Those of us who find Einstein's Theory of Relativity a little hard to digest, are probably having the same gastronomic problems with Adam Crozier's latest explanation and justification of the costs involved in the creation of this new wonder stadium in North London.

This was always going to go ahead, and it was always going to be on the old Wembley site, nothing was ever more certain, for let's face it, no matter what proposals Birmingham or any other forward thinking city in this country had put forward, there was only ever going to be one location for this concrete monster, and whatever the cost, it would be acceptable, vehemently supported and defended.

The newspapers, which were not wholly ecstatic at the final disclosure of the plans, were filled with statistics such as the fact that this one stadium was costing very nearly the same amount of cash that eight or nine of the South Korean World Cup venues cost. Many comparative costs were published regarding the completion of other stadiums of note around the world.

Everything seems to come down to the cost per seat in building a new arena, and Crozier, along with Trevor Brooking felt very comfortable with the £4/£5,000 quoted in the press for the new Wembley Stadium. In fact that figure could be easily disputed, as there seems to be an amazing amount of acceptable flexibility in what sums are included or excluded from the cost of this stadium.

The movers and shakers, in arriving at this figure, have chosen to exclude the cost of demolition, car parks, necessary transport improvements etc etc, and based the cost per seat against the 'actual' spend on the building (quoted at £352m) which conveniently brings it in line with the other major stadiums around the world.

Adam Crozier was quoted in The Times as seeing this new stadium as a source of revenue to be invested in the grass roots of football in the coming decades. They are projecting annual operating profits, within five years of the building being completed, in the region of £10 to £20 million. No one has disclosed the running costs, and if grass roots were the issue then I am certain that a small proportion of the £757m (say for example the £100m that the FA are contributing) would go a long was towards addressing the problem in a more urgent fashion that waiting another five years before kicking it off, on the back of an expected, but far from guaranteed return.

It is more likely that the improvement to England's chances of staging a World Cup in 2014 or 2018 is behind the thinking, but grass roots concern was a nice quote.

For whatever reason, those involved in the decision have chosen not to compare the Wembley cost to that of the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff, which at £190m for 75,000 seats would seem to be a market stall bargain at the moment. Furthermore, and no doubt planned as a justification of the high spend compared to Cardiff, there was the public criticism of the Welsh venue by none other than Ken Bates. One can only imagine what pain it must have caused those in authority to have the plans delayed for such a length of time, forcing them to play so many games in the Welsh backwater.

We are assured that every seat will have more legroom than the previous occupants of the Royal Box enjoyed, which is an admirable claim, and no doubt something that regular attendees will be pleased to hear. What I didn't quite understand however, was the claim that they were building a stadium that would generate a great atmosphere and that somehow, if I have understood this correctly, the additional legroom afforded to the spectators would contribute towards this goal.

Now I am in no position to throw doubt on this claim, but I'm not too sure that removing the Windsor family members from the Royal box would have had too detrimental an effect on the atmosphere at past F A Cup finals, where of course everyone else's legs were tangled up in the limited space made available to them. To me it's the people in the ground, the quality of the game on the field, and the overall passion of the occasion that have always been the factors in generating atmosphere, but maybe I've missed something.

The statement that the venue was for the whole country would not be accepted by too many either I wouldn't have thought, as an acceptable reason for issuing contracts at such high levels. As with any other prestigious venture, the beneficiaries of the facilities are limited. Of the 90,000 seats, 18,000 will be earmarked for costly Corporate Entertainment outings, leaving 72,000 to be fought over by the masses that would like to attend a game there. Out of a population of some 57 million, that's not a great penetration level on making it a place for the whole of the nation, although as a percentage of those who can afford to make regular visits it's probably quite impressive. It will be interesting to see the price menu when it is eventually disclosed. Again The Times stated that the success of the venture would heavily depend on the take up of the ten-year tenures of the corporate facilities

The fact, surely, is that this is being built as a status symbol for a football nation that does not hold the place on the world stage that it thinks it should, but is more than capable of producing however large a supply of prawn sandwiches is required. In these new surroundings, I am sure that will be a very lucrative contract in it's own right.

The Friday night a week after the Wembley announcement, I trundled down to the Patti Pavilion to see a gig, with Dave Edmunds and Tommy Emmanuel sharing the bill. Most of you will have heard of the first name, but maybe not many, if any, the second, so to enlighten you, he's a great Australian acoustic guitarist with a fast growing following in this country, even though he's been around for 20 years or more.

Those of you who have been to the Patti will know what it's like. It's a sparsely furnished building, used for many purposes throughout a year and is a bit of a local landmark. The bar consists of a table with a fridge behind it, the glasses are plastic, the chairs would not look out of place in a local community centre, but depending on what event is being hosted the place can without doubt be very atmospheric. That Friday night was no exception.

I'm not too sure how much it cost to build initially, or what the fee was to move it in its entirety from Craig y Nos all those years ago, but what I am very sure of is that no matter which mathematical equation you chose, the building cost per seat at the Patti, at present day values, would see a couple noughts lopped of the £4/£5,000 estimate for the new Wembley, but as for atmosphere, it's all down to how the players play, and what the people watching think of it. Maybe that has all been lost in the financial maze that football has become, and maybe, just maybe one day, someone will cut down the hedgerows and allow people to see what is really going on again.

Even locally we are embroiled in arguments and discussions about the Morfa project, waiting on a council that seems to have the same real appetite for this project as Steve Watkin has for scoring goals, letting any possible barrier get in the way of it's progression, the other party always being the culprit, and all the while the potential occupants of the green rectangle in the middle (remember that part of it all), are gasping for breath. Unfortunately no one can hear them due the rustling of the promissory notes. Remember when sport was a pleasurable pastime and leisure activity? It never blunted the fervour or edge of the fans' conversations, but it was all about the game, and that's what is missing now.

If anyone has any feedback to give me, I'd love to hear from you at pauly@scfc.co.uk