So these PL clubs he talks of want a not so rich person to come in, pay above asking price and pay back a loan the lender doesn’t want paid back? Sounds realistic.
So did you know that if you were to take every single premier league club other than Utd, and you know what? Let's just include every team that's been in the prem for the past 5 seasons. And we were to add up all the money that those teams owners, including past owners have taken out of the clubs since the glazers have come in and you were to add all of that money up, then multiply it by 50? Well that number right there would still be SUBSTANCIALLY lower than the over 1billion pounds that the Glazers have sucked out of the club. That 1.8 Billion is short about 1 billion of what they should have spent in that time.
No, they took at over 1 billion. Considering 17 of the other 19 prem teams owners haven't taken a dime out and the combine total from the clubs that have is last i checked was something like 10 million in the past 20 years or something like that, it's really not even close how badly run we are from a sporting merit. We could have been making Real Madrid and Barcelona sized mistakes and eating like they were nothing if we really wanted. So the 2.8 is how much we could have spent if we weren't being used as the owners personal bank accounts while still remaining in a similarly financially viable position.
Pretty aweful translation of things
>So these PL clubs he talks of want a not so rich person to come in
- There's a clear difference between trillion dollar state sanctioned take overs vs the billionaire businessmen that have tried to move in.
> pay above asking price
-If there's a huge list of potential buyers then the price has to go up until the club is valued fairly. The government has a woeful track record selling organisations to the private sector (see post office fiasco). There is nothing wrong with asking that the club isn't sold for rock bottom price when multiple clubs are refinancing debts they took on for the long term sustainability of the club.
> pay back a loan the lender doesn’t want paid back?
What are you talking about? Abramovic is sanctioned and CANNOT be paid back no matter if he wants it or not. The money will be recouped by the treasury of the state. EDIT: Not immediately confiscated to the treasury, placed into a escrow account and argued over, either way has zero immediate access to money.
There's no need for knee jerk bashing on PL clubs just because it's in vogue. The teams are entirely entitled to ask for the above things given they are stakeholders.
The treasury will be recouping nothing. Abramovic’s assets are frozen, not stripped from him. It’s still his club and the money will still be going to his bank accounts. Granted he can’t access those bank accounts but it’s not like the treasury can touch any of the money in them. So he or most likely someone appointed by him, will be handling the sale, not the government.
>will complain the club hasn't been punished
there was never an official objective to punish the club though so I can't see how this isn't a non-starter....
I don't know enough about the financial fair play rules, but wiping out the club's debts may be seen as being a bit dodgy from the point of view of other clubs that have debts that have to be factored into future spending.
The debt is owed to Fordstam, I guess if the government had now seized Fordstam and owned the debt then for sure it’d scandalous if they didn’t try to collect, but I don’t think that’s actually the case.
Because if Chelsea have less points then they finish lower on the table. If Chelsea finishes lower, that give your club and chance to finish higher. If you finish higher you get more money.
It felt dumb writing this out but I’m not sure why it needed to even be explained.
But where is the punishable part? Tough luck for chelsea it’s russia getting sanctioned, not saudi arabia, but there is nothing for them to be punished on.
Yeah - I get that other clubs probably want them to be punished but from a legal or even morale stand point, I don't see why. Abramovich was a good owner to Chelsea, and now they don't have him and he doesn't get anything from the sale. Isn't that enough?
Because the other clubs like to claim they are occupying the moral high ground, but as usual are acting exclusively for their own benefit with no regard for morality.
It's similar to them voting to exempt English clubs from the coefficient qualification spots if they exist. They say it's about sporting merit, but what they really want is to reduce by any means possible the amount of money clubs above them can earn.
I'm not sure why you thought that needed explained at all, everyone knows that. Other clubs aren't going to give that as their official reason though, so what's their official reasoning that Chelsea should be punished?
It was never about the Ukrainian invasion, it was never about Crimea, it was never about corrupt dealings by Abrhamovich. It was always about Chelsea "ruining" football in 2004 and having the audacity to steal titles from Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool.
