Stamford bridge

silvia

New Member
How is it that one of the richest clubs in the world has a field that looks like a patatal (potato field)? 8O :?
 
its because the club has no soul, its all about money and looking good.

i heard that the groundsman was even instructed to use a green colouring to make "look good".:? :roll:
 
ahem.

The way Stamford Bridge is built, the field does not get the proper amount of sun and wind to keep the field green through the whole winter.

It's hard to compare it to fields on the continent, where the stands are usually further back from the field, thus allowing more sunlight to reach the grass. Also, you've got much better weather in the winter (with more sun).

Chelsea traditionally re-lay the pitch in the middle of the season. This year, a decision was made during the only multi-week window of opportunity so far this year to try to see it out until the end of the season. This theoretically should allow the grass to take better hold when the pitch is re-done over the summer.

However, this gamble turned out to be a bad one as the field deteriorated significantly in the games that came after that window had closed.

You can't relay the pitch with a one week break as that doesn't give the new pitch enough time to settle (the club has been citing this as the reason Scott Parker broke his foot last year, when he freakishly got his boot caught in the grass).
 
silvia said:
But it can damage players :? :? :?
Actually, a quickly re-laid pitch can be more damaging (see Scott Parker above).

Mourinho made a great point at a recent press conference - if Barca's pitch is so great because it's new and green, then why have so many Barca players had knee problems over the past year? :?:
 
Morbyd said:
ahem.

The way Stamford Bridge is built, the field does not get the proper amount of sun and wind to keep the field green through the whole winter.

It's hard to compare it to fields on the continent, where the stands are usually further back from the field, thus allowing more sunlight to reach the grass. Also, you've got much better weather in the winter (with more sun).


But it seems like other fields with same weather conditions and more sun up in the UK look like proper football fiels :?
 
Morbyd said:
Actually, a quickly re-laid pitch can be more damaging (see Scott Parker above).

Mourinho made a great point at a recent press conference - if Barca's pitch is so great because it's new and green, then why have so many Barca players had knee problems over the past year? :?:

The pitch is new. First game with the new pitch was last saturday, the club only needed 2 weeks to change it, and even in Spain January it's not the best time to do this kind of operation
 
Some of the other fields around are deteriorating too (I've heard Sunderland and Middlesbrough are quite bad)

Again, the biggest problem is the design of the stadium. It's not just the sunlight, too... the lack of air circulation (ie wind) is bad when there's so much rain.
 
Well, that's interesting, because I discussed this issue two years ago with people who know (i.e. high up in the CFC heirarchy) and no one ever mentioned the Thames.

The reasons I noted above are the reasons why it's so bad.
 
Morbyd said:
Well, that's interesting, because I discussed this issue two years ago with people who know (i.e. high up in the CFC heirarchy) and no one ever mentioned the Thames.

The reasons I noted above are the reasons why it's so bad.

Should always check your sources then, it's def the Thames which is the main factor why the pitch is so bad and that's from very reliable sources (who are also very high up in the CFC hierarchy :roll: :lol: )
 
silvia said:
How is it that one of the richest clubs in the world has a field that looks like a patatal (potato field)? 8O :?


saw some of the game at the weekend, and although it did lack grass, it looks like a flat enough playing surface, esp compared to Sunderlands.

anyway, both Barca and chelsea have to cope with it. its called HOME advantage. ;)
 
Morbyd said:
Higher than the chief executive and/or dep. ceo for operations?

I thought not :roll:

You're not the only one who has friends in high places :roll: :lol:

Don't feel embarrassed that you're in the wrong, it happens to us all at times, you'd best go and have words with your contact about giving you misleading information ;)
 
Barbie said:
You're not the only one who has friends in high places :roll: :lol:

Don't feel embarrassed that you're in the wrong, it happens to us all at times, you'd best go and have words with your contact about giving you misleading information ;)
Hmm... you see, Babs, I'm not wrong. I have no idea who your source is but I can guarantee you that mine is better.

But if it makes you feel superior to say that I am wrong, go ahead. I know you really really like to do that. Heaven forbid that someone could actually be more of an insider on something than you are. :roll:

I think I will have words with my contacts when I'm in town this week. I'm sure they'll just confirm what they explained to me 2 years ago. In any case, I know they'll have the full information since they'll be making the decisions on when to re-lay the pitch. :roll:
 
Morbyd said:
Well, that's interesting, because I discussed this issue two years ago with people who know (i.e. high up in the CFC heirarchy) and no one ever mentioned the Thames.

The reasons I noted above are the reasons why it's so bad.

Morby i think Babs is right y'know :lol:

And the clue is in the name of the ground - Stamford bridge was originally a bridge over the watercourse of the River Fleet.
 
Back
Top