That is true.
The protests started when the lack of atmosphere, very long sight-lines and most importantly a raft home losses soon became the reality.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] West Ham situation. Is it the same?
- Thread starter Couldn't Be Hyypia
- Start date
That is true.
The protests started when the lack of atmosphere, very long sight-lines and most importantly a raft home losses soon became the reality.
Exactly. They're having a poor season, that's all, and those fans who were stupid enough to believe that a move to a bigger ground would result in them immediately becoming a top-four side are angry that it hasn't happened.
And yes the Olympic Stadium isn't an ideal football ground, but that was the trade-off for getting a massive ground for peanuts. Withdean wasn't an ideal ground either, but we had some great times there. (Remember Swindon?). If their signings had gelled and they were top-half none of these protests would have happened.
Tokyohands
Well-known member
Their situation is nowhere near the same as ours was and I think a stint in the Championship would give their portion of idiotic fans, who fight among themselves, a bit of a reality check. Sayonara!
1234andcounting
Well-known member
- Mar 31, 2008
- 1,609
At what point should fans begin to organise themselves because they sense the underlying structure of the club is beginning to disintegrate? As we know, it takes a huge amount of effort to dislodge owners who either can't or won't run a club as both a (reasonably) successful business venture and a coherent sporting endeavour. Did Leyton Orient fans leave it to late? How about Coventry City? Blackpool? We have, in a sense, been fortunate, with an incredible reversal of fortune to get to where we are now. But compare us with Hull City, who have come back and look like imploding again in a much shorter time-frame.
At the very least, the watch words for supporters who love their club are "eternal vigilance".
At the very least, the watch words for supporters who love their club are "eternal vigilance".
Gazwag
5 millionth post poster
Why didn't the pitch invasions start in the first half when they were playing well rather than wait until they went one down.
Gazwag
5 millionth post poster
Blue Valkyrie
Not seen such Bravery!
Bad situation really.
The owners have seen the opportunity to brand them as London FC - the "London" on the badge gives this away - and clearly also see this as essential to a high value sale to an overseas buyer. Happy days for the owners. Not so happy for the fans with their downgraded match experience.
The owners have seen the opportunity to brand them as London FC - the "London" on the badge gives this away - and clearly also see this as essential to a high value sale to an overseas buyer. Happy days for the owners. Not so happy for the fans with their downgraded match experience.
jasetheace
New member
- Apr 13, 2011
- 712
I cant really make a judgement.
It would be helpful if the West Ham fans provided a list of requirements. However, things can only appear on the list if they have a solution and a plan for making it happen. It cannot just be a list of moans.
It would be helpful if the West Ham fans provided a list of requirements. However, things can only appear on the list if they have a solution and a plan for making it happen. It cannot just be a list of moans.
I really find it hard to sympathise with fans of clubs who arrogantly assume that them being good once means they should still be so. See also: Leeds, Newcastle, Massive, to an extent Arsenal & Liverpool at a different tier.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 30,586
The 2016/17 WHUFC accounts show profit from sale of Boleyn Ground as £8,664,000, which is about the same price as it cost to buy Havard Nordtveit and Sofiana Feghouli.
BHAFC_Pandapops
Citation Needed
- Feb 16, 2011
- 2,844
That is actually scandalous that you can buy one player for more than a whole stadium.
This is where I'm struggling, too.
We keep hearing about broken promises, yet when people talk about what they were promised they talk about challenging the top 6, and running debt-free. I've seen articles from fans side of things, again repeating this idea of broken promises, one of the articles seemed to acknowledge that you can't guarantee success in football, and the West Ham fans know this. If they know this, why take the promise of challenging for the top six not only serious, but so serious, it should apparently be a reality after only a year? If they want the club to be run debt-free, surely that means using your money to pay off debts* as well as spend on players. (Even though as El Pres has noted their player spending has increased).
I understand that there is the issue of the owners charging interest on their loans to the club, but that isn't illegal, or especially nefarious. It would be great if all owners were like Tony Bloom, offering interest free loans and alternative payments (my understanding is some of Blooms initial loans were able to be paid off in the form of shares in the club?), but these days not all owners, particularly at the top end, are local businessmen investing in the club they supported as a kid. They are billionaires or international businessmen who are looking to profit from owning a club in one way or another. To do that, they need the club to stay in the premier league, so I don't see the owners of west ham anywhere near the likes of Archer/Stanley/Belotti in terms of being "bad owners"
I also understand that leaving the ground you've had for over 100 years is a major move, and can be upsetting. But people aren't complaining about the move itself. Just the benefits (i.e. on-pitch success) haven't materialised... after one and a bit seasons.
Even the list of demands following the meeting that called of the march seemed so... trivial (perhaps excepting the one about the badge) and none of them seem related to the ground move or even their performances on the pitch
1: [club] Must take up full away ticket allocation
2: Memorial [garden] to be maintained regularly
3: The Hammer and Castle badge to be recognised with immediate effect on match programme and in future in the stadium
4: The owners to be more professional on social media ie remove the Sullivan kids from speaking on the clubs behalf
5: The 15 minute interval must be addressed its impossible to get to the toilets get a drink and be back for the restart a for the second half
It really is hard to feel sympathy for the fans when there's no clear reasonable explanation for their upset.
On the other hand, though, it is really easy to dislike the Gold/Sullivan/Brady.
Hampster Gull
New member
- Dec 22, 2010
- 13,462
Didn’t see to much angst or protests when they were winning yesterday 
Hahahaha, Is that seriously a list of their top 5 gripes with the club??
Not being told when the 2nd half is going to kick off, blimey, torrid times at The Tax Payers Stadium.......
Load of JCLs then. Anyone who's a serious football supporter knows that the half-time interval is 15 minutes long (Law 7: Players are entitled to an interval at half-time, not exceeding 15 minutes). The fact that they didn't know that suggests that the people making the protests are not long-standing football fans but probably hangers-on who could get/afford tickets for the Emirates.
That just smacks of how much the Goldstone was priced at as a sale price ignoring the real value of the land that will be realised after that wont be put into the club.
Guy Fawkes
The voice of treason
- Sep 29, 2007
- 8,205
I read that more as they want the club to find a way to reduce the queuing times at half time, so that their fans can do those things during the 15 min break rather than (as you have seemingly read it as) calling for the break to be extended
Exactly like we had with our fans complaining about the queues at half time when we first moved in to the Amex and how long it takes to get served
A Partridge
New member
- Apr 1, 2018
- 5
this could look like some sort of dirty protest