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.