Originally posted by Buzzo
View Post
You are a loss to the world of Politics Dom. These are semantics really, and just quoting one line of a response removes a bit of context.Every plan and every contingency is of course only affected by the actual failure of a deadline being met, and an unforeseeable element being introduced, but on a engineering build of close to £1bn, there should be a degree of realism on the time frame. Perhaps Spurs should have allowed for two seasons at Wembley with the contingency that if the stadium was signed off early they would move in sooner?
The transfer of information is whats interesting, when did Spurs actually find out what was going on, and how did that effect the agreements they had in place with the FA and PL. The talk of contractrors being paid vast amounts in the summer suggests there was an understanding that deadlines would not be met.
Fwiw, you were arguing the exact opposite point (realism of meeting a deadline on a complex build) when we were discussing the new Barca stadium. Which to me, though perhaps realistic in time frame is a project that will encounter many, many unforeseeables. I would say that the LFC main stand project finishing on time will be an exception rather than a rule on this type of engineering build.
Not sure I was arguing the opposite with the Barca build either - as I suspect that if the Spurs stadium didn't experience the apparent H&S **** up, then that too have been open for the LFC game as planned.
who's arsed?
Comment