Roman Abramovich plans to sell Chelsea | SOLD for £4.25BN

[edcunited1878]

Thanks, yeah I figured they were generating a huge amount of revenue, which aids their spending. Boehly's group does seem like the best bet in terms of investing in the team, increasing the club's commercial revenue and doing something about the stadium.

Speaking of the analytical focus. A core part of Boehly's group is Danny Finkelstein who's heavily invested in data driven analytics in football.

It's part of running a modern club...running it efficiently in the largest cost areas, i.e. player salaries and player development. Chelsea are doing it a little now with letting go Christensen and possibly Rudiger (probably would be a mistake to let him go). But if the club doesn't value them as highly and their impact on the pitch isn't worth their future wages, they can buy at least one CB and can grow them into the team, alongside Silva, Chalobah, Sarr, etc.

So when you need or really want to spend big, like on the next Kante or Jorginho to pair with a Kovacic, etc. then the funds are available.

 

[I’m loving my life]

They corrupted football economics and wages irreparably since 2003. The PL was on a relatively even keel lbefore that. The right outcome is that they go into administration or are made defunct or instead are relegated to the 10th tier of football. Loving the mental gymnastics from the nauseating plastics to justify their murdering human rights abusing owner. Sorry but you have no place in our league. Go somewhere else.

 

[SirReginald]

Boehly makes money out of the Dodgers, he is not pumping his own money in and takes a nice cut off the top and he will want to do the same with Chelsea. Roman was funding Chelsea to the tune of 900,000 per week out of his back pocket and there is simply not another owner out there like that. If you want to talk about denial it is those Chelsea supporters like yourself who seem to think it is going to be business as usual with new owners. I am not saying Chelsea are going to plummet out of the PL but they will have to adopt a very different financial model going forward.

There’s no denial. We know this. Its precisely the reason that a small section of fans still chant his name.

However there’s a lot of wishful thinking by other fans that the money will dry up, which is also unlikely. Not to mention the 19 other clubs in the league opposed to the idea we may benefit from an ownership change - forgetting that the club is not being sanctioned or punished, it’s the victim of circumstance.

When the dust is settled, I don’t expect many fundamental changes. We will likely find new innovative ways to generate income and fund transfers and be more prudent with our choice of transfers. Beyond that is pure fantasy.

 

[Powderfinger]

The funds won’t dry up but Chelsea over the next ten years are likely to have roughly similar revenues as Arsenal and Spurs, maybe less depending on the stadium situation. That’s the new bracket the team will live in financially and the on field expectations are likely to follow.

Unless you have state owners that can just snap their fingers and increase commercial revenues through shady deals, the ability of owners to increase revenues for a club like Chelsea is actually very limited. There's no magic formula that someone like Todd Boehly can put to work. You have the stadium that you have, and unless you want to raise ticket prices (which are already pretty high) massively, the revenue from that isn't changing much in the near term. Revenue from TV is entirely tied to performance on the field in domestic and European competition. Commercial revenue can be increased marginally but the biggest sponsorships are already locked in at set rates for Chelsea in long term deals, so there's not a lot of room to grow.

 

[P-Ro]

They corrupted football economics and wages irreparably since 2003. The PL was on a relatively even keel lbefore that. The right outcome is that they go into administration or are made defunct or instead are relegated to the 10th tier of football. Loving the mental gymnastics from the nauseating plastics to justify their murdering human rights abusing owner. Sorry but you have no place in our league. Go somewhere else.

But apart from all that, we're sound right?

 

[adexkola]

The PL was on a relatively even keel lbefore that.

 

[Spoony]

New owners will be taking money out...whereas Roman was putting money in.

 

[Gandalf]

Makes money?Sometimes, not always. Last year his revenue was less than just his player salaries. With baseball, to gauge an owners group, you look at how MUCH they want to make money. The lowly Orioles can make money with a payroll of 30 million and a horrible team. Being the LA Dodgers, he could sit back and print money just getting near the playoffs.

But instead he pushes 230 - 240 million a year in salaries alone. THE big spender on the block.

Not to mention he’s known for running excellent organizations. The people he’s already brought into the group, including one of the architects of Fenways Liverpool overhaul, have been great.

HE also isn’t the money guy. He’s done his homework and understands what the landscape looks like, and the money men working with him on Chelsea are bigger money hitters than the Dodger group.

