Amazon Search and Bookmark
AFFILIATE SEARCH | Shop Amazon.co.uk using this search bar and support WHO!

Attendances at the Bowl

West Ham Online's Football Forum
Post Reply
User avatar
stubbo-admin
Posts: 1977
Old WHO Number: 12009
Has liked: 395 times
Been liked: 938 times

London Stadium Attendances at the Bowl

Post stubbo-admin »

So much as most think he's a wind up cսnt (and he clearly revels in that) Whetstone has produced an article for Iain Dale that lays bare the real attendance figures at our 'World Class' home.

Each week the attendance given is the tickets sold figure, but the fans that turn up are quite a different thing.

You can read the article here, but in average since 23/24 season, whilst 62,400 is what is what is published most weeks, the real attendance is typically nearer to 50,000, with averages dipping below 50k this season for the games that data is available for via FOIA.

https://www.westhamtillidie.com/posts/l ... es-exposed

Just another example of the shambolic state of that stadium and the draw of the world class team the board have worked so effectively to have playing within it.
onsideman
Posts: 1669
Old WHO Number: 16825
Has liked: 411 times
Been liked: 287 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post onsideman »

dealcanvey wrote: 23 Feb 2026, 09:43 Looked pretty much full on Saturday.
Not even close

At least 10 empty seats across our row and the one in front in West Lower. That's 10 of about 50, and the upper tiers are generally sparser
User avatar
Massive Attack
Posts: 8325
Old WHO Number: 321955
Has liked: 4835 times
Been liked: 2588 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Massive Attack »

A better image of how it was going to be achieved if you imagine the Chicken Run being built closer to the touchline..


It's all LIES, LIES, LIES! 🤑

Image
User avatar
Massive Attack
Posts: 8325
Old WHO Number: 321955
Has liked: 4835 times
Been liked: 2588 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Massive Attack »

Mad Ferret" wrote: 23 Feb 2026, 10:33
Massive Attack" wrote: 23 Feb 2026, 10:27 Because we had already moved the pitch across in to a different Postcode towards the Rio Stand when initially redeveloping the Ground so to make room for the intended eventual Chicken Run redevelopment eating in to a bit of both the Sir Trev Stand and Bobby Moore Stand.

We didn't just ruin the excellent touching distance to the pitch away from the Chicken Run for the sake of it. 

Busses were intended to pass underneath it with how they were going to rebuild it.
Then no wonder the stand never got built. Would've cost a fortune.


Affordable at the time they initially wanted to go ahead with it, especially with the Premier League finances taking off more and more each season. Plus it helps when we keep selling our best players like Rio to finance such redevelopments.
User avatar
Mad Ferret
Posts: 2552
Has liked: 220 times
Been liked: 409 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Mad Ferret »

Massive Attack" wrote: 23 Feb 2026, 10:27 Because we had already moved the pitch across in to a different Postcode towards the Rio Stand when initially redeveloping the Ground so to make room for the intended eventual Chicken Run redevelopment eating in to a bit of both the Sir Trev Stand and Bobby Moore Stand.

We didn't just ruin the excellent touching distance to the pitch away from the Chicken Run for the sake of it. 

Busses were intended to pass underneath it with how they were going to rebuild it.
Then no wonder the stand never got built. Would've cost a fortune.
User avatar
Massive Attack
Posts: 8325
Old WHO Number: 321955
Has liked: 4835 times
Been liked: 2588 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Massive Attack »

Because we had already moved the pitch across in to a different Postcode towards the Rio Stand when initially redeveloping the Ground so to make room for the intended eventual Chicken Run redevelopment eating in to a bit of both the Sir Trev Stand and Bobby Moore Stand.

We didn't just ruin the excellent touching distance to the pitch away from the Chicken Run for the sake of it. 

Busses were intended to pass underneath it with how they were going to rebuild it.


How it was before they intended to do it..

Image



They were going to bring the new Chicken Run close up to the touchline again..

Image
Last edited by Massive Attack on 23 Feb 2026, 10:34, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mad Ferret
Posts: 2552
Has liked: 220 times
Been liked: 409 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Mad Ferret »

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5315091 ... FQAw%3D%3D

Don't see how you build a bigger stand there without infringing on the right to light of the people in those blocks. 

Also would've had to re-route the road, or build over it which would've been very expensive.
User avatar
Massive Attack
Posts: 8325
Old WHO Number: 321955
Has liked: 4835 times
Been liked: 2588 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Massive Attack »

Mad Ferret" wrote: 23 Feb 2026, 09:58
Fauxstralian wrote: 23 Feb 2026, 09:45 Don’t really pay much attention to the upper tiers but 50k feels low
As said redeveloping the Chicken Run stand to fill in the gaps in the corners even if it was on the same footprint of the existing stand was the right answer 
Obviously we’re told lies about the restrictions caused by the bus station behind
To me 45,000 to 48,000 would be an ideal size for us
Filling in the corners of the Chicken Run would've yielded about a 3k increase, so hardly worth it.

And it couldn't be made any bigger due to the blocks of flats directly behind, rather than the bus garage.

Not true. They had the planning permission back in 1999 at one point but then Newham Council under that slimy Labour Jock cսnt Robin Wales got in to bed with GSB to fuck it off once they decided they wanted the Olympic Stadium instead, so the Council and Club didn't entertain permission for a 2nd time for their own invested interests. 🤑 

Yet another lie peddled by the GSB regime. 
User avatar
Mad Ferret
Posts: 2552
Has liked: 220 times
Been liked: 409 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Mad Ferret »

Fauxstralian wrote: 23 Feb 2026, 09:45 Don’t really pay much attention to the upper tiers but 50k feels low
As said redeveloping the Chicken Run stand to fill in the gaps in the corners even if it was on the same footprint of the existing stand was the right answer 
Obviously we’re told lies about the restrictions caused by the bus station behind
To me 45,000 to 48,000 would be an ideal size for us
Filling in the corners of the Chicken Run would've yielded about a 3k increase, so hardly worth it.

