In Support Of Leyton Orient And Safe Standing

Ian

Ian began writing Twohundredpercent in May 2006. He lives in Brighton. He has also written for, amongst others, Pitch Invasion, FC Business Magazine, The Score, When Saturday Comes, Stand Against Modern Football and The Football Supporter. Ian was the first winner of the Socrates Award For Not Being Dead Yet at the 2010 NOPA awards for football bloggers.

You may also like...

1 Response

  1. SuffolkChris says:

    You say in your piece Re: Leyton Orient that, “nobody has been able to convincingly explain why Premier League and Football League rules regarding one club moving into the immediate vicinity of another have been swept to one side to allow West Ham to move to Stratford”. I shall, in the interest of fairness atempt to give you that explanation.

    Firstly it may help if I show you the Premier League rule that is in question…I am assured that the Football league rule has very similar wording.

     
    “5. Each Club shall register its ground with the Secretary and no Club shall remove to another
    ground without first obtaining the written consent of the Board, such consent not to be
    unreasonably withheld.
     
    6. In considering whether to give any such consent, the Board shall have regard to all the
    circumstances of the case and shall not consent unless reasonably satisfied that such consent:

    6.5 would not adversely affect Clubs (or Football League clubs) having their registered
    grounds in the immediate vicinity of the proposed location; and
     
    6.6 would enhance the reputation of the League and promote the game of association
    football generally.”

    All rules whether they be Premier league rules, football league rules, the UK tiddly wink association rules, or the rules of your local workingmans club, have two things in common. They have to be lawful, and they have to be used fairly and reasonably. Hence the wording of clause “5” “such consent not to be unreasonably withheld”

    This rule and the football league rule were bought in to try to prevent another Wimbledon to Milton Keynes scenario. Had this rule been in existance at the time Wimbledon could still have relocated their ground to Milton Keynes but without the consent of the football league would have had to go to court if they wished to retain their league status. They would have had to argue that the football league were acting unreasonably in not giving their consent.

    The case of West Ham United’s proposed move to Stratford is totally different. If the Premier league or football league had withheld consent It is doubtful if any court in the land would consider that to be reasonable, and the reason is simple.

    West Ham United bear the name of the London borough where they were formed and have always played. Their current ground at Upton Park is in West Ham (now called Newham), and The Olympic Stadium at Stratford is also in West Ham (Newham). West Ham’s present ground is approx three miles from Leyton Orient, (Which incidently is in The London borough of Waltham Forest). Moving to Stratford will put them approx one mile from Leyton Orient. So to summarize, The Premier league and football league know that it is very unlikely that any court would consider that witholding consent from West Ham when they are proposing to move just two miles from their current home, and remaining within the London borough that bears their name, would be a reasonable implementation of their rules.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>