Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Chelsea's new ground

13»

Comments

  • Spurs and Chelsea's new grounds look amazing.

    Unlike the Olympic stadium which I told you 5 years ago would be shit.
  • If this gets built it will look absolutely spectacular imo, especially for a night game with little columns of light shining out from between all the brick pillars.

    A proper piece of architecture in its own right, quite aside from being a unique look for a sports arena.

    These modern stadia like your St Mary's and Britannia, and even the once proposed Valley are all well and good, but they all look the same and just lack some soul because of it. Even worse when they get built away from the club's traditional home, like some kind of edge of town shopping mall that ultimately kills the town's centre.

    This will be so unusual looking, and in it's traditional location, so will not suffer any of the lack of atmosphere issues that have blight West Ham at the Olympic stadium, for example.

    I am just a tiny bit jealous of this.

    I applaud Spurs for building on the WHL site as well.
  • Things have gone full circle. 20 odd years ago, the logic for all the big clubs in London would have been to move further out towards the M25, for easy car access. Instead, it's good that they're staying in their historical areas.
  • Swisdom said:

    Reminds me a bit of North Korea's Ryugong Hotel that was both hideous and so poorly designed that it couldn't be used as it was too heavy

    image

    They've been building that hotel for decades but haven't had the money to finish it. Became a political embarrassment to the Kim dynasty there and they had it removed from stamps which show the Pyongyang skyline.

    It does now have glass on the outside thanks to an Egyptian mobile phone company who gave them cash in exchange for a receiver on the top. The inside is still just concrete though.
  • interesting that the number of away fans is increasing by a big fat zero

    Not going to affect us for a while!
    Checkatrade away v Chelsea u21s.
  • If this gets built it will look absolutely spectacular imo, especially for a night game with little columns of light shining out from between all the brick pillars.

    A proper piece of architecture in its own right, quite aside from being a unique look for a sports arena.

    These modern stadia like your St Mary's and Britannia, and even the once proposed Valley are all well and good, but they all look the same and just lack some soul because of it. Even worse when they get built away from the club's traditional home, like some kind of edge of town shopping mall that ultimately kills the town's centre.

    This will be so unusual looking, and in it's traditional location, so will not suffer any of the lack of atmosphere issues that have blight West Ham at the Olympic stadium, for example.

    I am just a tiny bit jealous of this.

    I applaud Spurs for building on the WHL site as well.

    Indeed. It's like a revisit to a time (Victorian) where buildings were built with such grandeur. It's looks like an old cathedral rather than a football ground and adds to its surroundings rather than stick out. The seating isn't a perfect (dull) circle but raises and lowers to maximise it's capacity like the characterful grounds of old.
  • Have probably said it before but this is going to be a nightmare for transport in the area. Practically the whole of Hammersmith, Kensington, Chelsea, Fulham etc is gridlock when they play at the moment, let alone with a further 15,000 people going to the game.

    Obviously they will always get their way though.
  • Sponsored links:



  • Echoes of Liverpool's Catholic Cathedral.
    Different.
  • Chelsea stadium: £1bn Stamford Bridge hit by family dispute - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42648061

    Good luck to them but Chelsea will get their way. Most surprising was the report that 28% of seating would be hospitality. These clubs make me sick.

    These people make me sick. It's like those morons who buy a house near an airport then moan and whinge about the noise of the planes FFS.
  • Chelsea stadium: £1bn Stamford Bridge hit by family dispute - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42648061

    They'll sling some money at the case and win.

    It's design is to ensure it doesn't block as much light as other designs might have.
  • Chelsea stadium: £1bn Stamford Bridge hit by family dispute - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42648061

    Good luck to them but Chelsea will get their way. Most surprising was the report that 28% of seating would be hospitality. These clubs make me sick.

    These people make me sick. It's like those morons who buy a house near an airport then moan and whinge about the Tories wanting to bulldoze their home and 10,000 others to build a new runway.
  • cafc999 said:

    Chelsea stadium: £1bn Stamford Bridge hit by family dispute - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42648061

    Good luck to them but Chelsea will get their way. Most surprising was the report that 28% of seating would be hospitality. These clubs make me sick.

    These people make me sick. It's like those morons who buy a house near an airport then moan and whinge about the noise of the planes FFS.
    TBF they have lived in that property for over 50 years and the noise or amount of people are not the issue. The issue is about the "Right to natural light" on their property as the new stadium would leave their house in permanent shade.
    I'm always behind the little people, as it were, in such situations. I was brought up on *Batteries Not Included after all. But the needs of the many should really outweigh the needs of the few here. This stadium is going to be around a lot longer than the, although they should be very well compensated.

    That said, I do feel incredibly sorry for places like the village of Charlwood, which will get bulldozed when Gatwick inevitably gets expanded.
  • With 28% hospitality it will become another library like the Emirates. Really ruining football is money.
  • JohnBoyUK said:

    sam3110 said:

    Anyone else think the Spurs capacity is just a direct dig at West Ham, Chelsea and Arsenal? They all have 60000 seater stadiums but the new Spurs stadium will be a 61000 seater stadium...

    The Chelsea stadium looks amazing from the outside, but apparently they'll need to move out for 3 years whilst rebuilding it, where will they groundshare? Fulham and QPR are too small, West Ham is a non starter, Spurs and Arsenal are doubtful too, and I wouldn't want them at Wembley for that amount of time

    Spurs might be playing at Wembley when Chelsea need a home anyway.

    Wembley or Twickenham have been rumoured as the likely grounds.
    The '61' is significant as its a permanent memory of the 1961 double winning year.
    I thought it was in honour of Josh Magennis and the 61 was the number of games he is going to go without scoring.
  • They have been offered at least £100,000 compensation.

    Give me £100,000 and I'd suffer a bit of shadow.
  • Sponsored links:


  • With 28% hospitality it will become another library like the Emirates. Really ruined football has money.

  • JiMMy 85 said:

    cafc999 said:

    Chelsea stadium: £1bn Stamford Bridge hit by family dispute - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42648061

    Good luck to them but Chelsea will get their way. Most surprising was the report that 28% of seating would be hospitality. These clubs make me sick.

    These people make me sick. It's like those morons who buy a house near an airport then moan and whinge about the noise of the planes FFS.
    TBF they have lived in that property for over 50 years and the noise or amount of people are not the issue. The issue is about the "Right to natural light" on their property as the new stadium would leave their house in permanent shade.
    I'm always behind the little people, as it were, in such situations. I was brought up on *Batteries Not Included after all. But the needs of the many should really outweigh the needs of the few here. This stadium is going to be around a lot longer than the, although they should be very well compensated.

    That said, I do feel incredibly sorry for places like the village of Charlwood, which will get bulldozed when Gatwick inevitably gets expanded.
    But tbe need of many in question here is a football cl
    25May98 said:

    They have been offered at least £100,000 compensation.

    Give me £100,000 and I'd suffer a bit of shadow.

    Not when your house is worth over a £1.5m
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!