And it couldn't be made any bigger due to the blocks of flats directly behind, rather than the bus garage.
On The Ball
Posts: 471
Old WHO Number: 14382
Has liked: 193 times
Been liked: 56 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post On The Ball »

Lato wrote: 23 Feb 2026, 07:44  I think we all know the figures have been doctered since the move but, l am shocked its that much. How much longer are these Clowns that run OUR club think they are going to get away with the bull shit and lies.

Just feck off now!
They haven't been "doctored" at all - they just report tickets sold, which is what all Clubs do. It's misleading certainly, but they aren't "doctored".
Fauxstralian
Posts: 4522
Old WHO Number: 321173
Has liked: 78 times
Been liked: 654 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Fauxstralian »

Don’t really pay much attention to the upper tiers but 50k feels low
As said redeveloping the Chicken Run stand to fill in the gaps in the corners even if it was on the same footprint of the existing stand was the right answer 
Obviously we’re told lies about the restrictions caused by the bus station behind
To me 45,000 to 48,000 would be an ideal size for us
dealcanvey
Posts: 625
Old WHO Number: 212132
Has liked: 43 times
Been liked: 119 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post dealcanvey »

Looked pretty much full on Saturday.
violator
Posts: 911
Old WHO Number: 15360
Has liked: 312 times
Been liked: 308 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post violator »

wils wrote: 23 Feb 2026, 08:49 When people criticise The dwarf and Brady for not delivering on “world class team for a world class stadium“ it suggests the person doing it had bought into the promise in the first place. How many did?
More likely to be sarcasm mate
User avatar
Massive Attack
Posts: 8325
Old WHO Number: 321955
Has liked: 4835 times
Been liked: 2588 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Massive Attack »

Only BS could significantly reduce our attendance whilst occupying the Shithole. 
onsideman
Posts: 1669
Old WHO Number: 16825
Has liked: 411 times
Been liked: 287 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post onsideman »

Dick Shaftsbury" wrote: 23 Feb 2026, 07:55 The stadium was always too big for us. We needed 45,000 to 50,000.

 
Sorry for repeating myself, but that only applies in the event they fail to build the support.

Leaving aside the abysmal stadium, of course it made sense to have the capacity for growth. They're just too useless to achieve it
User avatar
Far Cough UKunt
Posts: 2278
Has liked: 620 times
Been liked: 970 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Far Cough UKunt »

I dunno, some people might have, I just took it as a marketing slogan, otherwise known as a load of old bollocks.
User avatar
wils
Posts: 1233
Location: London
Old WHO Number: 276191
Has liked: 241 times
Been liked: 536 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post wils »

When people criticise The dwarf and Brady for not delivering on “world class team for a world class stadium“ it suggests the person doing it had bought into the promise in the first place. How many did?
Chinkey Weasel
Posts: 45
Has liked: 81 times
Been liked: 21 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Chinkey Weasel »

......yep, you're keeping Sullivan's pockets, nicely topped up, so he's sure to walk away
User avatar
Massive Attack
Posts: 8325
Old WHO Number: 321955
Has liked: 4835 times
Been liked: 2588 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Massive Attack »

Dick Shaftsbury" wrote: 23 Feb 2026, 07:55 The stadium was always too big for us. We needed 45,000 to 50,000.



 

We have the fanbase to fill it, like we peoved earlier on if so many weren't driven away by GSB and how they mismanaged the the Club move amongst other things.
twoleftfeet
Posts: 2979
Old WHO Number: 214368
Has liked: 126 times
Been liked: 691 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post twoleftfeet »

The day they signed off on selling the Boleyn was the day our soul died. We could have redeveloped the ground, 45,000 capacity, safe standing and kept the intimidating nature of our home ground intact.

We can only hope that, one day, new owners will find some land in our heartlands and build us a football stadium to bring back the real fans and rid us of the tourists who turn up and spend much of the match with their backs to the pitch taking selfies.
Dick Shaftsbury
Posts: 361
Old WHO Number: 319145
Has liked: 357 times
Been liked: 203 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Dick Shaftsbury »

The stadium was always too big for us. We needed 45,000 to 50,000.
 
User avatar
Tomshardware
Posts: 1322
Old WHO Number: 266280
Has liked: 704 times
Been liked: 333 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Tomshardware »

Some games its been clearly nowhere near full, I was there on Saturday and it was pretty full.  I had a bunch of Krauts sat behind me but most around me were genuine West Ham fans.
Lato
Posts: 331
Old WHO Number: 14079
Has liked: 31 times
Been liked: 41 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Lato »

Is there still a waiting list to get a season ticket?
Lato
Posts: 331
Old WHO Number: 14079
Has liked: 31 times
Been liked: 41 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Lato »

 I think we all know the figures have been doctered since the move but, l am shocked its that much. How much longer are these Clowns that run OUR club think they are going to get away with the bull shit and lies.

Just feck off now!
User avatar
Far Cough UKunt
Posts: 2278
Has liked: 620 times
Been liked: 970 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post Far Cough UKunt »

To be fair 50,000 is still a great number that some clubs would love to have?
onsideman
Posts: 1669
Old WHO Number: 16825
Has liked: 411 times
Been liked: 287 times

Re: Attendances at the Bowl

Post onsideman »

...because they've failed to grow the support
Post Reply