EPL: West Ham United and Olympic Stadium, a Match Made in Shallow Public Coffers

To all but the most ardent West Ham United and Tottenham Hotspur supporters, the matter of the Olympic Stadium has faded from memory.

Not even the most vociferous of Tottenham's protestations were enough to keep the matter newsworthy in a week that saw Wayne Rooney's oft-touted, equally disparaged bicycle kick and Arsenal's triumphant routing of Barcelona at the Emirates.  

A week on from the announcement that West Ham United FC had officially won use of the Olympic Stadium in the wake of the 2012 Summer Olympic Games, the dust has settled, the air has cleared and we must ask ourselves, is this really a good thing?

First, there's the nature of the Olympic Stadium. The soccer pitch sits in the center of a track. A standard Olympic track is eight lanes across. Each lane is 48 inches wide with a two-inch barrier separating the lanes from one another.

Excluding all other barriers that may sit between the stands and the pitch, there is at least 33 feet of space between the fans and the players.

If nothing else, West Ham is known for its tradition of passionate support. This will surely be hampered by drastically increasing the distance between the fan and the player.

It has been pointed at that one of the four sides at Boleyn Ground is similarly distanced from the pitch to accommodate television crews, reporters and more, but one out of four is surely better than a massive, 33-foot ring separating the squad from the supporters.

Secondly, there is the size of the new setting. Olympic Stadium seats 80,000. Apparently, after the games, a portion of those seats will be removed. After this downsizing, the stadium will still seat 60,000, nearly twice Upton Park’s capacity of 35,303.

West Ham majority owners David Sullivan and David Gold have stated their intent to use the increased capacity of the new stadium to the benefit of supporters. To this end, tickets for children and family will be offered at a reduced rate. This is certainly an admirable gesture, and one West Ham supporters can look forward to.

However, exclusivity is in many ways advantageous for sports franchises. Getting tickets to see the Boston Red Sox at Fenway Park, which has an occupancy of approximately 37,000, often requires offering the blood of the firstborn.

Seeing the New York Mets at Shea Stadium, on the other hand, was more often than not a matter of showing up on game day with $20 to cover admittance and a beer. Shea had an occupancy of 57,333. The new Mets stadium, Citi Field, seats 42,000. A lesson was clearly learned in between these two stadiums.

Of course, the Mets aren't the New York Yankees, but then, West Ham isn't Chelsea or Arsenal.

Sullivan and Gold can offer reduced-price tickets all they want, it doesn’t guarantee that a side facing relegation—a side that may well be playing in the championship when it gains occupancy of the stadium—will be able to draw 60,000 supporters on a weekly basis.

More important—and alarming—than both of these concerns is the issue of money. To reiterate, the Olympic Stadium cost an estimated £537m, or approximately $872 million. Its construction was funded in full by public money.

Is it ethically sound to simply hand over a £537m building project funded by public money to a corporation, especially in light of the recent global economic crash and subsequent recession?

Think of it this way. If the British government spends £537m building a new airport and decides that, after an important air show, the facility will be handed over to Boeing or Virgin, would anyone have a problem with that?

The problem with awarding use of the Olympic Stadium to West Ham ultimately lies with the government of the United Kingdom, which thought to pass the grounds on to a company before thinking its use should be the providence of the British people.

Shouldn't such a facility be reserved for schools, community teams, local games, occasional events and EPL or visiting team exposition matches?

Shouldn't West Ham have to make repairs to Boleyn Ground out of its own pocket rather than depend on public infrastructure to support it?

Surely Millwall and Leyton Orient supporters would be disappointed to know they funded a building venture that will attract potential investments in the tens of millions to West Ham.

But then, Millwall's for the daft...