2012 at the moment has no legacy. Foreigners have been employed in the main to build the site - despite promises UK labour would be used. No one wants to buy any part of the site.

Now West Ham have offered to "care-take" the stadium after 2012 I hope the TORY Government bite their hand off.

This would be fantastic for the working people of East London to have their main football club based in this landmark stadium. Tickets would be very cheap ( probably a tenner a game for Premier League football ) and it would revitalise this awful part of London with a heart.

It has worked for MAN CITY with the Commonwealth Stadium in Manchester - and West Ham are a fantastic football club and one who provided our only ever WORLD CUP winning team.

It would be fitting for this club to play in this National Stadium which would mean as well that London would have THREE world class grounds ( Wembley - Arsenal - Olympic Stadium )

Now West Ham have offered to leave their spiritual home - the only answer is to put them in this stadium and therefore protect the legacy of 2012.

With the curent jitters going around premiership clubs i would be surprised if half of them are in existence by 2012.With Portsmouth on the brink and both Liverpool and Manure United in debt up to their eyeballs its only a matter of time before the "Premiership" goes bang, killed by the greed of its players. West Ham are a middling team, they always have been and no amount of soft core pornographer owners is going to change that.London might have three world class grounds but most of the occupiers of the boots that play on these grounds are from foreign shores. West Ham fans may think that they have been saved by the owners of the Daily Tits but they not out of the woods yet i fear.

Giles - you seem to forget that they took a very small club in comparison ( Brum ) and have planted them firmly in the Premier League on very small gates.

West Ham have a very large fanbase in East London. They have as many fans as Arsenal and Tottenham - perhaps more local fans. They are very viable as a club representing a large area.

Though the Premier Bubble looks as if it may burst in the next few years - not least because the SKY monopoly is being challenged seriously by BT and ESPN. I still think any big club will survive because debt is only relative to the size of the club. Portsmouth may have only a tenth of the debt of Man Utd - but Man Utd are 200 times bigger than Portsmouth - hence out of the two only one is in any real danger and even small clubs like Exeter survive with gates of 4,000 when millions in debt. Companies just go under and re-surface under new ownership and name.

So do you think they should get the ground ?

I'm all in favour of the Sullivan takeover - good luck to the two Davids - if they have reached this level of financial acumen, thank god they even want to be involved in football.

Wish we had a few similar tycoons who thought music could be profitable.

Boris seems to like the idea but there again that may be a vote catching ploy in the run up to the General Election. It seems that there are other contenders such as Saracens RFC and even Leyton Orient. Athletics and other sport was edged out of Wembley when that was built and i fear that will happen again if the football mafia get their hands on this stadium.

Hammers legend Billy Bonds doesnt like the idea either.

Leyton Orient have a newly built ground which is big enough for their needs. Athletics does not need a big stadium in London. We only need it once every 50 years for the Olympics - so build a new one every time.

The stadium will not be used if it is not occupied by a large football club. Saracens have no affinity with the East End - their base is in Herts and Barnet. Their fanbase would not travel all the way regularly to a stadium a further 15 miles away.

West Ham are local - they represent the ordinary people of the area. That is why they should get the stadium. It makes total sense.