And the days of us needing … did you guys say “dark money?” …. What a load. It’s money. Dark implies you don’t know the source and we know from REAL audits that’s not true. Any way, they are over? They were already over. People on here literally saying we needed 900 mil injections every few years ? Maybe that’s all wishful thinking, but none of it is true. Without Roman we are less likely to make sudden impulse splurges like Torres it Lukaku, but I would argue that easily makes us a better team, not worse. And even with those insane layouts we would have been net moneymakers 5 of the last 5 years without Covid hitting.

Chelsea isn’t where a lot of you see it anymore.

And people implying Ronan will “get his money”? He. Literally. Offered. To. Let. The. Trust. Give. It. To. Charity.

The crooked UK Tory’s are the ones obsessed with it.

Opposing teams will be able to sell tickets to our home games and we won’t. The womens team CAN sell tickets… tell me again how this was to thwart Russia and not a punitive attack on the club itself?

What a crock.

But Roman won’t be the one coming after your government with Lawyers. You guys lied about a respected, global, multinational company being involved in genocide, an invasion, and war crimes. You have done serious harm just to get at an owner you didn’t like, even though he had already agreed to sell. They will be coming after a LOT more than 3billion

What complete and utter bs. I won't pick it all apart as I literally only mentioned that Boehly is motivated by profit which is a change from Roman and then you went on this ludicrous fantastical screed responding to all manner of points that I never made.

I will pick up one point though. It is established fact from his own testimony given in prior depositions that he has been involved in crooked deals with Putin's government to enrich himself so the continued denial that he is a supporter of Putin does not stand up to even cursory examination and beyond that his activities in Israel demonstrate what a ruthless and cold blooded individual he is.

 

[SirReginald]

They corrupted football economics and wages irreparably since 2003. The PL was on a relatively even keel lbefore that. The right outcome is that they go into administration or are made defunct or instead are relegated to the 10th tier of football. Loving the mental gymnastics from the nauseating plastics to justify their murdering human rights abusing owner. Sorry but you have no place in our league. Go somewhere else.

Did we corrupt the economy or were teams like Madrid doing that long before us?

It was a natural evolution to the demands of the sport. We most likely sped up the process and had an indirect influence on the price of players in England but it’s really this simple, if it wasn’t us then it would have been someone else.

To say “your owner is evil and by association so are you“ is simply slander and shows how ignorant many people are regarding the situation.

 

[Cutiepatootie]

Did we corrupt the economy or were teams like Madrid doing that long before us?

It was a natural evolution to the demands of the sport. We most likely sped up the process and had an indirect influence on the price of players in England but it’s really this simple, if it wasn’t us then it would have been someone else.

To say “your owner is evil and by association so are you“ is simply slander and shows how ignorant many people are regarding the situation.

To say “your owner is evil and by association so are you“ is simply slander.."
Completely wrong.
If you have cheered on i.e. you have subjectively enjoyed, Chelsea's success bought by the butcher, thereby turning a blind eye to the blood money, then you are implicated subjectively in your owner's evil.


"...and shows how ignorant many people are regarding the situation."
The only ignorance exhibited here is yours.
Your ignorance is your refusal of ethical responsibility. In reality you made the choice to follow him as yiur leader/ your owner as you put it. Yiur choice. You could have chosen to withdraw, to disown your supporting of Chelsea whilst Abramovic is indeed the owner.

You knew it was blood money but you still cheered on for glory, for the sake of plastic tin pots. You choose to suspend your belief for the sake of narcissistic reward.

Your ignorance is in your ignoring your ethical responsibility and in your subjective disavowal of Abramovic's blood money.

 

[Gandalf]

Did we corrupt the economy or were teams like Madrid doing that long before us?

It was a natural evolution to the demands of the sport. We most likely sped up the process and had an indirect influence on the price of players in England but it’s really this simple, if it wasn’t us then it would have been someone else.

To say “your owner is evil and by association so are you“ is simply slander and shows how ignorant many people are regarding the situation.

Got to agree with most of this.

I have no particular ill will towards Chelsea or its supporters beyond the obvious rivalry that exists with other big teams and I have no interest in petty retribution towards the club based on what Roman did or did not do as an owner. Chelsea supporters had no control over who bought their club or how he funded it and honestly as annoying as the sugar daddy spending was most of us did not view Roman as anything more than a shady crook like most billionaires and honestly there are plenty of those in the PL.

I can quite easily make a distinction between the bad man who under renewed scrutiny looks to be far worse than we had originally thought and the club that he bought. Provided he is out of the picture Chelsea should be able to go about their business just like any other team.

