West Ham Olympic stadium battle.

[Falkor]

Telegraph

Tottenham Hotspur and Leyton Orient face crucial week in oppostion to West Ham's Olympic Stadium move

Tottenham and Leyton Orient will discover within days whether their challenge to West Ham's tenancy of the Olympic Stadium has been successful after a High Court judge spent the early part of this week considering their case.

By Paul Kelso

Mr Justice Davis will rule on whether to grant permission for a judicial review of the decision to declare West Ham the preferred bidder after considering four separate applications from Tottenham and Orient.

The clubs are challenging the decision of the Olympic Park Legacy Company to select West Ham, the Government and London mayor Boris Johnson for endorsing that decision, and Newham Council's decision to agree to lend £40 million to a joint venture with West Ham that will convert and run the stadium.

If successful, Tottenham and Orient will be granted a full trial at which their challenge will be heard, which is likely to be no earlier than October.

The clubs have already won the first round of their challenge after the judged rejected an attempt by the Government and the mayor to skip the first phase of the judicial review and proceed straight to a substantive hearing in the autumn.

Tottenham and Orient objected, arguing that the judge should decide whether to grant permission for the challenge before hearing the substance of the case. That process began on Monday when Mr Justice Davis began studying several hundred pages of documents submitted by the various parties.

The legal challenges follow the acrimonious bidding war between Tottenham and West Ham that culminated in February with the Hammers being selected as preferred bidder.

Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy, desperate to develop a new stadium to keep pace with their Premier League rivals, believes he was encouraged to enter the Stratford bid, only to be used to drive a better deal out of West Ham.

Orient, meanwhile, believe that West Ham's move to within a mile of Brisbane Road will have a huge impact on attendances and the club's commercial prospects.

Orient are also challenging the Premier League's decision to approve West Ham's potential move to Stratford. An arbitration hearing will be held in the autumn.

The clubs' submissions, copies of which have been seen by Telegraph Sport, reveal that Tottenham and Orient are challenging both the process and the substance of the OPLC's decision, and Newham's financial support for West Ham which they say breaches European laws on state aid.

The submissions also reveal that one of the OPLC's grounds for rejecting Tottenham's bid was that their plans to renovate Crystal Palace as an alternative to retaining the athletics track was "inadequate and under-funded" and "does not provide a long-term sustainable athletics legacy".

Spurs reject this argument, insisting that they provided a £500 million guarantee to underwrite their bid and the Crystal Palace scheme.

The role of Newham in providing a £40 million loan to West Ham is at the heart of the challenge from Tottenham and Orient, while the legal process is understood to have exposed tensions between the OPLC and the council over the key issue.

Without the Newham loan, West Ham cannot afford to take on the stadium, but Tottenham and Orient argue that it is an inappropriate use of public money and was made unlawfully. Given this, they argue that West Ham's bid, which relies on council funding, is not financially secure and should not have been approved.

Tottenham argue that the Newham loan breaches EC laws banning state aid for private companies; that the council acted beyond its powers by entering into the deal with West Ham; and finally that Newham should have considered offering similar terms to them as they would then potentially have benefited from having two Premier League clubs in the borough.

Newham's defence is technical but crucial. The council argues that in fact it has not agreed to make the loan, but simply agreed that its chief executive could make the loan in future, if a suitable deal can be agreed with West Ham over terms and conditions.

Tottenham argue that this admission proves that the OPLC should not have approved West Ham, as without the Newham money the bid cannot satisfy the key criteria that any tenant has "committed, secure and agreed" funding.

Newham's claim that the loan has not been agreed is understood to have greatly concerned the OPLC, which based its decision to award West Ham the stadium on the fact that the funding was in place.

The council and West Ham are understood to have signed numerous documents to that effect.

The Daily Telegraph understands that the OPLC was so concerned that it has written to Newham demanding clarification of the status of the loan. The council is thought to have responded that the loan will be available to West Ham, but Tottenham and Orient will claim that that admission negates the council's defence on other points.

Describing the OPLC decision as "irrational, discriminatory and unfair", Tottenham accuse them of displaying bias towards West Ham in the bidding process and of secretly changing the rules by which the preferred bidder would be chosen.

Tottenham argue that in key areas they were not given vital information about how the decision-making process would be made, particularly in relation to the five criteria on which the final call was based.

The OPLC set out the criteria at the start of the process, stating that they were listed in order of importance, with the financial certainty of bidders rated the most important.

