Universal Chelsea Hating Thread

I bet they've all got b&o (forget how to spell the full word!) hifi's too....sigh....still, it looks nice!

 

More attractive full stop.

 

If you've ever seen that footballers cribs prog on one of murdochs channels you will see that money buys everything but taste when it comes to footballers.

 

Apparantly Gerrard has turned down £100,000 a week. If the Chelski figure is correct at £120k a week thats around £6.24 million a year and no doubt there will be win bonuses etc on top of that. It makes you sick.

 

Chelsea are not the new Blackburn, they are the new Man U, who bought success when they went public in the very early 90s. The top transfer fees are still dominated by Man U. Gerrard will not go to Chelsea he will go to Real Madrid, who announced they would only come in for him if he asked for a transfer and guess what??????
Footballers are generally utterly degenerate uneducated scumbags. They are getting more and more neanderthal. I fully agree with Alan Sugar's summary of the breed. I can't wait for the day when Murdoch squeezes their collective bollocks that he has been gently holding for the last couple of years.

 

It's hard to diagree Bob, alas let's be honest though - football right from grass roots level at your local parks is tattoos, foul language and low-level behaviour to a great extent. I would not single out the players on the pitch.

As football remains the game of the masses to a large extent it simply reflects the cultural level of our society, doesn't it? It's frustrating that it is such a beautiful game conceptually and that there is something about scoring a goal that is more fulfilling to shooting a basket, scoring a try, holing a putt etc.

I guess I am in a minority that prefers to watch more skillful players on the box at Stamford Bridge (overpaid or not) competing against Europe's or the World's best than a wet Wednesday night at Wigan against Grimsby or some other Northern Riviera meccas live from Wiffin's Bridge.

I agree that Gerard was always going to go, he's 24 and has a great opportunity to experience a bit of life, grow hugely from the experience, be a middle fish in a bigger pond and become the biggest there rather than the constant spotlight in something he has outgrown etc. What can he honestly get by staying to compete with the potential gains in today's international, cosmopolitan World. Mone is a convenient by-product that he will earn large amounts of in the process. I don't blame him one bit for resisting the emotional pressure-cooker he has succumbed to continuously for month after month and finally said enough is enough, I have to go. I still struggle to see why he is rated so highly but that's another story.

Paul

 

That says a lot about about football fans. Me I'm in awe of the people who turn up week in week out to lower division football. Remember Paul, when Chelsea finally win the Champions league, you'll still have another 4 times to do it to beat Liverpools record. You're a club buying history not making it

 

You misunderstand, I am not a Chelsea supporter. I or my club are not buying anything. I don't have a club.

I do have a soft spot for a few teams. Chelsea because my daughter was born at the Chelsea & Westminster hospital, Liverpool because I supported them as a kid (and followed them passionately for the first 4 of the 5 you mention), Man utd yes because I enjoy watching their style of play in Europe (Ronaldo, Rooney, Van Nibbler and Giggs is my favourite attacking line-up anywhere). Spurs, West Ham and Newcastle because I like the attacking play they all traditionally aspire to and Reading because my Father was growing through their ranks before National Service, career and family hit that on the head.

However, I would mercilessly switch over to watch Real MAdrid, PSV, AC Milan, Boca Juniors or anyone else playing great football if I thought it better. You're spot on that the week-in, week-out attendance of lower and non-league fans is true devotion and to be admired. I confess to being a shallow ba**ard these days with little allegiance, sorry to suggest that I had any integrity, just my views on it all!

Paul

 

The funny thing about following Rugby League instead of football is the general attitude towards the game. RL is much more family orientated, can you believe the Police dont attend games, thats right, not one bobby. Theres very little segregation and its all quite chilled out, even a big derby of around 17-18,000 is fine. Yet its a brutal game when you watch it close up. Im shocked when I go back to a footie game, its seems to bring out the worst in people.

 

Eh Lord how about if you were Chelsea supporter when they were in the old league Two back in the early 80s should you now stop supporting them and switch to say AFC Wimbledon if you are a true football fan?

 

My first game was rovers v chelsea back in '88 when I was 9! This was in the old second division and we draw 1-1. Im pretty sure Chelsea went up through the play-offs that season, we lost our play-off semi against Palace 3-4 over 2 legs. At a guess the attendance would have been around the 9,000 mark. How things change!

We have the ultimate new breed of fan round here, Wigan Athletic fans, they're everywhere and they've only been in the Football League 20 odd years!!

 

LOL well in case you hadn't guessed my family are Chelsea fans and always have been. I went to my first game with my brother and dad in the very early 70s when I was about 5
I also went regulaly in the 80s when we were saved from going out of business by uncle Ken and saved from going into the old third division by a David Speedie goal (anyone remember him?). As someone said Chelsea now are like Man U were a few years ago and I now know what it must have been like for Man U fans. Yes Chelsea have attracted a lot of new fans, and an awful lot of new enemies LOL but some of us did spend the 80s watching s**t football in the pouring rain and do get bit sick of the abuse we now get. I don't agree with everything Abramovich and Kenyon do and I am in favour of a wage cap but the way some people carry on you would think Abramovich was single handly killing football in this country, if their club was taken over by Bill Gates they would be partying in the street.

