Tottenham would scrap running track if they take over Olympic stadium

By Duncan Mackay
British Sports Internet Writer of the Year

October 5 – West Ham United’s chances of taking over the Olympic Stadium following the London 2012 Games have been greatly boosted by the news that its closest rival does not plan to keep the athletics track even though that is one of the key requirements of being awarded tenancy.

American entertainment giant AEG and Premier League Tottenham Hotspur, who have launched a joint bid, claimed that it would not make economic sense to keep a permanent running track if they take over the £563 million stadium.

“I think it’s a crime if you sacrifice having a perfect football stadium for convincing yourself you are going to do a track and field event every 10 years that can’t stand on its own two feet,” AEG President Tim Leiweke said.

“There are very few stand-alone track and field events that pay for themselves to use a whole stadium.”

The original plan called for the Olympic Stadium to be downsized from 80,000 after the Games to 25,000 and become the centre of track and field in Britain.

But both West Ham and Tottenham would turn it into a 60,000-seat stadium after the Olympics and Paralympics.

West Ham have already pledged that they will keep the track.

AEG Europe chief executive David Campbell claims the athletics track is not a deal breaker.

The wording of the invite for expressions of interest in the stadium by the Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC), which will decide the venue’s future, does not oblige bidders to retain a running track, he claims.

“It is about fan experience which is absolutely a part of what we do,” said Campbell.

“It is great for the fans and for the artists – be it in football or basketball or concerts.

“If you get a Premier football team you cannot have a running track around the stadium.”

AEG, whose transformation of the Millennium Dome in Greenwich since they took it over and turned it into the O2 Arena, makes them an attractive potential tenant to the OPLC who are looking for a self-financing partner.

Leiweke claimed that would not be the case if an athletics track remained.

“With football, you’re going to get 30-plus matches a year and you’ll be able to talk about naming rights and founding partners and suites and the revenue streams to make these kind of venues work,” said Leiweke.

But dumping the running track would go against one of the key promises that helped London win its bid to host the 2012 Olympics and Paralympics.

London were struggling behind Paris until chairman Sebastian Coe convinced Lamine Diack, the President of the International Association of Athletics Federations and an influential member of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), that by voting for London it would leave a long-term legacy for the sport in Britain.

But getting rid of the athletics track would ensure that the Olympic Stadium is not turned into a white elephant, Leiweke claimed.

“It makes sense long term,” he said.

“The Government and everyone needs to make a decision to ensure that it is usable.

“You make that stadium the best football stadium in the country for Tottenham because if you do that then you are going to make it the best stadium for the next 30 years.

“You have to make it more more usable and easy to use, unlike the Bird’s Nest [the 2008 Olympic Stadium in Beijing].

Contact the writer of this story at zib.l1734805634labto1734805634ofdlr1734805634owedi1734805634sni@y1734805634akcam1734805634.nacn1734805634ud1734805634