press can't say we're boring so have a pop at fans instead

[The Brit]

very harsh piece by martin samuel in the mail today

how can you have a pop at our attendance when we haven't moved stadiums...the reason we don't totally sell-out is the corporate section

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-1313469/Martin-Samuel-Roman-Abramovichs-457m-1-639-new-Chelsea-fans.html

[Spiller86]

It's essentially a thinly veiled attempt at calling us a small club, still third best in London, even if we win things and play better football than both of them.

Obviously many of the things related to the Bridge and expansion/relocation (which of course Samuel didn't mention) have been said over and over again so no need to repeat them I think we're all on the same page there.

One point I would like to take up is his insinuation that Roman's success hasn't attracted any new fans so therefore there wouldn't be demand for more seats. That in my belief is utter bollocks.

First of all this isn't just a matter of fanbase it's a matter of supply and demand, for many fans the price is simply too high. Now Samuel makes the argument that in net terms ticket prices declined over the past four seasons, well who is to say that the price wasn't set too high in the first place.

Secondly, new fans in an established football market like London don't appear overnight. People aren't cynical enough to simply just jump ship and support Chelsea instead of Arsenal or Spurs, that takes a decade or more to get the young kids who decide they want to follow Chelsea instead of another club to come to the age where not only do they want to go to matches but where they can afford/have enough points to go.

I've no doubt demand would probably be there to expand to 45,000 now, keeping the price as it is but because of the planning permissions etc. etc. etc., it's tough to do. I think sometime in the next decade when the economy gets back to a measure of strength we will see the Bridge at between 45000 and 50000 no doubt.

Then maybe we'll get some credit.

[TheWestwayWonder]

Certainly out of character, considering the writer (but not the source).

In short, its a stupid piece considering what all of us know, and what he should've discovered looking into this topic. Look at the financial numbers. Chelsea are now a top ten club in the world in terms of overall value and revenue, every year, from just about ever resource. That says it all. A club's fanbase are a lot bigger than their matchday gates, Mr. Samuel.

[jcm28]

Yes I agree that a club's fanbase is not only the ones in the matchday gates. I, for example, probably would have never even heard about chelsea if it wasn't for roman, and I have already bought chelsea jerseys and jackets over here where im from.

However, I do believe that expanding the bridge would be good, although a bit hard.

[bjd]

Not really sure that Samuel is having a pop a Chelsea really. It's hardly scathing and quite fair in places.

[sizzler85]

I read the article too .. Martin was everything but sense in saying the numbers at the stadium did not shore up since the Roman era started .

It was a silly and funny talk . Well , we could not expand the stadium and for that reason we do not have many people in the stadium . But what does he know about the influence and the fan base outisde England particularly Asia and Africa . We have Essien , Drogba and Mikel - three of the 4 african superstars are playing for chelsea . The 4th one is Eto . I m sure chelsea have a lot of fans in Africa . In Asia , we are beginning to exert influence and I can say we have a very big fan base here with only Manures ahead of us .

When the club brand goes global , the fan base increases and there will be lot other ways for the club to increase their profits . The article was rubbish to say the least considering the argument putforth and all I can say is brand chelsea will soar to new heights in the near future .

[bonetti]

If that's Journalism I'm a banana - he must be paid by the word

[andy]

Not really sure that Samuel is having a pop a Chelsea really. It's hardly scathing and quite fair in places.

I agree.

but still it is very short sighted and nonsense really attendance does not mean a thing. The fact that our matches seems to be constantly moved for television is a better barometer of success

the Brit was spot on the corporates were mostly empty yesterday.

[Mr Chelsea]

i think the empty seats are down to those non Chelsea fans who buy tickets and season tickets for games then just cant be bothered to turn up, unless there is a so called top club playing against, when the mancs, dippers, spuds or arsenal turn up therse never an empty seat

when the likes of blackpool and west brom turn up these people that have the tickets cant be arsed going or selling there tickets via official channels,

they just want to be able to say i was at the chelsea v man u match at the weekend to there office buddies on a monday morning

telling there office buddies on a monday i was at chelsea for the blackpool game on the weekend doesnt have the same credibility

the real chelsea fans then cant get tickets, or are priced out tickets, cus these pillocks that don't really support chelsea but just like been on the chelsea band wagon have got them

[dkw]

Its a strange one this as Samuel is normally pretty fair to Chelsea FC. Not sure what hes on about though, it doesnt really make a lot of sense as he gets the capacity wrong (according to official figures its 41,841 not 42,499 as he stated, so 41,423 isnt a bad attendance considering the game it was) so his figures are all wrong. He uses Arsenals attendance as a counterpoint yet doesnt point out that they include all ST holders in their figures even if they dont go. I wonder if he had a poor cup of tea at the Bridge lately or something.

[PloKoon13]

There's more to a stadium than attendance figures. Piss poor article.

[Englishman]

Which allegedly massive club with the supposed 'best fans in the world' only got a gate of 25,000 for a 'special European night' last Thursday?

[Tea Bar Boy]

The title is misleading living and basing an article on bums on seats in a media virtual age is very old skool . It would be interesting to see the TV / Internet viewing figures for the same period as a comparison and I bet they would should a huge increase in Chelsea followers across the globe .

[bluegraham]

Which allegedly massive club with the supposed 'best fans in the world' only got a gate of 25,000 for a 'special European night' last Thursday?

the mighty liverpool