Not everybody are big on collective shame.
Enzo 'Terry' Fernandez | Vice-Captain of Chelsea
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Of course. I think it's appropriate though, to a degree. As it is to feel some level of pride when your club does something admirable. For example, if I was a Chelsea fan I'd feel pride about my club's role in the rise of women's football. Whilst I would feel shame at failures in dealing with racism, this being the latest example.
The sad reality is if you leave it up to the clubs to self police this kind of thing, I personally think most clubs would choose the easy route and not willingly handicap themselves, especially when it concerns one of the star players at the club, and hope that everyone has forgotten about this by the time the season starts, which is why we have governing bodies in place to rule on these matters.
Imagine living in a world where money can make problems go away like magic…
As opposed to most of the world (and plenty of football clubs/players actually) where you got a severe ban or sacked.
Sure FIFA will sort it though
The Chelsea fan who made a racist gesture towards Son was banned for 3 years.
This guy gets to apologize and pay a relatively small sum of money and move on.
That makes sense.
This guy gets to apologize and pay a relatively small sum of money and move on.
That makes sense.
It is obviously hard to know how other clubs would deal with this. I know we'd all be a lot happier if the other players who sang it, and their clubs, found themselves in the same position as Enzo and Chelsea did.
As others have said, I wish I had faith in FIFA here. What should obviously happen, in my eyes, is punishment both to Fernandez and to the Argentina national team as a whole and these should take a considerably stronger form than charitable donations.
I agree with you on what should happen to both Enzo and the Argentinian NT. I don’t think an in person apology and donation to a charity is good enough. But sadly, if you leave it up to Chelsea, that’s probably as far as they’ll go with this.
Hmm, Cavani got banned for a tweet.
Oh look, FIFA and/or the FA will come down with a ban any day now. Gotta make an example out of this to stamp out racism right?
Wait, he’s not an United player, nevermind. All good, water under the bridge etc.
Wait, he’s not an United player, nevermind. All good, water under the bridge etc.
Enzo has a bigger problem: finding minutes.
The last two months or so we’ve all been talking about how he’d be perfect in the deep lying playmaker role with the inverted fullback next to him.
But Lavia is straight hijacking that job. When Maresca put him in last night …. He put him forward in the 8 spot he wants Palmer to play…. To see how he does?
At least in the mock 11’s I’ve been working on from watching training and preseason… I never have Enzo as a starter.
The last two months or so we’ve all been talking about how he’d be perfect in the deep lying playmaker role with the inverted fullback next to him.
But Lavia is straight hijacking that job. When Maresca put him in last night …. He put him forward in the 8 spot he wants Palmer to play…. To see how he does?
At least in the mock 11’s I’ve been working on from watching training and preseason… I never have Enzo as a starter.
That's more telling of you than it is of Enzo.
A bigger problem... Than being a racist?
That’s pretty close, but he’s better lookingI’m just curious, you NEVER actually answer points in my posts. You just make derogatory comments and move on.
So, if you are actually a Chelsea fan, I’ll ask:
Did you not find it interesting that Enzo was not substituted in to the position that he was supposed to be playing this year, and instead was tried in the forward 8 spot that will probably be occupied by Palmer?
Lavia was subbed off, the deep lying playmaker spot was open for him to get minutes, but instead Maresca wanted to see how he fared breaking in somewhere else.
Because talking to you is fecking exhausting. It really is the equivalent of talking to a brick wall. After a few posts one just has to realize there's absolutely nothing to be said that would change your mind so what's the point in discussing further?
I find it highly ironic that you of all people would question anyone else's support of the club when you have yourself time and time again proven you are obviously more a supporter of the club owners rather than the club itself or any of it's players.
I've no doubt you might even like the club/team but that still falls well short of your obvious love for Clearlake and the man crush on Boehly.
