Leyton Orient chairman Hearn brands Olympic Stadium untenable
LEYTON Orient chairman Barry Hearn has slammed London 2012 organisers, insisting the £500m Olympic Stadium will be untenable after the Games has finished.
DAMNING: Leyton Orient chairman Barry Hearn predicts the 2012 Olympic Stadium is untenable and will eventually be demolished (Getty Images)
The outspoken sports promoter admitted he had been in talks about moving Orient into the stadium but with Locog insisting the athletics track will remain after the Games, Hearn turned his back on the idea.
The stadium has become a focal point of London 2012 organisers' legacy plans with chairman Lord Sebastian Coe adamant the venue must keep its capacity to stage track and field events.
And while the initial intention was to reduce the stadium's capacity to approximately 25,000 with its primary purpose to be athletics, Mayor of London Boris Johnson has admitted he wants the stadium maintained at its full size for potentially lucrative events, such as the 2015 Rugby World Cup.
Meanwhile, new West Ham United owners David Gold and David Sullivan have recently stated their intentions to become tenants and the stadium has also been named on the shortlist for England's 2018 World Cup bid.
But Hearn has laughed off the idea of using the stadium as a football venue and suggested a lack of interest in athletics events in this country would lead to the stadium ultimately being demolished.
"The Olympic Stadium is the biggest disaster and waste of public money I have ever seen," said Hearn, also chairman of the Professional Darts Corporation and World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association.
"The day after the Olympics has finished and the grass starts growing in the seats, that stadium is not sustainable.
"The slant of the seats is all wrong for football. There is an athletics track, a warm-up track and long jump pit, so the fans will be miles away and any football fan will tell you that is what kills the atmosphere.
"I was talking to them seriously for three years about moving in to the stadium it if it was going to be 25,000. But I said don't build something where my fans would go, ‘oh thanks a lot, we used to have a proper football ground and now we have got this'.
"And who goes to watch athletics? You watch it during the Olympics and then you will be lucky to get 500 people at the Don Valley stadium the rest of the time.
"They are going to be left with a stadium that is not useable - a great opportunity thrown away. They will knock it down. That is the only choice they will have."
Working...
Comments
I'm glad there are such
I'm glad there are such people who think of the best usage of public money. I also think that if something is built it should be used in as many ways as it is possible, so that in future it bring larger profits. It is better to think of it beforehand but not afterwards as in case of the World Cup in South Africa. Here is the video: http://www.tubesfan.com/watch/debriefing-the-2010-world-cup-laurent-dubois-debates-the-costs-of-the-world-cup . It turned out that the costs of this huge event were enermous but gains were comparatively small. I think it should be a lesson for all other countries who will organize any famous sport events.
Gains less than costs
I'm glad there are such people who thinks of the best usage of public money. I also think that if something is built it should be used in as many ways as it is possible, so that in future it bring larger profits. It is better to think of it beforehand but not afterwards as in case of the World Cup in South Africa. Here is the video: http://www.tubesfan.com/watch/debriefing-the-2010-world-cup-laurent-dubois-debates-the-costs-of-the-world-cup . It turned out that the costs of this huge event were enermous but gains were comparatively small. I think it should be a lesson for all other countries who will organize any famous sport events.
gucci bags
awesome article.
The O2 was a white elephant.
The O2 was a white elephant. The enormous amount of public money spent on it was thrown down the drain. The fact that it was possible to give away the basic structure to a foreign commercial company in no way justifies the way taxpayers' money was squandered by grandstanding politicians.
It would be a scandal to spend £500 million on a 25,000 seat athletics stadium even if it was viable on an operating basis. That isn't much larger than Crystal Palace, which is barely used. And this isn't just a UK problem. Athletics is a non-viable sport that depends on handouts everywhere. The arrogance of the likes of Lord Coe, who think that there sport has a god-given entitlement to spend other people's money is infuriating. Give this stadium to football, that is the only viable use.
Sustainability
The south or London has not been waiting for a stadium "like this" at all judging by what has been done about it. The events the correspondent prefers just dont generate revenue. Ergo Hearns is right.
Uses for a second-hand Olympic Stadium
Mr H makes some valid points but his purpose is not clear. The 4,574 fans who watched Orient's last home match wouldn't need anything that big.
The O2 (Millennium Dome) was similarly derided as a white elephant when first built.
I hate football - it doesn't
I hate football - it doesn't rule the world. I would much rather watch athletics, cycling, triathlon or any other sport than football.
Why does he think if football doesn't take it over it will fail - idiot! How long has the south/London waited for a facility like this - too long. It will get used and hopefully not by footballers!
Post new comment