Final decision on Olympic Stadium must be right one for London

Today is the start of a process that will see one of our top clubs in London transformed forever.

Tottenham Hotspur and West Ham United both want to move to the Olympic Stadium after the Games in 2012.

Their bid documents were handed over to the Olympic Park Legacy Company this morning.

Led by chair Baroness Ford, the 15-strong board will digest the information provided by the two great rivals over the next seven days before making a decision on who will occupy the stadium in Stratford.

Their decision is massive. Both clubs need bigger stadiums if they want to compete at the highest level in the Premier League and Europe.

It is an emotive issue for both sets of supporters. Spurs have been at White Hart Lane for 112 years but redeveloping the ground has proved problematic and expensive. But can their fans stomach moving to the east end?

West Ham have been at Upton Park for 107 years, yet again, redeveloping the ground is just too prohibitive. Yet can their supporters stomach moving to a stadium with a running track?

Today's Standard Sport reveals the arguments put forward to the OPLC today.

West Ham claim they are the only club that can provide the 'legacy' promised by Lord Coe when he won the right to host the Olympics back in 2005 by keeping the track in their 60,000 stadium.

Spurs, though, argue that it makes no financial sense to have a football ground with a track. They point to numerous leading clubs in Europe, like Bayern Munich and Ajax, who realise that having a track around the pitch does not work in the modern game. The gloves came off this morning when Spurs boss Harry Redknapp in his newspaper column claimed West Ham will "die" if they move to Stratford.

The decision is not an easy one.

The Olympic Games will be the most wonderful event in this country since the 1966 World Cup. If as the head of the IAAF Lamine Diack suggests knocking the stadium down and ripping up the track would be a "lie" and "finish" Britain as a host of world events, then West Ham must win the bid.

But when will we ever fill a 60,000-seat stadium again for athletics after the Games? Crystal Palace struggles to sell 15,500 tickets for high-class Golden League events in the summer. Surely, it makes more sense for Spurs to transform the arena into a football stadia as Manchester City did after the 2002 Commonwealth Games?

Tough one. Two great clubs, only one winner, what a shame they can't share it once the fighting is over.

It is worth remembering that we wouldn't be having this debate if Lord Coe had not been successful and brought the Games to London in the first place.

The final decision must be based on what is in the best interests of London and the rest of the country and not what is in the best interests of two football clubs.

West Ham: We'll provide lasting legacy for the whole country

Spurs: Fans will be the big losers if running track stays

West Ham need 2012 stadium to reduce crippling debt

Spurs will lose their identity but leaving Lane is the only viable option