Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded
No Avatar image uploaded
Chelsea Rumours Member Posts
RPD's Profile
RPD's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To RPD's Posts
To RPD's last 5 rumour replies
To RPD's last 5 banter replies
RPD's rumours posts with other poster's replies to RPD's rumours posts
16 Nov 2025 10:04:41
A question for ED01, a few posts on here recently about Chelsea being sanctioned again, any truth in this or is it just conjecture from fellow posters?
{Ed001's Note - I think they are referring to the ongoing investigation into the finances under Roman, which you have yet to be sanctioned for.}
1.) 16 Nov 2025 16:44:48
Thanks ED01, do you think we will face serious sanctions because of what happened under Roman?
{Ed001's Note - the offences are very serious, so they are going to have to do something, but obviously there are mitigating circumstances, with it being a previous owner. Judging by how that is dealt with in the EFL, I would expect a serious sanction.}
2.) 16 Nov 2025 17:20:58
Thanks ED01 for your reply, It looks like Roman may of really created a huge problem then for the club and the current owners. As a Chelsea fan I have always been very grateful for everything Roman did for us but what is your view of him and his reign at our club looking in from the outside?
{Ed001's Note - he pays for genocide. He was a murderous gangster. Detest the man, sorry. He is everything that is wrong with society right now, him and his ilk, Musk and the like. But that is not the club's fault, and I doubt any club owner in the modern era is much different to be honest. You don't get rich enough to buy a Premier League club by being a good guy.}
3.) 17 Nov 2025 09:48:32
Thanks ED01, do you think the current owners did the right thing in self reporting what they found under Roman's time in charge even though it may well cost us a points deduction?
{Ed001's Note - they did the right thing morally, surely that should be all that matters?}
4.) 17 Nov 2025 11:49:53
Yes ED01, 100% agree with you and think it was correct for them to highlight the dodgy dealings under Roman. Hopefully the new owners self reporting the club will be taken into account when the penalties coming our way are handed out.
{Ed001's Note - they should be.}
5.) 17 Nov 2025 13:09:09
In my opinion the owners made the correct call on every level.
Once they found out they, again in my opinion, had little choice but to report immediately what they had discovered. Reporting it at a later date would probably have brought about a more severe sanction.
6.) 17 Nov 2025 13:14:28
EDOO1,
You are correct that it was the moral thing to do but let's be fair the idiots at the prem league and FA never picked it up and you wonder if they ever would have.
You just wonder what else is hoing on throughout the leagues that nobody knows about.
7.) 17 Nov 2025 22:10:43
Thanks for your input ED01, it is good to see our new owners doing the right thing by both our club and also the game in general. Well done to them.
{Ed001's Note - very welcome and I fully agree, it is one thing they have got totally right is their immediate reporting of the irregularities.}
8.) 19 Nov 2025 13:14:55
Interesting hearing about Roman! I always wondered about his past but it never really registered with me but it certainly wound my Spurs and Arsenal mates up. In fact, thinking about it, it wound all my non Chels mates up when he took us over.
I really don't care who our "custodians" are but would prefer they were clean and honest and not crooks but I thought the FA did checks on them nowadays ED01?
{Ed001's Note - the FA are not exactly a beacon of light and honesty themselves mate. They do basic background checks, but they can only go on what is proven, not on what is known but you can't prove in court. We know Roman, for example, got up to a lot of shady stuff, so bad that even the oligarchy that is Russia said it was too much. He was ordered to become governor of his home region and pay for everything out of his own pocket as punishment. This is a country where the FSB were in charge and all the oligarchs (and by extension Bratva) were FSB just took what they wanted using the leverage they had discovered over people. People that stood up to them just disappeared. So whatever Roman did, must have been bad if they felt he deserved to be punished! A country where anything goes says you have gone too far, then you know there is some real dark stuff involved.
And now in Israel, he is massively contributing funds to the settler projects that are illegally stealing land from the native population. It is akin to going to the USA and paying for people to go in and just steal the reservations there from the Native Americans. But if the FA did a background check on that, despite it being hugely illegal (as well as disgustingly immoral) would they stop him owning a football club in England over it? No they wouldn't. They do not consider it as a problem, despite it being against all international and humanitarian laws.}
9.) 19 Nov 2025 16:10:11
I had no idea Roman was upto all that ED01 and as I previously said I have little to no interest in who our owners are providing they put their hands in their pockets and buy players (sounds really selfish thinking about it but that is how I have always looked at club ownership) .
