by John
King
(This article was first published in
the weeks following the CPO EGM of October 2011)
Everything
about the build-up to the Chelsea Pitch Owners’ meeting felt rotten – the
rushed response to the club’s attempt to buy the shares and remove the
influence of the CPO; the out-of-date list of shareholders; the sales of
block-votes in the lead up to the meeting (people with money were buying 100
votes each in one hit); a national newspaper’s article that club chairman Bruce
Buck had allegedly phoned a long-term Chelsea supporter several times, asking
that an opponent of the buy-up be ‘sidelined’; and then there was the time of
the meeting set by the CPO board – 11.30 on a Thursday morning, when most
people would be at work. It wasn’t looking good. I thought back to the Save The
Bridge days in the late 1970s, when we used to drop our coppers into buckets at
the bottom of The Shed stairs, the early 1990s when the ground was saved for a
second time. Now this was happening. It all seemed very sad.
The
block-votes issue was the biggest worry. Twenty individuals had apparently
bought 2,000 votes in the previous two weeks. Most would be Yes voters. It
meant that one person was buying the voting power of 100. It didn’t matter if
they had never been to a game in their lives – they would be worth 100 people
who had followed the club across the country for twenty years. Those No voters
who managed to get to the meeting – or put in a proxy – clearly stood little
chance. With the end of the CPO would come the demolition of Stamford Bridge
and the end of Chelsea FC. Whatever happened to democracy? That was the way we
were thinking as we approached the ground.
Turning
into the forecourt, a long line of people stretched towards the ground, faces
from The Shed, North Stand, Gate 13, West Stand, the Benches, T-Bar, Matthew
Harding and all the other corners and sections of the stadium. Everyone knew
the score, that the odds were stacked against them, but this was a good
turn-out, those present eager to have their say. Many had travelled for hours,
some even flying in from abroad. This was the most important day in the club’s
history.
The
first time I went to Stamford Bridge was in 1970, when the greatest team of
them all was playing the beautiful football that only really returned with
Ruud, Zola and Vialli in the 1990s, a style that we are still looking to
recapture today. Chelsea have had some fine sides since the era of Osgood,
Cooke and Hudson – Eddie McCreadie’s Blue And White Army; the John Neal team of
Kerry Dixon and Pat Nevin; the first year of Jose’s rule when he was using
Arjen Robben – but none have matched the magic of that side, who were roared on
by a crowd famed for its passion. Before them there were Docherty’s Diamonds,
Ted Drake’s league-winners – there’s always a link. The ground connects all
these memories, carries the history on. Without it we would probably end up as
one more shirt-selling franchise stuck in a sterile stadium named after a
multinational. History is important. It can’t be bought and sold, only erased.
As
one 70-years-plus supporter said later in the day, the difference between those
representing the club and the supporters at the meeting was one of emotion. We
had it, they didn’t. Bruce Buck and Ron Gourlay were cold and professional, the
rank-and-file hot and very bothered. Bruce loves a one-liner, knows how to play
a home crowd, but today the smile quickly faded and he came across as
patronising, defensive, finally irritated. He said everyone wanted Chelsea to
stay at Stamford Bridge, but... And was soon challenged. It has long been said
the council won’t allow the expansion of the ground, but when asked how many
planning applications had been submitted in the last year he had to admit that,
apart from one for a minor alteration, there had been none. The supporters
showed their anger and frustration. He didn’t look comfortable at all.
Ron
grinned. You could imagine him thinking ‘what am I doing sitting here with all
these scruffy herberts when I could be in Malaysia sipping a nice mango
milkshake, surrounded by some proper new fans in fresh club shirts.’ Later
Bruce called the club ‘the firm’, in one of those slips where someone shows off
the language they use away from the public, but knew enough to try and correct
himself, while Ron mentioned the ‘brand’. The crowd jeered and his grin
widened.
The
best thing about the meeting was how the Chelsea supporters did themselves
proud. A large number spoke and put their points across with passion,
self-control and an eloquence those representing the club lacked. They
demolished the arguments put forward, which were often lazy and contradictory.
One of the weakest was the Trust Roman approach, which was meant to play on the
supporters’ loyalty, but few were falling for this and it was pointed out that
this had nothing to do with the Russian – what
would happen if his priorities changed, if he lost his fortune, or – god-forbid
– if he died like poor Matthew Harding?
The
work of those who came together in the short period before the meeting had
clearly done a brilliant job in mobilising opposition, and in the end the CPO
shareholders stood tall and pulled off a remarkable result against a much
wealthier and stronger opponent. It made me proud to be a Chelsea fan. And yet
the battle to save Stamford Bridge has probably only just started.
In
the aftermath, the club were quick to point out that they had gained 61% of the
vote – they needed 75% to have their offer accepted. While that is technically
true, the more important figures show that, once the block-votes are
discounted, 60% VOTED NO. In terms of individuals, the percentage is, I
believe, higher – OVER 60% OF INDIVIDUALS VOTED NO. It was a walkover for the
Boys In Blue. A clear victory. And that was just the CPO members able to vote,
as many weren’t registered, while some proxy forms were said to have not
arrived. It should also be remembered that the No figure across the wider
Chelsea support generally is likely to be at least as high, and probably more
so, once the realities are understood. Most people don’t have shares, but that
doesn’t mean they aren’t as loyal as those who do.
CPO
chairman Richard King resigned soon after and there are apparently legal
challenges being considered in light of what occurred in the build-up to the
meeting, but the problem hasn’t gone away. The unfairness of the last-minute
block-shares/votes has to be addressed. Morally certainly, and probably legally
as well. The CPO now finds itself in an interesting position.
