Chelsea Thread

Chelsea is actually earning more than Man Utd these couple of years in terms of transfers. Like all the other teams, we needed a start with a bunch of good players and spending and now it's time for profit.
 
chris97 said:
even man city and arsenal fans are going to show off? come on ,did they ever know the feeling to win a champions league??
Click to expand...

You've misread my post if you thought I was doing that.


Beach, it's only recently, with the likes of Mike Ashley, the Glazers and the lot at Arsenal, when football clubs have been run for profit. Most of football history clubs have been run by people like Swales, rich people/rich fans, with no expectation of doing anything but losing money
 
Rentboy said:
Exactly! We could have been talking about Leeds United, who were also performing well and getting CL spots. The difference being that Leeds United already had a rich history in English football.
What happened though, is that they were bankrupt and never returned to the Premiership.

It's so funny that we could be talking about Leeds and this could have been the Leeds United thread (and some of the same people in here would declare themselves Leeds fans) :LOL:
Click to expand...

Provided they did exactly the same as Chelsea, i would have loved Leeds, because i actually loved them at the time they had players like Bremner, Giles, lorimer, Mc Queen and others.

And you know what i don't get?

Why is the ideal to support one club forever and this in a football world where players constantly move?

If my favourite player moves from one club to another, why wouldn't i change clubs?

And once again, in this fastly evolving football world, the G14 tried to freeze some status quo and install a glass ceiling. Sports need constant change and in a way the Abramoviches saved football (but only in a way).

Arsenal fans shouldn't moralize...Beveren.
 
Last edited:
Dennis Bergkamp- said:
"When you start supporting a football club, you don`t support it because of the trophies, or a player, or a history, you support it because you found yourself somewhere there; found a place where you belong'
Click to expand...

Although I followed Dennis to Arsenal, like a kid chasing another and found myself in a place I couldn`t leave.

The word support has more to do with the way you're brought up,No? As wees/children your biggest support comes from your parents, they console after a loss and celebrate w/ the victory . You understood consoling is part, if not, more important than the victory. I`ve seen nutter parents having a go at their kids relentlessly, just over the top screaming -no censorship- and such. When ,that kid knows only victory matters! Those sort of parents ' sometime ' thrives and their kids become professionals due to their parents strong will for winning. I see these flyby night supporters 'gloryhunters' and I wonder do they do this for the winning matters only?

Do they follow temporary contracted players to a club? At least we can see the way the modern football goes...it`s too hard to committ to a small club,when you don`t find yourself ,because you live through the eyes of the player and that is the biggest bizzare from someone in my age. When , I saw Dennis in '94 WC in Orlando(3m away)... all I could do is call his name and he looked at me w/ a grin. Im not design to run up to a player to get a sign autograph, I`ll take a photo w/ him(if) we spoken . The thing is culture plays no part anymore like pipas said I dont think its dead . I think the next generation has no need for roots.

tbh I see so many Chelsea supporters always trying to prove themselves as to why they support Chelsea-trophies-history n such. I think they`re trying to convince themselves why they belong. Stop exposing yourself, this generation don`t give a buck!
 
Mehtab said:
Chelsea is actually earning more than Man Utd these couple of years in terms of transfers. Like all the other teams, we needed a start with a bunch of good players and spending and now it's time for profit.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you've clocked the issue with selling prime-aged assets to balance the books right?

It's undeniable that Chelsea have absolutely done wonders selling Mata and Luiz for their fees respectively, but who is left to sell at 30m+? Courtois and Hazard I'd say. And that's it. And you'd be toast without either.

Chelsea only posted an operating profit because of selling peak players at crazy fees. That's not a sustainable business model.


@ Godo - I still see a huge difference in a local businessman investing in his or her community team - like Delia Smith - and Abramovich laundering blood money through London, or Sheikh Mansour blowing some inherited pocket change on a marketing gimmick in some weird island thousands of miles from home. But maybe you're right, it's all the same.
 
gerd said:
Provided they did exactly the same as Chelsea, i would have loved Leeds, because i actually loved them at the time they had players like Bremner, Giles, lorimer, Mc Queen and others.

And you know what i don't get?

Why is the ideal to support one club forever and this in a football world where players constantly move?