Maybe, as fans, we should be grateful the club changed hands and get behind the new owners rather than constantly wingeing about trivial little matters when you take into account all that you have just explained ED01. Thankyou for your insight.
{Ed001's Note - I just think you can't blame a club for who owns it. You have to really divorce the club from the owners in your minds because no one earns enough to buy one by being a good person.}
10.) 19 Nov 2025 19:17:43
The new owners were absolutely right to report the irregularities. All fans whinge about the clubs owners, they have made mistakes but as I have always said out of the options put forward they were the right choice . Strangely, I have read reports that if the previous owner had disclosed the payments to third parties we wouldn’t have been in breach of the then extant FFP rules.
Personally, I just want the sanctions to be imposed and that we move on, whatever they are.
11.) 19 Nov 2025 20:52:03
I think the sanctions may well involve a loss of points which could push us out of champions league contention and maybe Tom B is correct that the threat of sanctions has stopped us getting a FOS sponsor? easy for some to blame our current owners for situations caused by our previous owner.
12.) 19 Nov 2025 22:34:43
I think it will be a fine and a one or two window transfer ban.
13.) 20 Nov 2025 13:17:39
I'm sure the FA and Prem will dish out sanctions to Man City before we are sanctioned, they must have worked out what to do about their 115 issues unless it's more now due to the increase in interest rates .
14.) 20 Nov 2025 16:48:43
Tom
I have been crying out for stability therefore I would be very happy with a transfer ban but that would have to be both in and out.
15.) 21 Nov 2025 07:16:33
Bill, I assume a transfer ban wouldn’t include loans because we have a few youngsters who could do with loans plus we have Sterling and Disasi.
16.) 21 Nov 2025 09:30:19
That is the clubs problem Tom.
17.) 21 Nov 2025 11:42:07
Any transfer embargo would only stop us signing new players either permanately or on loan. We would still be able to sell or loan players to other clubs.
18.) 21 Nov 2025 12:06:42
The vast majority of things about the club are the “club’s problem. ”.
19.) 21 Nov 2025 13:11:21
They are Tom.
20.) 25 Nov 2025 16:29:18
They are also our own problems as supporters.
29 Oct 2025 08:08:21
FOS update.
Deal will be announced very shortly, Oracle and Red Bull along with an airline are in the frame.
1.) 10 Nov 2025 09:03:24
Nearly two weeks on from your post RPD, any further update on the FOS.
2.) 14 Nov 2025 13:40:19
Bill, any mathematical benefit there was in waiting to find a FOS sponsor prepared to pay a substantial premium is gradually evaporating.
Like all fans it now makes zero sense to me. I guess I can only hope for a cunning plan.
3.) 14 Nov 2025 17:01:38
It's never made sense to me Tom, the revenue we have lost is nothing short of criminal.
Matt Law is now reporting there are no new updates on a FOS.
I don't know what the owners and commercial department are doing but they are not doing their job, losing us money and making us a laughing stock of the PL.
Cunning plan?, any plan would be something and don't get me started on the alleged SB project but I think like the sponser, that's also pie in the sky with these owners, more Glaziers.
4.) 15 Nov 2025 07:57:59
Tom, the deal is already agreed and as I previously posted will be announced shortly.
5.) 15 Nov 2025 08:21:52
These are the latest commercial income revenue figures as of 2023/24.
Revenue of £225m, up from £215m the previous season. Chelsea are streets ahead of the rest of the Premier League but second-lowest of the so-called Big Six partly due to no FOS sponsor, the new FOS sponsorship deal will add multi millions to these figures and close the gap to those above us.
Manchester City – £345m
Liverpool – £308m
Manchester United – £303m
Tottenham Hotspur – £255m
Chelsea – £225m
Arsenal – £218m
I have heard the new FOS sponsorship deal will be with Oracle and will be announced very soon.