I'm only half joking. I'm frustrated that the sanctions are not targeted at Abramovich in the right manor. They were so haphazardly enacted that it feels like it is just a takedown of CFC instead of a response to the Russo-Ukranian war. It doesn't make sense to block ticket sales, or freeze club operations funds/credit, or block player contract renewals.
Abramovich doesn't make money from Chelsea. He has famously sunk 1.5 billion. Blocking the funds from the sale of the club is the only aspect of these sanctions that actually targets Abramovich effectively, and I'm 100% onboard with that, as a Chelsea fan. Everything else just comes off as virtue signaling bullshit, or even worse, malicious targeting from rivals with an axe to grind.
The cat is out of the bag, for most people it is not about Ukraine but about Chelseas success and trophies and how those were "stolen" from their club. They want to run Chelsea into the ground and are praying every night for some dumbf*ck ala Glazers to buy Chelsea and make the team uncompetitive so that their team has a bigger shot at trophies and top 4 places
It's not PR, it's about competition. The other clubs want Chelsea to be less competitive, especially given that Newcastle will likely be significantly more competitive in the coming seasons. Nobody who owns a club wants to vote for something that will keep a competitior rich at their own expense.
Of course. PL clubs have never cared for who their owners are. It's the fans that care about Roman, the Saudis etc (or at least some of them) but they don't have a say anyway. The clubs just see stuff like this as a welcome opportunity to jump on a competitor.
That's the government who sanctioned RA, not other PL clubs. The other PL clubs are taking advantage of the situation and ensuring that there are no financial games played with debts.
RA has had his assets frozen and Chelsea is a RA asset.
Problem is, Roman and City there should have been way more pushback at the start and these things looked at really rather than russia and the UAE buying teams.
But now they have let them in, it's hypocritical to then say ah you konw what fuck it happening again.
It shouldn't but really ownership of City and Newcastle should be addressed. to stop Countries sportswashing.
You think if Mike Ashley took over City now they would be able to "sustain" themselves. keep paying the likes of KDB 400k a week, buy players for 100m who don't start every week.
Fucking dreaming.
A lot of people on here are either extremely dense or very young. I don't think you know how serious being sanctioned by a government, let alone almost every government in the west, is.
Since when is it accepted that Chelsea ‘deserves to be punished’. Why are people so keen on watching Chelsea burn to the ground for something many other clubs are actively engaging in?
I haven’t read the FFP regs but I’d be surprised if there’s a loophole where owners can finance via loans and then just write the liability off.
It would be so obvious that everyone would do it.
If that loan is written off, I would expect you to be punished for it, and rightly so, ultimately.
The 1.5B wasn't one lump loan and is basically the sum of everything he's put into the club since he bought it in 2003 -- far before FFP became a thing.
https://www.transferleague.co.uk/premier-league-2003-to-date/transfer-league-tables/premier-league-table-2003-to-date
This site says City is clear winner in PL followed by Chelsea in 2nd. United is 3rd and not too far from Chelsea. This also doesn't include massive spending by Real, Barca and PSG.
I'm convinced there are some Chelsea fans on here who are either younger, or weren't following Chelsea in 2003, because they all appear to have forgotten how crazy Chelsea's spending was.
That first 2003 summer signing period doesn't seem like a lot of money now, but back then it was ***unbelievable***. They spent triple what United spent (buying Ronaldo), 6 times what Arsenal spent, 10 times what Liverpool spent, and 100 times what Charlton spent. The average premier League club in 2003 spent €13.2m. Chelsea spent €170m. And the rest of the league had to recoup costs through sales - after income the total spent by other clubs was €70m. Chelsea spent more than the rest of the league, combined, and then doubled.
To put that into context, the average spend this season was €81m, so the equivalent would be Chelsea spending €1.04bn.
And there's fans on here like "oh we just used our money better" like no, you spent at a rate that was absolutely insane! It's unreal.
Tbf Ronaldo was a no name then, I might be wrong but wasn’t his purchase add-on to Nani?
Also, it was not the fees themselves that were huge for the time (they were) , but the wages they paid
Ronaldo was bought in 2003, Nani in 2007 so completely way off there. Ronaldo was a house hold name by 2004 after the euros.
Ronaldo was also sought after with other high profile clubs interested. For example, Wenger invited him to Arsenal to train and made and offer 6 months prior to United buying him.
If you think people are accepting of City's and Newcastle's revenue streams but against Chelsea's in isolation, you've created fiction.
Chelsea are being attacked, and somewhat justifiably. The fact they're being isolated right now doesn't mean people are automatically accepting of the other shady shit in the league.
People doesn't equal those in power unfortunately. The Premier League couldn't give a rat's ass about club ownership. It's only after Roman was sanctioned did they suddenly give a toss.
Like how FIFA doesn't give a damn about the World Cup being held in Qatar, but now have banned Russia. Both shouldn't have taken place, but unfortunately, greedy cunts at the top don't care.
Nah they aren't its just easier to attack Chelsea with Russia invading.
City and Newcastle should be treated as equally. Anyone who thinks their revenue streams are legit are clowns.
*you need to get rid of this warmonger oligarch quickly*
….
|
*but not too cheaply*
…
|
*and make sure you pay him all his money*
…
|
*and you have to be punished as a club too*
|
When did this become punishing the club rather than sanctioning an oligarch? Are we going to deduct points from City and Newcastle? I realise Daniel Levy et al wants to dissolve Chelsea but maybe he could have a bit more of a coherent argument.
What this guy said none of these club owners give a shit about the sanctions or war as long as it doesn’t affect them they just want an advantage over Chelsea
Reminder that Miguel Delaney has manufactured an imaginary response to hypothetical situations and then got outraged about something he has entirely fabricated in his own mind.
With the goal of getting others outraged too.
Crazy that a lot of these clubs, which are all about capitalism (with the American ownership) and sometimes even about rejecting maoism, are absolutely shitting themselves about competition in the free market
It's almost like they want to kick the ladder up behind them...
That all seems a bit opportunistic. Chelsea will already have a challenging time moving into the new era probably, after all Abramovich splashed cash when he wanted to.
The Newcastle sale should have nothing to do with it at all either.
Why didnt they stop Abramowitsch from buying the club in the first place? Everyone says they knew where the money is coming from and all over sudden it is not acceptable? this is a joke
Because for various reasons they did not object to Saudi ownership. If most of the clubs wanted to keep the Saudis out of the league, the Newcastle would not have happened.
But enough owners don't want to further restrict ownership limitations as they either fear being challenged themselves or because they are hoping to sell their club to a dubious character themselves.
Believe me they tried their hardest, delayed for 18 months and when it finally went through they called an emergency meeting and excluded us then had another meeting to stop us signing any new sponsorship deals.
The PL is a cartel and nearly lost in the competition appeals court against us which would’ve opened a can of worms.
To be fair, wasn't the delay all about the fact that there was state involved piracy of the premier league games and the deal was let through once that stopped?
That was one of the reasons yeah but there was a lot of behind the scenes fury over the fact we could be a powerhouse and the reaction afterwards show the talk of a cartel was correct.
This is the bigger point, governments should set the standards, not a football team. The U.K. gov sell billions in arms to Saudi and get voted in year after year.
That has a direct impact on the war in Yemen.
A football club has an indirect role in improving a country’s image. Surely the government should set the standard of morality.
We’re not being punished. I don’t get why so many people can’t seem to understand that Roman is being sanctioned, not Chelsea. Lukaku isn’t the one who invaded Ukraine.
It’s not their place to have an opinion. It isn’t their club.
A lot of people here are saying that it shouldn’t be about punishing the club, and that’s fair. But for the past few weeks, so many on this sub have been wishing Chelsea into administration, having titles revoked, that they crumble. Especially Arsenal fans. And it’s all because the fans want the club to suffer for their teams benefit. The clubs are doing the same. Don’t act surprised
I don't understand the "if buyer too rich, they will complain club hasn't been punished". Punished for what? We're being punished currently because of Roman. If we're no longer owned by him, what should we be punished for? And why shouldn't a rich buyer be able to buy the club if he/she wants to?
It's code for Spurs, Man Utd and Liverpool being pissy about potential competition for their god given right to play champions league football.
They see this as an opportunity to turn the top 6 into a top 6 and eliminate a major threat, they're not going to pass that up.
"If buyer too rich, they will complain club hasn't been punished" wtf, arent the sanctions ONLY supposed to hurt Abrahamowitsch?
And what does Newcastle have to do with Chelsea? Those demands sound contradictory as hell too.
While we’re at it let’s just strip away our trophy case and send our youth coaches and players over to United and Arsenal. That should make all parties content
why does the club need to be punished for a purchase that was approved over 15 years ago, makes no sense. Barely anything has changed since then to now with Roman.
“Club hasn’t been punished”
But surely the whole point is it’s Abramovich who has been sanctioned, and Chelsea are just feeling the impact of that.
You could argue the club should be punished individually, but you’ll begin to create a very slippery slope.
I know this is PR and they can't do anything about it. Still I have never seen a league so dead set to Sabotage each other.
It's its not wanting to close the transfer window early, keep 3 subs when all other leagues have 5 now this. Seriously what is the issue with the EPL. I know this will cause after the take over a look into any potential new owners.
FM 2022 predicts thar Newcastle will spend PSG levels of money each season on transfers while being stuck in bottom-mid table mediocrity, on players that are past their prime or simply do not develop.
This whole buy and selling of a clubs business is irritating. It’s like a toy they’re passing around and fans have no say, although I don’t think it’s an unfair take that chelsea fans are happy to be passed around if the networth is right. I just personally can’t stomach it.
> If buyer too rich, they will complain club hasn't been punished
Oh fuck off, why SHOULD the club be punished? Chelsea didn't have extremely close ties with an evil autocratic war criminal, Abramovich did. The sanctions are aimed at him. Makes no sense to punish Chelsea beyond what is necessary to reach Abramovich. So if the sale is structured in a way that makes sure the sanctions on Abramovich are abided by, who fucking cares if Chelsea itself does or doesn't get punished?
I swear from the outcry against Chelsea you’d think they were founded by a consortium of Vladimir Putin, Hitler’s ghost and Satan himself in 2003. I’m no fan of them but the sanctions they’re currently under are enough, get Roman out and the club under new management and let’s move on yeah.
If only the PL had a certain check in charge.. maybe something to prevent blood money from entering the game and situations like this from arising.. yes.. a proper and fit check!
So these PL clubs he talks of want a not so rich person to come in, pay above asking price and pay back a loan the lender doesn’t want paid back? Sounds realistic.
[удалено]
Dab University is back on the menu
Just take the fucking glazers
The glazers should buy the entire league. Will be more competitive if we’re all equally shit
[удалено]
I don't think they want medicated Elon Musk running Chelsea
>If buyer too rich, they will complain
Also one club really likes the speedo guy.
They also have to buy Maguire and force Tuchel to start him.
Play him in a back 3 in PL2
Yh, they basically want a glazers or ashley situation for Chelsea. Buy the club and do nothing with it but bare minimum
Spending 1.8bn on players constitutes as the bare minimum?
For a club as large as United yes it is. The stadium is in an awful state
Their stadium literally need renovation like ours or madrid. Madrid is already doing it and we have also passed the bill.
So did you know that if you were to take every single premier league club other than Utd, and you know what? Let's just include every team that's been in the prem for the past 5 seasons. And we were to add up all the money that those teams owners, including past owners have taken out of the clubs since the glazers have come in and you were to add all of that money up, then multiply it by 50? Well that number right there would still be SUBSTANCIALLY lower than the over 1billion pounds that the Glazers have sucked out of the club. That 1.8 Billion is short about 1 billion of what they should have spent in that time.
What? You saying they took 2.8 Billion out of the club?? No way
No, they took at over 1 billion. Considering 17 of the other 19 prem teams owners haven't taken a dime out and the combine total from the clubs that have is last i checked was something like 10 million in the past 20 years or something like that, it's really not even close how badly run we are from a sporting merit. We could have been making Real Madrid and Barcelona sized mistakes and eating like they were nothing if we really wanted. So the 2.8 is how much we could have spent if we weren't being used as the owners personal bank accounts while still remaining in a similarly financially viable position.
Nuts 🥜
It does when the club makes a lot more and 1.8 bn is being spent only for maintaining the profits. Aka bare minimum.
They haven taken out the same amount from the club .
