Tag Archives: Chelsea Supporters Trust

The Big Stamford Bridge Sleep Out

Chelsea Supporters’ Trust with the full co-operation of Chelsea Football Club are delighted to announce that we will be holding a charity sleep out at Stamford Bridge on Saturday, November 16th.

The event will raise funds for two homeless charities; our neighbours at the Oswald Stoll Foundation and the Glass Door Homeless Charity, based on the Kings Road in Chelsea.

Chelsea fans will have the opportunity to sleep out for the night in one of the stands at Stamford Bridge to help these charities tackle homelessness in Hammersmith and Fulham.

Participants must be Chelsea season ticket holders or members, be aged 18+ and will need to pledge to raise at least £100 in sponsorship.

There is space for up to 200 people to sleep overnight, so please get involved.

To book your place please click this link :

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/the-big-stamford-bridge-sleep-out-tickets-70122928567

On the evening of Saturday November 16th, those that are registered should turn up with a sleeping bag and pillow, stay overnight and go home in the morning. That’s all there is to it!

We are working on how we can use a mechanism such as Justgiving to help people raise the money by setting up their own individual sponsorship page . That way it goes straight to the charity and you do not have to collect it. We are still sorting out a few admin bits and pieces but will then get in touch with all the attendees and explain what can be done.

If you have any questions, please email enquiries@chelseasupporterstrust.com

Foodbank collection at Sheffield United game

Chelsea Supporters Trust are pleased to announce that our next collection for the Hammersmith and Fulham Food Bank will be on Saturday 31st August before the Sheffield United game.

The collection point will once again be adjacent to the cfcuk stall which is situated opposite the Fulham Broadway Centre, next to the old Fulham Town Hall and on the corner of Fulham Road and Cedarne Road.

The stall will be manned from approximately midday and donations can be left until roughly an hour before kick off (2pm). We are extremely grateful to Chelsea FC once again for allowing us to store the donations at Stamford Bridge before being collected by the food bank staff.
Cash donations are always gratefully received too!

The following items are urgently needed,

  • Long life/UHT milk and juice
  • Tinned fruit
  • Tinned Vegetables
  • Small bags of rice
  • Tinned rice pudding
  • Other puddings e.g sponge, angel delight, etc.
  • Small jars of instant coffee
  • Washing tablets, small boxes of powder

At the moment they have plenty of

  • Feminine hygiene- pads and tampons
  • Baked beans
  • Pasta
  • Tea

Further collections will be made at the Liverpool, Brighton and Newcastle home games.

Time for UEFA to take action on managing the Champions League and Europa League finals

The fan experience at UEFA finals must be improved, say fan groups of last year’s four finalists.

Ahead of tomorrow’s draw in Monaco for the Champions League and Europa League 2019/20 tournaments, supporters of last season’s four finalists are calling for changes in how UEFA manage the finals. ​

A joint statement by Arsenal Supporters’ Trust, Chelsea Supporters’ Trust, Spirit of Shankly and Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust reads:

Reaching a UEFA Champions League or Europa League final should be a wonderful experience for a club’s supporters. Instead, they can face a struggle just to attend the match. ​Problems range from inadequate numbers of tickets being awarded to the finalists through to all-but-impossible travel arrangements. Too often fans who had supported their clubs in every round up to the final were left out of pocket or not able to attend the final at all. 

We have drawn up a six-point action plan to improve the supporter experience. It has been referred to the Football Supporters’ Association (FSA) and Football Supporters Europe (FSE). We now call on UEFA to engage in meaningful dialogue with supporters and address these points.

1. Allocation: 80% of tickets should be made available to the two competing finalists. with the remaining 20% for sponsors, the football family, key stakeholders and small general sale.
 
2. Capacity: only stadiums with large capacities should be selected to ensure maximum ticket availability. We suggest 60,000 or greater for the Europa League final; 75,000 for the Champions League final.
 
3. Affordability: ticket pricing for the final to be fair and affordable. There should be a stretch pricing policy allowing choice for fans. 
 
4. Accessibility: the final venue must have the highest standards for accessibility for people with disabilities, including travel access to the stadium; sufficient food, drink and washroom facilities; and have not been subject to a UEFA charge for the treatment of fans for at least 24 months prior to the final.
 