If my favourite player moves from one club to another, why wouldn't i change clubs?

And once again, in this fastly evolving football world, the G14 tried to freeze some status quo and install a glass ceiling. Sports need constant change and in a way the Abramoviches saved football (but only in a way).

Arsenal fans shouldn't moralize...Beveren.
Click to expand...

The thing about supporting one club is a thing of loyalty I guess. Since loyalty isn't found on players anymore, it's great that most fans at least keep it up. It takes some dedication to follow a club every time they play, learn a bit about its past and so on.

I don't think your example is a good one, because if taken literally it would mean you would support several clubs and then lose interest for football when your favourite player retires.
I guess you can take a liking for a club in a league that is neutral. That was more or less how I wound up supporting Arsenal, by watching Dennis Bergkamp.

But to start to follow a club that is a rival to yours because of a player, or whatever other reason... this is something I cannot understand.

As for the likes of Abramovich "saving" football... this is baffling. I guess it is something we will always disagree on.
Laundrying money through a football club isn't what football was intended to be. A knuckle head such as David Luiz going for 50m, or one single player making north of 300k a week... this isn't what football was intended to be. These things go hand in hand with the state of football right now though, with this FIFA scandal and such.

I don't want to hope for a utopia or be a football romantic - it's inevitable that it is all about money. But it is taking unprecedented turns.
 
beachryan said:
@ Godo - I still see a huge difference in a local businessman investing in his or her community team - like Delia Smith - and Abramovich laundering blood money through London, or Sheikh Mansour blowing some inherited pocket change on a marketing gimmick in some weird island thousands of miles from home. But maybe you're right, it's all the same.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant to the point.
Like I said, clubs being run for profit is a recent development in football. That's a fact whether this or that benefactor is a saint or a sinner.
Owning a football club and using fan loyalty for profit is worse for football than some rich person, foreign or not, coming in and injecting large amounts into the club.
Many in football yearn for 'the good old days', well, the past was dominated by the latter, not the former.
 
Last edited:
To me the notion of rivals is the most ridiculous aspect of football.
I'm a Spurs fan. So i'm supposed to hate Arsenal...this is ridiculous.

I'm supposed to hate Arsenal because of something that happened 100 years ago and far from the place where i live...

It's even more ridiculous if i read what Bebo and you post sometimes...both of you are a continent away, yet can't stand Spurs. Why? Because Spurs are supposed to be Arsenal's rivals? Come on, this is really a herd mentality.

On top of all this Arsenal usually play good football and i like good football, so why would i hate Arsenal?

About Chelsea now. It seems the fashioned thing to hate Chelsea...
I was over the moon when Spurs beat Chelsea 5-3 on new year's day, but if the majority of so-called football fans have to hate Chelsea, well then i will have a soft spot for them...

Chelsea are as immoral as any other big football club, they aren't worse than the rest of the bunch...
 
Godotelli said:
Irrelevant to the point.
Like I said, clubs being run for profit is a recent development in football. That's a fact whether this or that benefactor is a saint or a sinner.
Owning a football club and using fan loyalty for profit is worse for football than some rich person, foreign or not, coming in and injecting large amounts into the club.
Many in football yearn for 'the good old days', well, the past was dominated by the latter, not the former.
Click to expand...

No you're missing the point by 'running for profit'. Clubs today outside of (annoyingly) Manchester United are not run 'for profit' in the sense you're implying.

They're run in a manner by which they can afford to run again next year. Breakeven, 'in the black' whatever you want to call it. Almost no clubs actually make 'profit' - they reinvest any surplus back into football-related activities.

That's always been the case, if I'm my local Bermuda Athletics Association club with a budget of $10k a year raised from raffels to keep the floodlights on for night matches, or if I'm Tottenham Hotspurs trying to ensure I can afford to keep Harry Kane.

That's the thing that's galling about the Citys/PSGs/Chelseas of the world - that they need not worry about breakeven - they can gamble and lose and it matters nought.

It's precisely why rich kids are much more likely to be rich adults. They can take risks without ever truly worrying about not eating tomorrow. Who cares if CFC posted losses for 9 consecutive seasons - Abramovich was never going to let them go bust. That's just not true for 18 of the clubs in the division.
 
gerd said:
To me the notion of rivals is the most ridiculous aspect of football.
I'm a Spurs fan. So i'm supposed to hate Arsenal...this is ridiculous.

