London 2012

swede · Post by **swede** » Wed May 28, 2008 3:01 am

I think its main use post-olympics will be for cricket.

The english version of the IPL will begin in 2010 and this location must be perfect for Essex, who otherwise only have a very small ground.

If it works well, I could imagine Kent taking a long hard look at the crystal palace athletics venue, which can also seat 25,000

britishspud · Post by **britishspud** » Sun Jun 01, 2008 4:48 pm

Jeffles · Post by **Jeffles** » Sun Jun 01, 2008 8:35 pm

Cricinfo has a piece suggesting the venue may suit cricket but it would probably need a big tenant to keep it as a cricket venue. Half a dozen Twenty20 games won't pay the bills on its own. Maybe it could do a Sydney and get retractable seats so that it could accomodate cricket and a rectangle sport.

Middlesex and Surrey have good grounds at the moment so as swede says, Essex or Kent would be the likely tenants but would they be willing to move?

britishspud · Post by **britishspud** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:39 am

do you want me to laugh at you too jeffles?

the stadium and track will be the HQ of british athletics,now tell me why,during summer when the athletics people would be using the track,would they turf over it and play cricket there.....were are the athletes going to go?

imagine it like the MCG but in reverse, would AFL allow an athletics track to be installed at the G every winter.

had we built a normal,stand alone athletics stadium that was'nt also the HQ for the british athletic ass. then the venue would be great as an occasional cricket venue, i first said that about 18 months ago as one of the reasons it should have been kept as a 80,000 capacity venue and have ENGLAND play ODI's & 20/20's there...

Jeffles · Post by **Jeffles** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:45 am

I was just speculating mate. Things change you know. Stadiums get built with certain plans in mind and sometimes they change.

swede · Post by **swede** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 9:34 am

britishspud wrote:do you want me to laugh at you too jeffles?

the stadium and track will be the HQ of british athletics,now tell me why,during summer when the athletics people would be using the track,would they turf over it and play cricket there.....were are the athletes going to go?

How about next door to the olympic warm-up track...or are you expecting 127 big crowd-pulling athletics events every summer, making the constant availability of stadium track essential?

britishspud wrote: imagine it like the MCG but in reverse, would AFL allow an athletics track to be installed at the G every winter.

yes, wouldnt they accept offers for events that doesnt interfere with anything else?

britishspud wrote: had we built a normal,stand alone athletics stadium that was'nt also the HQ for the british athletic ass. then the venue would be great as an occasional cricket venue, i first said that about 18 months ago as one of the reasons it should have been kept as a 80,000 capacity venue and have ENGLAND play ODI's & 20/20's there...

it would have been the perfect hattrick: pay money in order to lose money, while undermining other income sources

swede · Post by **swede** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 10:01 am

Jeffles wrote:Cricinfo has a piece suggesting the venue may suit cricket but it would probably need a big tenant to keep it as a cricket venue. Half a dozen Twenty20 games won't pay the bills on its own. Maybe it could do a Sydney and get retractable seats so that it could accomodate cricket and a rectangle sport.

Middlesex and Surrey have good grounds at the moment so as swede says, Essex or Kent would be the likely tenants but would they be willing to move?

Its Essex turf, right next to their historic HQ of Leyton and they have already been looking at taking T20 back to the area.
They are committed to redeveloping their own ground, though, so it would only be for T20 as tenants, and ofcourse only if the new T20 league is succesful enough to create the need.
I agree that, they would still try to attract a football club but they can do both. I would think both sports would want to close-off one end with a temporary stand.

bazza · Post by **bazza** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:36 pm

swede wrote:I think its main use post-olympics will be for cricket.

The english version of the IPL will begin in 2010 and this location must be perfect for Essex, who otherwise only have a very small ground.

If it works well, I could imagine Kent taking a long hard look at the crystal palace athletics venue, which can also seat 25,000

The problem with using it for cricket is that it would be half sensible.

Of course they want to keep the Athletics track there so it won't happen.

If they were getting rid of the Athletics track then they could have kept it a decent size and got West Ham, Tottenham or Lleyton Orient to play there.

I think it would be a good venue for the London White Elephants to base themselves at - they just need to find a sport to play

kilonewton · Post by **kilonewton** » Tue Jun 03, 2008 5:06 am

If I remember correctly, didn't they lay the aths track at the 'G and then play the Boxing Day Test with the track covered with turf?

britishspud · Post by **britishspud** » Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:01 pm

thought the work started after the boxing day test?

swede · Post by **swede** » Tue Jun 03, 2008 8:14 pm

bazza wrote:
swede wrote:I think its main use post-olympics will be for cricket.

The english version of the IPL will begin in 2010 and this location must be perfect for Essex, who otherwise only have a very small ground.

If it works well, I could imagine Kent taking a long hard look at the crystal palace athletics venue, which can also seat 25,000
The problem with using it for cricket is that it would be half sensible.

Of course they want to keep the Athletics track there so it won't happen.

If they were getting rid of the Athletics track then they could have kept it a decent size and got West Ham, Tottenham or Lleyton Orient to play there.

I think it would be a good venue for the London White Elephants to base themselves at - they just need to find a sport to play

If Essex staged, say 10 games there with a 25,000 capacity crowd at an average £35 incl corporate, they would get close to £10 million.
I would put the cost of turfing-over (parts of) the track at little more than 50K, basically irrelevant.

keeping it as an 80,000 venue for cricket would be impossible unless they would be willing to flatten Lords and the oval.

( Someone wrote a book arguing just that titled "pommies" apparently because the author´s idea is that australians would do as he suggests. I must admit to be surprised that bulldozers were standing by tho knock-down the old stands at the SCG and move all cricket to the olympic stadium)

Keeping it as major football venue is simply too difficult technically, I think. You would have to rebuild so much of the stadium that it becomes pointles.

Small-time football is realistic because there wouldnt be any need to rebuild. Just close-off one end with a small temporary stand and have most people on the sides. Leyton Orient do fit the bill, geographically as well.

Jeffles · Post by **Jeffles** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 12:01 pm

I forgot to add that TWG (read: AFL) could play there if it were a cricket venue.

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:46 am

Jeffles wrote:I forgot to add that TWG (read: AFL) could play there if it were a cricket venue.

bazza · Post by **bazza** » Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:46 pm

Latest news from London is that the new mayor Boris Johnson is reviewing the Olympic budget and legacy in an aim to get value for money.

So far there hasn't been much mention of the main Olympic stadium but it will be interesting if the post Olympic configuration and tennant comes up

They might realise that the sensible thing of making a 50,000+ capacity rectangular stadium for a soccer team might be the way forward

Sydney Cricket Ground 12 · Wed Jul 30, 2008 6:43 pm

There are webcams of the Olympic Site and the Olympic stadium.

The links are:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/webcams/images/2012_110.jpg
http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/webcams/images/2012_99.jpg

enjoy!!