Chelsea are deciding over a temporary switch to the home of English rugby at Twickenham as they discuss plans for a new stadium to replace the iconic Stamford Bridge
The idea of Chelsea moving to Twickenham makes a lot of sense. Yes, the Range Rovers, picnic hampers and tweed jackets would be nowhere in sight.
Instead, they'd be replaced with a uniform of designer gear and a copious amounts of lager, rather than champagne. Twickenham's anthem of 'Swing Low, Sweet Chariot' would likely morph into something less palatable. However, one constant would be a sports team having the privilege of calling a world-class stadium their home. It seems like a logical move for both the football club and the Rugby Football Union (RFU).
The proposal has been suggested because Chelsea wants to either redevelop Stamford Bridge or build a new stadium near Earls Court, and would need somewhere to host their home games in the meantime.
Meanwhile, the RFU is in desperate need of additional income, due to the ongoing struggle with record losses. If Chelsea did relocate to England HQ, as it's known in rugby circles, we would get to see if the London club is as big as it believes it is.
Twickenham, when full, is one of the finest stadiums in the UK. It can hold 82,000 spectators and is capable of creating a thrilling atmosphere. But could Chelsea fill it?
That remains to be seen, but what Twickenham is also good at is retaining spectators long after the final whistle. The vast space surrounding the ground is filled with places to eat and drink, albeit at steep prices.
Rugby fans seem to linger around the stadium after a match, and perhaps Chelsea could find ways to keep their own fans outside following games. However, it's worth mentioning that commuting to and from Twickenham can be a nightmare.
The traffic is unbearable, there's no direct underground link, and the overland trains pack commuters like sardines in a tin. RFU chief executive Bill Sweeney has hinted that Richmond Council might be hesitant to let Chelsea become new tenants of Twickenham.
Twickenham sits right in the heart of one of London's wealthiest boroughs, and local residents have strong objections to the number of events held there. So, the idea of thousands of Chelsea fans flooding their tranquil suburban streets is likely to fill them with dread.
However, London Mayor Sadiq Khan is open to discussions. "My message to Chelsea is come and speak to us in relation to what you want to do," he said (via the Daily Star).
"Chelsea are victims of their own success, and Stamford Bridge is now too small for them. After all, this is a team that has twice won the Champions League. We work closely with all seven of our Premier League clubs but I'm sure Chelsea look with some envy at the stadiums some of their rivals in London have."
Despite Khan's comments, Chelsea haven't clinched the league title since 2017. Their popularity as the biggest club in the capital is also an ongoing competition, which puts the potential move to Twickenham as a real test of their stature in football.
Because if this venue turns out to be impractical, Wembley could then be a potential alternative, but that would present an entirely new set of challenges.