Breaking News
Translate

Police turn down West Ham’s plea for help at London Stadium

City Police’s senior officers in London have turned down a request from Premier League clubside West Ham to help secure their stadium on match days. Their action was based on the fact that the £700 million ground does not have a “satisfactory’’ radio system. The club had requested a police presence in the ground after crowd trouble.

The Hammers only moved to the London Stadium at the start of the season. “Until there is comprehensive radio coverage, officers will not be routinely deployed within it,’’ said the Metropolitan Police’s Peter Terry. Terry, who is deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police and in charge of specialist crime and operations, added: “The stadium operators are responsible for the safety and comfort of their customers and staff.

“This issue was highlighted to the stadium operators in October 2014 and the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has been in negotiation with stadium operators regarding the provision of Airwave radio inside the stadium. “During this time, the MPS had spoken to the stadium operators several times to highlight the consequences of not installing such a system.

“The MPS is not able to provide Special Policing Services at this time as it would normally, as there is no satisfactory radio system across the ground.’’ All of Great Britain’s emergency services and more than 300 public safety organisations use the Airwave radio system to communicate. West Ham confirmed that 10 fans were ejected from the stadium during the 4-2 defeat by Watford on Saturday.

There were more disturbances during the first home Premier League game against Bournemouth last month. West Ham is a tenant at the London Stadium, which is owned by E20 and was built to host the 2012 London Olympics. E20 says it is addressing the recent trouble.

Documents released last year showed the taxpayer — not the club — would foot the bill for much of the match day operating costs, including security.

 


Disclaimer

Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.