6.) 15 Nov 2025 08:44:21
Hope you are correct RPD but it still comes back to the amount of money we have list over the last 2/3 seasons, let's hope the new deal is worth £100mil a year to make up for the lost revenue.
Also we are well into November therefore whatever we get this season will be pro-rata.
7.) 15 Nov 2025 12:11:15
Bill, if we end up with a “multi year deal at a premium” then we may well end up better off than not doing a deal.
My fear is that we will do a deal for this season only. I was told ages ago but didn’t believe it was true but some sponsors only want a one yer deal because of a potential sanction against the club.
I thought that was a rubbish rumour but who knows!
8.) 15 Nov 2025 17:55:41
Tom, the whole area of sponsorship in the premier league is going to be a mess come the end of the season due to betting companies no longer being allowed to sponsor teams which will of course drive prices down. It will be a scramble to pick up deals.
If I was investing in football sponsorship I would keep my ink dry and see how it all pans out so any deal we can pick up will be a good one for this season and then wait and see what happens going forward.
9.) 15 Nov 2025 20:23:20
RPD, you may well be right and obviously I don’t know the details of this supposed sponsorship deal with Oracle but it’s hard to believe the club have got what it wanted.
Also, if it’s a rest of season deal the maths about hanging on for a big pay day after qualifying for the Champions League and Club World Cup would no longer work.
16 Oct 2025 08:28:28
A few rumours that Juve are in for Maresca. I know a few on here would like to see him replaced but I think that would be a real shame, the guy is starting to build a winning team and the players understand his methods. I hope he turns them down and commits to us long term.
1.) 16 Oct 2025 10:50:07
RPD am sure Maresca will stay as long as the club thinks of him as they do now in same way that you do. I think most of us would like him to stay for at least this season and hopefully beyond cos that would mean CFC being successful - and surely at least getting ECL qualification again - but also because the players know him, seem to like and trust him and his tactics/ system/ s, he won the CWC, and frankly it is not clear to many of us in, cuding me who would definitvely do a better job who is also avaiolable and willing to come to CFC. Also the seemingly endless rebuilding process has made progress towards us having a critical mass of fine young players even if some additions and greater consistency (the two may ho together) still necessary to have us more securely back among the top few clubs in EPL and on European stage.
2.) 16 Oct 2025 13:13:16
I guess it will depend on whether Juve can afford his release clause, whatever that is.
If they can, as Tom has pointed out on a number of occasions, we are a business so therefore we would take the money and run so to speak.
3.) 20 Oct 2025 12:15:04
Not sure if this was a thumbs up or down as both thumbs are up lol.
{Ed033's Note - The second thumbs up will be removed after the site updates.
4.) 21 Oct 2025 10:14:14
Cheers Ed.
25 Sep 2025 15:16:26
Matt Law reporting that Enzo Maresca was very upset not to have been backed in his pusuit of a new centre back and striker following the injuries to Colwill and Delap. Is Matt ITK at Chelsea? He also reports the powers to be are not happy with Maresca going public on the above? Usual paper talk or is something bubbling under the surface?
Also, anyone read King Carlo's latest book? His relationship with Roman and how Roman micro managed him and his team? Quite a read.
1.) 25 Sep 2025 16:06:58
I posted something similar a couple of days ago RPD but also included Maresca also wanted a GK.
He was let down by the SD's who seem to be obsessed with churning wingers.
I would not be surprised if all parties parted company before the end of the season.
Hopefully with the financial constraints imposed by the corrupt organisation that is EUFA, we might see a stable playing squad for the next couple of seasons.
I kept on about a FOS where we have lost several millions and even if and it's a big if, we do get a FOS, the first couple of seasons will just be recouping money to cover the previous losses.
2.) 25 Sep 2025 19:19:57
Bill, we all hope that a FOS sponsorship deal happens soon. If it is who most people think it is and if it’s close to the amounts being mentioned then the delay will probably be mathematically worth the wait.
RPD, Matt Law is a good journalist as far as they go. He always had a good insight into everything Chelsea. It was rumoured he was very good mates with Gary Cahill and one or two other players. Strangely his info lately hasn’t been as accurate as in previous years but his views are always to be respected.