 

[adexkola]

Did we corrupt the economy or were teams like Madrid doing that long before us?

Oh hush.

Football was grand and equal before Roman came on the scene in 2003. And even if it wasn't, at least such disparities was earned. Or something.

 

[Dancfc]

To say “your owner is evil and by association so are you“ is simply slander.."
Completely wrong.
If you have cheered on i.e. you have subjectively enjoyed, Chelsea's success bought by the butcher, thereby turning a blind eye to the blood money, then you are implicated subjectively in your owner's evil.


"...and shows how ignorant many people are regarding the situation."
The only ignorance exhibited here is yours.
Your ignorance is your refusal of ethical responsibility. In reality you made the choice to follow him as yiur leader/ your owner as you put it. Yiur choice. You could have chosen to withdraw, to disown your supporting of Chelsea whilst Abramovic is indeed the owner.

You knew it was blood money but you still cheered on for glory, for the sake of plastic tin pots. You choose to suspend your belief for the sake of narcissistic reward.

Your ignorance is in your ignoring your ethical responsibility and in your subjective disavowal of Abramovic's blood money.

Out of curiosity does that (in your opinion) go for every one who has been associated with Chelsea in the Roman era?

In your eyes are Zola, Kante, Thiago Silva, Mata and Ancelotti evil by association too?

 

[adexkola]

Kante is definitely evil. What good man runs endlessly?

The less said about that eyebrow of Ancelotti, the better

 

[WeePat]

Out of curiosity does that (in your opinion) go for every one who has been associated with Chelsea in the Roman era?

In your eyes are Zola, Kante, Thiago Silva, Mata and Ancelotti evil by association too?

What about clubs who do business with Chelsea? United bought two 'morally compromised' and 'tainted' players from Chelsea who were only there because Abramovich's money brought them there, and what about all those clubs who have accepted Abramovich's money in exchange for one of their players. Let's spread the guilty by association net high and wide.

 

[cyberman]

To say “your owner is evil and by association so are you“ is simply slander.."
Completely wrong.
If you have cheered on i.e. you have subjectively enjoyed, Chelsea's success bought by the butcher, thereby turning a blind eye to the blood money, then you are implicated subjectively in your owner's evil.


"...and shows how ignorant many people are regarding the situation."
The only ignorance exhibited here is yours.
Your ignorance is your refusal of ethical responsibility. In reality you made the choice to follow him as yiur leader/ your owner as you put it. Yiur choice. You could have chosen to withdraw, to disown your supporting of Chelsea whilst Abramovic is indeed the owner.

You knew it was blood money but you still cheered on for glory, for the sake of plastic tin pots. You choose to suspend your belief for the sake of narcissistic reward.

Your ignorance is in your ignoring your ethical responsibility and in your subjective disavowal of Abramovic's blood money.

Not only this but they argued back against fans who pointed out how blood stained their fortunes are.
Apparently we were just jealous and wanted to keep a monopoly on the finances and stamp out competition that threatens our historical standing.
Its all in this very forum. Chelsea fans made peace with what they were a long time ago.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Did we corrupt the economy or were teams like Madrid doing that long before us?

It was a natural evolution to the demands of the sport. We most likely sped up the process and had an indirect influence on the price of players in England but it’s really this simple, if it wasn’t us then it would have been someone else.

To say “your owner is evil and by association so are you“ is simply slander and shows how ignorant many people are regarding the situation.

Strawman.

It DIDN’T have to be anyone. The ill gotten gains of your owner fcuked up the finances of football. No League needed it. Your club facilitated it.

So Fcuk your club and all of the tone deaf Justifications.

 

[Dancfc]

Not only this but they argued back against fans who pointed out how blood stained their fortunes are.
Apparently we were just jealous and wanted to keep a monopoly on the finances and stamp out competition that threatens our historical standing.
Its all in this very forum. Chelsea fans made peace with what they were a long time ago.

That was only brought up because very few people gave two shits when it was A.C. Milan being funded by Berlusconi (someone who has an openly strong friendship with Putin) infact someone on this forum actually admitted he didn't mind it happening to Milan because they're a historic great.

 

[Zaphod2319]

Didn’t Roman’s interest become public very late when he bought the team?

Mystery bidder making the cut!

 

[adexkola]

Not only this but they argued back against fans who pointed out how blood stained their fortunes are.

This is true.

Apparently we were just jealous and wanted to keep a monopoly on the finances and stamp out competition that threatens our historical standing.

