Well the other lot wouldn't want to play in the English league when they in favour of Independance. Money talks and I can't see why the waters couldn't be tested.
Agreed, there is something about his need to "educate" the watching public that is grating with many as well as his lack of tactical nouce.
Get up off your knees and play football, thats all any of the watching public want, not some half arsed political virtue signalling that lost its meaning over a year ago.
It's been built at different times giving a disjointed feel. Now the club have purchased several of the buildings adjacent to the ground, expansion/modernisation is made easier than ever before, plus the club will not have to move while development is underway if done in sections, avoiding a massive cost.
Two finals only beaten on penalties, 3rd place and a CL QF, i'd say most fans accept this given the problems the club have had. The new owners seem fine and i doubt there will be much difference going forward.
The bottom 6 is where i expect Fulham, Bournemouth and Forest to be for most of next season, joined by Brentford, Leeds and possibly Southampton. Before any new signings i'd wager Bournemouth, Forest and Brentford as the fall guys.
Earlier in the day I watched the National League play off Semi between Wrexham and Grimsby - wow 4-5 and a last minute winner to boot.
Yes but unfortunately its the train that everyone wants to catch.
Just a thought, were the SNP in charge of organising the final?
No it couldn't have been them. They have never done anything wrong. It must have been the authorities, the police, the stadium, or the pre match bore fest singers... any one but those loveable scouse scamps
I believe that was included in the requirements each set of bidders had to account for.
The purchase of significant tracts of land including the Sir Oswald Stoll Mansions will allow scope for developing one end of the ground at a time, while still playing. The new West Stand is fine, the old East and two ends will be rebuilt one at a time to conform with the West Stand as per Liverpool and Newcastle upbuilds.
This will cost a fraction of Spurs and mean the railway line which runs behind the ground will not need to be moved reducing cost. No Chelsea fan would swap either Spurs, Arsenals or the West Ham athletic stadium for the last 25 or so years... inc the 5 before Abramovich's arrival where Viallis and Gullits teams started wining.
I never include the Spanners in anything Chelsea will follow the Liverpool and Newcastle models and develop on the existing site without having to move and avoiding the 1bn debt that the Spuds have run up. I'd settle for a 52k capacity which should be possible as the club now owns much of the surrounding area which was the cause of us having to look at alternative sites in the past.
The Emirates is fast going out of date and they have had to refurb a number of areas. Would rather watch in a shithole than a corporate library anyday.
We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.