Ground sharing the OS or Wembley [yes they can / no they can't]

SuzanneClaretSuzanneClaret
edited January 2016 in Stadium & Training Ground
This discussion was created from comments split from: All things Olympic Stadium related including the count down.
«134

Comments

  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    edited January 2016
    LLDC have confirmed we are powerless to stop them having a groundshare....

    Not sure that's what at least one of the board had us believe?

    ;hmm
  • SuzanneClaretSuzanneClaret
    KB, the we don't have to ground share information came from KB.

    She said it in a meeting I was in.

    I'm seeing her tomorrow, clarification will be sort.

  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    Think she's blown it Suze......if she's told a porkie over this....then what else is there?
  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    Is it the last SAB tomorrow???
  • SuzanneClaretSuzanneClaret
    There is an SAB meeting tomorrow, no idea if it is the last or not.
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    Slaven_Cups_His_Beard said:

    LLDC have confirmed we are powerless to stop them having a groundshare....

    Not sure that's what at least one of the board had us believe?

    ;hmm

    Source?
  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    The internet.
  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    Oh well, nothing has ever been wrong on there,so that's that, then...
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    It was The Sun, wasn't it? ;biggrin
  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    ...although Brady admitted it would be possible for another club to play in their new 54,000-seat stadium, she rejected suggestions that the club would agree to any request from Tottenham. Although the final decision rests with the LLDC, any deal would depend on West Ham’s approval.

    “In reality they probably could – but only with our permission,” West Ham’s vice-chairman said at the launch of their Club London hospitality packages for the new stadium. “No one has asked us for our permission and, if they did, we would probably say no, depending on who it is – if you get my drift. We are the anchor tenant for the winter matches and nothing else can happen in that time without our permission and our football matches take priority over everything else.”

    The chair of the London assembly budget and performance committee, John Biggs, has previously said that a temporary groundshare with Tottenham would be beneficial to the LLDC. Yet the agreement with West Ham means that they have primacy of use and it is understood that they effectively have the power of veto over who uses the stadium.

    http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/sep/23/karren-brady-olympic-stadium-west-ham-united-tottenham-hotspur

    That's from over a year ago.
  • SuzanneClaretSuzanneClaret
    ;ok

    I think I paraphrased.
  • Expat_HammerExpat_Hammer
    SuzanneClaret said:

    ;ok
    I think I paraphrased.

    I don't think anyone heard it though ;run

  • eskimokingeskimoking
    So basically LLDC make the decision. We have a gentleman's agreement that they will ask our opinion first. Bottom line is, if it gets them a boatload of income, then we will have to groundshare.
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    Dunno, what about this bit?
    Yet the agreement with West Ham means that they have primacy of use and it is understood that they effectively have the power of veto over who uses the stadium.
    I suspect there's a lot of small print. ;puzzled
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    You can't beat small print.....I mean you literally can't beat small print
  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    grey_til_I_dye said:

    Oh well, nothing has ever been wrong on there,so that's that, then...

    ;biggrin
  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    eskimoking said:

    So basically LLDC make the decision. We have a gentleman's agreement that they will ask our opinion first. Bottom line is, if it gets them a boatload of income, then we will have to groundshare.

    Looks like the long and short of it
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    As the lawyers say " the large print giveth and the small print taketh away".
  • ironmike44ironmike44
    Eski - I worked for the company that drafted the contract.

    No such thing as 'gentleman's agreement' in contract law.

    WHU have the right of veto on any activity which might impact adversely on their ability to fulfil all of their 'FA football commitments' - this specifically includes sharing the ground with anybody else (football team or otherwise) during the EPL season - also the club are obliged to pay an additional fee if we qualify, and play games, in cup or European competition. That's not to say WHU wouldn't agree to 'ground share' - but they would have to be satisfied that they were still able to fill their FA commitments.

    Mind you if the Sun or the Internet says differently I stand to be corrected ;wink
  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    So why isn't that being reported from the first days court action regarding the fan appeal regarding the OS which I believe started today?
  • ironmike44ironmike44
    Haven't the faintest idea - but my understanding is that the 'fan request' is for full disclosure of the contract terms - the decision on whether to uphold all or part of the request is, I understand, some way off yet.

    As I say - the Internet or the Sun may prove me wrong but I'm happy to await the result of appeal hearing in full - I may find that the contract draft I read changed substantially before signature - who knows?
  • MJ_IRONSMJ_IRONS
    Someone referred to the small print, well here it is...you see the Internet is right ;lol

    small-print-9990363
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    The appeal that started today is an appeal against the LDCC decision to keep certain (commercial) details confidential.

    A decision will rule on whether or not they have to reveal all details or can keep some secret.

    So I wouldn't expect any 'new' info about the terms of the contract to be put into the public domain today. That's not what the hearing is about.

    Only after appeal is decided, and only IF the appeal is rejected, will further, previously 'secret' details be released.

    So anything not already in the public domain will remain confidential until the outcome of the case, surely?
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    Mrs G do you not mean only IF the appeal is successful.
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    ;hmm Which way round is it? Who's appealing against who?


    Yes, sorry, LLDC appealing against the FOI request, not the other way around. So if appeal is successful...
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    edited January 2016
    The LLDC finance executive, Geraldine Murphy, told an information tribunal that a groundshare could happen “if the teams co-operate and the Premier League co-operates”, during its appeal hearing against the disclosure of West Ham’s tenancy agreement at the Olympic Stadium.

    Murphy said West Ham did not have a veto on such a decision, even if it would require the co-operation of the east-London club.
    http://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/jan/25/west-ham-face-possibility-of-groundsharing-at-olympic-stadium

    So, no actual 'veto', but ground-share requires teams to co-operate before it can happen.

    Call it what you like, that's EFFECTIVELY a veto in my book.
  • VorselaarhammerVorselaarhammer
    This was just another round to fill up papers.

    There has always been the option for another team to share the ground.

    But the point as Mrs Grey points out is that we have to agree to it.

    That is a veto in all but name....
  • SuzanneClaretSuzanneClaret
    I'm going to ask KB tonight, if I get the opportunity.
  • HammerexHammerex
    Sock it to her Suz ;fishslap
  • SuzanneClaretSuzanneClaret
    There will be no 'socking'.

    I will make a polite enquiry.
Sign In or Register to comment.