5. Infrastructure: the location of the final venue to be a city with excellent transport links, including the capacity to deal with additional charter flights, and ideally good rail links to nearby cities and airports; bed-space capacity to deal with the large number of visitors.
 
6. Equality: the host country must abide by a human-rights and equality policy that ensures no discrimination or denial of right of entry is applied to any player or supporter travelling to the final.

Tomorrow’s much hyped draw will involve everybody from the football family except the very people without whom there would be no European Football – its supporters. We call upon UEFA to strengthen its dialogue with fans and request that they start by engaging with groups like ourselves to discuss the proposals we have put forward to improve arrangements for fans at the final stage of the Champions and Europa Leagues.

Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust
Arsenal Supporters’ Trust
Chelsea Supporters’ Trust
Spirit of Shankly, Liverpool Supporters’ Trust 

Foodbank collection at Leicester City game

Chelsea Supporters Trust are pleased to announce that our collections for the Hammersmith and Fulham Food Bank will re commence on Sunday 18th August before the Leicester game.

The collection point will once again be adjacent to the cfcuk stall which is situated opposite the Fulham Broadway Centre, next to the old Fulham Town Hall and on the corner of Fulham Road and Cedarne Road.

The stall will be manned from approximately midday and donations can be left until roughly an hour before kick off (3.30pm). We are extremely grateful to Chelsea FC once again for allowing us to store the donations at Stamford Bridge before being collected by the food bank staff.
Cash donations are always gratefully received too!

The following items are urgently needed,

  • Long life/UHT milk and juice
  • Tinned fruit
  • Tinned Vegetables
  • Small bags of rice
  • Tinned rice pudding
  • Other puddings e.g sponge, angel delight, etc.
  • Small jars of instant coffee
  • Washing tablets, small boxes of powder

At the moment they have plenty of

  • Feminine hygiene- pads and tampons
  • Baked beans
  • Pasta
  • Tea

Further collections will be made at the Sheffield United, Liverpool, Brighton and Newcastle home games.

CST VAR Education Visit

Representatives from the Chelsea Supporters Trust attended education sessions regarding VAR at the Stockley Park HQ last week.

Video Assisted Referee (VAR) was voted in unanimously by Premier League clubs to be introduced for the 2019/20 season and until they vote against it, it is here to stay.

VAR philosophy is “minimum interference, maximum benefit,” which, of course remains to be seen!

The system has been tested extensively over nearly three years and the Premier League now believes they are ready to go live. The system has been shown and explained to football club staff, players, journalists, media pundits, commentators and supporters representatives.

The words “open” and “transparent” were used a lot during the session.

Who is the referee? What happens when there are lots of games going on at once?

Every match has its own dedicated team featuring a VAR , an Assistant VAR and a Technical Expert. Therefore if 10 games are played simultaneously such as happens on the last day of the season, there will be 10 VAR teams each monitoring their game.

The assistant keeps watching the game in play while the VAR is reviewing a decision. The VAR is a fully qualified Premier League referee; next season when the match day referees are announced for the coming round of PL games, they will announce the VAR for each game at the same time.

If the system breaks down (for example there is a communications failure somewhere breaking the link between the VAR Control Centre and the ground), there should be an announcement inside the ground letting everyone know that VAR is not in operation, and another when it is back on again. This is apparently the protocol for the goal line technology we already have in place.

What does use of VAR cover?

The VAR system covers ‘clear and obvious errors’ and ‘serious missed incidents’ in relation to goals, penalties, (straight) red-cards and cases of mistaken identity. The Premier League are pushing the message “minimal interference maximum benefit”

‘Clear and obvious errors’ is probably the most misunderstood or misinterpreted part of this; one of the most contentious uses of VAR is for marginal offsides, how can being an inch on or offside be considered a clear and obvious error? It was made very plain in the presentation that, because they can measure to a high level of accuracy, it is considered a matter of fact and will always be checked – like the goal line technology we have got used to in recent years. You may not agree but that is the way it is treated by the authorities.

When it comes to determining whether a player should receive a red card for a dangerous tackle however, the ‘clear and obvious error’ test does apply. During the briefing we looked at a tackle from a game last season when a late tackle from a defender was given a yellow card, the referee judging it to be reckless but not dangerous; whilst we almost all felt that it was a dangerous tackle worthy of a red, it was also agreed that this was not sufficiently clear cut to overrule the referee’s decision. However another example was shown where it was right to intervene and a red card was issued after VAR intervention – a blatant sending off.
VAR can also be used if it there is a potential case of mistaken identity when a player has been given a yellow or red card.

