[big plan]

:wtf: Gosh, that looks awful!

What's the need for these gigantic distances between the sidelines and the pitch? :bash: I don't see the scale, but it kinda looks like those stands are what? - Hmm, about somewhere between 1.7 and 2.5 miles away from the pitch maybe?

Are they planing to build Helicopter landingpads there between the runningtrack and the stands, or a runway for private VIP-jets? -Hotels? - A shoppingmall?...

It's an athletics stadium, with sightlines built for athletics; and these ought to be superb given the intimacy of the stadium (half the height from the field to the top seat of the Birds Nest). The distances are not atypical and according to the architect the design actually has the stands closer to the track than most equivilent sized athletics stadiums.

"By pulling these facilities out of the main body of the stadium, we were able to dramatically reduce the scale and mass of the building, as well as the embodied energy required in the construction.

This had the added benefit of enabling the creation of a much more intimate seating bowl, with spectators much closer to the track than in comparable stadia."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11418422

It will be suitable for football, but by no means ideal. But nobody claimed otherwise - it's an athletics stadium built for an athletics legacy. West Ham will have to work around that fact if they want to move in there.

From an athletics perspective I think it is too early to make a an accurate judgement in regards to distances between the stands and the track.
One thing that is pretty clear though is that it makes for an absolutely rubbish football stadium. I think West Ham will be making a big mistake if they do actually move into it.

Will be visiting london in a week and a half. Hopefully will manage to take some good pics :)

i will be at the end of month in london! i don't know if i'll visit this site or i have to wait till it's finished :cheers:

i will be at the end of month in london! i don't know if i'll visit this site or i have to wait till it's finished :cheers:

Hmmm, maybe you and RobH could meet up for a drink. ;) I can't imagine it's that long now before this stadium is complete.

Hmmm, maybe you and RobH could meet up for a drink. ;) I can't imagine it's that long now before this stadium is complete.

:lol:

It'd fit well for an... cricket stadium... the distance between the pitch and te stands is really huge, even for an athletic stadium... Compare to Montjuic in Barcelona...

It'd fit well for an... cricket stadium... the distance between the pitch and te stands is really huge, even for an athletic stadium... Compare to Montjuic in Barcelona...

Barca really does have a tiny gap though, I'd guess the extra warmup tracks at the side of modern athletics stadiums need to be there in order to host big events.

It'd fit well for an... cricket stadium... the distance between the pitch and te stands is really huge, even for an athletic stadium... Compare to Montjuic in Barcelona...

Well yes in that a Cricket Oval will generally be wider then an Athletics Stadium but and Athletics Stadium is almost always far longer. The MCG had to have seating removed just to fit in and Athletics track for the 2006 commonwealth games. A cricket oval is more circular with 150m/130m pretty standard internationally compared to Athletics with is generally around 190m/110m normally.

Spurs don’t want athletics track if they secure 2012 stadium

Tottenham's bid to move into the Olympic Stadium does not include any provision for an athletics track.

Last week Spurs made a shock last-minute move to take over the Stratford venue following the 2012 Games in conjunction with entertainment giant AEG.

But today's revelation from president and chief executive Timothy Leiweke makes it extremely unlikely that the plan would be accepted by the Olympic Park Legacy Company.

Leiweke, who is meeting Spurs executives this afternoon during a whistlestop visit to London, said: “I think it is a crime if you sacrifice having a perfect football stadium for convincing yourself you are going to do a track and field event every 10 years.”

London 2012 promised the International Olympic Committee when it won the right to host the Games that an athletics track, capable of staging major events, would be part of the legacy of staging the Games.

AEG Europe chief executive David Campbell believes the athletics track is not a deal breaker.

The wording of the invite for expressions of interest in the stadium by the OPLC, which will decide the venue's future, does not oblige bidders to retain a running track, he claims.

Campbell said: “It is about fan experience which is absolutely a part of what we do.”

West Ham also want the stadium but Campbell added: “Spurs is economically and commercially viable — I think it is more commercially viable than other bids. We are not crazy. We do not do things that do not work in the end. We do not back losers.”

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-sport/football/article-23885049-spurs-dont-want-athletics-track-if-they-secure-2012-stadium.do

Let's hope we fail then and West Ham or UKA get the nod next March!

Not building the brilliant NDP, Spurs moving to the East End, and my club ruining London 2012's athletics legacy would be the worst of all worlds from my point of view. It'd be a complete travesty in fact.

what?? totenham will take this stadium??!! :nuts:

how dare you suggest that! :)

Playing in a stadium with a track is the biggest nightmare you can imagine.
I hope no club will use the stadium

I'm in London all next week so hopefully I will get to see this feat of engineering, only thing is I have no idea where it is located, is it close to the city centre, apparently I can get on DLR and go right past the stadium so presumably it's between the city centre and Canary Wharf?

Help appreciated :D

Here ya go

http://www.theviewtube.co.uk/