I don't know because I didn't fancy staying up till 4 am on a work day to watch the team take part in a glorified training session. My opinions are based on what I've seen from each of our players in the past and what I know them to bring to the table and I simply do not see a scenario where a possession-based coach like Maresca would not rate Enzo Fernandez incredibly highly.
Pre-season games are a time for experimenting new things and seeing what works, you really shouldn't read too much into what happens in those. Once the real games begin, Maresca will go with what he knows to be his best team and I would be really, really surprised if Enzo is not a part of that XI more often than not.
So to recap… still didn’t answer, because it’s too taxing for you.
Didn’t watch the game, because that’s too much trouble.
Don’t know enough about our ownership to know that Eghbali is the overseer now, and Boehly is shifting to Strassbourg and helping to acquire new ventures
Got it.
I haven’t talked to Todd since high school. The important thing is what Clearlake are trying to build for the team that I support.
He's already got done for the chanting and running a red light before the season even started.
He's someone we should be selling as soon as possible.
He's someone we should be selling as soon as possible.
Insulting another member
Still didn't answer to what? I have tried explaining to you as to why I think you're a fecking moron for not having a player of Enzo's quality on the ball in any of your 'mock lineups' but if you can't comprehend what you're reading, what's the point?
Well, yes. During the season I watch 100% of the games and juggle my schedule around the games if I have to. But I'm not getting sleep deprivated during the week for a fecking meaningless pre-season friendly. Does that make me a bad fan?
Now what gave you that idea? I know full well that Boehly's role has diminished quite a bit from when they first started out and never claimed otherwise, did I? I even mentioned Clearlake first you dimwit.
I DO believe Maresca rates him. But I disagree the choice in the friendly of where to play him is insignificant. This is the first time Enzo has suited up for him. You want him to come on, be familiar, be comfortable.
But instead of subbing him into the position he’s expected to be playing, and the most similar to what he does for Argentina, he puts him in the spot most people think he’s going to play Palmer.
I don’t know the Enzo has ever played in a possession based system of the type we will use. I am unfamiliar with what he played at Benfica.
Lavia has. And he had done it for Maresca, and he frankly looks like he can do things in that base that Enzo frankly struggled with (he is slow and his defensive stats are … poo)
If Palmer comes to one of the 8’s, the way he played Nkunku (which makes sense, Maresca wants WIDE wingers) and Lavia is better suited to the base, that leaves one spot for Enzo to compete with, and Caicedo is better playing forward even if you count KDH out (which I don’t).
So yes, I find that interesting.
Last edited:
Wow, 3 attacking of the poster and not the post. Thanks for that. I was busy answering your take on Enzo.
But it’s difficult because you …did t actually see what I was originally commented on and decided to attack me anyway.
Just:Enzo is good on the ball .
So I narrowed it down: if Lavia and Palmer start in midfield, who gets dropped for Enzo? I’m genuinely curious what you think.
And yes, I do appreciate clear Lake. They are renowned the world over as one of the best sports leadership groups on the planet. Chelsea is actually a small brand compared to what they normally deal with, And they have sterling reputations as owners
Last edited:
Luckily for him no one in the English media gives a shit about him or the club he plays for.
Old news.
Old news.
Id be annoyed if the FA dont punish him severely. Cavani got punished for calling someone "my friend" ffs.... I know theyre stupid like that and only know english language but if they let this one slip itll be massively disappointing.
My suggestion is to relegate Chelsea if they keep Enzo because he is a danger to the beautiful game.
My suggestion is to relegate Chelsea if they keep Enzo because he is a danger to the beautiful game.
Seems fair. In fact, relegate all the teams with blue home shirts, just to be thorough.
Care to elaborate because I'm under the impression Chelsea are pretty much the first large scale sports operation Clearlake Capital have taken part in so how exactly can they already be renowned as one of the best in the business at that? What other merits in sports ownership do they have other than the clown show we are now witnessing at Chelsea?
