What's to understand? Chelski's owner is a gangster, gained his money by gangster means, is a citizen of a gangster state and has bought success at Chelski by means of a cheque book.
This explains why your club garners little respect.
Random Football Chat
- Thread starter GlastonSpur
- Start date
What's to understand? Chelski's owner is a gangster, gained his money by gangster means, is a citizen of a gangster state and has bought success at Chelski by means of a cheque book.
This explains why your club garners little respect.
Haha. None taken, since I am well up there among the brighter few.
You on the other hand do need to appreciate the simpler things since the complex ones make you show up so yeah good choice.
By the same token, If Roman owned Liverpool in particular, I bet half the Utd supporters on this forum, defending their new second-favourite club or keeping a discreet silence, would be be all over him (and I do accept that some Utd fans do criticise him now).
And, on a related note, had City not similarly been taken over by a uber-rich tyrant I bet you wouldn't be posting what you just did.
We can all play the pointing out hypothetical double standards game here.
Last edited:
If you really don't care less about what someone is prepared to do to others to make money (or what they're prepared to do to people in general to attain and maintain power) then that's on you, but it's not wise to presume that anyone who argues otherwise is jealous or tribalistic, as you implied earlier.
Wow. What's with all the Chelsea fan hate here? Battle for top 4 getting to some of you?
As I said he's not the first. Where was this outcry last season etc.. And I don't think Fsg, the glazers, levy got where they are by being nice guys.
Last post I have for the day until midnight. I think all your sentiments have been addressed already in the last 2 pages. There's no need to keep derailing the thread. Open a thread in the General Forum if you wish. This is a top 4 thread.
You are seriously putting the likes of FSG, the Glazers and Levy in the same category as Abramovich?
You might not like the way some firms or individuals handle their business but Abramovich has very little to do with business. He's supposedly worth $12 billion from an industry he himself confessed that he doesn't understand, and understandably so because he's not very bright as was embarrassingly demonstrated on the stand. He's a blunt instrument operating for others who really hold the power and the wealth. Some may laugh at the suggestion that Putin owns Chelsea, and they are right in that technically he doesn't. However Putin owns Abramovich, he owns him lock, stock and barrel and he'll do whatever he wants with him whenever he wants to do it, anybody would be naive to believe otherwise.
Putin is an absolute master, he's operating on a different level to anybody in the western world. His complete and total control over anything and everything Russian including the 'oligarchs' is a truly extraordinary and underrated performance by one of the most interesting players the world has ever seen. And that's just domestic without even looking at his ever growing influence over the West, just look at the US right now and probably even Brexit. Whilst Abramovich serves a purpose to Putin he will be fine and that will likely last forever. It will also protect Abramovich from sanctions etc as an attack by Western politicians on Abramovich especially the UK govt would be a direct attack on Putin himself, something as illustrated in the Ukraine war that would likely never happen.
Here's a very interesting but slight old article from Forbes, gives a very good if only brief summary into what is really going on.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....re-oligarchs-spell-bad-russian-190210009.html
I swear that this is my last post on this, for me it's just way too interesting a subject not to discuss.
And I really don't care about the Chelsea part in all of this or their fans, they are totally inconsequential to the real story.
It's mostly just Spurs fans being Spurs fans.
Please stop derailing this thread and bring your discussion to a more relevant thread. Its pretty annoying.
Back to the topic of this thread. Chelsea and City are nailed on for top 4. Spurs look pretty solid and don't seem to drop too many points, only 3 losses so far, impressive. I have given up on top 4 after we failed to beat 10 men Bournemouth so I think it will be a tussle between Arsenal and Liverpool for the final 4th place.
Back to the topic of this thread. Chelsea and City are nailed on for top 4. Spurs look pretty solid and don't seem to drop too many points, only 3 losses so far, impressive. I have given up on top 4 after we failed to beat 10 men Bournemouth so I think it will be a tussle between Arsenal and Liverpool for the final 4th place.