All managers want players and it’s understandable that he wanted a CH and CF but the club sometimes has to look at the bigger picture. We will be getting a striker from Strasbourg next season, so there is little point in blocking his path. A seasoned CH would have been a good shout but maybe they have faith in Fofana (still not sure) and Colwill. I would have personally kept Veiga for the season but maybe bridges were burnt.
3.) 25 Sep 2025 20:02:31
Tom
There are also more and more little digs by Maresca in his recent press conferences.
4.) 25 Sep 2025 21:04:35
Bill, honestly mate I must listen to different press conferences. I think he has made just a few mistakes in press conferences but he is generally very respectful of everyone including the club, the SD’s and the owners.
As I’ve said, I’m sure he would have liked another CH and CF when Colwill and Delap got injured. In my opinion football managers manage in the moment and have very little understanding of any bigger picture.
5.) 26 Sep 2025 09:12:19
Tom
Coaches don't need a bigger picture, their job is to coach the team and provide the SD's with what's needed to be successful.
They are no longer managers, just coaches, hence why clubs now have SD's to bring in/ let ho of players.
6.) 26 Sep 2025 09:46:38
Thanks Tom for the update on Matt Law. It would be disasterous if Maresca left and yet another change was made. We need a little bit of stability now and after all, Maresca did what his recent predecessors couldn't achieve and that was champions league football and trophies.
7.) 26 Sep 2025 11:28:09
RPD, there is an argument that with the player investments the owners have made that winning cups and CL qualification was a minimum achievement. I personally believe EM overachieved in his first season as our manager and his first season as a premiership manager.
Bill, that’s my point. Managers focus from game to game and a singular season. That to a certain extent is understandable because they can be sacked or called to be sacked by some fans after just a few bad results. Remember this season we had one poster saying he should be sacked after our opening day draw against Palace.
Owners and SD’s tend to take a slightly longer term view on player recruitment. Especially at our club like ours.
8.) 26 Sep 2025 19:45:30
Tom
Just wondering if there is a long term view as you say, why is there such a high churn of playing staff?
9.) 26 Sep 2025 19:56:01
Bill, you know my view on this subject. I see us as a trading club who buy young players, increase there value and then sell them on.
So, my view is that the so called “churn” will continue under our current ownership.
Any stability will just be for about 3-4 years for most players.
I may well end up being wrong. It’s just my opinion!
10.) 27 Sep 2025 07:49:43
Just wondering where the long term view is then Tom.
11.) 27 Sep 2025 09:52:27
A managers is game to game (as they keep in telling us) and for a singular season (if there lucky) and im guessing OUR club is about 3-4 years or when a players value is sufficient to sell.
12.) 27 Sep 2025 13:31:24
But that is not a long term view Tom, nowhere near.
13.) 27 Sep 2025 14:36:43
Well it’s three or four times longer than a managers!
14.) 30 Sep 2025 19:31:58
No matter what maresca wanted, his inverted full backs is not going to work. Wingers are left alone, midfield is deep.
15.) 30 Sep 2025 22:40:26
I thought that was part of the plan. Wingers left one on one and the inverted full back making the extra midfielder. I’m not a massive and I certain don’t like it being used for every game.
01 Sep 2025 15:49:12
Jackson gone, £14.2 million loan fee plus £56.2 million obligation to buy fee making total package worth £70.5 million. It has been confirmed the obligation to buy fee is on top of the world record loan fee. Nice bit of business for a player who cost £30 million and walked around like a spoiled brat most of the time.
1.) 01 Sep 2025 16:07:30
Does sound like a good deal RPD and had always preferred if he left that he did not go to EPL rival. He had some v good games for us though was always a card ( yellow or red) waiting to happen cos of that temperament!
2.) 01 Sep 2025 16:20:21
It is a great deal, what we don't know if there are clauses for him to complete the permanent deal.
3.) 01 Sep 2025 17:12:02
Bill, the devil is in the detail. A mate tells me that for BM to meet the obligation Jackson has to participate in a “lot” of games. I’m not sure what that means or if it’s true.
4.) 01 Sep 2025 17:12:57
It's apparently an obligation for Bayern to buy him at end of loan period Bill though i don't know if there are any get out clauses at all. Wouldn't have thought so?
5.) 01 Sep 2025 18:29:45
Ok so there is a condition about how many appearances or hours on pitch Jackson would have to. make but presumably we aren't going to know? Now perhaps Bayern could lend us Harry Kane for rest of season and it would be a double whammy for us!
I.
6.) 01 Sep 2025 18:39:39
As Tom has said JBS, it's down to him playing a number of games. I suppose we will see him back here next season as they have a certain Harry Kane in front of him.
7.) 01 Sep 2025 18:42:45
even if they don't buy him tom were getting nearly half his transfer fee back from his loan and we can still flog him next summer club have done realy wekk.
RPD's banter posts with other poster's replies to RPD's banter posts
06 Dec 2025 17:50:21
Arsenal are looking wobbly, only 2 points from their last 3 away games and as a poster pointed out the other day you can't blame it on not having your first choice 11 on the pitch. City under Pep will hunt them down I think and that Emery is a brilliant manager at Villa and surely if Arsenal had kept him they would of won the league a few times by now? As for us a top 4 battle is on and it just shows how hard this league is, no easy games at all and anyone can beat anyone on the day.
I have the game but I heard Robert Sanchez was simply brilliant and saved us time after time? at least that is a positive. Other than that a pretty poor start to December as per previous seasons going back many years.
1.) 06 Dec 2025 17:11:37
RPD, yes Sanchez was ok again and Fofana was solid.
Sounds like the Delap injury will keep him out for a while but Cole got about 60 mins under his belt so that’s a big plus.
Big midweek game coming up followed by the usual very tough weekend premiership game. I love it.
2.) 06 Dec 2025 18:37:01
Fair play to Leeds, came back against Man City, beat us and get a draw tonight against Liverpool having been 2 nil down. I have said it many times, this is a very hard league to win, anyone can beat anyone.
27 Nov 2025 10:15:11
As expected the planning permission was granted last night to build on Earls Court without any plans to include a stadium which effectively means we will be staying at Stamford Bridge. Roman spent 20 years looking at ways to build a bigger ground but was thwarted for many different reasons and our new custodians have explored all options and have already purchased the land adjecent to the west stadium which currently houses the war vets. The shed holds just 6,000 seats and the east stand 13,000 so I imagine those 2 stands will now be under consideration for development.
We will likely smarten the place up and grab another 10,000 seats but that will be that. I think the future of football will likely be with clubs having their own TV rights and broadcasting all their own games so increasing our world wide fan base will be the way to go revenue wise and we currently have the 6th largest fanbase in world football and that was before our Club World Cup win which may of put into the top 5. Real Madrid and Barcelona lead the way. At least that topic can now be put to bed.
1.) 27 Nov 2025 13:17:11
Why should the topic be put to bed RPD, let's move elsewhere where we would get planning permission.
2.) 27 Nov 2025 13:45:55
Bill, if we could move elsewhere I’m sure that would have been an option under consideration.
There is nothing available. So, as I have been saying for a long time, just get on with the redevelopment of SB. My guess is it will stand by stand.
3.) 27 Nov 2025 18:41:09
Tom
Lets hope KB is around to bail us out again.
4.) 27 Nov 2025 20:09:49
Matt Law is now reporting our owners have not ruled out making a bid for the whole Earls Court site from the current owners inclusive of the planning permission. They want that site to build a world leading stadium and are prepared to trade SB.
Maybe it's not quite put to bed just yet? These developments totally explain why the owners have not put out any updates as so much is happening behind the scenes.
5.) 28 Nov 2025 07:52:08
Earls Court was always very unlikely and in some ways I’m glad it’s all done and dusted. There is supposedly another potential sight (unnamed) within two miles of SB we are looking at.
The club has 1bn set aside for stadium development. It will be interesting to see what is finally decided but I’m personally not that bothered.
23 Nov 2025 17:16:18
Watching the Arsenal v Spurs game, how totally out of his depth is Thomas Frank? Their fans want him out and it just shows it is not easy stepping up from being a low block manager relying on set pieces as he did at Brentford to coaching at higher (supposed) level. We dodged a bullet with him.
1.) 23 Nov 2025 20:14:28
We did RPD, the Spurs tariff were terrible.
20 Nov 2025 10:03:49
The planning application decision on developing the Earls Court site will be announced on 26th November, this is a monumental moment in our history and one that the owners hope will go in our favour. If the decision goes against the current owners of Earls Court then Blue.
Co hope to step in with a bid for part of the land in order to build a new stadium. If planning is granted then Chelsea FC has no other option than to remain at Stamford Bridge. At least we will know what direction this is going in and what are everyone hoping for?
1.) 20 Nov 2025 13:09:05
RPD, thanks for information mate. I guess that also explains why any SB development proposal wasn’t mentioned in the mins of recent FAB meeting.
2.) 20 Nov 2025 13:18:51
Thank you for the update RPD.
3.) 20 Nov 2025 14:06:59
I agree Tom, there has been nothing to report really since the owners took over as this Earls Court site is probably the last chance for the club to relocate and this planning outcome will then determine the next steps. Old Oak Common has been muted but again, until Earls Court is put to bed either way nothing can really be said but I do understand the owners are 100% behind increasing our match day fan base and whilst a move away from the Bridge makes most sense it is looking increasingly likely that a stand by stand redevelopment may well be the only way forward.
4.) 20 Nov 2025 16:46:41
Thank you for your update RPD.
5.) 20 Nov 2025 16:55:54
Despite my affiliation with SB, a move to a new site is my preference. We would be able to stay at the Bridge during the construction of a new stadium. Also, redevelopment of SB is fraught with difficulties, not least with planning permission; local ( affluent) residents have already joined forces to oppose any application.
That process would delay the project by at least a couple of years .
6.) 20 Nov 2025 18:21:27
The affluent should realise that having a major football club in their area is a big draw.
7.) 20 Nov 2025 19:33:00
I would love us to stay at Stamford Bridge but I think Jimbo is right that it will be a nightmare getting through all the planning hoops and what for? another 15,000 seats at a cost of hundreds of millions, it will take quite a few years to get the money back. This should of been dealt with many years ago but I think Roman had a little problem over his visa and pulled the plug on that stadium re-build, I think he even bought a brick company to make sure we had enough bricks to build the thing? didn't it start underground? I 'm happy as we are but I think we have about 30,000 on the season ticket waiting list so I suppose another 15,000 or 20,000 seats will allow more fans to watch live football.
8.) 20 Nov 2025 22:20:07
Greenaway, you are right. We might eventually get planning permission for redevelopment at SB, but highly unlikely for a 60,000 seater stadium. As you say the owners would have to consider whether the cost of adding X amount to the capacity is worthwhile given that you would want it to be multi-purpose to host other types of events.
I don’t blame Roman or the new owners for this problem; the location and physical environment surrounding SB has always been problematic to expansion of the stadium on the existing site.
9.) 21 Nov 2025 09:33:16
I agree Jimbo
Stadia nowadays are far more than football venues and if we stay at the Bridge, we will have the same problem with residents as do the owners of Twickenham.
10.) 21 Nov 2025 10:57:50
Bill, that is why the owners would prefer the move to Earls Court and explains the wait. This planning decision is monumental for our club and if the current owners of Earls Court succeed in gaining permission to develop on the 26th November we will almost certainly have to stay at Stamford Bridge and I would imagine overhaul what we have on a stand by stand basis and a few thousand more seats at best.
Jimbo is correct in all he says on this matter.
11.) 21 Nov 2025 12:10:38
Circumstances that are mainly out the club’s control will dictate the outcome. I’m not sure there is much blame to be attached to any owner!
12.) 21 Nov 2025 13:32:41
Been looking at all the stuff about the Birmingham City stadium, due for completion in 2030 (looks amazing btw), and thinking - come on Blue Co, pull your fingers out.
13.) 21 Nov 2025 16:45:33
So what advice would you give to Blue. co then J?
14.) 21 Nov 2025 21:46:10
RPD, exactly. We are located in a very expensive part of the capital city. Man U or Birmingham have no problem finding the land and gaining planning permission. i was born and bred in London, if I could have thought of a suitable location I would have informed Todd.
15.) 21 Nov 2025 22:37:49
Exactly Jimbo, maybe J has never been to Stamford Bridge or London.
