And damn I hope Rafa comes back LOL
English (and other British lower league) Football Discussion
Chelsea thread
4007 replies
·
500,859 views
Yep, your club is an embarrassment. Sums up everything about Chelsea that is so unlikeable.
How ironic to have an Arsenal fan commenting on a Chelsea thread and calling us a joke club. Your boardroom problems have cost you every trophy for the last seven years and to become a feeder club. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
As for the sacking of Di Matteo, it's a farce. The guy delivered us two trophies in a very short space of time, one of which was the European Cup (I refuse to call it the Champions League, because it's not). He's then been charged with rebuilding the side and the style of play. He's started to do that and three or four poor performances do not make him a bad manager. He got it very wrong in Turin last night but he deserved time and support from those who hired him.
Di Matteo was a fantastic player for us and his name as a manager for our club, albeit a brief period, will rightly be forever in our history.
Freelance Football Writer
You can call Arsenal many things. But with the stability and financial independence we have, a joke club is not one of them.
Hmm... Plenty of Gooners would disagree with you in the light of the protracted Usmanov vs Kroenke feud. Also, financially independent is another misnomer. The club is still heavily in debt from its new stadium, hence the highest ticket prices of any club in England and still selling off your best players.
By the same token, a joke club doesn't win Premier League titles, the European Cup, Cup Winner's Cup and numerous FA and League Cup titles in the last decade and a half. So either way...
Freelance Football Writer
Taking the reigns at Chelsea is a death wish, Im surprised they can even find people keen
wow, I thought RDM would make it to the end of the year at least. Helped us bring in two titles, and has us in the top 4 with a transitional team.
Hmm... Plenty of Gooners would disagree with you in the light of the protracted Usmanov vs Kroenke feud. Also, financially independent is another misnomer. The club is still heavily in debt from its new stadium, hence the highest ticket prices of any club in England and still selling off your best players.
It's still much better than being run by a megalomaniac sugar daddy. Arsenal are run the right way and 'plenty of Gooners' would agree with me, with 60k selling out every game.
The fact is, all your 'history' could have easily gone to Fulham QPR etc if Roman had chosen a different spot on the map.
Hmm... Plenty of Gooners would disagree with you in the light of the protracted Usmanov vs Kroenke feud. Also, financially independent is another misnomer. The club is still heavily in debt from its new stadium, hence the highest ticket prices of any club in England and still selling off your best players.
By the same token, a joke club doesn't win Premier League titles, the European Cup, Cup Winner's Cup and numerous FA and League Cup titles in the last decade and a half. So either way...
Hey PaulSG, did you not know that Gooners bag any club that has achieved more than them in the last few years.
Most of the supporters are good blokes but there is the odd one or two that are obnoxious.
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
Hmm... Plenty of Gooners would disagree with you in the light of the protracted Usmanov vs Kroenke feud. Also, financially independent is another misnomer. The club is still heavily in debt from its new stadium, hence the highest ticket prices of any club in England and still selling off your best players.
By the same token, a joke club doesn't win Premier League titles, the European Cup, Cup Winner's Cup and numerous FA and League Cup titles in the last decade and a half. So either way...
Hey PaulSG, did you not know that Gooners bag any club that has achieved more than them in the last few years.
Most of the supporters are good blokes but there is the odd one or two that are obnoxious.
Hey PaulSG did you know that Leggy stalks my posts? He REALLY likes me.
How did i know Leggy would turn up in here defending Chelsea.
Too predictable in your old age there gramps.
Three for me, and two for them.
I knew the two Bill & Bens would turn up.
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
I guess this proves Gen Y are brain dead.
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
It's still much better than being run by a megalomaniac sugar daddy. Arsenal are run the right way and 'plenty of Gooners' would agree with me, with 60k selling out every game.
The fact is, all your 'history' could have easily gone to Fulham QPR etc if Roman had chosen a different spot on the map.
We'll agree to disagree on the running of Arsenal then. Difference is you have two megalomaniacs running that club, neither has enough of a share to have ultimate control though... yet.
But opposing fans talking of our lack of history pre-Abramovich clearly know absolutely nothing. We won competitions such as the European Cup Winner's Cup (first time in 1971), FA Cup, League Cup European Supercup and the old Division One in 1955 (modern day Premiership) well in advance of Roman's arrival. So to say we have no "history" pre-Abramovich is utter nonsense.
