• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Canning Town Bingo Club

It's part of the deal, that security is the responsibility of the stadium operator. They really have no choice.

One aspect of the deal that doesn't get emphasised is that West Ham supposedly got the good terms because they were only using the stadium for 25 days of the year. However, the decision to go cheap on the so-called retractable seating means that West Ham have to stadium for 9 months of the year, ten times more than planned.
 
Seeing as (those of us that are in London) are paying for the Olympic Stadium to remain operational, surely it is only fair that the away fans of London clubs get free entry to our stadium when we are away to West Ham?
 
this is the first time I can honestly say I've been looking forward to watching a spammers game we're not playing in, the match is live in the US, i'll be getting up early hoping to see carnage, riots, pitch invasions galore, loss of points for the bubble blowers and automatic relegation to league 2. #love the queen mum
 
So no charge from the FA then? It was mentioned that they could be forced to play a game or two behind closed doors but clearly the fact that this was about the 15th time there has been trouble at the OS since it opened doesn't bother the FA at all.
 
Jurgen the German said:
So no charge from the FA then? It was mentioned that they could be forced to play a game or two behind closed doors but clearly the fact that this was about the 15th time there has been trouble at the OS since it opened doesn't bother the FA at all.
Click to expand...
it does seem to have just disappeared doesn't it
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43600194

Yep, that's right. You're going to struggle to attract good players because your fans are clams.

Not because nobody has ever heard of you, you play in the worst top flight stadium in existence, you're run by a trio of fudgewits who couldn't spell professional between them, are a perennial yo-yo club and have just about the world's least inspiring manager in charge. Never thought I'd say it, but your clam fans are the least of your problems.
 
scaramanga said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43600194

Yep, that's right. You're going to struggle to attract good players because your fans are clams.

Not because nobody has ever heard of you, you play in the worst top flight stadium in existence, you're run by a trio of fudgewits who couldn't spell professional between them, are a perennial yo-yo club and have just about the world's least inspiring manager in charge. Never thought I'd say it, but your clam fans are the least of your problems.
Click to expand...

Did you do a quick check on 'professional', just to make sure :D

Have a little chuckle with this one
http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2018/03/2...west-ham-fans-should-be-grateful-for-beating/

...according to unpopular co-owner David Sullivan West Ham supporters should be grateful they did not miss out on the London Stadium to Spurs.
Speaking to the West Ham United Independent Supporters Association in a meeting following the protests during the Burnley game, Sullivan risked the wrath of supporters by suggesting they should be grateful Spurs did not beat them to the stadium.
In minutes - which were corroborated by Sullivan in the interests of fairness - sent to members following the meeting on Tuesday (March 20th), he said Tottenham were "gutted" to miss out on moving to Stratford.
"(David Sullivan) did elaborate on some points including a desire to move the seats closer to the pitch but was aware that the Sports Grounds Safety Authority Green Guide advises that it is not considered good to have seats that are exposed to the elements," the minutes read.

"It was agreed that the stadium has generated a good atmosphere at times. David Sullivan raised that Spurs were close to securing the stadium. (It was) pointed out this was seen as many as a bargaining chip used by Tottenham with Haringey Council but David Sullivan said that Spurs were “gutted” not to secure the stadium.
"He added had we not won the bid for the OS, it would have been Spurs. The thought of having Spurs in our Borough, with a new stadium, just two miles from Upton Park was unthinkable to the board. I still believe it was the correct decision to move, please be the judge in 10 years. There really is no going back and we have to make it work."

Well played Daniel!

And he's asking them to judge in another 10 years? Excellent.
 
Stand by your air-poppers, it's them v Southampton in a rip-roarin', in-fightin', coin-peltin', directors'-box-stormin' relegation 6-pointer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back