Don't think City are nailed on. They are in a strong position, but got some tough matches coming up.
Forgot about Lyon, but they're both good sides, good thing one of them won't make it through.
We'll finally move from 6th spot if Everton can beat Hull next Saturday.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/79/ce/0a/79ce0a3b5ec6a1358791ce9fb220e217.gifLook at the Liverpool fans moralising shit. If you had any morals you'd stop supporting the disgusting racist club of yours.
They werent a bad side before he came in though. Ok they didnt win as much as they do, but they were pretty decent and you still couldnt beat them
He is worth more than 12 BN if you ask me.
I can understand why United and Arsenal fans got angry when Abramovich brought success to Chelsea. Because Chelsea then stopped Arsenal's domestic dominance, competed with United domestically and internationally. But Spurs? FFS NO!
Spurs was performing inferior when comparing to Chelsea, that's why when quoted the same cost, Abramovich took Chelsea instead of Tottenham (take 30 seconds Google it if you don't know). And hate him or not he would have been your owner now if you were better than us at that moment. But the fact is that your best league achievement in Premier League era is getting into top 4 and Chelsea was able to do that years before Abramovich took over. Chelsea also won UEFA Cup Winters Cup and UEFA Super Cup and 2 FA cups 6-7 years before 2003, while Spurs UNTILL NOW are still the biggest English bottlers in Europe year after year when given the chance. The fact that Spurs - with their best squad in Premier history - could effort to lose fecking mighty Gent to have an edge over United in top 4 race shows everything about your club's attitude about winning trophies. And what can I say more? In term of winning trophies, your club achievement in Premier League era is till worse than Chelsea's BEFORE Roman took over.
I don't want to get back into that was never the point being made in the first place?
We can dick wave all we want about which club is better or more successful (congratulations, that is you) but that wasn't really the point and I'm not sure why
People can do what they want with their clubs, that is their decision. How they view it is up to them. I knew a couple of Chelsea fans who stopped following the club as soon as Abrahmovich took over. They no longer felt it was their club. I would have a very difficult choice to make if the same happened to my own club. A friend of mine stopped supporting Spurs when Redknapp was manager because of how much he hated the man on a personal level. He could not have sat there at WHL and cheered on the team with that man as manager. Similarly, I would not have been able to still follow the club if Levy had taken us to Stratford ffs.
If you or others etc want to not do so, that is completely fine and up to you. Why however you wish to make it into a dick waving contest and 'banterously' report on how many trophies Chelsea have won in comparison to Spurs, or what it has to do with the point, I don't know.
If we are talking about direct comeptition though, well the arrival of Abrahmovich saved Chelsea from possible liquidation and (along with the riches at Man City) also meant that rather than likely finishing in the CL places for pretty much every season in the past 10 or so, we've achieved much less than that.
Please carry on though.
Back on topic, we'll hopefully find out about Kane in the next day or two. A long term injury could mean the difference between comfortable qualification for the CL or possibly ending up in the EL places. We'll have to hope for good news.
My nature is not to blame other teams first and I have never blamed Spurs in term of not winning trophies. Your club is doing a good job but the fact that you blamed Abramovich for bringing trophies to Chelsea but don't you know that he would have been your club owner if you were performing better than us at that point? So if you are feeling lucky that you don't have an owner like him, then we are unlucky because we were better than you at that moment.
Secondly, what is the point of blaming Chelsea's success under Abramovich era when Spurs until now till haven't matched Chelsea's trophies won in Premier League era even before he took over? That means even if Chelsea had won nothing after 2003, that's fecking 14 years, Spurs would still have been inferior in interm of winning trophies.