Freelance Football Writer
It's still much better than being run by a megalomaniac sugar daddy. Arsenal are run the right way and 'plenty of Gooners' would agree with me, with 60k selling out every game.
The fact is, all your 'history' could have easily gone to Fulham QPR etc if Roman had chosen a different spot on the map.
We'll agree to disagree on the running of Arsenal then. Difference is you have two megalomaniacs running that club, neither has enough of a share to have ultimate control though... yet.
But opposing fans talking of our lack of history pre-Abramovich clearly know absolutely nothing. We won competitions such as the European Cup Winner's Cup (first time in 1971), FA Cup, League Cup European Supercup and the old Division One in 1955 (modern day Premiership) well in advance of Roman's arrival. So to say we have no "history" pre-Abramovich is utter nonsense.
We aren't bankrolled by anybody, which is the difference no matter how you try and dress it up.
Listing a few trophies over the past 100 years pre-Roman just proves my point, especially when you compare it to your list on the previous page of post-Roman trophies, so thanks for that!
Those trophies could have just as easily gone to Fulham, they could have just as easily gone to QPR, and you know that. Instead the trophies went to you. Well done.
It's still much better than being run by a megalomaniac sugar daddy. Arsenal are run the right way and 'plenty of Gooners' would agree with me, with 60k selling out every game.
The fact is, all your 'history' could have easily gone to Fulham QPR etc if Roman had chosen a different spot on the map.
We'll agree to disagree on the running of Arsenal then. Difference is you have two megalomaniacs running that club, neither has enough of a share to have ultimate control though... yet.
But opposing fans talking of our lack of history pre-Abramovich clearly know absolutely nothing. We won competitions such as the European Cup Winner's Cup (first time in 1971), FA Cup, League Cup European Supercup and the old Division One in 1955 (modern day Premiership) well in advance of Roman's arrival. So to say we have no "history" pre-Abramovich is utter nonsense.
We aren't bankrolled by anybody, which is the difference no matter how you try and dress it up.
Listing a few trophies over the past 100 years pre-Roman just proves my point, especially when you compare it to your list on the previous page of post-Roman trophies, so thanks for that!
So who are Kroenke and Usmanov ?
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
Arsenal's debt is currently at 98 million, which is a mortgage for the new stadium, and is being paid off quicker than originally forecasted in '05 (which in itself is quite a feat given the financial turmoil that's engulfed the world since then)
They also have cash reserves of 70 million which could all but pay it off if it weren't for the extravagant penalties that come with such an action
Arsenal is fully self-sufficient financially, one of only 3 teams in the prem I believe (Arsenal, Reading and Swansea). Fulham used to be but I hear they've racked up a bit of debt now that is not being serviced properly (no source sorry, this is only something I read somewhere). AFC is not the heavily indebted club PSG makes it out to be (ironic acronym that)
Chelsea have 110 million debt, not including the 760m they owe to Abramovich, with no plan to pay it off - remember their old director said they'd be self-sufficient by now ARF!
I'd be afraid if I were a fan - now he's won the champs league he could walk away at any time. If any of his businesses start to suffer you know what will be the first cab off the rank - his play thing Chelsea fc.
It's still much better than being run by a megalomaniac sugar daddy. Arsenal are run the right way and 'plenty of Gooners' would agree with me, with 60k selling out every game.
The fact is, all your 'history' could have easily gone to Fulham QPR etc if Roman had chosen a different spot on the map.
We'll agree to disagree on the running of Arsenal then. Difference is you have two megalomaniacs running that club, neither has enough of a share to have ultimate control though... yet.
But opposing fans talking of our lack of history pre-Abramovich clearly know absolutely nothing. We won competitions such as the European Cup Winner's Cup (first time in 1971), FA Cup, League Cup European Supercup and the old Division One in 1955 (modern day Premiership) well in advance of Roman's arrival. So to say we have no "history" pre-Abramovich is utter nonsense.
We aren't bankrolled by anybody, which is the difference no matter how you try and dress it up.
Listing a few trophies over the past 100 years pre-Roman just proves my point, especially when you compare it to your list on the previous page of post-Roman trophies, so thanks for that!
So who are Kroenke and Usmanov ?
