Chelsea to White City

[RobertoQPR]

Anyone see this story in the telegraph. Apparently they're looking at land in yards away from Loftus Road! Can't find a link to the story online though!

[LOOPYHOOP]

They can get knotted!The cheek of it!(if true)

[Ric-Roc]

As much chance as Spurs getting the Olympic stadium.

Chelsea fans having their team in Bush........I think not.

(Besides we've got enough sh!t & filth on the plot as it is without them adding to it.)

[Balders1967]

The Telegraph

Chelsea could up sticks from Stamford Bridge and move to White City in bid to build bigger stadium

Pundit Mark Lawrenson set a few hares running with his on-air claim that he had been told by “contacts” that Chelsea were about to leave Stamford Bridge for a new stadium.
Chelsea could up sticks from Stamford Bridge and move to White City in bid to build bigger stadium
Keeping up attendances: Chelsea are looking at the possibility of a move away from Stamford Bridge so they can accommodate even more fans in the stands.

The announcement was made on Radio Five Live prior to the Champions League tie against FC Copenhagen and immediately led to speculation that Chelsea had finally struck a deal to move to the nearby Earl’s Court site which they have looked at in the past.

Not so it seems.

In fact Lawrenson’s revelation came on the day that the site’s owners, Capital & Counties, published their long-anticipated masterplan which includes the building of 7,500 new homes across 77-acres and the regeneration of the 77-acre plot.

And no football stadium.

Indeed it seems the window of opportunity for Chelsea to de-camp to Earl’s Court has definitely closed.
Related Articles


“We are pressing ahead with this plan and will submit a planning application in June,” a source said on Thursday. It doesn’t mean that Lawrenson was wrong.

Although the line from the club is that their “preference is to stay” at the Bridge, there is an acknowledgement that they are hemmed in by geography alongside Fulham Broadway with a 42,000 capacity ground.

“We don't need to leave Stamford Bridge to break even,” chief executive Ron Gourlay said.

“Of course it would help if we had another 15,000 or 20,000 seats but that's not the reason behind any move.

“We’re always looking at all options when they come along. Some doors get closed and others open again.

"We're always aware of that. It's a bit like the naming rights [to the stadium]. We're still looking for a partner. It's got to be the right partner for the club and the fans. If that partner doesn't come along we'll go down a different route.”

So what could be the different route when it comes to the stadium? Which “door” has opened?

According to sources in the property world there is only one possible site in west London that Chelsea could consider.

That is at White City which is four miles from Stamford Bridge but, crucially, is still in the same borough of Hammersmith & Fulham which would make developing the Bridge site easier.

There is a large parcel of land next to the new Westfields shopping centre and adjacent to the A40. It’s also very close to Queen’s Park Rangers stadium. A ground-share, perhaps?

[danQPR]

About as likely as that Chelsea Megastore in Westfield

[m_cooper]

so whats happened to the chelsea to earls court then?

[The White City General]

The irony is 90% of Chelsea fans nowadays won't realise what an issue this is.

[JudoRanger]

surely this wont be allowed.

there is a rule that protects clubs from other clubs moving into their area. leyton orient used it when opposing west hams bid to move to the olympic stadium.

hopefully we can do the same if it ever arises.

[Ric-Roc]

surely this wont be allowed.

there is a rule that protects clubs from other clubs moving into their area. leyton orient used it when opposing west hams bid to move to the olympic stadium.


hopefully we can do the same if it ever arises.

But that never worked!

[acricketer]

I'd look to maximise turnover being in their position. Why can't a business base itself close to its' competition. At the moment they are Tescos and we are the CO-OP.

If our owners are concerned, then they probably have the wherewithall to block the move. We'll cross that stamford bridge when we come to it!

[Ty Shoes]

Take over Stamford Bridge and let them build in White City.
Two birds with one stone.

[stanley75]

I strongly suspect this is just Chelsea PLC playing the market a bit - with the collusion of estate agents. Chelsea's known interest in any site tends to lead to the price going up (as sellers think that Abramovich will bank roll it) so Chelsea talk up lots of interest in lots of sites to try to minimise that effect. Estate agents wanting to sell talk up Chelsea interest to get the price up and to inspire wobbly buyers to snap it up quick. It all means most of these stories are totally baseless. Plus in this instance Chelsea are trying to get leverage with the Council over Earls Court so rumours they are about to plot up somewhere totally different does that no harm.

Rangers are playing pretty much the same game, for the same reason , on our "move" albeit with less conviction to any kind of move. But if you read the papers we are off everywhere and nowhere when it is not a very well kept secret where the favoured site is (or was).

[silvercue]

surely this wont be allowed.

there is a rule that protects clubs from other clubs moving into their area. leyton orient used it when opposing west hams bid to move to the olympic stadium.

hopefully we can do the same if it ever arises.

No. The rule is non enforcable - it will not help LO.

You would also have to prove that the incoming team caused you to lose out financially. Can't be proven very easily. Even if it was, the club moving in could go back to court and challenge the rulling as businesses in the UK are not subject to such daft rules.

Also Chelsea are in the same borough, so would make it even more useless.

[crowlehoops]

they can f**k off

[Fraggy]

I'd look to maximise turnover being in their position. Why can't a business base itself close to its' competition. At the moment they are Tescos and we are the CO-OP.

If our owners are concerned, then they probably have the wherewithall to block the move. We'll cross that stamford bridge when we come to it!

Whoa, steady there, I would say that we are more Waitrose/Marks n Sparks & they are nothing more than an over-hyped Lidl's