Chelsea's new ground
Comments
-
Spurs and Chelsea's new grounds look amazing.
Unlike the Olympic stadium which I told you 5 years ago would be shit.0 -
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.4 -
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.2
-
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.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
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.0 -
Checkatrade away v Chelsea u21s.ElfsborgAddick said:
Not going to affect us for a while!LargeAddick said:interesting that the number of away fans is increasing by a big fat zero
0 -
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.Exiled_Addick said: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.1 -
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.5 -
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.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Echoes of Liverpool's Catholic Cathedral.
Different.0 -
It's not a proper stadium unless you can use the floodlight pylons to guide yourself in on the drive through an unknown town!13
-
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.AllHailTheHen 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.0 -
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.Brendan_O_Connell said:
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.AllHailTheHen 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.10 -
They'll sling some money at the case and win.AllHailTheHen said:Chelsea stadium: £1bn Stamford Bridge hit by family dispute - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42648061
It's design is to ensure it doesn't block as much light as other designs might have.
0 -
Brendan_O_Connell said:
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.AllHailTheHen 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.2 -
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.cafc999 said:
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.Brendan_O_Connell said:
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.AllHailTheHen 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.
That said, I do feel incredibly sorry for places like the village of Charlwood, which will get bulldozed when Gatwick inevitably gets expanded.0 -
With 28% hospitality it will become another library like the Emirates. Really ruining football is money.1
-
I thought it was in honour of Josh Magennis and the 61 was the number of games he is going to go without scoring.JohnBoyUK said:
The '61' is significant as its a permanent memory of the 1961 double winning year.Leeds_Addick said:
Spurs might be playing at Wembley when Chelsea need a home anyway.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
Wembley or Twickenham have been rumoured as the likely grounds.1 -
They have been offered at least £100,000 compensation.
Give me £100,000 and I'd suffer a bit of shadow.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
JoshrewCAFC said:
With 28% hospitality it will become another library like the Emirates. Really ruined football has money.
0 -
But tbe need of many in question here is a football clJiMMy 85 said:
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.cafc999 said:
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.Brendan_O_Connell said:
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.AllHailTheHen 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.
That said, I do feel incredibly sorry for places like the village of Charlwood, which will get bulldozed when Gatwick inevitably gets expanded.
Not when your house is worth over a £1.5m25May98 said:They have been offered at least £100,000 compensation.
Give me £100,000 and I'd suffer a bit of shadow.2
