100 games in charge at West Ham United.
He are some stats from his first 100 games in charge at the s
9,000 minutes of football
3,271 hoofs up field
3,843 minutes of the ball being in the air
3 times the ball rolled out by the WHU keeper
7 The average number of touches the West Ham midfield have in a game
741 reported cases of repetitive strain injury to the neck (3 of them WHU players)
43 wins
237 games of head tennis during matches
38 lost balls
51 reported near misses with passing planes
1 'ball forward' still orbiting earth
Well done Big Sam....keep up the good work
You all have a good night now
Congratulations Big Sam
posted on 25/9/13
A lot of people have said similar, people don't get the difference between short term renting and leasehold, or leasehold and commercial tenancy.
Commercial tenancy is used by multinational companies who measure thier turnover in billions and has no stigma whatever.
posted on 25/9/13
Dramatic: True. The vast majority of flats, penthouse or otherwise, are leasehold and not freehold.
And a lot of banks rent their premises on commercial leases. Just look at Canary Wharf.
The OS is a great deal for West Ham. I'm almost embarrassed at how cheap we're getting it and how much it will cost the taxpayer.
Only bitter Spurs fans are making it seem like it's a bad thing.
posted on 25/9/13
Must be embarrassing for those companies renting in The Shard or Canary Wharf. Oh, except it isn't.
posted on 25/9/13
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 25/9/13
posted on 25/9/13
Galv
Sorry but everyone stopped talking about the content of your original article some hours back.
posted on 25/9/13
Someone switch off the broken record. Myspammers has been on repeat for the last couple of years
posted on 25/9/13
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 25/9/13
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/9/13
myhammers
West Ham were incredibly lucky to get the OS. We'll have similar-sized stadiums, yet ours will have cost us next-to-nothing.
====================
I dont see anything lucky about moving from a football stadium that you own, to share and pay rent on someone elses stadium that isn't even purpose built for the sport that your team play, for nearly 100 years.
It is far better, clearly, to have a stadium that you own, that is purpose built for the sport that you play, and that you have the sole rights to use and have a say in who uses it.
West Ham's "home" is just simply somewhere they have been allowed to play football, a bit like a Sunday league team being allowed to hire pitch 9 over Hackney Marshes.
By all means be happy that you can see your team play in a big stadium but there is simply no comparison between:
A purpose built football stadium that is owned and having total control and full rights over.
And:
A stadium that is built for athletics, your club will be playing second fiddle to athletics, and one that you have to pay to use but will never own.
We'll get funding and sponsors to pay for our shiney new football stadium, whilst you can keep chucking £2m down the drain year on year, paying to hire a football pitch in someone elses stadium.
Everyone's happy...