The big talking point this week has surrounded the future of the Olympic Stadium and, for what it's worth, this is my take on it.
So we now know that
West Ham are to be the long term tenants of the Olympic Stadium post 2012, subject to the Olympic Park Legacy Company recommendations being approved by Boris and government ministers (it’s unlikely they’ll go against this).
The Hammers bid to move from Upton Park to Stratford is based on retaining the running track, something which Spurs weren’t intending to do. Tottenham, whilst knocking down the current stadium and building their own, were offering to pay for the redevelopment of Crystal Palace, thus creating a smaller, purpose built athletics facility.
It would seem that the lure of keeping the track in East London and in doing so, sticking to the pledge made to the IOC when London won the right to stage the games back in 2005, was too much. As
BBC Sports Editor David Bond puts it, “dismantling the iconic stadium at the heart of the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park and replacing it with a football ground, while compelling financially, was against the spirit of London's bid”.
To me this implys, Tottenham’s bid makes more financial sense, but because we said we’d do something, we can’t now change the plan, even if potentially for the better.
As a sports fan, and someone that reached an international level in athletics (Commonwealth Games, Manchester 2002) I’m not convinced this decision is the best thing for track and field. My views would appear to be along the same lines as Darren Campbell, judging by
this article from the Evening Standard.
Campbell poses the question, how much will athletics get to use this, all singing, all dancing multi-sport stadium? I remember in my Leeds City days, we would train at South Leeds Stadium. The facilities, which were excellent by the way, were shared by Hunslet Hawks rugby league club, who would play home matches on a Sunday afternoon, restricting athletes access on these days. A bit of forward planning, with the assistance of the National League fixture list meant the two clubs could share reasonably happily, but it would only take a good run in the Challenge Cup and an unexpected match might appear. Also, Sky Sports show a small number of National League 1 matches, Thursday nights are the times these games are screened. Thursdays is a key training night for many athletics clubs, and Sky can often make their choice of TV match with fairly short notice. I’ve not been at Leeds since 2004, so have no idea if this has ever caused a problem, but given that there is potential for this to be the case, and considerably more likely for a football club such as West Ham, regardless of what league they’re playing in at the time, something will have to give. You can bet your life an East London schools athletics competition won’t win the day over football being rescheduled for TV.
Tottenham argue that keeping the running track would have a negative impact on the atmosphere at football matches. Something which is backed up by Brighton fans being desperate to move out of the athletics ground which has been their home for over a decade, and if the Rotherham supporter who’s letter appeared in the Guardian at the end of last week is anything to go by, they’re none too thrilled with life at Don Valley either. It’s also worth pointing out that the trend across Europe appears to be, rip up the running track, or move to somewhere that doesn’t have one.
So what of this, inspirational legacy we hear so much about?
Those in favour of keeping the track argue that kids would be motivated to train hard, knowing that one day they might compete in the same place as Usain Bolt, Jess Ennis or Mo Farah achieved whatever they might next year. People take inspiration from all kinds of places and so it’s not unlikely that someone, somewhere, would think this. However, in my experience of training in a group of emerging athletes, our Leeds City sprint group included many either on the fringes or with the ability to reach international level, it was the Olympics, World Championships or Commonwealth Games itself that was the carrot. Sure we didn’t have an Olympic Stadium down in that there London to look towards, but had there been, I’d have been disappointed in our coach (one of the finest I ever worked with) if he’d used that as a motivator.
I accept footballers dream of Wembley, tennis players Wimbledon, rugby players Twickenham, cricketers Lords, but to reach the top level at any of those sports means you will inevitably do your thing at one of those stadiums. To reach the very top of track and field means a once in a four year opportunity in a different country from the previous time.
I’m not sure we’d be deprived of a major tourist attraction if the Olympic Stadium became just a football ground either. Were I to visit Barcelona, Sidney or Beijing, I don’t think I’d be rushing to see where the Olympics were staged, despite the efforts of Linford Christie, Cathy Freeman or Usain Bolt. Berlin on the other hand, everyone should go there, but I have my doubts if 2012 will see a sporting and historical occasion quite like Jesse Owens. While you’re there, you can wonder what the atmosphere is like for Hertha Berlin matches, playing this season below the Bundesliga. Although West Ham aren’t likely to move into their new home until 2014, their current league form suggest relegation to the Championship is a strong possibility, and you only need to ask fans of Leeds, Norwich, Derby, Southampton, Charlton and Middlesbrough that once you’re down, it’s very difficult to get back up again.
I actually don’t really care if West Ham fans get lumbered with a stadium they can’t fill and that generates a poor atmosphere. Equally, I’m not fussed how Spurs resolve the issue they have with White Heart Lane not being big enough to match their current ambitions. I simply remain to be convinced that, despite the feeling of victory amongst the athletics community, that this option will lead to greater success on the track, whether Hammers fans get used to peering over it or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment