Did the plans get stopped?
Did the plans get altered?
Did London get the 'award' taken off it?
Plans are altered all the time for various reasons. Our (Spurs') initial stadium plan in 2008 was withdrawn after heritage protests and the plans were altered. London skyscrapers are built with heritage concerns in mind already (especially with regard to St Paul's), and it's hardly unheard of for buildings to be reduced in scale because of this kind of thing.
Various threats were made from UNESCO and continue to be made. They haven't followed through but they haven't with Liverpool either and nor have Everton's plans been "stopped", so let's see how all this develops. If UNESCO follows through on its threat to Liverpool or if Everton's stadium is cancelled
then it'll be different from London. As it is, it feels fairly similar at this stage. A few threats and a bit of a stand off but with the likelihood of approval in the end.
What I do find funny is people just assuming plans went through in London "without a murmur". It's up to Liverpool how it deals with UNESCO and its WHS, but some people are undermining their own arguments with fake news. And I say that as someone who supports this stadium development.
That's a fair point about the Shard but when we feel the claws of interfering bodies in Liverpool we feel it particularly bad. The scale of development and investment in London is on another planet compared to Liverpool. Here we face disappointment after disappointment, stall after stall. The sheer heavy handedness of UNESCO against this backdrop is all too painful for us. In London, another developer could have easily have sprung up to build the Shard somewhere else. We don't have that luxury.
That's fair enough.