Doesn’t slow motion make everything look deliberate?

When reviewing incidents of handball or foul play, the review is first conducted in real time to get the sense of the incident, before viewing in slow motion. Handball guidelines will continue to operate to PL standards.

Are all penalty saves going to be retaken?

No, they are not going to forensically examine every penalty save to see if the keeper moved an inch off the line, as seemed to be the case in the recent Women’s World Cup but they will still check for obvious offences – if the goalkeeper is a yard off the line they can expect to be punished.

The interpretation for encroachment seems a bit odd. If defenders rush in, it is only retaken if an encroaching defender clears the ball and not if the striker misses; however if a forward encroaches and the penalty is scored directly, the penalty will be retaken even though the encroaching forward had no direct involvement.

What will the fans in the ground know? Can we see the review?

It was made clear that we will not see reviews being conducted. There are a number of reasons for this: The International Football Association Board (IFAB), the body in charge of setting the guidelines at a global level, will not allow it nor will they allow referees microphone conversations being broadcast; the game in progress is constantly under review; and even when play has stopped and a review has not yet completed, it is felt that it will slow things down – once again this remains to be seen. TV viewers will not be seeing the review either, although they will have more opportunity to look at the incident as they would today in normal play.

What should happen in the ground is that the scoreboard will display a message with the type of review while play is paused, something like “VAR CHECK RED CARD DECISION”. When the review completes the message will change to “VAR COMPLETE” if the decision stands. However if a decision is overturned by VAR then the screen will announce this and a clip of the incident in question will be shown on the scoreboards in the ground. There are at least a couple of grounds in the Premier League where there is not a screen, in which case the review and result will be announced over the PA system. At the moment no advertising or sponsorship will be allowed on the VAR screen.

When does the VAR review incidents? Can players ask for a review?

This is definitely not well understood. The game is being constantly reviewed by the VAR and his assistant from the first kick to the last. Teams do not get ‘appeals’ to ask for reviews because the VAR team is continuously reviewing the game and all incidents within their scope. The only situation we could come up with when a player could ask for a review is an off the ball incident which no one has spotted in real time.

Players will have to get used to this – and if they run after the ref making huge TV screen gestures telling him or her to review the massive injustice they have just witnessed, they will get booked. However it is fine to ask the ref have you checked such-and-such and make a small TV gesture whilst doing so. In this respect it is the same as the situation today when asking if a player should be carded being OK or waving imaginary red cards at all and sundry being a bookable offence.

Are we going to see the ref running to review incidents four or five times a game?

That is not supposed to happen, although the referee always makes the final decision. There will be situations where the ref will want to make a call after reviewing it on screen, but generally it is expected that the on field ref will trust the VAR and only use the Referee Review Area (RRA) for unseen incidents or when the VAR information is outside the matchday referee’s expectations. It was also felt that referees consulting in the RRA would only add to the time taken for the decision to be made and would only be used as a last resort.

Will we get the time back spent waiting for a VAR review?

Yes and No. The time added on at the end of each half will be the time added by the referee as is the case today plus the time spent waiting for a review advised by the VAR team. All well and good, but if an incident occurs, say a penalty offence is missed by the referee and action continues for another two minutes before the ball goes out of play or goes quiet enough for the ref to stop play, and we then go back to award the penalty, the two minutes of playing time following the foul that has been ruled ‘dead’ is not added back on. A penalty that should have been awarded in the 85th minute finally gets taken in the 88th minute after 30 seconds additional review, only the 30 seconds is added on. The assistant VAR will be keeping a record of the time taken for reviews and will pass on the figures to the match referee at the end of each half.

How is offside judged?

The practical session using VAR was really helpful for this. We had a series of video clips with various situations from last season, with the full range of camera angles to support the process. As in a real game, the technician was there to support us as we acted the role of VAR. It was our job to conduct the reviews, spot incidents, check goals etc whilst the ‘live game’ continued on the big monitor in front of us.