Spurs say that "without warning" the OPLC changed the rules during the final bidding, judging the criteria with equal weight. This, they say, worked against them as West Ham should have failed the financial test, and the areas they were "perceived as failing" – reopening the stadium rapidly and flexible usage – were third and fifth on the list.

They cite a letter from Johnson as evidence of the confusion, even among OPLC stakeholders. Explaining his decision to back West Ham, Johnson initially said the objectives "were listed in order of importance". In a subsequent letter however he has admitted that this was "a mistake and obviously so".

Should find out by Friday what is going on, im really confused tbh i dont understand it all, with any luck Spurs and Orient will win, they can build a new East stand.

What does make me laugh Orient moved across London to were they are now, i think they are moving 1.7miles staying in the same borough.

I know most of ya hate West Ham, but just seems like witch hunt this time, esp when Spurs want to knock the OS down and build a totally new stadium, i dont hear that idiot Orient chairman moaning about that.

 

[Wozza]

but just seems like witch hunt this time, esp when Spurs want to knock the OS down and build a totally new stadium, i dont hear that idiot Orient chairman moaning about that.

Probably because West Ham, not Spurs, won the bid.

 

[Falkor]

Probably because West Ham, not Spurs, won the bid.

also might have something to do with the new stadium orient asked for and West Ham flatly said no

 

[Vatican Citys No.2 Keeper]

Orient really shouldn't have a leg to stand on as they only publicly opposed it a week or two before it was awarded to WH. Whilst I sympathise with them they got involved too late to have a legitimate claim IMO.

Spurs on the other hand is just sour grapes. Total hypocrisy in terms of their rivalry with the gooners, and the words "pot" "kettle" & "black" come to mind.

At the end of the day WH had most legitimate claim, so if they want to play in an atmosphericless bowl & throw money down the drain in the process then let them!!

 

[peterward]

I wanted Spurs to win the bid, mainly because that involves redeveloping Crystal Palace athletics track, which in turn means no new Palace stadium at their preferred site.

how terribly sad would that be

 

[beorhthelm]

Orient didnt want to know and have apparently no problem with Spurs moving just down the road, which makes no sence.
Spurs weren't interested until very late in the game. they were going to redevelop their ground and iirc submitted a bid for the Olypmic stadium on the closing day, which was seen at the time as keeping options open and putting pressure on Haringey to approve their plans.

for some daft reason, Spurs thought knocking down the stadium and building a new one would be approved by the committee, whose purpose is to ensure a legacy is kept from the olympics. i think there's a technicality they failed to put on the bid process, to actual weight factors such as this, so the process is open to challenge. but honestly, i think Spurs are just pursuing it to be awkward twats, though may have burnt some bridges with Haringey so might actually need it now.

Orient are definatly just being awkward twats, there wasnt a dicky bird from them over the West Ham bid until about the week of the committe decision.

 

[TS90]

Orient don't mind Spurs moving there because they wouldn't be handing out cheap or in some cases, free, tickets to the level that West Ham promised they would in their bid for the stadium. Hearn reckons that a Spurs move rather than a West Ham one would also result in Orient losing less of the 'floating fans' that the two clubs share at the moment.

 

[Falkor]

They are going to be droping ticket prices i would imagine to around 20quid, the free tickets are going to local school children.

Orient wanted a new stadium out of it, West Ham said not a hope in hell, then they kicked off.

Like i said they moved into the boro when west ham was there first.

 

[Scotty Mac]

Orient don't mind Spurs moving there because they wouldn't be handing out cheap or in some cases, free, tickets to the level that West Ham promised they would in their bid for the stadium. Hearn reckons that a Spurs move rather than a West Ham one would also result in Orient losing less of the 'floating fans' that the two clubs share at the moment.

this - spurs could quite feasibly sell out 60,000 without having to recruit local floating fans with free and cheap tickets, meaning orients fanbase wouldnt be too affected

west ham on the other hand know that they will be playing in a half empty stadium and the only way they'll get anywhere near filling it is by making the place dirt cheap and poaching people from the leyton area

 

[beorhthelm]

this - spurs could quite feasibly sell out 60,000 without having to recruit local floating fans with free and cheap tickets, meaning orients fanbase wouldnt be too affected

west ham on the other hand know that they will be playing in a half empty stadium and the only way they'll get anywhere near filling it is by making the place dirt cheap and poaching people from the leyton area

this seems to be the tenuous theory Hearn is using. i call it bollocks, if one club will impact you, so will another, albeit to a different degree. Westham might be offering freebies, but i dont recall it as many as claimed, and i dont see why spurs would instantly gain 30000 fans, with out some discounting themselves. added to this, they would presumably not play on the same days due to proximity, so i wonder just what the impact will be.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

At the risk of stating the blindingly obvious the Olympic Stadium was built for athletics and NOT football, so I can't see why the athletics track shouldn't stay with football having to accomodate it's requirements around this.