This is also true.

Its all in this very forum. Chelsea fans made peace with what they were a long time ago.

Also true!

 

[cyberman]

That was only brought up because very few people gave two shits when it was A.C. Milan being funded by Berlusconi (someone who has an openly strong friendship with Putin) infact someone on this forum actually admitted he didn't mind it happening to Milan because they're a historic great.

I understand that since a rich owner taking over a big club shouldnt make that much difference to a historically huge clubs finances. Teams who attract big names and spend big money doesn’t upset the market with a big takeover or can even sports wash in any way since the fans aren’t so starved for success that they become cheerleaders for human scum. All a new owner achieves with a takeover is upping their own profile

 

[Nickholas]

Awww I can't post links yet.. :0(


Who is the mystery bidder.. Someone we all know?

 

[1905]

I understand that since a rich owner taking over a big club shouldnt make that much difference to a historically huge clubs finances. Teams who attract big names and spend big money doesn’t upset the market with a big takeover or can even sports wash in any way since the fans aren’t so starved for success that they become cheerleaders for human scum. All a new owner achieves with a takeover is upping their own profile

So your issue is with the sheer amount of money then and not the morality of it. Atleast you admit it, fair play.

 

[DavidDeSchmikes]

 

[Liver_bird]

The rickets owning a Tory club with Chelsea’s history would probably be the most fitting thing possible.

 

[WeePat]

The rickets owning a Tory club with Chelsea’s history would probably be the most fitting thing possible.

Fecking no thanks.

 

[Bluelion7]

Not only this but they argued back against fans who pointed out how blood stained their fortunes are.
Apparently we were just jealous and wanted to keep a monopoly on the finances and stamp out competition that threatens our historical standing.
Its all in this very forum. Chelsea fans made peace with what they were a long time ago.

How blood stained are our fortunes? What does that even mean? Roman is not a Douma member, nor does he hold any Russian state assets. Hence the reason he WASN’T deemed sanctionable by the U.S.
He is no more responsible for Russia invading than Oprah Winfrey .
Zelensky and our people were both AT meetings where Roman tried to argue on their behalf and intercede. They would not speak of him the way they are now if he was there telling them how to peacefully concede. Putin has shot some of his closest people recently for less. His oldest children live in Russia and are vulnerable.

Tools like Chris Bryant are told this behind closed doors originally and responded with basically “It only counts if he can make them completely withdraw! Chelsea must pay Fam!”

Then the UK straight LIED about Roman and a global company he owns stock in, tanking it and ruining families in multiple countries including the U.S. Just to justify punishing a football team he was already selling?

Our (US) intelligence has had the UK begging us to back them on Abramovich sanctions. So much so that we were looking to see if more than 25% of the parts on his personal plane were American so they could get him on an airspace technicality because you guys are desperate to save face.

And all of this has led to the whole “if you’ve supported Cheksea you are drenched in the blood of innocents” Schtick. And you can say that’s only a few people, except your government is behaving that way. There are entities controlled directly by the Russian interior hit much lighter than the intentional attack on a British football club.

Do people really not see that using one of the worst events in human history to take out a football rival is twisted?

 

[adexkola]

The rickets owning a Tory club with Chelsea’s history would probably be the most fitting thing possible.

What's hilarious is fans concerned about Roman's alleged crimes against humanity, having no issues with the Ricketts owning a PL club.

 

[Gandalf]

Our (US) intelligence

Surely that is an oxymoron.

 

[cyberman]

So your issue is with the sheer amount of money then and not the morality of it. Atleast you admit it, fair play.

I’m against both but I can see the argument?

 

[Nickholas]

What's hilarious is fans concerned about Roman's alleged crimes against humanity, having no issues with the Ricketts owning a PL club.

but they do have issues with the Ricketts owning a Premier league club.. It seems everyone does..

 

[Bluelion7]

The Ricketts may be horrible people, I don’t know. But what they ARE famous for is promising big things when it comes to being a spending force for their team, and then not following through.

I asked a family member from Chicago how he felt about the Ricketts and his first response was “The liars? They stabbed us in the fecking back”

So …. That wouldn’t be ideal.

 

[Cutiepatootie]

How blood stained are our fortunes? What does that even mean? Roman is not a Douma member, nor does he hold any Russian state assets. Hence the reason he WASN’T deemed sanctionable by the U.S.
He is no more responsible for Russia invading than Oprah Winfrey .
Zelensky and our people were both AT meetings where Roman tried to argue on their behalf and intercede. They would not speak of him the way they are now if he was there telling them how to peacefully concede. Putin has shot some of his closest people recently for less. His oldest children live in Russia and are vulnerable.