Kroenke is the majority shareholder - american investor, owns Colorado Rapids, Denver Broncos and Denver Nuggets. Nicknamed "Silent Stan" - he doesn't get involved in footballing decisions whatsoever, very rarely gives interviews. Property Development background, his wife is the heir to Walmart. His sporting investments are for profit, he's not a bankrolling hobbyist, more in the Glazer mould except he doesn't gut the club with debt - not one cent in fact (only debt is the stadium mortgage).
Usmanov 2nd largest shareholder but still doesn't have a seat on the board - the rest of the board has grouped together against him, mainly due to his criminal past and dodgy reputation. Google him, I don't know it all off the top of my head, but he's a dodgy russian who wants to be abramovich, and arsenal doesn't want him. He is extremely wealthy, even more than Roman.
We aren't bankrolled by anybody, which is the difference no matter how you try and dress it up.
Listing a few trophies over the past 100 years pre-Roman just proves my point, especially when you compare it to your list on the previous page of post-Roman trophies, so thanks for that!
Well it does prove you were wrong. The fact remains that those trophies were won prior to Abramovich buying the club. You implied we had no history pre-Abramovich. The facts prove you're wrong. Quite simple. The fact we've won more trophies post-Abramovich buying the club is irrelevant.
To say you aren't bankrolled by anybody is extremely naive though. All clubs are bankrolled by individuals. Do you honestly think gate receipts, TV rights etc pay the bills? Not all of them they don't. If you think there's no bankrolling by Usmanov, Kroenke and the remainder of the original board then you're very much mistaken and don't understand the workings of a football club very well.
Freelance Football Writer
Thanks for posting! Good read!
Some wonderful and wonderfully bad names from the past there. Although the period with Geoff Hurst was awful, he didn't have much to work with. The club was skint and it was very much a time of blooding the youngsters. John Neal brings back fond memories though and then John Hollins and Bobby Campbell. Great days! :)
Freelance Football Writer
We aren't bankrolled by anybody, which is the difference no matter how you try and dress it up.
Listing a few trophies over the past 100 years pre-Roman just proves my point, especially when you compare it to your list on the previous page of post-Roman trophies, so thanks for that!
To say you aren't bankrolled by anybody is extremely naive though. All clubs are bankrolled by individuals. Do you honestly think gate receipts, TV rights etc pay the bills? Not all of them they don't. If you think there's no bankrolling by Usmanov, Kroenke and the remainder of the original board then you're very much mistaken and don't understand the workings of a football club very well.
You sir, are wrong.
Arsenal's income does indeed pay the bills, and provides more on top of that. There are no cash injections from any of the Arsenal board or share holders. In fact the biggest criticism recently of the board have been around the profits they've made/are making from the club, and how that money could be contributing to bigger player purchases. Not the perfect board by any stretch, we have our own problems, but requiring cash injections from wealthy shareholders is not one of them.
Don't claim that someone else doesn't understand the workings of their club when it's in fact you who is lacking the understanding.
We aren't bankrolled by anybody, which is the difference no matter how you try and dress it up.
Listing a few trophies over the past 100 years pre-Roman just proves my point, especially when you compare it to your list on the previous page of post-Roman trophies, so thanks for that!
To say you aren't bankrolled by anybody is extremely naive though. All clubs are bankrolled by individuals. Do you honestly think gate receipts, TV rights etc pay the bills? Not all of them they don't. If you think there's no bankrolling by Usmanov, Kroenke and the remainder of the original board then you're very much mistaken and don't understand the workings of a football club very well.
You sir, are wrong.
Arsenal's income does indeed pay the bills, and provides more on top of that. There are no cash injections from any of the Arsenal board or share holders. In fact the biggest criticism recently of the board have been around the profits they've made/are making from the club, and how that money could be contributing to bigger player purchases. Not the perfect board by any stretch, we have our own problems, but requiring cash injections from wealthy shareholders is not one of them.
Don't claim that someone else doesn't understand the workings of their club when it's in fact you who is lacking the understanding.
Indeed. Read up a bit on Arsenal finances if you want to see how a football club can be run without financial doping (I know, a difficult thing to consider for a Chelsea fan, but it can be done).
back to back 0-0 draws. Have to get a result from West Ham in the weekend.
Good to see Marin finally get a run, albeit a very brief one
yuck, 3-1 :/
Must-win game against FC Nordjaelland in the Champions League on Thursday, and then Sunderland away before the Club World Cup.
Fingers crossed that Shaktar can bet Juventus.
