Leaving Stamford Bridge

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
crocarno

crocarno

Member
Feb 3, 2011
480
16
18
It's been a while since there has been any news on a potential move away from Stamford Bridge.

As far as I am aware, the consistent message is that we cannot increase the existing site by more than 6-8k which, by my reckoning, really isnt worth the effort. It appears that the only way we can achieve 60-75k stadium is a move away.

What I'd like to understand is how will this ever happen? It appears that there is still a lot of resistance about a move away (I appreciate that it's not everyone's ideal resolution), but how on earth will we be able to compete long-term if we don't add c.20,000 seats to the ground? Where will we go and when.

Although regrettable, I don't see any other viable option. That said, it's been very quiet on that topic recently. Does anyone have any "knowledge" of future plans?
 
Heard a rumour Abramovich is interested in some locations in Odessa <ok>
 
Have a feeling that the recent poll of season ticket holders and members on safe standing and the demonstrations of the prototype points to us staying at the bridge . Fulham council are said to be bending over backwards to keep us in the area with all sorts of alternatives being offered to increase capacity of the bridge
 
crocarno said:
It's been a while since there has been any news on a potential move away from Stamford Bridge.

As far as I am aware, the consistent message is that we cannot increase the existing site by more than 6-8k which, by my reckoning, really isnt worth the effort. It appears that the only way we can achieve 60-75k stadium is a move away.

What I'd like to understand is how will this ever happen? It appears that there is still a lot of resistance about a move away (I appreciate that it's not everyone's ideal resolution), but how on earth will we be able to compete long-term if we don't add c.20,000 seats to the ground? Where will we go and when.

Although regrettable, I don't see any other viable option. That said, it's been very quiet on that topic recently. Does anyone have any "knowledge" of future plans?
Click to expand...

The latest accounts showed that ZERO was spent on either looking for or planning of a new stadium or increasing SB. Since failing to get Battersea and RA"s loss of the vote it would appear we've given up completely. SB can't be expanded unless massive obstacles regarding safety are overcome. The council keeps saying these can be overcome but have turned down every idea we've given them about it. They won't say what they think will be successful as apparently 'it's not their job'. So they keep up the lie that its not them but the clubs fault.
Anyway, as i said the club are no longer spending money on anything about moving or increasing capacity so it would appear we are at SB with this capacity for a long time to come.
 
Its a real quandary.
No team likes to leave their ancestral home, yet in modern football, it is becoming a necessity, especially with FFP now, for the teams in the CL to have a stadium with 60k capacity if they want to keep their spending at a competitive level.

Would you rather see us scrape 3rd-6th every year at SB and the odd FA cup, or win league titles and CL cups whilst at another ground?
I think I would go for the latter, as much as it would pain me.
Arsenal and City fans seem to have gotten over it.
 
It does feel like we are stuck in Limbo - surely it is time to do something though, just seems like that is all a very long way off. If a decision is made to move (or expand), plans & £'s are needed, approval required, the build to happen - then to start playing. Surely that's 3-4 years away at best. Can we afford to stay where we are for that long?
 
crocarno said:
It does feel like we are stuck in Limbo - surely it is time to do something though, just seems like that is all a very long way off. If a decision is made to move (or expand), plans & £'s are needed, approval required, the build to happen - then to start playing. Surely that's 3-4 years away at best. Can we afford to stay where we are for that long?
Click to expand...

Agreed, this is also a worry for me.
I assumed something would have been in place by now.
But the whole thing seems to be dragging along with no end in sight. And its only going to hurt the club more and more.
It really needs to be made Priority One.
 
Ideally, tear it up and rebuild on it. It took Wembley 4 years, could we wait that long and groundshare somewhere else, probably not.
 
If we want a bigger stadium there's no way we'll stay where we are. They must have paid **** loads to different architects to figure this out.

I think it would be horrible to go and play somewhere else for a few seasons too! It's just such a shame we didn't get Battersea.
 
Bodanki said:
Agreed, this is also a worry for me.
I assumed something would have been in place by now.
But the whole thing seems to be dragging along with no end in sight. And its only going to hurt the club more and more.
It really needs to be made Priority One.
Click to expand...

I think it was and no solution was found after spending millions on it. Sometimes there are problems that have no solution.
 
JCC87 said:
Ideally, tear it up and rebuild on it. It took Wembley 4 years, could we wait that long and groundshare somewhere else, probably not.
Click to expand...

You still have the exact same problems as now with the access and egress. It's the location of the land that is the problem.
 
Drogs said:
If we want a bigger stadium there's no way we'll stay where we are. They must have paid **** loads to different architects to figure this out.

I think it would be horrible to go and play somewhere else for a few seasons too! It's just such a shame we didn't get Battersea.
Click to expand...

I will always wonder if we could have bid more had RA known he could sell the SB site to recoup some losses. We'll never know but he asked the Pitch Owners for a reason and I really don't think it was to line his own pockets after the money he's already spent. Unfortunately that no vote may have scuppered the best solution in Battersea.

Anyway, the bottom line is that the club has stopped all activity be it redevelopment or new build so it seems over to them.
 
CPofL KTBFFH said:
I think it was and no solution was found after spending millions on it. Sometimes there are problems that have no solution.
Click to expand...

There is quite an easy solution, find a plot of land big enough to house the stadium we require, buy it, and build the f**king stadium :)

Obviously we want it as close to the Kings Road as possible, and still in SW, but it surely cant be that difficult. Then again, what the f**k do I know, I am no business man or builder.
 
The economics of modern football and the likelihood of RA not spending as much, means that in the not too distant future, Chelsea will not be competitive without at least a 55,000 seat stadium and preferably 65,000.
There are 2 barriers in our way.
1. Fulham Council who must have a really sore bum from sitting on the fence for 4 years.
2. The intransigence of the Pitch owners.
Unless one or both have a change of heart, and soon, then we will be really struggling.
Talk about a rock and a hard place.
 
shedend59 said:
Have a feeling that the recent poll of season ticket holders and members on safe standing and the demonstrations of the prototype points to us staying at the bridge . Fulham council are said to be bending over backwards to keep us in the area with all sorts of alternatives being offered to increase capacity of the bridge
Click to expand...

Safe standing won't help with capacity numbers. Each standing position requires a seat plus European football regulations require everyone to be sitting anyway; in short, each standing position is the same size as a seated position.
 
Gerrez said:
Safe standing won't help with capacity numbers. Each standing position requires a seat plus European football regulations require everyone to be sitting anyway; in short, each standing position is the same size as a seated position.
Click to expand...

Total bollocks as usual from a scouser I have been at the bridge for a game against WBA and there was 63,000 and now we have seated just under 43,000 and we don't turn up late or drunk.
 
King Ossie64 said:
Total bollocks as usual from a scouser I have been at the bridge for a game against WBA and there was 63,000 and now we have seated just under 43,000 and we don't turn up late or drunk.
Click to expand...

Completely uncalled for <doh>
 
Biggest bug bear of this club is short term planning be it on the pitch or off it; in addition to that there the opposition of the local residents & police to increased capacity, the CPO have got their heads stuck up their jacksies and the Council who wants us to stay in the borough and have yet to come up with any constructive ideas........clearly long term we're screwed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back