This cleared up one of the big questions, as it had never been entirely clear which frame should be used to freeze play for offside as contact can last several frames. The very first contact with the ball is the key point in time. So checking a decision, you first roll back and forward a frame at a time to establish the kicking point. All the other screens (you have 4 showing different angles when conducting a review) are synchronised. Having established the precise point of contact, you then zoom in on the players in question, find the rearmost point of the defender that can play the ball and the system uses 3D to drop a line down to the pitch and thus across the field. You then repeat that for the forward. If the attacker’s red line is closer to goal than the defender’s blue line, it is offside.

This was fine for a clear decision when a player was obviously offside by say 3 inches, but when trying to judge the top of the forward’s shoulder to work out if a player was offside by less than an inch it felt extremely uncomfortable.

With practice this should be done quickly – the Harry Kane penalty incident in the League Cup last year should not have taken 4 minutes… nor should the linesman have stopped as though about to flag. Linesmen are having to be retrained not to flag immediately if the decision is close; we can only hope they learn quickly when doing it every week.

A goal results from a corner which should have been a goal kick. Will the VAR overrule it?

No. The system is not there to re-referee the whole game, only to look at the phase of play that led to the goal. What defines the relevant phase of play is something that a lot of time has been spent on to trying to reach agreement on… and not all players or coaches appear happy with the result! Particularly when an example used to illustrate the point featured their team conceding a goal 30 seconds or more after a striker should have been flagged for offside…

In a nutshell, the phase of play might be defined in reference to factors such as:

– the point where a team gains possession;
– the last point at which the defence was able to ‘re-set’
– when the defence last had a chance to clear the ball

There was agreement with the principal but it can be foreseen that this leads to a lot of arguments; the decision on when to start the VAR review will no doubt cause a few discussions next season. This is, to steal a phrase form the late Douglas Adams, one of those “rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty” to which we will have to get used to in the coming season.

In conclusion…

Don’t shoot the messenger! We still have reservations about the introduction of the system but feel through the programme of education that is underway, we finally have some clarity on how it will be operated. Having experienced sitting on the hot seat, albeit in a training situation, it gave us a great insight into how hard the VAR job can be; apparently one of the VAR technicians commented that at the end of game they often could not tell you the final score, so intensive is the process. It should also be noted that the technicians are not allowed to work on games involving the team they support!

The joy of seeing a goal go in will be somewhat tempered once we have gone mad for 60 seconds only to see it wiped out – the current system is quick but as we know not always right. If VAR was as quick to make a decision for offside as the current technology for determining whether the ball has crossed the line, it would be very welcome. There was still a feeling that fans in the ground should be able to witness the reviews when play has stopped and a review is in progress.

On the plus side, some of the atrocious tackles that are missed by refs will be picked up and punished immediately. We think this is great as it will benefit the team whose player has just been two-footed, rather than a small advantage to the next few teams that their opposition play as that play may be suspended following the games. Also unlike the current system, whereby the level of media attention can determine whether the FA charge any given player, this should always be dealt with on the spot to an fair standard for all.

Hopefully decision making on key incidents will improve, and although they acknowledge that they will never get to 100%, an improvement on the current Key Match Incident accuracy of 81% must be welcomed. We are about to find out.

CST Statement on Supporter Bans

The news that Chelsea have banned one supporter for life and five others for between one and two years for behavior relating to the abuse of Raheem Sterling at Stamford Bridge last December, whilst understandable is disappointing.

The Crown Prosecution Service stated in April that there was not enough evidence to prove racist abuse or public order offences. However, the Club have taken an alternative view, without the burden of proof needed to establish whether any criminal offences had occurred.

Abusive behaviour is abhorrent, whether in the febrile atmosphere of a football match or in society as a whole and racism is unequivocally no subject for semantics or ‘whataboutism’. The Chelsea Supporters’ Trust will always support the Club in taking action where racist abuse is proven.

However, the crux of this matter is that the Club are entitled to enforce any disciplinary action they deem fit if a supporter breaches their ticketing terms and conditions. Simply put, the club are not a public body and they can enact whatever policies they like in respect of supporters’ behaviour.

While we respect the Club’s right to do this, we do find their procedures troubling.

In the interests of fairness and natural justice, we believe there needs to be consistency and transparency around the Club’s banning procedures. Currently it seems that the Club are acting as ‘Judge and Jury’. When a supporter’s ability to support their team is at stake or worse, their employment and reputation, we believe it would be more equitable to use independent arbitration in the appeals process or an appeals committee independent from the Club.

