Chelsea are set to play all their home games at Wembley while their ground is being re-developed.
Stamford Bridge's revamp, taking its capacity to 60,000, is expected to keep the venue out of use for three seasons, starting with the 2017-18 campaign.
The Premier League are expected to give Chelsea the go-ahead, subject to planning permission being granted for the new-look Bridge project.
The west London club are two-thirds of the way through the process after publishing plans and staging a meeting to canvas local opinion about the project.
If the plans get the green light, the re-vamp will start in May 2017 – which is when Chelsea will make the national stadium their temporary home, at a cost of around £12million a year.
The FA have been sounded out and have agreed in principle to the move, while Chelsea are also happy with the 50,000-capacity limit for games at Wembley imposed by Brent Council.
That only leaves the Premier League to give their blessing, and that is a formality once the Blues fulfil the league's criteria of:
* Good transport links
* A guarantee that all home league matches will be played at the stadium.
* A proximity to the ground the club are leaving.
Chelsea will satisfy all three.
Wembley can handle crowds in excess of 85,000, as has been shown on international days, FA Cup semi-finals and finals, the League Cup final and the play-offs.
Chelsea will pledge to play all home matches at the stadium and Wembley is a mere 10.6 miles from Stamford Bridge.
Twickenham, home of England's rugby union side, had also been considered but Wembley is the clear first choice.
It shouldn't happen, in my opinion. If Wembley is supposed to remain the arena for the big finals, when teams either cope with the pressure of the environment or crumble under it, then you can't have one team, already super-powerful, that has come to regard it as their home. You'll also see loads of teams - who'd probably never get there on merit - play there at least once a season, which would also cheapen the experience.
Stamford Bridge's revamp, taking its capacity to 60,000, is expected to keep the venue out of use for three seasons, starting with the 2017-18 campaign.
The Premier League are expected to give Chelsea the go-ahead, subject to planning permission being granted for the new-look Bridge project.
The west London club are two-thirds of the way through the process after publishing plans and staging a meeting to canvas local opinion about the project.
If the plans get the green light, the re-vamp will start in May 2017 – which is when Chelsea will make the national stadium their temporary home, at a cost of around £12million a year.
The FA have been sounded out and have agreed in principle to the move, while Chelsea are also happy with the 50,000-capacity limit for games at Wembley imposed by Brent Council.
That only leaves the Premier League to give their blessing, and that is a formality once the Blues fulfil the league's criteria of:
* Good transport links
* A guarantee that all home league matches will be played at the stadium.
* A proximity to the ground the club are leaving.
Chelsea will satisfy all three.
Wembley can handle crowds in excess of 85,000, as has been shown on international days, FA Cup semi-finals and finals, the League Cup final and the play-offs.
Chelsea will pledge to play all home matches at the stadium and Wembley is a mere 10.6 miles from Stamford Bridge.
Twickenham, home of England's rugby union side, had also been considered but Wembley is the clear first choice.
It shouldn't happen, in my opinion. If Wembley is supposed to remain the arena for the big finals, when teams either cope with the pressure of the environment or crumble under it, then you can't have one team, already super-powerful, that has come to regard it as their home. You'll also see loads of teams - who'd probably never get there on merit - play there at least once a season, which would also cheapen the experience.
