London Mayor Sadiq Khan is playing something of a political game with West Ham following his recent comments about the club’s continued residency at the London Stadium.
Diplomacy has never been Khan’s strong point, and his remarks about the Hammers’ frustrations with their home ground came across as a poorly disguised temper tantrum. To misquote Morecambe and Wise, the Mayor said “all the right words, but in the wrong order.” The message sounded very much like: “If you don’t like it, you can leave.”
Khan’s claim that he’s been hearing about new West Ham owners for nine years might well be true, but his insistence that he enjoys an “amazing relationship” with the club’s current ownership would have made Pinocchio blush.
The Truth About the “Great Asset”
Khan described the London Stadium as “a fantastic asset to our great city” and praised its use for football, athletics, concerts, and baseball. But who is he kidding? The former Olympic venue reportedly loses between £20–30 million a year, and should West Ham be relegated, rental income will halve overnight.
The London Stadium is not the world class venue many claim
Major League Baseball games at the venue make a huge loss, the O2 Arena is far superior for concerts, and UK Athletics barely use the stadium — with this summer’s national championships held in Birmingham. Next year, the UK will host the European Athletics Championships, another flagship event that should, in theory, have gone to Stratford. Instead, it’s being staged in Birmingham.
A quick walk around the site tells the real story. The warm-up athletics track beside the stadium is cracked, weed-ridden, and littered with discarded hurdles. Birmingham and Sheffield are used far more frequently because their facilities are better maintained and actually fit for purpose.
The truth is, the Olympic legacy needs West Ham far more than Sadiq Khan would ever admit. The best he can hope for is that new ownership eventually takes the stadium off his hands. Because with annual losses running into the tens of millions, it’s hard to imagine many Londoners are thrilled about bankrolling an asset they neither visit nor use
You mention the ‘tattiness’ of the stadium. As tenants, are not West Ham responsible for general maintenance of the ground? I’m not talking the scale of work that is the responsibility of the landlord, but mere housekeeping. If there are weeds, then get rid of them. Same with discarded hurdles. It’s our home ground now, like it or not. Surely the board want to keep it in the condition deserving of such a well established premier league club? As taffyhamner says, we have to make the best of it. The past is in the past, we need to leave it there now. As for Sadiq Kahn, he’s just being a politician, saying what needs to be said when it needs to be said. He’s certainly not at fault for our impending relegation and the fact that our board are about as welcome as a heat seeking suppository.
The truth is that neither West Ham nor Khan can be blamed for the current situation. Those who planned the 2012 games, notably Livingstone and Coe, in conjunction with the Blair government ruled out built in convertability for football. The LLDC then struggled to find an anchor tenant and had to offer West Ham a sweetheart deal to try to save face. The rest is history. It is what it is and we are where we are. Move on and make the best of if.
Spot On, George .. Livingstone and Coe proper keep their heads down now, don’t they! ..
London Stadium…soulless,difficult to get into ,nightmare to get out of. Needs million spent to make it a football stadium. Khan?…everytime he opens his mouth a lie come out.
It is what it is, Gonzo. I don’t think there is much that Khan can do or wants to do. There are no plans being put forward at the moment and so there is nothing upon which to comment or decisions to be made right now or anytime soon.
Story of something of nothing.
Boleyn is not coming back and we are where we are. Let us enjoy what we have and leave the speculation about our downfall to our inconsiderate rivals.
Brilliantly put!