Charlton Athletic have demanded their Premiership game against Chelsea be replayed because of the state of the Stamford Bridge pitch. Chelsea are set to relay their playing surface after it deteriorated severely and now the Addicks have claimed their 4-1 defeat was played "on an artificial sand surface." The south London club claim that the game breached FA Premier League rule 17 section I which states that matches have to be played on grass. "At no time prior to our fixture at Stamford Bridge on 11 January were we informed by Chelsea that we would be playing on an artificial sand surface," said Charlton chief executive Peter Varney. On arrival at Stamford Bridge, we were advised by Chelsea officials that the game was in doubt and the pitch was being inspected by the match referee, Mike Dean. Alan Curbishley immediately raised the matter with the referee and was advised the pitch met the league criteria of 'being flat' and on this basis the match would go ahead. "We were not offered an opportunity for our players to train on the artificial surface to judge the effect of the bounce of the ball "In our opinion, video evidence will show the bounce was different to a normal grass surface. "Chelsea officials advise us that their players trained on the pitch on Thursday and Friday of last week, and the footwear worn by their players in the match was appropriate for an artificial surface. "The footwear worn by some of our players was not appropriate for the surface and again we will refer to video evidence on this point. "In the interests of the integrity of the FA Premier League and sportsmanship between member clubs, we must lodge a formal complaint to the FA Premier League. "In the light of the evidence available, we are requesting that the match be replayed on a grass surface." Chelsea responded to Charlton's complaint issuing a statement which drew attention to the referee's judgement that the pitch was playable. "Chelsea have not received any request from either the Football Association or Charlton Athletic regarding a replay of Saturday's match," read the statement. "The referee and match officials carried out an inspection of the pitch before the game. "Their decision was that the surface was in a satisfactory condition for the match to be played." From bbc sport online
Bullsh*t. When Champions League teams go out to some unknown city in Eastern Europe to play on ragged pitches, do they ask for rematches regardless of the result? No didn't think so ... So why could Charlton get a 'special offer?' Someone tell em to live with reality... Btw- has FF or sports.com ever had an Addicks fan?
RE. 1. Agreed. RE. 2. Check out FatAddick in the Charlton forum - and often in the West Ham forum as well because he hasn't got anybody to talk to .
Do any oldies remember the state the old Baseball Ground used to be in? They lost, it was the same conditions for both sides blah blah blah. End of.
Indeed - and they won the title on it didn't they ? Incidentally , back in the late sixties / early seventies Chelsea and West Ham fought out a very entertaining 5-5 draw on a Stamford Bridge pitch referred to at the time as a "duck pond". Plus , hard to forget the drama-filled FA Cup Final of 1970 between Chelsea and Leeds , contested just days after the Horse of the Year show had taken its toll.
Sure they lost. But you can't deny it was because of an unkind bounce, or 4 come to think of it. I mean, it was such a close match that if the pitch had been in better condit... Hang on... F uck'em!
Yes and if they felt that strongly about it they should have refused point blank to play on it BEFORE the game. The pitch is an absolute disgrace though, it has to be said. How has it got this bad? You would have thought that the money people pay to watch Chelsea would mean that they could afford decent ground staff.
I think they do deserve a replay – I mean, it wasn’t a shit pitch, it was an astro type thing, and don’t all professional football matches have to be played on grass
What a load of rubbish!I wonder if Charlton would want the match replayed if they had won?It was the same pitch for both teams,I doubt Chelsea even like playing on it.30 years ago matches were played on far worse pitches,even on snow.Charlton are disgracing themselves asking for a rematch.Sour grapes from a team that were thrashed.
everyone excpet the guffer nailing this one on the head. If you have a problem with the pitch file a protest and don't play on it. You can't get your arse handed to you and then claim the pitch was bald.....
If you refuse to play the game then you are in breach of FA rules, Middlesborough refused to play Blackburn a few years ago and were docked points. Better to play the game then lodge a protest, as they have done. The Premier League rules state that matches must be played on grass, but I think Charlton are p*ssing in the wind with this . . . Having said that, it's not really correct to say the 'pitch' was the same for both teams, as Chelsea had trained on it for two days, and Charlton claim they didn't have the appropriate footware . . .
Where's the grass? 56.83% of 12054 votes on the BBC poll reckon the match should be replayed! :eek: BBC poll - Should Chelsea v Charlton be replayed because of the pitch?
ozwat, im a bit sceptical about that poll. if u look at their 'have your say' section on it, the trend is clearly that the majority think it shouldnt be replayed. methinks one or two charlton fans are just bombarding the yes votes.....
Are you sure there are that many Charlton fans???? I have sent in several comments on recent issues and have yet to see one shown I think there is more chance the BBC select the comments so they reflect what the BBC want them to, in this case that the match shouldn't be replayed :eek: In the recent BBC poll "Who's the best striker?" 60.68% of 36193 votes were in favour of Henry over Van Nistelrooy If you "bombardment" theory holds, I think manu fans would have flooded that poll, there ought to be more of them Henry vs Van Nistelrooy
Bollox. Charlton should accept the result and move on. I'm sure their 4-1 defeat was not in any way due to the state of the pitch. However, it may explain how and why Hasselbaink fell over in the penalty area for Chelsea's opener. Maybe. When Chelsea won the CWC cup a few years back they had to play the 1st leg of a tie in some Eastern European country and that pitch was much, much worse than the one at SB. It was probably the worst pitch I have ever seen. Vialli was likened, by none other than Big Ron, as being "like a donkey on Brighton beach". Not sure if it was cos he thought he was playing badly or cos of the state of the pitch. Big Ron marches to a different drummer it seems.
they should have refused to play on it if they didn't like it. although Chelsea should now be relegated to the conferance, be forced to play behind closed doors for 10 years and have Ken Bates raped by a herd of Rhino's as punishment......and forced to sell us Gallas for £2.50 and a packet of doritos.