Tools like Chris Bryant are told this behind closed doors originally and responded with basically “It only counts if he can make them completely withdraw! Chelsea must pay Fam!”

Then the UK straight LIED about Roman and a global company he owns stock in, tanking it and ruining families in multiple countries including the U.S. Just to justify punishing a football team he was already selling?

Our (US) intelligence has had the UK begging us to back them on Abramovich sanctions. So much so that we were looking to see if more than 25% of the parts on his personal plane were American so they could get him on an airspace technicality because you guys are desperate to save face.

And all of this has led to the whole “if you’ve supported Cheksea you are drenched in the blood of innocents” Schtick. And you can say that’s only a few people, except your government is behaving that way. There are entities controlled directly by the Russian interior hit much lighter than the intentional attack on a British football club.

Do people really not see that using one of the worst events in human history to take out a football rival is twisted?

"Do people really not see that using one of the worst events in human history to take out a football rival is twisted?"

No. What's twisted is the butcher's blood money being allowed to sportswash his image to a readymade global audience. A global audience created over decades by real football clubs based on rules of competition and genuine sporting effort rather.

What's even more twisted is grown men cheerleading the billionaire butcher like besotted little schoolgirls, willing to ignore the blood monet for the sake of a few tin pots in their cabinet.

The most disappointing thing about these billionaire, oligarchic, blood money, sportswashing projects is how readily the shameless 'grown men' supporters of Chelsea, City and now Newcastle, abandon all ethical consideration and responsibility and become weaponised, infantilised defenders of a barbarism ( brutal domestic violence and theft of the peoples resources and murderous wars in Yemen and Ukraine), that they really should not be cheering and whose association with they should be disgusted by, rather than celebrating like glory hunting imbeciles.

 

[1905]

I’m against both but I can see the argument?

There is no argument to be had. You have said in essence that you wouldn't mind the Saudi's at United because you're already a big club, and that you can't be sportswashed because you're a big club. It doesn't work like that, you can't pick and choose when or when it's not ok to be owned by corrupt individuals.

What's hilarious is fans concerned about Roman's alleged crimes against humanity, having no issues with the Ricketts owning a PL club.

Because the reality is they don't care about who Roman is or what he has done. They only care as rival fans that he's invested so much into Chelsea and they don't like it. Hiding behind the morality of it is just an easy out for them to express it. Ask yourself this question, if Roman didn't invest much into Chelsea or treated Chelsea like the Glazers do United, would these same people care about him as an individual? I'm leaning towards an emphatic no.

 

[cyberman]

There is no argument to be had. You have said in essence that you wouldn't mind the Saudi's at United because you're already a big club, and that you can't be sportswashed because you're a big club. It doesn't work like that, you can't pick and choose when or when it's not ok to be owned by corrupt individuals.



Because the reality is they don't care about who Roman is or what he has done. They only care as rival fans that he's invested so much into Chelsea and they don't like it. Hiding behind the morality of it is just an easy out for them to express it. Ask yourself this question, if Roman didn't invest much into Chelsea or treated Chelsea like the Glazers do United, would these same people care about him as an individual? I'm leaning towards an emphatic no.

No, I have not said anything of the sort and have voiced my anger in here about a rumoured Saudi takeover many times.
what are you even talking about here?

 

[1905]

No, I have not said anything of the sort and have voiced my anger in here about a rumoured Saudi takeover many times.
what are you even talking about here?

I understand that since a rich owner taking over a big club shouldnt make that much difference to a historically huge clubs finances. Teams who attract big names and spend big money doesn’t upset the market with a big takeover or can even sports wash in any way since the fans aren’t so starved for success that they become cheerleaders for human scum. All a new owner achieves with a takeover is upping their own profile

?

Are you unaware of who Berlusconi is? He isn't just simply a 'rich owner'.

 

[Rajiztar]

How blood stained are our fortunes? What does that even mean? Roman is not a Douma member, nor does he hold any Russian state assets. Hence the reason he WASN’T deemed sanctionable by the U.S.
He is no more responsible for Russia invading than Oprah Winfrey .
Zelensky and our people were both AT meetings where Roman tried to argue on their behalf and intercede. They would not speak of him the way they are now if he was there telling them how to peacefully concede. Putin has shot some of his closest people recently for less. His oldest children live in Russia and are vulnerable.