I'm supposed to hate Arsenal because of something that happened 100 years ago and far from the place where i live...

It's even more ridiculous if i read what Bebo and you post sometimes...both of you are a continent away, yet can't stand Spurs. Why? Because Spurs are supposed to be Arsenal's rivals? Come on, this is really a herd mentality.

On top of all this Arsenal usually play good football and i like good football, so why would i hate Arsenal?

About Chelsea now. It seems the fashioned thing to hate Chelsea...
I was over the moon when Spurs beat Chelsea 5-3 on new year's day, but if the majority of so-called football fans have to hate Chelsea, well then i will have a soft spot for them...

Chelsea are as immoral as any other big football club, they aren't worse than the rest of the bunch...
Click to expand...
yes, I`m guilty of such immaturity. I fully understand rivalry and love it. I still go to UF (University of Florida) vs FSU (Florida State)games, I went to UM(University of Miami) 2yrs only but still lol .
I think Jack was a tool to spat out about Spurs during a FACUp celebration or Sczeny taking a selfie after a Spur match. I did love Theo holding his fingers up 2-1 .So, Im guilty and hope I`ll grow out of it but in the mean time.
What you think of Shit? I j*ke lol
 
gerd said:
To me the notion of rivals is the most ridiculous aspect of football.
I'm a Spurs fan. So i'm supposed to hate Arsenal...this is ridiculous.

I'm supposed to hate Arsenal because of something that happened 100 years ago and far from the place where i live...

It's even more ridiculous if i read what Bebo and you post sometimes...both of you are a continent away, yet can't stand Spurs. Why? Because Spurs are supposed to be Arsenal's rivals? Come on, this is really a herd mentality.
Click to expand...

If you live in a bubble, so to speak, then it's fine. In that case, you don't understand rivalry and don't really care about it.

I had the notion of this rivalry before I ever set foot in an English stadium, but after living for some 3 years in London and going to the Emirates Stadium a lot, I caught that "fever" too.

Call it mob mentality, call me immature or whatever. But when you're in the thick of it, it's nearly impossible to stay neutral.

In your case when you say you're a Spurs fan - and I'll say this without knowing the extent of your commitment - you either never set foot at White Hart Lane or you're zen like Yoda.

Of course there are boundaries and to me it's nothing more than banter and piss taking. It's not as if I'd lose perspective of things.

Say what you want, but without local rivalries football would be a bit boring. It always adds something to the mix, such as when mid-table teams would have nothing else to play for in a season but everyone would get excited about a derby. Winning a derby sometimes is the most exciting things some sets of fans experience during a season.
 
Rivalries are important. Not to truely hate the other team, but have some banter and some trash talk around to raise spirits or to simply get your team motivated even more. Those matches are what makes it very special. I don't hate Liverpool or Man City because I'm a Man Utd fan, my best friend is a Liverpool fan and we banter each other all the time. Its for bragging rights. Something that makes you feel a little bit better.

At the end of the day, is it very important? Maybe, maybe not. Is it childish to have such things? probably, but so is the notion of being a fan. Feeling that this is YOUR team and you are part of it....but isn't that also what makes football so great? what makes sports so great?
 
I've never been the White Heart Lane. Sadly.
Does it make me a lesser Spurs fan?

IMO, Spurs fans are worse than Arsenal fans (the fact alone that they call Arsenal 'the scum'...).

I don't mind the banter. I don't mind the teasing. But sadly there are people who take it seriously, who are not intelligent enough to see it's just banter.

As for Wilshere and Spurs...there are worse things than that.

In fact i almost liked it, Wilshere is the only Arsenal player of the current crop (and perhaps ever) i never really liked. He's an idiot. If i was one of his team mates, i would be embarassed by his attitude (and i'm not talking about the Spurs thing, i'm talking about his general attitude).

Walcott making the 2-1 gesture was actually great imo...people were happy that he was injured and that was his reaction...
 
Lampard should be blamed for what again? For Chelsea not giving him a contract he wanted?

bullshit.
 
Lampard was an outstanding player for Chelsea. I can't see what fault he has?
The only thing is that 36 is no age for a field player to be able to compete at the highest level.