It
is clear the CPO’s relationship with the club has to change and that it needs
to operate in a more professional manner. Nobody paid by the club or benefiting
from a close link should be involved in such important decisions – whether that
is a wealthy member knocking about with the stars, or current or ex-players who
will suffer from unfair pressures. It should be run by people who stood in the
rain as we were hammered 6-0 in the 1970s, or were on the end of a kicking in
the 1980s, or watched Glenn Hoddle’s sweeper system emerging on an iced-up
empty terrace in the 1990s, or a teenager who has to listen to all that ‘You’ve
got no history’ rubbish today. The CPO has a real chance to grow and expand and
connect everyone together. That’s not anti-club, just independent. If anything
it is pro-Chelsea. The CPO membership
are flying the flag for the bulk of the Chelsea fans who want to stay at
Stamford Bridge.
The
much-quoted Fair Play rules said to have lead to this mess are meant to
encourage clubs to think differently, to make them realise that football isn’t
just be about the depth of their pockets, that a team can be developed in other
ways. To respond to this by destroying your biggest asset – the ground, which
represents the club’s history – is surely missing the point. Chelsea have always
been at Stamford Bridge. Unlike most other clubs, we have stayed true to our
roots. Our success and history didn’t start with the arrival of Roman, much as
he is loved by the masses. There is no Year Zero, Blue Revolution, New Chelsea.
The club needs to take a look at itself and show a bit more respect, forge a
real connection with its traditions. The supporters don’t want that destroyed.
We don’t want Stamford Bridge demolished and replaced with more yuppie flats.
The
club said at the meeting that they were looking to add 10,000 new seats – maybe
15,000. At £50 each that is £500,000 (or £750,000) a match – which is a modest
sum in today’s game. To fit the Fair Play rules why not start by addressing our
transfer policy? Since Claudio Ranieri, the big money paid out has had ‘mixed’
results. Put Andriy Shevchenko and Fernando Torres’ fees and wages together and
you are probably talking over £100 million. That is nearly ten years’ worth of
extra seats. Why not buy more wisely? Why not introduce a youth system that
brings in local players? This doesn’t have to cost a fortune, and the talent is
out there in the suburbs, in areas where so many kids are Chelsea mad. We are
always hearing about how great Barcelona are, their local talent, so why not
learn a lesson? That is what the club should be doing to deal with the Fair
Play rules. That is why they were introduced, surely?
The
reality of the CPO is that – unique to the rest of the Premiership – it has the
chance to move into the modern age and develop itself, really help shape the
future of the club, maybe even English football itself. The fans of Liverpool,
Man United, Newcastle and all those other clubs who have been under the cosh
would kill to own their pitch and – in effect – the name of the club itself. Those
with power need to realise that the promotion of money above history and
culture is outdated. Look at German football – ultra-cheap tickets, packed
stadiums, fans running clubs. We could have that here. Make no mistake, the
supporters are what matter most. Without the passion of the fans a professional
football club is nothing. Twenty-two grown men kicking a ball around a patch of
grass in silence – who would pay to watch that? The TV money the Premiership
craves isn’t going to go to a league of sparkling-new, no-atmosphere stadiums.
Despite
our success, profile and location, Chelsea aren’t filling a 42,000-seater
stadium for every game as things stand. That is what the club should be
addressing – the lack of atmosphere and the real reasons why they have missed
out on generations of young supporters. One of the oddest notions at the CPO
meeting was the club chairman pointing out that Chelsea have some of the oldest
fans in the Premiership. First, so what? Second, whose fault is that? It’s not
like there are never any empty seats available. Supporters have been saying for
years that the club needs to decrease prices for younger fans, encourage locals
rather than tourists. Instead of talking this way about their most loyal
followers, the club should be thanking the ‘old’ fans (we are mainly talking 40
and 50 year olds here I think) for keeping the atmosphere alive – not
causing more resentment.
The
CPO meeting reminded me of the People’s Pledge conference a couple of weeks
earlier, when a cross-section of ordinary, seemingly powerless people attended
a series of talks on Britain’s membership of the EU and the need for a
referendum. The biggest cheer of the day came when a woman spoke into one of
the microphones offered to the audience. She said to forget all the endless
arguments about money, that really what it boiled down to was a question of
identity – that she would rather be poor and living in a free England than rich
and stuck in a United States Of Europe. Maybe that’s what a lot of people feel
about staying at Stamford Bridge. Not that we would be poor, but that our
identity is essential. What is the point of endless trophies if the club is
playing in another location, with none of its core support left? Yet all of
this is unnecessary – as most of us are sure Stamford Bridge could be expanded
and, since the meeting, the council have responded to the idea that they won’t
allow development by stating they want the club to stay in the borough.
We
are constantly hearing that Roman is so rich he is running Chelsea for the love
of the club alone, that he is a loyal supporter with the best interests of CFC
at heart, that it isn’t about the loans he has made being turned into a
long-term profit. Bruce Buck, meanwhile, said everyone wants Chelsea to stay at
Stamford Bridge. Fair enough. So instead of the CPO giving its influence away
for no real reason, the club needs to back off and let the CPO sort itself out
and, once that has happened, they both need to work together, on an equal
footing, to make sure Chelsea stay at Stamford Bridge.
(John King, a life long Chelsea fan, is the author of a number of best selling novels including The Football Factory, Headhunters and England Away).
