We have finished above Arsenal for the last 6 seasons running (soon to be 7). I don't see how they can be considered as the cream of London any longer. In terms of London teams Chelsea have set the new benchmark and are now the team to beat. We have topped the LDN head to heads every year bar 08/09, dating back to 04/05. Only United have won more trophies than us since 2000 (by 1). Since 1990: Spurs trophies - 3 Arsenal trophies - 11 Chelsea trophies - 12 Arsenal had the better of the 90s, Chelsea had the better of the 00s.
Isn't that what you call our club? Spurs fans are always slating our support despite the fact it is the 3rd best in the country only behind United and Arsenal, and 5th all time best average attendance. Spurs fans are always boasting about their great fanbase yet couldn't even sell out 3,000 in their biggest game of the season against City, we took 3,700 with ease to Old Trafford in a tie we were already losing. Not many could take just shy of 4,000 on a Tuesday night in April to a match you realistically have no chance of winning. I was a bit overzealous in my criticism but the fact remains we are a better supported club. Happens in swings and roundabouts. We have already sold out our first 3 games to Stoke, Norwich and West Brom yet Spurs haven't sold out theirs to Man City, Man Utd and Liverpool. It speaks volumes
I thought I'd post this from;http://www.chelseafc.com/page/ChelseaPitchOwnersDetails/0,,10268~1330733,00.html CHELSEA PITCH OWNERS When the freehold of Stamford Bridge was sold to Marler Estates plc, (later owned by Cabra Estates plc) in 1984, the future of football at the ground became uncertain and many Chelsea Football Club fans will remember that we faced continual threat from property developers. When Cabra Estates plc went into liquidation in 1993 the club immediately acquired the freehold to the ground. Chelsea Pitch Owners plc was formed in 1997 to ensure that such a battle with property developers would never happen again. In December of 1997, Chelsea Village (now Chelsea Football Club Ltd) provided CPO with a non-recourse loan of £10 million to purchase the freehold of the ground. CPO granted Chelsea FC a 199-year lease and, in order to repay the loan, CPO started selling shares of £100 each. The main objective of the company is to raise money to repay the loan and broaden the ownership of the ground to all interested stakeholders through the sale of shares. The company was set up without the objective of making a profit or issuing dividends. Within the lease agreement between CPO and Chelsea is the provision for CPO to have contractual rights in respect of the name Chelsea Football Club in the event that Chelsea were to relocate from Stamford Bridge. Ergo Chelsea supporters own the pitch, the fans are Chelsea Football Club please log in to view this image KTBFFH
Oh really? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...in-Chelsea-for-Champions-League-football.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/jun/17/luka-modric-tottenham-chelsea I also like how a quote from Modric was the only thing you tried to counter, perhaps you should be speaking about that with him then. Or perhaps what he said makes sense and he second choice would be to stay put right where he is.
How on earth can you say Arsenal are the cream of London? Jeez, I thought Kopites only lived in the past.
To be fair to Yurilly he has provided all there is out there on the subject. If Modric was definitely staying he would have said so 100% on that sound bite you posted yesterday. This leaves the situation thus open to speculation, just because Levy said he isn't going anywhere doesn't account for much either as we all remember he said the same about Berbatov. Personally, Levy knows Modric wants to move on, if it isn't this window it will be the next but I'll bet you he isn't a Spurs player come the start of next season if you don't do any better than the 'Thursday night club'.
As a gooner , I can see why Modric would want to play CL football after Spurs did well in it last season. Yurilly, I think the fact Abramovich would pay him twice and a bit more than he is getting at Spurs may have a teeny weeny bit to do with it like Nasri and Man City. I grudginly admire Spurs for getting in the CL on a low wage bill if they can pay a player like Modric 'only' 45 k a week. I am not sure Arsenal or Chelsea could do it.