They certainly have their grubby, greedy little hands in tons of businesses in tons of different fields and I have no doubt some of those businesses in totally unrelated fields are much larger ventures than Chelsea FC but as far as I know elite level team sports has not been part of Eghbali' or Feliciano's portfolios prior to the takeover of Chelsea and subsequently Strasbourg. If I'm wrong, feel free to educate me.
And yes, I know full well some of the other minority owners like Boehly and Walter have a long history of team ownership in the American sports leagues but don't forget you just tried scolding me that it's Eghbali with the keys to the kingdom now (which is true and which I never disputed) so let's not move the goal posts just now. I'm dying to know what you can tell me what it is about Clearlake's sports expertise that according to you has made them the envy of the whole planet.
Well for starters I'd wait a little bit more than 45 minutes of meaningless pre-season excellence against Club America before declaring Lavia as a starter. For me Lavia is the one who has it all to prove, whether we're talking about his quality as a player against PL level opposition or more importantly his questionable fitness record from the last year. So to put him ahead of Enzo in all of your 'mock lineups' is a bit weird to say the least.
If Lavia indeed does prove to be excellent and also manages to keep himself fit, then I would just move Palmer back out wide where he played brilliantly last season. As of right now we have Madueke and Palmer as options at RW. Given these two options:
1. Madueke as RW, Palmer in midfield and Enzo on the bench
2. Palmer as RW, Enzo in midfield and Madueke on the bench
I would take option number two any day of the week. Madueke is a solid player but ultimately I don't think he's good enough to be a long term starter and for the upcoming season only really serves as a placeholder for Estevao and Paez to come in next year.
Dude they own the LA Dodgers, and are close to full control of the Lakers. Boehly had dinner with Lebron before he went to work Mendes and Benfica for the Enzo deal.
Why do you think they can walk into the South American market and already know most of the major agents and people of influence? The Dodgers practically control the talent pipeline system of South and Central America. Their control over the talent pool in baseball is impressive.
That’s why we can approach one of the most esteemed footballing figures in Brazil, the head scout of Corinthians, and have him switch to Chelsea; not because they just started their first sports enterprise.
But they DO specialize in long term total rebuilds. I think their first World Series title with the Dodgers came 5 years in?
They do have an excellent reputation among athletes as well. Players WANT to play for them.
If they were allowed to come in and just ask what the price was on the best player they could get at each position, they would. They paid nearly 340m for one pitcher. FFP and the direction it’s going in determines the landscape. And more and more squads will be trying to copy what we are doing in the future. They have to. Again, FFP. Moving a player older than 26 will be hard for anyone.
2. Now we are talking. So, those were literally the ones I was thinking about, and I also would have leaned to 2 at first … but Madueke is improving every day under Maresca, and he’s using his right foot more and more. He is, by statistics, one of the 3 most dangerous one on one dribblers in the league, and he’s been putting balls on a plate for players. We will struggle for width with option 1.
It is a good problem to have.
I think you are comparing two very different sports and arenas. It might well be that Chelsea have several top young players from their contacts in South America one day, but so far, Clearlake have just created instability in the squad, devalued and disappointed their academy players and wasted a lot of money on average players.
Ambition is great, but there are very little signs that they are heading in the right direction thus far. More than a billion spent, 3 managers in, and they aren’t even close to the top teams in the division, never mind in Europe.
isn't people's main concern that Chelsea do not seem like a club that needed a long-term total rebuild?
See, he cannot possibly be racist.
No. It's what the owners wanted.
We were just 12 months removed from being European champions. Yeah we lost of a couple of players because of the UK government sanctions but beyond an initial spending spree to replenish the squad, what we needed was a gradual process, not spend 1 billion in the first 3 transfer windows.
The only players left from the squad that won the CL in 2021 is James and Chilwell. Every single notable player from that squad is gone. In 3 years we've signed 34 players (and we're not done yet this summer) and sold/released 30 players. That kind of monumental turnover was absolutely not needed.