Finally, when it comes to respect. You said Chelsea earns a "little respect". Some guys you know have stopped supporting Chelsea since Roman took over. Who care about those "some guys"? I have personally been in a club with thousands of Chelsea fans in France supporting Chelsea week in, week out. I also used to manage a Facebook group of over 500 000 members all are Chelsea fans in one country in Asia (biggest football fan group there) so had the chance to meet Chelsea's ambassadors whenever they visit there. Those members are all young (age 15-35) and new Chelsea fans (followed Chelsea <15 years). In the modern world they grew up and watched Chelsea winning trophies - or at least the club attitude to win trophies - and they love it. They became a Chelsea fan. Some bad moments like last year we stood at the mighty 10th place but none of them left. They are all till having a dream of visiting Stamford Bridge one day. Who can blame them plastic fans?
Yes, Chelsea is probably hated and earned "little respect" in England but it is now a massive global club, 4th biggest global football fanbase, most followed Premier League club in various big countries in all continents. It is loved by millions of people around the world and it shows in the contracts with Nike (£900 million) and Yokohama (£200 million).
Edit: Unfortunately I can't see City or Spurs or even PSG getting the global status or global fan base that Chelsea is having now because the new generation who was born in modern era with Internet, Facebook - specially in developing countries - they saw Chelsea's dominance first and already love Chelsea.
Last edited:
didn't realise people across the world had stopped having kids, when did that happen? Is there never going to be another 'new' generation who will support other teams apart from the might Chelsea?
I understand your point. But in most developing countries (at least in the country I managed), Premier League has only been popular in the last 20 years. The 10 years booming in popularity was between 2000 - 2010. So the audience has witnessed United, Arsenal then Chelsea dominance. The new generation will be affected by previous generation, like father is the guidance of a child, when taking a club to follow. Unfortunately City and Spurs are not viewed as good clubs to follow there, probably just like Chelsea in England. So it may take a long time for people to be familiar to City or Spurs' successes (if your club can manage to do it).
Our facebook group is currently has slightly more than 500 000 fans. United and Arsenal got a little fewer, but Man City group has just less than 25 000 members, and Spurs fan page has less than 2 000. You can check Facebook group of football club in Asia and see the difference. People there are using Facebook much more than Twitter.
p/s: that will be my last post of the day due to limitation.
Sorry, you are not the Spurs fan guy who posted the original comment about the "little respects" and "blaming success" above. I just stupidly thought that was the same guy responding to me.
That's fine. Let's focus on the thread where I said before, Spurs, Man City, United and Chelsea to be in top 4.
I have to respond to you here as I have no post left.
Last edited:
As I said, I don't really intend on getting drawn into another long discussion off topic from the thread. But I'm not really sure how what you've said there has any relevance at all to what I've said?
I don't really understand what you mean about blaming Spurs for not winning trophies. Yes of course I know that. I personally am happy about that. Other Spurs fans may not be.
Again, I'm not 100% sure what you're saying there. Is it not quite obvious that we may well have had more success in the past ten years if 1 and then 2 of the clubs above us, who are there due to outside money, were not? Who knows, we may well still have been shit and won nothing and gotten relegated but I'd be willing to bet that ten years of regular CL participation and we'd be looking a lot different than we are now.
I said absolutely nothing about Chelsea and respect, I didn't say that those guys are representative and I didn't say that Chelsea haven't gained thousands upon thousands of new fans in this period. I haven't called those fans plastic fans. I didn't say that Chelsea don't have a massive global fanbase now and sponsorship deals coming out of their asses. What this has to do with anything I don't really know.
My point from the beginning was simple. The initial comment was about Abrahmovich and nothing to do with the success of Chelsea or the relative success of Tottenham. Different people have different priorities when it comes to football. And as I've always said, grown men/ women trying to lord it over another grown man/ woman because of eleven men they have no link with kicking a ball around is....well its stupid. That was what I responded to.
Anyway, last post on the matter, I'll stop derailing the thread.
The whole conversation has gone straight over your head!
The discussion wasn't even about football itself, it was merely a simple question to one fan of Chelsea if he was comfortable having Roman Abramovich owning the club he supports.