Football, like society has changed. Clearly some behaviour is simply unacceptable at football in the modern age with violence and racist and abusive behaviour top of the list. Given what is potentially at stake for supporters, we believe the Club should make their policies relating to unacceptable behaviour and breaching conditions of ticket use far more accessible and visible than they currently are.

It would seem sensible for supporters to acquaint themselves with exactly what the club considers to be behaviour that would put you in breach of their conditions and lead to a ban. The Club’s policy document can be downloaded here.

We will continue to support the Club taking action against racist and abusive behaviour from both Chelsea supporters and supporters of all clubs, but we will also challenge the Club when we believe that their procedures and rationale for banning supporters is unfair.

CST Statement on European Super League discussions

Chelsea Supporters Trust, in common with other Premier League Trusts and supporter organisations, have deep concerns about stories of a possible UEFA European Super League which have received media coverage in recent weeks.  

As a result the Chelsea Supporters’ Trust sent a letter (click here to read the letter) to Chelsea FC expressing our opposition to the idea of a European Super League being discussed by the European Club Association. The full statement by the United Football Supporters Organisation can be read here (http://www.fsf.org.uk/blog/view/six-reasons-to-oppose-a-european-super-league), outlining our opposition in detail.

CST board members met with Chelsea executives Bruce Buck and Graham Smith to discuss the matter. They confirmed the club position, and that of the Premier League, which is one of opposition to the idea, as reported in the media.  The club is working with other Premier League clubs to counter the idea, which they see as detrimental to both Premier League and European domestic football in a wider context.  

The parties will continue dialogue on the issue going forward.

The Europa League Final in Baku

The Europa League Final between Chelsea and Arsenal on May 29th is presenting unprecedented challenges to supporters who wish to be there in the hope of witnessing Chelsea winning another European trophy.

It is clear that, whilst a pleasant place to visit for a group stage match, Baku is a totally unsuitable location for a major European final. The combination of cost, complexity in regard to travel arrangements and time off work has massively reduced the travelling support, including those who loyally and ordinarily go to all home, away and European matches.

None of this is the fault of the people of Baku. The blame lies predominantly with UEFA who, yet again, re-affirm their contempt for match going supporters.

Due to UEFA’s choice of Baku, the supporters who do manage to make the trip face a late finish of the game (potentially after 01.30 if it goes to extra-time and penalties) causing potential problems for travelling supporters returning to hotels or travel hubs. But before supporters get this far, the issues faced in actually getting there are insurmountable for many.

These issues are exacerbated by the inadequacy of airports in terms of handling large numbers of extra flights, the lack of direct flights and high cost of indirect ones and the complexity of journeys from Tbilisi or Kiev by overnight train or minibus for example.

With the difficulties supporters face in getting to Baku, it might not seem unreasonable that UEFA have only allocated 6,000 tickets to both Chelsea and Arsenal out of a capacity of 68,000. However, this is potentially a worrying trend for future seasons. UEFA notoriously provide an inadequate allocation for supporters in finals, instead favouring the ‘UEFA family’ and may use the understandable but likely unsold allocation by both clubs as a barometer for future allocations.

In addition, the political situation between Azerbaijan and Armenia means that Arsenal player and Armenia Captain, Henrikh Mkhitaryan, feels unsafe to visit the country and now misses out on the chance to play in the biggest game of his career. There have also been reported cases of supporters of Armenian extraction who have been refused a visa to enter Azerbaijan. Choosing a location where there are issues with political conflicts and human rights abuses makes a mockery of UEFA’s claims of inclusivity.

On the subject of inclusivity, UEFA and the stadium’s provision of facilities for disabled supporters is inadequate. The sightlines for some of the wheelchair spaces in the stadium are compromised by poor pitch visibility. In Baku itself, there is limited accommodation and infrastructure accessible to disabled supporters. Awarding a final to a City and Stadium which cannot adequately provide for disabled supporters due to poor views and inaccessibility is a damning indictment of UEFA’s #equalgame campaign.  

Rather than arrogantly pushing back on recent criticism, once both English clubs had reached the Quarter Finals, surely a round table discussion between UEFA, Azerbaijan and the two clubs on details, logistics and airline capacity should have taken place. Better still, a fall-back venue could and should have been identified.

