West Ham win battle to move into the Olympic Stadium
-
West Ham strike gold: Tottenham lose the battle to move into Olympic Stadium
The future is bright: A computer generated image shows how the interior of the Olympic Stadium - with athletics track kept intact - will look
The question facing the 14 men and women of the Olympic Park Legacy Company on Friday will be the only one that has ever counted: how could the country sell its reputation for the sake of a few thousand season-ticket holders?
The promise that Lord Coe made to the members of the International Olympic Committee in Singapore six years ago was to preserve post-2012 an athletics legacy with a wider community use in an underprivileged part of the East End of London.
It won for Britain hosting rights to the greatest sporting spectacle in the world for the first time since 1948.
That is why Coe called it a 'moral obligation' that West Ham won over Tottenham, who propose to rip out the running track, tear down most of the £500million stadium and turn it into their personal home from home. Eleven miles from Tottenham.
No wonder the OPLC executive have decided after weeks of deliberations, delays and resubmissions to recommend to their own board that they endorse West Ham at tomorrow's crunch meeting. It will be a vindication of the aggressive PR campaign waged by West Ham vice-chairman Karren Brady.
She claims it would be a 'corporate crime to bring the bulldozers in' and even invoked the monarch in the cause. 'The Olympic Stadium was built on a promise, made in the Queen's name, to have a legacy for athletics,' she said this week.
The only hope Tottenham have is if West Ham's plans are not underpinned by a strong financial base.
Field of dreams: West Ham have been given the nod to take over the Olympic Stadium following London 2012
The club deny their costings are flimsy, with or without Premier League survival. If so, there can only be one winner as set down by the OPLC's five criteria: One, to achieve a viable longterm solution for the stadium that is deliverable and provides value for money. That could arguably be achieved by both.
Two, to secure a partner with the capability to deliver and operate a legacy solution for a venue of the stadium's size and complexity. (Both meet that requirement, depending what is meant by 'legacy solution'.)
Three, to reopen the stadium for operational use as rapidly as possible once the 2012 Games have finished. (That is West Ham - their reconfiguration work is less extensive.)
Four, to ensure that the stadium remains a distinctive physical symbol supporting the economic, physical and social regeneration of the surrounding area. West Ham clearly win on that criterion if the 'symbol' must represents an Olympic heritage.Five, to allow flexible usage of the stadium, accommodating a vibrant programme that allows year-round access for schools, the local community, the wider public and elite sport. No contest. West Ham promise a range of other sports from day to day, all year round.
There are those who say football is not best watched over an athletics track but West Ham plan to cut the corners off the running track, minimising the distance from seat to pitch.
Decision time: West Ham are expected to be confirmed as the preferred bidder
Do West Ham fans care? Not greatly. It is their patch, certainly more so than Spurs, and winning the stadium preserves their status as the big beasts of east London.
Spurs have warned that they might launch a long legal dispute. Should the board shun them tomorrow they would surely have no other possible source of redemption, given that the Government and, especially, London Mayor Boris Johnson are unlikely to refuse to ratify the OPLC's decision.
And it is, as Lord Coe was saying, all about a promise we made to the world.
-
Oh my, maybe West Ham will play in the Championship next season. I wonder if the Olympic Stadium will be full when playing Bristol C, Doncaster or Scunthorpe........