For a keeper though, it's different and some can play till they're 38 or 39. However they better keep playing to maintain the level and you can't fault a guy of Petr Cech's quality for wanting to play every game. He found the perfect situation where he can stay in the same city, play at Champions League level with a team that is only improving to be again one of the main serious contenders for major trophies.

He will get some abuse from Chelsea fans, but it shouldn't be nothing more than the treatment Cesc Fabregas got (some Arsenal fans even applauded him). In fact, Chelsea fans should be more respectful than that because the guy spent 11 years and won loads of stuff with them.
 
Most Chelsea fans will applaud him.
And gthen there are Always idiots, but it seems that regarding Chelsea everybody focuses on those idiots as if they are the majority of the fans...

If Chelsea supporters had booed one od their own players like Eboue, people would still mention it...but this happened at a so-called "proper" football club and nobody ever mentions it.
 
People focus on the bad Chelsea fans because their behaviour has been so disgraceful that it really stands out.

No other set of fans send death threats as often as them, and I can't remember Arsenal fans sending death threats.
First they got Anders Firsk retired (Mourinho played a big part in it) and now they apparently did the same to a player who served them so well for 11 years.

And then there was that stuff with a black man in the Paris metro.

Those "fans" aren't doing Chelsea any favours and no wonder people will generalise and start regarding them as low life thugs, etc etc.
 
In terms of treating players appallingly, I can't recall anything on these shores which quite matches how Eboue was treated by Arsenal fans, and that wasn't a minority

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0Ntn6moW1s

How Utd fans treated Nani and Fellaini whilst Moyes was manager is probably the closest in recent times
 
Last edited:
The Whole Eboue substitution was appalling man management from Wenger. You usually applaud a player off the pitch and the manager makes it a point to sub off at a certain time. That night Denilson and Song were just as bad w/ their passing. So Wenger was at fault playing Eboue out of position and allowing him to walk off to force more booing .

Is that the worst Arsenal fans has done? Booed Eboue back in 2008,and beside twitter poles :BLEH:

I know Liverpool fans remodel MUFC restrooms. The usual suspect are taring seats and such. Chelsea are just terrorizing folks in different countries.
 
Last edited:
It was only an example bebo, nothing more...silly tribalism.

Don't you think i'm sometimes embarassed by Spurs fans (remember Walcott, that was so embarassing). But of course every Arsenal fan is an example of fair-play...
 
The commentator was absolutely right there about how anyone can make mistakes... until he said Arsene Wenger fed him to the lions by subbing him. That's rubbish. As a manager you have to be ruthless and, while man management comes into the equation, the result comes first. The match was 1-0 and Eboue was a calamity that needed rectifying that night.
...and the fact that he does that by introducing the ever so shambolic Mikael Silvestre into the match tells you a lot about the Arsenal squad of those lean years :LOL:

Nobody's saying here Arsenal fans are flawless and examples of morals. I can number quite a few examples, including the treatment of our own players. I was at the stadium when they were booing Arshavin on the bench - the guy wasn't even playing, he just got his name announced pre-match.
However I cannot recall any incident of death threats or racism from Arsenal fans, that much I can atest to.
 
Mehtab said:
Arsenal fans death threat: http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/267461/Van-Persie-wife-death-threat-fear

Arsenal fans racsim: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...-abuse-Newcastle-midfielder-Cheick-Tiote.html

Just shows there are no perfect fans. All fans are equally worse. So, stop targeting Chelsea fans :)
Click to expand...

Arsenal FANS racism lol ...

A man was arrested on suspicion of a racially-aggravated public-order offence during a Premier League match.
Click to expand...

Yes, RVP is something typical and shows how scary fans can get. Liverpool`s Gerrard move to Chelsea ,or Rooney move to Chelsea. I think we all get it, so many examples.

Yes, gerd its silly and I`m starting to see clearer on the tribalism campaign . I would love to see Ramos join MUFC for the good of the league and want Liverpool to get stronger to keep from letting (1) club dominate.
 
Didn't really take long to find similar thing about Arsenal fans...let's face it, every club has fanatic arseholes among it's fans.

It is stupid to think that "our" club is an exception.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom