Chelsea have second chance at CPO agm

Chelsea FC are thinking of making another proposal to purchase the freehold of Stamford Bridge at the annual meeting of Chelsea Pitch Owners (CPO) in December.   Apparently under the CPO constitution the club would only have to obtain more than 50 per cent of the vote to pass the motion, as opposed to the 75 per cent needed at extraordinary general meetng as was held earlier this week.

Moving forward at Chelsea

Following yesterday’s rejection of Chelsea’s proposal to acquire the freehold of Stamford Bridge from Chelsea Pitch Owners (CPO), it is recognised that there has to be a constructive dialogue between the club and fans to reach a mutually acceptable outcome.


Do Accrington need a new stadium?

Accrington Stanley’s owner Ilyas Khan thinks that the club is not sustainable at the Crown Ground in the longer run and needs to move to a new stadium to be viable.   The club has already had to reduce staff numbers to keep costs under control.   A possible site for a £7m stadium has been identified near Hyndburn Sports Ground and Mr Khan might be prepared to contribute £2m towards the cost.

Olympic Stadium mess almost finished Orient

Barry Hearn has revealed that he risked Leyton Orient’s future to block West Ham’s proposed move to the Olympic Stadium and he has warned the Government that he’ll do it again if they ‘illegally’ shoehorn the Hammers into the stadium.


Hearn told The Football League Paper, ‘We risked going out of business to challenge this.  You worry because all these legal costs mount up but we had a board meeting and decided that if West Ham moved to the Olympic Stadium that would put us out of business anyway so we had to challenge it.’

Spurs welcome Olympic Stadium decision

Tottenham Hostpur have welcomed the Olympic Park Legacy Company (OLPC) decision not to proceed with the current bid process for a legacy tenant in a brief statement.


‘We welcome the OPLC decision to end the current Olympic Stadium bid process, said the Spurs statement.   ‘We firmly believe that the bid we put forward was, in fact, a realistic sporting solution for the stadium, along with a substantial return to the taxpayer, community programming and athletics provision.’