Tools like Chris Bryant are told this behind closed doors originally and responded with basically “It only counts if he can make them completely withdraw! Chelsea must pay Fam!”

Then the UK straight LIED about Roman and a global company he owns stock in, tanking it and ruining families in multiple countries including the U.S. Just to justify punishing a football team he was already selling?

Our (US) intelligence has had the UK begging us to back them on Abramovich sanctions. So much so that we were looking to see if more than 25% of the parts on his personal plane were American so they could get him on an airspace technicality because you guys are desperate to save face.

And all of this has led to the whole “if you’ve supported Cheksea you are drenched in the blood of innocents” Schtick. And you can say that’s only a few people, except your government is behaving that way. There are entities controlled directly by the Russian interior hit much lighter than the intentional attack on a British football club.

Do people really not see that using one of the worst events in human history to take out a football rival is twisted?

The comedy gold of bbc panorama investigative journalism about Roman. Missing file from Russia which is very confidential,can't be disclosed,can't be verified,there was kidnap happened,he was gained from it but no proof of his involvement, investigative officer the witness against roman who involved in sex scandal.

I usually laughed at this kind of propaganda programs from regimes like Russia,Syria,china, saudi. Because they don't need to provide evidence. They can say whatever they want to say about any one to suit their agenda and people have to accept what they say.

I thought democracies are different and people wanted to see evidence before believe things.

 

[Gandalf]

The comedy gold of bbc panorama investigative journalism about Roman. Missing file from Russia which is very confidential,can't be disclosed,can't be verified,there was kidnap happened,he was gained from it but no proof of his involvement, investigative officer the witness against roman who involved in sex scandal.

I usually laughed at this kind of propaganda programs from regimes like Russia,Syria,china, saudi. Because they don't need to provide evidence. They can say whatever they want to say about any one to suit their agenda and people have to accept what they say.

I thought democracies are different and people wanted to see evidence before believe things.

You mean the allegations that can be verified because he actually admitted to them under oath in a court case?

 

[I’m loving my life]

To say “your owner is evil and by association so are you“ is simply slander.."
Completely wrong.
If you have cheered on i.e. you have subjectively enjoyed, Chelsea's success bought by the butcher, thereby turning a blind eye to the blood money, then you are implicated subjectively in your owner's evil.


"...and shows how ignorant many people are regarding the situation."
The only ignorance exhibited here is yours.
Your ignorance is your refusal of ethical responsibility. In reality you made the choice to follow him as yiur leader/ your owner as you put it. Yiur choice. You could have chosen to withdraw, to disown your supporting of Chelsea whilst Abramovic is indeed the owner.

You knew it was blood money but you still cheered on for glory, for the sake of plastic tin pots. You choose to suspend your belief for the sake of narcissistic reward.

Your ignorance is in your ignoring your ethical responsibility and in your subjective disavowal of Abramovic's blood money.

Absolutely magnificent post. Couldn’t have put it better myself. Well done, sir

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

How blood stained are our fortunes? What does that even mean? Roman is not a Douma member, nor does he hold any Russian state assets. Hence the reason he WASN’T deemed sanctionable by the U.S.
He is no more responsible for Russia invading than Oprah Winfrey .
Zelensky and our people were both AT meetings where Roman tried to argue on their behalf and intercede. They would not speak of him the way they are now if he was there telling them how to peacefully concede. Putin has shot some of his closest people recently for less. His oldest children live in Russia and are vulnerable.

Tools like Chris Bryant are told this behind closed doors originally and responded with basically “It only counts if he can make them completely withdraw! Chelsea must pay Fam!”

Then the UK straight LIED about Roman and a global company he owns stock in, tanking it and ruining families in multiple countries including the U.S. Just to justify punishing a football team he was already selling?

Our (US) intelligence has had the UK begging us to back them on Abramovich sanctions. So much so that we were looking to see if more than 25% of the parts on his personal plane were American so they could get him on an airspace technicality because you guys are desperate to save face.

And all of this has led to the whole “if you’ve supported Cheksea you are drenched in the blood of innocents” Schtick. And you can say that’s only a few people, except your government is behaving that way. There are entities controlled directly by the Russian interior hit much lighter than the intentional attack on a British football club.

Do people really not see that using one of the worst events in human history to take out a football rival is twisted?

You’re so ill informed. Still. How?