ulsterchelsea

Best way i can sum up my feelings

Still dont want it but i feel the imminent sacking coming

Dont know where to start so i wont bother. So so poor. Well deserved by West Brom tho

First time ive honestly felt that AVB could be a goner

For fuck sake Andre mix it up a bit

Did i fill out my tax returns? mmmmm, might go out and paint the fence, its looking a bit shabby

Put Torres or Drogs on the wings and put Danny in the middle. Neither of our main men look decent in front of goal but can cross a ball and Danny cant provide a great deal but looks for goal all the time instead.

What are any of them doing

Le arse really are a shower of bastards

For Fuck sake. On my phone so I can't do a face palm sign but i assure you my face is well and truly planted in my hands. At least everyone is having good crack in the dressing room as usual

Thats right i remember reading that.

Its still an option tho isnt it

West Brom will be buzzing after their big win against Sunderland so hope we are up for this tomorrow

A fair few if's,might's,could's and even an apparently in Harrys tour de force there! Bravo

That espn piece is by Harry Harris a reknowned bullshitter, its also dated today and he talks about how roman has a decision to make on the eve of our game with BOLTON! Make your own conclusions but i call bullshit

oh, get you now

Rooney...I fucking hate the sight of that twat and chimp features Bale too

no, the CPO basically said that whilst they, like most of us, wanted to remain at the bridge it seemed that the facts and figures Chels had provided had put an end to that but that they would still like to speak to the council for themselves to 'double check' so to speak.

as i said earlier failing the council telling the CPO that the figures are incorrect there really is only one option

It would seem so

Yeah reading it i honestly thought at first the option of the Shed and Matthew Harding being expanded was a possible goer but the figures speak for themselves.

CPO BOARD STATEMENT ON MEETING WITH THE CLUB On Friday 24 February Chelsea FC invited CPO board members Steve Frankham, Rick Glanvill, Dennis Wise and Gray Smith to a meeting where extensive and detailed presentations were made by Ron Gourlay and Bruce Buck from the club, as well as architects and planning advisors working with them, regarding the potential expansion of Stamford Bridge. CPO board member Bob Sewell was away. Areas covered included: present club finances and the challenges to revenue generation of the present stadium capacity; potential benefits to supporters' match day experience; planning, safety, heritage, environmental, political, disruption and access issues surrounding the expansion of Stamford Bridge; the increasing demands of live TV coverage. We were shown designs and figures from many different plans exploring ways to expand all parts of the Bridge, along with explanations of the costs involved set against future income, and benefits to match goers. These schemes ranged from finding 2,500 new seats in corners of the ground to the total demolition and rebuild of a 55-60,000-seater stadium on the same site. The presentations were very open, with regular input, questions and points made by the CPO board. All were responded to with clarity and transparency by the club and the experts they had brought along. From the presentations and discussions, which lasted several hours, it was clear that an immense amount of time and money has been allocated to exploring how to expand Stamford Bridge. Chelsea FC's conclusion is that none of the schemes would achieve the goals of giving greater access and a better experience to supporters, and increasing matchday income. Like many of our shareholders, we have hoped and felt that there might still be some way to expand the capacity of Stamford Bridge. Having seen the detailed analysis, we all felt that a persuasive case was put that this might no longer be feasible or viable. Since so many of the planning issues concern the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham, we are requesting further information and comments from them regarding Chelsea's presentation. We hope that as far as possible Chelsea make the materials we have seen available for scrutiny by all shareholders and supporters so that the issue can be debated further.

CPO are saying that although they like most had hoped to stay at the Bridge, it now looks unlikely but they will be checking with Fulham and Hammersmith borough to make sure that all the figures Chels have put forward are correct. Looks like the end of an era And promptly! couldnt believe the web site had this up 18:30 on the dot

CPO are saying that although they like most had hoped to stay at the Bridge, it now looks unlikely but they will be checking with Fulham and Hammersmith borough to make sure that all the figures Chels have put forward are correct. Looks like the end of an era

Conclusions It is clear to the Board of Chelsea Football Club that a complete new build of a 60,000 seat stadium at Stamford Bridge has little chance of acceptability. We believe that, after our discussions with the council they have come to the same conclusion. A 60,000 new-build would cost over £600 million and require the club to play away for at least three seasons and, even if the economics were acceptable, the planning risks would likely be insurmountable. Expanding Stamford Bridge to 55,000 also has a number of challenges. The cost per seat of expanding the stands is very high. The incremental revenues provide an unsatisfactory level of return, would not even cover the hypothetical financing costs, and the planning risks are significant. We believe the council recognises these challenges. The club's exercise over the years has been to analyse a large spectrum of possible expansion options, even some which would appear to be unworkable. The Board recognises that our work will not satisfy every fan, but the Board also believes its work has been thorough, appropriate and in the best interests of the club and all of our fans. To reiterate what was said at the beginning of this summary, the club are not in any way stating we have made a decision on the need to move.