16.) 22 Nov 2025 07:26:03
Whilst my comment was (I thought obviously) sarcastic, my advice to Blue Co, in particular the two arguing factions (Team Egbahli vs Team Boehly), would be to put egos aside and try and come to a decision that’s best for the club - I suppose that’s the problem with being owned by a consortium, not one clear voice.
Yeah, never been to either, I know nothing of the stadium or city. Maybe I should pop along sometime, take a ride on that big wheel thing and get a better appreciation of the complicated planing permission process. Whilst up there, I could see if I can spot a suitable chunk of land to point out to Todd. Just from looking at Google maps, ‘Hyde Park’ looks like it’s got some promise, although that lake would have to go. Anyway, got to go, those Yals won’t herd themselves.
17.) 22 Nov 2025 09:49:16
This will not go down too well, but what about moving away from the area completely.
We will never get what we want where we are located, and building stand by stand will probably bankrupt us as a club with costs rising by the day.
The residents will never allow any other form of entertainment other than our home games like the residents of Richmond and we will never be big enough for England games.
It makes absolutely no sense to stay at our present location and don't get me started on Fulham Broadway underground station.
18.) 22 Nov 2025 10:53:10
Bill, my guess is, if the club moves to far from its present home the CPO will not allow the use of the Chelsea name.
19.) 22 Nov 2025 16:44:52
No problem Tom, that should not stop us moving.
Just out of curiosity Tom, I know the CPO own the pitch but who owns the rest of the ground including terrace and outside area?
20.) 22 Nov 2025 16:56:59
The club.
21.) 22 Nov 2025 19:14:07
Interesting, so if we did move away, no football could be played at the Bridge unless the owners allowed access.
22.) 22 Nov 2025 19:53:39
Bill, its never going to happen mate?
If you follow your logic the current owners couldn’t develop anything in the pitch area.
I have given my guess what will happen.
If we can’t build a new stadium close to the current SB site then I believe our existing site will be developed stand by stand. Starting with the East and then The Shed.
14 Nov 2025 16:01:08
I saw these stats which really do paint a picture and back up what a few of us have been saying for a while, Chelsea are top in big chances created (37), top in XG (20.7), top in shots on target per match (5.6), 2nd in most goals scored (21 - 2 behind City) . And this is without our best attacker and one of the best attackers in Europe who has only played 145 mins so far.
You may not be a fan of stats but people who analyze games rely on it a lot. And stats tell you Chelsea is the best attacking team in the league so far and when Palmer returns we will reach an even higher level this season, add a top level striker like Haaland and we would likely be at the top of the table.
1.) 14 Nov 2025 16:32:28
RBD, we do have a highly regarded and sought after striker from Strasbourg joining us no later than this summer.
Thanks for the stats.
2.) 14 Nov 2025 18:31:12
Not in the same league as Haaland Tom, at present, nowhere near.
3.) 14 Nov 2025 19:00:18
Bill, I know very little about the lad. Maybe he will turn out to be better than Haaland.
4.) 15 Nov 2025 08:46:21
But is not at the moment Tom wheras Hallamd is the finished article already and is somebody we need not somebody who may or may not make it one day, German spring to mind?
5.) 15 Nov 2025 09:46:47
Bill, we ain’t ever going to sign Haaland of for that matter Kane.
As I say, I know very little about the lad who is about to join but let’s give him a chance.
6.) 15 Nov 2025 10:25:34
Emanuel Emegha is 6 foot 5 inch and a real powerhouse apparently, captains Strasbourg and averages a goal every other game, just called up by Holland as well. Could be the way to go with the game starting to evolve towards the old school hoof it and let the big striker batter the centre backs plus the relentless pursuit of mastering set pieces.
Could be a decent signing Tom.
7.) 15 Nov 2025 12:30:50
Guys, I suppose time will tell but I would say the French league is far different to the prem.
8.) 15 Nov 2025 13:27:36
Greenaway, if he has now been picked for Holland I will no doubt be forced to watch him. I know there was a lot of intron him from other clubs in the last window.