'They' meaning Clearlake or just Walters and Boehly, who you just said yourself has very little influence at Chelsea now that Eghbali is the head honcho?
I specifically asked what Clearlake's level of involvement in sports pre-Chelsea was and you failed to answer to that. You were very specific in your own words when you said appreciate Clearlake because they are "renowned the world over as one of the best sports leadership groups on the planet" and that is what I asked you to prove by giving any examples of Clearlake's sports know-how, not Boehly's or Walters'.
Money can buy anything
I'm sorry, but were his teammates supposed to ignore him forever? I think the governing bodies should suspend him, but I don't think we should get onto his teammates for just wanting to put it behind them and move on. Let's not be silly here.
There's a gap between ignoring and just not taking part in PR social media posts smiling like best buddies. I couldn't care less about his apology or the "talk" they had.
Also, why is Reece James present twice in that picture ? Chelsea cheating again cloning players...
Specially when you end up with arguably a weaker squad after spending all that money.
I mean it can click with Enzo Maresca as I think he's a pretty good manager and can implement a great system with Chelsea's current squad but if we have to make an evaluation up to today it's been the greatest failure in the history of sports. Spending that much to end up in 12th and 6th is absolutely awful no way to defend that.
No, Clearlake is an investor in what is now Blueco. Look, Boehly’s group is Eldridge. Wyss starts to get involved when you factor in the Guggenheim partners. Walters is an investor through the now created Blueco portfolio I believe.
Eghbali wasn’t involved in their bid for the Dodgers with an independent entity, but he was specifically involved in their attempt at the Washington commanders. That doesn’t mean he didn’t have financial involvement in the Dodgers.
The Dodgers, by the way, staggered everyone months ago by spending a billion dollars in just 10 days. Sound familiar?
It is a large private equity firm. They arent shifting for performance reasons. They do it on a set schedule for financial reasons. I’m not even sure Blueco existed prior to Chelsea. But it is things like this that allow them to “loan” themselves 850m for the first instellment on stadium renovation.
If you were in the inner circle and had funds YOU could be part of Blueco.
This is splitting hairs. You aren’t going to be having some emperor sitting in a throne like with Roman. It is a collective following a formula they believe in. If you want to get on board, great. If not go buy an Arsenal scarf or something. The Kroenke’s are notoriously wonderful people.
So to sum all that up: Clearlake's involvement in sports prior to buying Chelsea was non-existent but have since then looked into opportunities to expand their investment portfolio into other sports clubs. Gotcha. On the other hand Boehly, the man not so much in the picture at Chelsea these days, has played a part in the Dodgers and some other clubs which is all well and good but also a completely different ball game, both literally and figuratively.
If we look back to what started this dicussion, it was you questioning whether I'm even a Chelsea fan or not because I supposedly didn't know that Boehly isn't the one running things anymore, which by the way I never even claimed he was. I then questioned what makes Clearlake so special that we should just trust them 100% no questions asked because to me it's looked like they don't really have any prior experience and people with little to no experience are often prone to making silly mistakes which in my opinion they have made an abundance of this summer. And to this you reply with some ramblings about Boehly's excellence which has nothing to do with what I asked.
Earlier I told you talking to you is like talking to a brick wall and that was a exhibit A.
Ah, so now I should just switch allegiances from the team I have supported for more than 25 years because the people who've owned it for just over two years turned out to be utter cnuts?
Thanks for the suggestion but I'm gonna have to pass. I will continue to give my full support to the team but the people running the club can eat a bag of dicks for all I care.
It's not even that I think their methods won't bring success eventually. It's just that I think their methods are despicable and I would prefer the club I love not to operate like that.
@Bluelion7 I wrote up some of my issues with Clearlake/Boehly and would love to hear your comments.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think everything the owners/directors have done is bad. In fact I think they’ve done quite a bit of good as well. The incentive-based salary structure has put the club in a much better position to being financially sustainable in the long run and despite some obvious mistakes in the transfer market they’ve also signed some really exciting and very talented players to the squad.
