This is a discussion I've been having with one of my mates that I go to the games with. Do you feel that having more London teams in the PL is detrimental to your teams chances or does it help? I'm not a big fan of West Ham, Spurs or Arsenal to say the least and I am sure the feeling is mutual for their fans as far as Chelsea are concerned but which viewpoint do you guys take on this? One side of the argument is that more London derbies means closer and more purposeful matches than say... Swansea or West Brom for instance, but on the other hand I would much rather travel to Fulham or Spurs on a midweek night than have to go to Swansea which is a long journey for the players and fans. For instance Chelsea and Fulham contest the West London Derby on Boxing Day. 6 days before that we play Spurs at WHL and 5 days after Boxing Day we play Aston Villa at home. Traditionally Chelsea don't do well in the Christmas period but the fact that we don't leave London for basically 2 weeks which could be crucial. Arsenal are in a similar boat. From Boxing Day, they will play 3 games in a row in London. Surely that has to be better than travelling up to Blackpool at a time when the games come thick and fast? As much as I can't stand West Ham, I would like them to come up, and I am hopeful QPR can stay up. I personally feel the more London teams in the PL, the better. I remember in the 90s when London clubs used to do so poorly in visits up north and I think it would be much easier for our clubs if there were more London clubs. Thoughts?
You are quite correct & thanks for pointing it out, even if you did have to resort to personal attacks to do it.
it's pretty awesome having 3 teams within less than 3 miles of eachother, i don't care much for the rest of london...
Agree, H&F is the 3rd smallest Borough in London so it is commendable to have 3 teams all local to each other.
To be honest I don't think of games against other London teams as being derbies. Our derbies are the games against those from our part of London. So, this season in the Premier League our (that's Fulham, by the way) usual derbies against Chelsea have been added to by the ones with QPR. When we play Spurs and Arsenal they are just games against big premier league clubs, no different to me from if we were playing Liverpool, etc. No offense to Arsenal or Spurs fans, I'm sure your feelings when you play us aren't on a par with when you play each other.
i'm with you on that Captain Morgan,i see the london derbies as chelsea v Fulham,and now qpr as well and Spurs v arsenal
I suppose it depends on who you support. Fulham have never really had a traditional rival as such which puts a different complexion on things. Most Chelsea fans identify West Ham, Spurs and Arsenal as the big 3 that we have to win because more than just points is at stake. Any derby involving West Ham, Spurs and Chelsea always has added spice because across London they are without doubt the 3 most hated teams in London and the teams that most other London clubs would identify as being one of their top rivals.
Technically no, although Chelsea just about touch the border hence why we are allowed to use the name, if we were any further away from Kings Road then we wouldn't legally be allowed to use the name Chelsea, which is partly why it would be difficult to move.
No, we should limit the league to no more than one team from any one city, with the solitary place going to whichever club has existed the longest. Oh, wait a minute, that means Fulham stays and the rest of you have to find another league to play in. What a coincidence.
I know Chelsea fans don't regard us as such, but long before we were in the Premier League, most Fulham fans regarded Chelsea as our main rival. In the 90s when we were in the lower divisions and Brentford were the rivals that we actually got to play against regularly, you still heard songs about our dislike for Chelsea far more than you did for Brentford. Chelsea are Fulham's traditional rivals.