 

All success is bought!

Gerrard has decided to stay at Liverpool: yet again it is shown that Chelsea cannot buy anyone that they want!

Chelsea have been linked with every striker/midfielder in Europe this Summer but have not been able to buy one (yet!) which contradicts the point of this thread. When Chelsea do buy a player they frequently pay double market value and the selling club has the better of the deal - Petr Cech and Mateja Kezman being two exceptions to this.
But, many players will now not even consider Chelsea as they know that they cannot be guaranteed first team football. And any rival teams will do everything they can to stop their best players going to Chelsea, including breaking their own wage structures.

As for Chelsea automatically buying success, you only have to consider three highly expensive signings they did make recently: Crespo, Veron and Mutu - a massive outlay and no part of last season. Money was succesfully spent on Mourinho, Duff, Robben and Drogba - and even then the last two only played half a season (Drogba on the pitch!). Talking of the overpriced Drogba, he cost less than Manchester United's attempt to buy success with Rooney and his season's record was almost equal.
Mourinho did provide the best value for money entertainment in Football last year - not only for Chelsea supporters but for the entire footballing world! Anyone who can make Ferguson, Wenger and even UEFA appear so foolish and self-deluding should be applauded by most football fans!

It should also be noted that Abramovich could have invested in any club in the world, he decided to look at the top of the Premiership before identifying Manchester United and Chelsea. Apparently he was uninspired by the atmosphere at Old Trafford and settled for the passion and potential at Stamford Bridge. He has proved himself to be the model club owner by giving his manager full support, being ruthless when necessary (Ranieri) and religiously attending Chelsea games - who could ask for more?

The richest club has always been most likely to have success. In the 70's this was Liverpool bankrolled by the Littlewood millions, in the 90's it was Manchester United bankrolled by their PLC flotation, in this decade it could be Chelsea but this is by no means certain. Time will tell ...

 

Speedie, speedie, speedie :notworthy the guys a legend at Ewood, he got us promoted with his 30+ goals. As it happens I saw him pull on the Rovers shirt a few weeks ago in a testimonial at Ewood, he partnered Shearer up front (how good to see Shearer in a Rovers shirt again). He's HUGE now, too many pies I think. Of course we had the leg end that was Simon Garner in those days.

 

Duff :cry:

 

Great points Lord. Chelsea can't buy any player who doesn't want to leave look at Henry. Greedy players and even greedier agents are causing all the problems not Abramovich.

 

All 8000 of them their average attendances in those years. City got an average of over 30,000 in Div. 3 when they fell to that level. Like I say Chelsea are buying history not making it.

 

T-Bone,
Duff must have been a great loss to Blackburn Rovers - but one man cannot make a team. The £17m (?) Rovers received for him probably did more to keep Rovers competing than he could have on his own. The same could be said of West Ham, another recipient of lots of Abramovich money and what happens? Promotion!

AOS,
I too remember Speedie, playing for Coventry against Chelsea - The Shed chanted 'Speedo, Speedo' whilst the East Stand chanted 'Chelsea Reject' - fickle fans, eh?! Your point regarding agents is at least as good as any of mine!

Summit,
City spent those gate receipts on getting back to the big time, then spent even more to get into debt without success. All football clubs spend money - Chelsea are getting some success by return, City (Leeds, etc) only got into debt.
Money guarantees nothing but spending it wisely helps. If Chelsea do pay £25m for SWP I hope City spend it wisely as you wouldn't want to be boasting about 'massive' gates in the lower divisions again would you?

 

Totally agree you must build a team, you can't just buy 11 superstars and expect them to gel that's why I agree with whoever said the best money Abramovich spent was on Mourinho. He could have bought Rooney instead of Droga but he knows who wants for the team.
Lordsummit I can understand that you are upset about Wright - Phillips possible departure but carrying on about what a big club Man City is, how many millions of true fans they have. How everybody who finishes above them should be relegated etc. doesn't endere you to non Manchester City fans. Remember last season Chelsea lost in the league to only one club - Manchester City. I have friends who are Man City fans and believe me they gave me lots of stick about that while also saying how brilliantly Chelsea played against everyone else. That's the sort of behaviour I expect of a fan of any club.

 

Bernstein and Keegan were our problems, plus a mortgage to pay for a new stadium. Most of our debt is based on that. Lord I would disagree though, it's clubs that sell players. If the club agrees a fee the player hasn't got a lot of choice, look at Scott Parker, Joe Cole, Glenn Johnson to name just a few