9.) 16 Nov 2025 16:50:59
I doubt whether anyone on here has seen Emegha play; let’s hope he is the answer to the No 9 problem. I’m not sure why his height is relevant; many to top strikers weren’t particularly tall.
Height isn’t even that important in heavyweight boxing. Joshua 6’6” with a glass jaw and Mike Tyson 5’ 10”. If those two had fought there would have been only one result.
10.) 16 Nov 2025 18:30:54
Jimmy Greaves 5ft-8ins. Best Chelsea player/striker I have ever seen.
11.) 16 Nov 2025 19:04:42
Tom, never saw Greaves play for Chelsea but his record speaks for itself. I remember as a kid going to QPR when he played for Spurs and he handballed the ball into the net, I was behind the goal. No VAR then.
12.) 16 Nov 2025 19:48:49
Jimbo, there is that much footage of him playing. I was very young and although my Dad was occasionally taking me to the Bridge to watch Chelsea, I hadn’t yet chosen a team to support.
I can’t remember who we were playing but he was unplayable and I think scored a hat trick. That day it pushed me closer to becoming a Greaves groupie and a Chelsea supporter. I was totally devastated when the club sold him to raise money and save CFC.
13.) 16 Nov 2025 22:26:48
Tom, I have seen some footage of him scoring goals for us. I do recall an iconic photo of him on the bus to the Bridge with supporters when football players were just highly paid workers.
21 Nov 2025 11:42:07
Any transfer embargo would only stop us signing new players either permanately or on loan. We would still be able to sell or loan players to other clubs.
17 Nov 2025 22:10:43
Thanks for your input ED01, it is good to see our new owners doing the right thing by both our club and also the game in general. Well done to them.
{Ed001's Note - very welcome and I fully agree, it is one thing they have got totally right is their immediate reporting of the irregularities.}
17 Nov 2025 11:49:53
Yes ED01, 100% agree with you and think it was correct for them to highlight the dodgy dealings under Roman. Hopefully the new owners self reporting the club will be taken into account when the penalties coming our way are handed out.
{Ed001's Note - they should be.}
17 Nov 2025 09:48:32
Thanks ED01, do you think the current owners did the right thing in self reporting what they found under Roman's time in charge even though it may well cost us a points deduction?
{Ed001's Note - they did the right thing morally, surely that should be all that matters?}
16 Nov 2025 17:20:58
Thanks ED01 for your reply, It looks like Roman may of really created a huge problem then for the club and the current owners. As a Chelsea fan I have always been very grateful for everything Roman did for us but what is your view of him and his reign at our club looking in from the outside?
{Ed001's Note - he pays for genocide. He was a murderous gangster. Detest the man, sorry. He is everything that is wrong with society right now, him and his ilk, Musk and the like. But that is not the club's fault, and I doubt any club owner in the modern era is much different to be honest. You don't get rich enough to buy a Premier League club by being a good guy.}
06 Dec 2025 18:37:01
Fair play to Leeds, came back against Man City, beat us and get a draw tonight against Liverpool having been 2 nil down. I have said it many times, this is a very hard league to win, anyone can beat anyone.
04 Dec 2025 20:56:00
Tom, you are right about the lurkers who come out and post the minute we lose a game but we don't actually know if they are genuine fans or trolls who enjoy winding up other clubs fans. Likewise we have posters across all the sites who never have a good word to say about "their club".
I take the view there are all sorts of reasons people are nothing but negative and it is quite often that they have no friends or family with whom to let off steam so come on these sort of platforms as a release.
04 Dec 2025 18:29:47
That article by tusole is factually incorrect.
04 Dec 2025 10:48:48
The last thing we need is a transfer ban Bill, that would really stop our progress. We are in desperate need of a proper 15 to 20 goal a season striker and a rock solid centre back who can play out from the back.
29 Nov 2025 12:00:25
No comparison at all with ourselves under Jose, we were and still are serial winners. Remind me what Arsenal have won under Artita in his 7 years building a team and out spending everyone bar Man U? I think ED01 explained that they should win the league this year almost by default but that could of been said last year as well? Don't get me wrong, I don't expect us to challenge for the title this season but the punters and pundits love in with Arsenal is quite frankly over the top considering we are only one third into the season and I have yet to see the cups handed out this early.