We are extremely disappointed that Chelsea FC have been unable or unwilling to help Chelsea supporters overcome the travel, expense and logistics in order for them to support the team in a European final. This, in spite of the Chelsea Supporters’ Trust’s suggestions as to how the club could offer material help to supporters wishing to go to Baku.

We suggested providing a subsidy for travelling supporters, having calculated the negligible financial impact on the club given the revenue earned from the competition this season. This is pertinent when considering that Chelsea FC’s travel partner, Thomas Cook, is charging an extortionate £979 for the official package for the day trip to Baku. Furthermore, the late notice of the UK airport to be used for both departure and return means it is hard for travellers to plan.

The price for Thomas Cook’s package is more expensive than most season tickets, and again it is disappointing that the club did not feel they could offer supporters an extension for season ticket renewals, as they have done before when Chelsea supporters faced additional expense due to the club’s participation in a European final. Tottenham Hotspur for example have extended their season ticket renewals to help supporters cash flow.

Chelsea is the only club of the four English European finalists insisting all of their supporters collect their tickets from a designated ticket pick-up location, even though tickets are clearly freely available. To compound things, supporters cannot take advantage of the free travel in Baku until they have their match ticket. Surely Chelsea could have re-thought their policy in lieu of the exceptional circumstances of the trip to Baku?

The lack of a statement from Chelsea FC is also disappointing. Arsenal FC, issued a statement expressing frustration and disappointment on behalf of their supporters; acknowledging the unsuitability of the venue, the challenges faced by supporters travelling to Baku and the need to ensure more care by UEFA in future venue selection. While this may not make any difference to UEFA’s immediate decision making, at the very least it sent out a message to their supporters that they were concerned about the difficulties they face and were on their side.

A similar statement from Chelsea would have engendered some much-needed goodwill from the supporters.

And, given the large numbers of Chelsea supporters who are extremely disappointed in not being able to get to Baku to support the team, we believe that Chelsea FC have missed a great opportunity to benefit from another gesture of goodwill by facilitating a ‘live broadcast’ or ‘beam back’ of the match, at Stamford Bridge or another suitable venue.  

This would have been very well received and while never able to replace the experience of being in Baku, it might have mitigated some of the disappointment.

Foodbank collection at Wolves game

Chelsea Supporters Trust are pleased to announce that our next collection for the Hammersmith and Fulham Food Bank will be before Sunday’s league game against Wolves.

If you are coming to the game on Saturday, the collection point for donations will once again be at the CFCUK stall which is opposite the Fulham Broadway Centre and next to the old Fulham Town Hall,

It is important to note that you will need to please bring any donations there by 1.15pm, as we need to get them in storage before the match.

Our thanks, as always, go to Chelsea FC who are kindly providing us with a storage facility for the donated items.

We hope you can give generously from the list of items below or if you can spare any amount of money that is also welcome.
Items that they urgently need are :
• Juice (long life)
• Long life sponge puddings
• Long life milk
• Tinned vegetables
• Tinned meat
• Rice pudding
• Coffee
• Toilet roll (and other toiletries
Please note they already have plenty of beans, tea and pasta

Thank you for your generous support.

For further information about Hammersmith and Fulham Food bank, visit their website or find them on Facebook and Twitter.

Foodbank collection at Huddersfield Game

Chelsea Supporters Trust are pleased to announce that we are having another collection for the Hammersmith and Fulham Food Bank. We hope that yet again, supporters will have a chance show their wonderful generosity!

The next collection for the Food Bank will be before Saturday’s league game against Huddersfield Town.

If you are coming to the game on Saturday, the collection point for donations will once again be at the CFCUK stall which is opposite the Fulham Broadway Centre and next to the old Fulham Town Hall,

It is important to note that you will need to please bring any donations there by 1.55pm, as we need to get them in storage before 2pm.

Our thanks go to Chelsea FC who are kindly providing us with a storage facility for the donated items.

We hope you can give generously from the list of items below or if you can spare any amount of money that is also welcome.
Items that they urgently need are :
• Juice (long life)
• Long life sponge puddings
• Long life milk
• Tinned vegetables
• Tinned meat
• Rice pudding
• Coffee
• Toilet roll (and other toiletries
Please note they already have plenty of beans, tea and pasta

Thank you for your generous support.

For further information about Hammersmith and Fulham Food bank, visit their website or find them on Facebook and Twitter.