Morning:
8°c
Athletics chief's fury over legacy for stadium
Matthew Beard, Sports News Correspondent7 Nov 2008
THE head of world athletics today launched an extraordinary attack on International Olympic Committee president Jacques Rogge over the legacy of the London Olympic stadium.
Lamine Diack, president of the International Association of Athletics Federations, accused Mr Rogge of a "lack of respect" for his sport for claiming that the athletics track could be removed from the stadium after the Games to prevent it becoming a white elephant.
He said destroying the track would be "totally unacceptable" and endorsed Sebastian Coe's vision to put athletics on the map in the capital after 2012.
Mr Diack, who voted for London to stage the Games, said scrapping the track would break a promise made to him and other IOC members by Lord Coe during the bid.
The track in legacy is problematic because it deters Premier League football clubs who might be potential tenants of the stadium post-2012, as it would keep fans too far from the action. Securing a top club such as West Ham or Tottenham as a tenant would lift the long-term financial burden of the Stratford venue from the Mayor.
Boris Johnson's office is in talks with rugby clubs and Championship football side Leyton Orient, but neither option would guarantee that the venue could pay its way.
Today's outburst by Mr Diack means that two of the most powerful men in world sport are at loggerheads.
Reader views (2)
Football does NOT need another stadium paid for by taxpayers, it can afford to pay itself. What about some support for other sports!!
London does not have a stadium at all, nor a decent swimming pool, nor a velodrome, nor a lot of things! Sport needs this investment, but NOT the £40m being paid for consultants!!
- Johnw, Peterborough, Cambs, 17/11/2008 17:18
Report abuse
And so gradually all the lies told to secure the games for London start to unravel. Just think, the cost of £11Bn would be enough to keep the POst Office going for another 55 years. Time for it to become obsolete.
- Jeremiah, London, 07/11/2008 17:10
Report abuse