That I don’t agree with their methods and think they’re utterly soulless people doesn’t take away from the fact I rate the current squad quite highly and am feeling more optimistic about our chances than I did this time last year. I will continue to praise the good decisions but also call out the bad when I see things that don’t sit well with me, of which there is plenty.
- The multi-club ownership. Said this a couple years ago and stand by it but I think any owner who dabbles in multi-club ownership is a cancer to the beautiful game. And I say this despite supporting a club that stands to benefit from the same owners also controlling Strasbourg but I just think it’s an utterly indefensible way of doing things. Ask any European fan what they think about multi-club models and 90% of us think it should be weeded out and killed with fire before the cancer spreads any further. I’m sure you think it’s a great new innovation to the sport, right?
- The handling of academy grown players. These owners have no idea what it means to be Chelsea. They could give less ducks about whether a player has grown up supporting the club and been raised by the club’s own academy. These private equity leeches will always prefer a foreign talent over a homegrown local boy of the same player quality if it means they can streamline the business and save even a tiny bit in wages, or if they think they can clock some delicious pure profit by selling off the homegrown player and replacing him with an imported one. It’s all just a business with zero room for emotion anywhere. I don’t know about you but football without emotion just seems boring as shit.
- The handling of the foreign youth policy. The youth hoarding has gotten to ridiculous proportions with hundreds of millions spent on an armada of young players with the intention of just farming them out on loan for other clubs to develop and then reaping the rewards ourselves. And I'm not talking about all the young players they've signed because there are those anyone with a set of eyes rates highly (ie. Estevao, Paez) and who will most likely be immediate first teamers upon arriving. I'm talking about the ones who just get bought because the scouts saw some potential in them but no thought goes into whether there's a pathway for each player or not. A few promising youngsters is okay but deary me they've really overdone it. Even though I can easily see scenario where this kind of strategy could lead to the club getting a few first teamers for a well below market value price I can’t help but think at the same time quite a few young players’ careers will get derailed along the way and I can’t say I’m a fan of this kind of scattergun youth strategy. I reckon very few of the numerous teenagers signed will even get a chance in the first team and eventually not everyone will even be afforded the best loan places for their development, thanks to the FIFA loan limits. I can guarantee to you with a 100% certainty within a few years we’re looking at a minimum few young players who haven’t developed quite as to expectations but who the club also can’t afford to sell at a big one-off on the books loss due to the financial regulations. At that point the club will use the loan spots for players with higher potential so those inbetweeners will just get kind of stuck and have their careers more or less ruined in the process. But hey what’s a few lives ruined if at least the business is booming, right? Isn’t that the American dream?
- The sponsorship fiasco(s). These arrogant wet wipes came in and exclaimed very publicly that they thought the previous regime didn’t do a very good job in increasing the club’s commercial incomes. Even if that may have been true, at the very least the club always had a shirt sponsor before each season started until these guys came marching in and started doing things their way. Now we’re going into a new season two years running without a main sponsor in place. Maybe inside your mind you can somehow spin this failure into something positive but to me this just screams amateur hour at the director level. Aside from pure incompetency what could possibly be the excuse for failing to secure a shirt sponsor when these clowns had all of last season to do that? Doesn't exactly fill one with confidence about these people knowing how to run a football club.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think everything the owners/directors have done is bad. In fact I think they’ve done quite a bit of good as well. The incentive-based salary structure has put the club in a much better position to being financially sustainable in the long run and despite some obvious mistakes in the transfer market they’ve also signed some really exciting and very talented players to the squad.
That I don’t agree with their methods and think they’re utterly soulless people doesn’t take away from the fact I rate the current squad quite highly and am feeling more optimistic about our chances than I did this time last year. I will continue to praise the good decisions but also call out the bad when I see things that don’t sit well with me, of which there is plenty.