If Tottenham are bitter about losing out on the bid, they should be told it's because their plan was rubbish for London, not because they didn't stump up enough money. There's nothing to stop them building a football only stadium on a different part of the site, and they weren't exactly keen to do this pre- 2005 when the site was available for regeneration.

And Orient's arguement is just so stupid - I'm sure Dundee Utd fans don't change allegiance to Dundee just because Tannadice and Dens Park are on opposite sides of Tannadice Street.

 

[Scotty Mac]

this seems to be the tenuous theory Hearn is using. i call it bollocks, if one club will impact you, so will another, albeit to a different degree. Westham might be offering freebies, but i dont recall it as many as claimed, and i dont see why spurs would instantly gain 30000 fans, with out some discounting themselves. added to this, they would presumably not play on the same days due to proximity, so i wonder just what the impact will be.

spurs wont need to gain 30000 fans - they already have enough. i believe there is quite a long waiting list for season tickets already, so it would be very much like arsenal's move from higbury to the emirates in that the capacity should be instantly filled

i think the bigger issue with west ham is that if young kids are able to go to a club for free on their doorstep, who are they more likely to grow up supporting? that will be what cuts into orients fanbase, taking away their future generations of fans and eventually making them unsustainable as a club

for what its worth, if the bid was going to go to a football team then it obviously should have been west ham. i can just see why orient and hearn are pretty worried about the situation

 

[beorhthelm]

for what its worth, if the bid was going to go to a football team then it obviously should have been west ham. i can just see why orient and hearn are pretty worried about the situation

i too can see a concern, however i think Orient over play it, and didn't mention it for a year or so while West Ham where campaigning and putting forward their proposal.

 

[Falkor]

but do spurs fans really wanna mover from now london to east i know many and not one of them do

 

[Tricky Dicky]

At the risk of stating the blindingly obvious the Olympic Stadium was built for athletics and NOT football, so I can't see why the athletics track shouldn't stay with football having to accomodate it's requirements around this.

Because no-one wants to use a 60k stadium for football and athletics. 60k is far, far too many for an althletics venue in this country, for anything other than the Olympics, they struggle to fill a few thousand for most meets, and no football club wants a track around its pitch (there used to be a perfect example on the South coast of a League one team playing at a ground with a running track round it, which was pretty useless, but they are apparently moving to a more appropriate ground ... can't think of the name of the club off-hand, I'll get back to you on that one).

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

Most kids will base their allegiance on a clubs success on the pitch, not where their ground is located. If Orient want to increase their fanbase then it's no good being parochial about it, they're going to have to start winning things and getting in the national conciousness. At the moment they aren't doing that so their club image is seen as nothing more than insignificant - and that doesn't attract kids. Start winning things and people sit-up and take notice, especially kids.

London has such good communication links that it's perfectly feasable for someone on Orient's doorstep to support Tottenham or West Ham right now.

Queens Park hardly fill Hampden, and just because they play there, it doesn't help them increase their fanbase - succes breeds success, unfortunately a huge ground capacity is no guarantee of success.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

Because no-one wants to use a 60k stadium for football and athletics. 60k is far, far too many for an althletics venue in this country, for anything other than the Olympics, they struggle to fill a few thousand for most meets, and no football club wants a track around its pitch (there used to be a perfect example on the South coast of a League one team playing at a ground with a running track round it, which was pretty useless, but they are apparently moving to a more appropriate ground ... can't think of the name of the club off-hand, I'll get back to you on that one).

Well West Ham do want to share, so that's your arguement shot to pieces. ( Or are West Ham not a football club ? )

 

[Tricky Dicky]

Well West Ham do want to share, so that's your arguement shot to pieces.

I didn't think they were keeping the running track, but I guess I'm wrong.

 

[Falkor]

west ham are bringing in retractable seating to the ground behind the goals, and possibly on the sides.

 

[Falkor]

I didn't think they were keeping the running track, but I guess I'm wrong.

they 1000% are mate