http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/15630954.stm Our beloved Bridge is set to go under the knife, I'm sure a lot of you may have read this article but thought it appropriate to put on the board Thoughts? Only positive I can take is the ambition Gourlay has stated in saying .
Just read it Drogs, i didn't realie how bad our situation was, in a few years were gunna have the 75th biggest stadium? Were meant to be within the top 10 teams in the world yet sunderland and villa to name two have bigger stadiums than us, i seriously think we need to find a nearby location and move stadium, along with these financial fair play rules were going to be well and truly ****ed if we don't move
I thought Hammersmith & Fulham were keen to see us remain at SB and were about to hold discussions to see if ground development could be achieved?
I like the idea of a 65k stadium, but it means leaving my beloved Bridge. I remember being at a midweek FA cup replay against the Spuds once. We came out of Fulham Broadway station about 6.30 for a 7.30 kick off . The Fulham Rd was just a dense mass of bodies. We got in and they closed the gates behind us on a crowd of over 70k and an estimated 20k locked out. By the time we got to the top of the terraces the game was 10 minutes old. Even if they could build it at SB the local systems of road and rail couldn't cope!
Hi! Hi! Hi! Robby! I was just thinking that according to all the stuff thats been said about Relocating / Rebuiliding that none of this is likely to come about for 10 years yet! SO ALL OF US" LETS STAY AT STAMFORD BRIDGE BRIGADE"---WILL HAVE 10 YEARS TO GET USED TO THE IDEA!!
Great memories. Never saw that many people at the Bridge; closest was v Fulham on Boxing Day when I was v young. 50odd K that day
It was never very comfortable Hammersmith, but when I was a youngster it was all a bit of a lark! I'm not sure I could handle it now!
Worst crush I experienced was night cup game v Saints and milk cup game at QPR and home to Sunderland.
As long as it's not some capitalist ploy named after a ****ing brand like the SAMSUNG STADIUM/ARENA and named after something meaningful, not just to line pockets.
Dont know much about the situation but do chelsea own stamford bridge or is it a long term lease - could they buy land to build a new stadium and what would happen if they bought the land that stamford bridge is on - would they knock the bridge and build on the same site or just build close to the stadium ps. I think these financial fair play rules are making clubs panic
the CPO (chelsea pitch owners) own SB, fans bought the ground to prevent property developers from getting their claws on it when we were in dire straits. £100 per fan.
This will help In granting control of the freehold to Chelsea Pitch Owners, the intention was to ensure that Stamford Bridge could never again be sold to property developers. Irrespective of how many shares are owned by an individual, voting rights are limited to 100 per shareholder to prevent any one person or organisation gaining control of the CPO.[3] The CPO also owns the name Chelsea Football Club Ltd, which is licenced back to the club on condition that the first team play their home matches at Stamford Bridge. This means that should Chelsea move to another stadium in the future, they would not be able to use the name Chelsea Football Club without permission from 75% of CPO shareholders.[4] The company is a non-profit organisation and is not listed on any Stock Exchange.[1][3] Its purpose is to raise the money needed to pay off the loan and then lease the freehold back to the club, on the strictly-defined proviso that the ground may only be used for football purposes. Fans are encouraged to purchase shares in order to secure the club's future. As of 2011, around 15,000 CPO shares have been sold, and approximately £1.5million of the debt has been paid off.[5] Club captain John Terry is the current President of the CPO.[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Pitch_Owners