Like somebody said before, I also know of real supporters of Chelsea who absolutely hate the fact that they are owned by Abramovich and they no longer go because of it. You can have 20 million in your Facebook group if you want, but they won't replace even a handful of the real supporters of the club who followed it through thick and thin who have been turned away by this and left disappointed that their club has merely become a toy and a political asset.
Can you guys please bring this to the Spurs or Chelsea thread? This thread is a discussion for the Top 4 race. Regarding the bold bit, I swear I've seen this a couple of times but this thread keeps getting derailed.
Or just start a new thread. Filling the Chelsea thread with it would also be annoying.
@Damien Please thread ban posters who keep derailing this thread.
All random chat that doesn't warrant its own thread in here.....
Random football fact: Lee Todd was a recipient of a fastest red card in history, 2 seconds. Ref blew the whistle a bit too strong, and Todd said "feck me, that was loud!", and got a red.
You can sit here with your high morality and ego and blame Chelsea on whatever as long as you want. It doesn't change the fact that there are more and more people loving that club, which makes the club become popular.
You can only imagine Chelsea got 20 million followers on Facebook? Check it again because it is the 3rd biggest followed club there. Why it is important? Because in this world that means business. Chelsea is going to get 60 million from Nike annually because of that popularity. How much your Spurs is going to get from the same partnership? Half of it? No not even half of it because you don't have the people who follow you enough. That popularity makes the club sustainable and even if Roman leaves Chelsea it is till attractive enough to get another ambition owner. And you really do think Chelsea is a toy? It is 1.2 billion in value and till growing, you don't have to teach Abramovich about how to treat that asset.
Edit: About Roman Abramovich I think you know about him even more than most of the journalist on this world does. Such an insideful and specific information. But you know Google or Facebook invade billions of tax annually, right? Millions of workers working in sweatshop 12-14 hours a day making cheap shirts for you, right? That's the real world beside Abramovich.
Oh yeah but you don't care, right? So I stop here and won't write anymore.
Last edited:
What would everyone say the dullest season of the PL era has been so far? Was thinking about this, and in recent times I'd plop for 14/15.
Chelsea comfortably won the league whilst being very good but not spectacular, the top four race was mostly a certainty barring a half-challenge from Spurs, and only Leicester's great escape made the relegation battle all that memorable.
Chelsea comfortably won the league whilst being very good but not spectacular, the top four race was mostly a certainty barring a half-challenge from Spurs, and only Leicester's great escape made the relegation battle all that memorable.
Yep 14/15 was dull. So was 2012/13. Both seasons followed really good campaigns which didn't help.
12/13 was relatively dull as far as the title race and top four battle went but it at least had the benefit of a major moment/shifting of the guard in Fergie retiring. Apart from that though, yeah, fairly average.
Goalkeepers should wise up to the fact they can move behind the goal line to make attacking players offside more often.
Think about it. You could feck up so many 2 vs 1 situations or basically any Jamie Vardy goal by doing so.
Think about it. You could feck up so many 2 vs 1 situations or basically any Jamie Vardy goal by doing so.
It was raining at Camp Nou earlier this evening. I have never seen that, I think. Not live at least.
David Moyes or Steve McClaren to take charge of United for just one game against somebody average (let's say West Brom)
Your life depends on United winning. Who do you choose?
Your life depends on United winning. Who do you choose?
McClaren. He was at least decent at United.
McClaren. God knows I'd have a heart attack, if we tried to win by putting high crosses in against West Brom.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-39919870
Some people are just ridiculously dumb. On what earth is that appropriate?
Some people are just ridiculously dumb. On what earth is that appropriate?
Is it me or has this season been quite dull?
There's just been no surprise package at all, pretty much everyone finished where they were expected to this year.
There's just been no surprise package at all, pretty much everyone finished where they were expected to this year.