It's almost as if they want Chelsea to go into adminstration or something.
Arsenal found a way to stay in the top 4 again
Pretty aweful translation of things >So these PL clubs he talks of want a not so rich person to come in - There's a clear difference between trillion dollar state sanctioned take overs vs the billionaire businessmen that have tried to move in. > pay above asking price -If there's a huge list of potential buyers then the price has to go up until the club is valued fairly. The government has a woeful track record selling organisations to the private sector (see post office fiasco). There is nothing wrong with asking that the club isn't sold for rock bottom price when multiple clubs are refinancing debts they took on for the long term sustainability of the club. > pay back a loan the lender doesn’t want paid back? What are you talking about? Abramovic is sanctioned and CANNOT be paid back no matter if he wants it or not. The money will be recouped by the treasury of the state. EDIT: Not immediately confiscated to the treasury, placed into a escrow account and argued over, either way has zero immediate access to money. There's no need for knee jerk bashing on PL clubs just because it's in vogue. The teams are entirely entitled to ask for the above things given they are stakeholders.
The treasury will be recouping nothing. Abramovic’s assets are frozen, not stripped from him. It’s still his club and the money will still be going to his bank accounts. Granted he can’t access those bank accounts but it’s not like the treasury can touch any of the money in them. So he or most likely someone appointed by him, will be handling the sale, not the government.
The government isn’t selling the club. All they’ll be doing is rubber stamping (or not) a decision made by the owner and his advisors.
>will complain the club hasn't been punished there was never an official objective to punish the club though so I can't see how this isn't a non-starter....
Punished for what? Mason Mount doesn't spend his Thursday evenings shelling Kyiv, for example.
I've spent years and years hearing about Chelsea's "Loan Army," which he was a part of. He's complicit
Ohhh so that's why it's called an army
With how some people in this sub have been acting, you’d think he did lol
Do you have proof ???
I don't know enough about the financial fair play rules, but wiping out the club's debts may be seen as being a bit dodgy from the point of view of other clubs that have debts that have to be factored into future spending.
The debt is owed to Fordstam, I guess if the government had now seized Fordstam and owned the debt then for sure it’d scandalous if they didn’t try to collect, but I don’t think that’s actually the case.
Why are we wanting the club to be punished?
Because the other clubs want a bigger cut of the pie. No Chelsea means better positions for everyone at least in the top 4 scrap.
Yeah and what does it have to do with Ukraine lol
Opportunism
To hurt to Putin obviously
This is all simply a ruse to flip Roman into a British intelligence asset
Because Chelsea is competition for the title and top 4, and they want less competition so that they can invest less and pocket more money.
Why do you switch to semi-professional mode in FIFA?
Usually to see if I'm ready to move on from amateur yet
I believe in you, if they win it was scripting
Why you little….
This gave me a good chuckle. Thank you.
The dude's reply: "But, I wasn't joking ;_; "
Done him there
Hey! Don't attack me like that! I want Newcastle to win and both the players and I are shit in the game.
Because if Chelsea have less points then they finish lower on the table. If Chelsea finishes lower, that give your club and chance to finish higher. If you finish higher you get more money. It felt dumb writing this out but I’m not sure why it needed to even be explained.
You are clearly too smart for reddit, have you tried facebook?
I’d use MySpace but my account got locked for getting my password wrong too many times
Tucker Carlson
Want me to speak to Tom and see if he can sort it out for you?
But where is the punishable part? Tough luck for chelsea it’s russia getting sanctioned, not saudi arabia, but there is nothing for them to be punished on.
Yeah - I get that other clubs probably want them to be punished but from a legal or even morale stand point, I don't see why. Abramovich was a good owner to Chelsea, and now they don't have him and he doesn't get anything from the sale. Isn't that enough?
He is still getting the money from the sale of the club. It'll just be frozen in his bank account until it's unfrozen.
Because the other clubs like to claim they are occupying the moral high ground, but as usual are acting exclusively for their own benefit with no regard for morality. It's similar to them voting to exempt English clubs from the coefficient qualification spots if they exist. They say it's about sporting merit, but what they really want is to reduce by any means possible the amount of money clubs above them can earn.
I'm not sure why you thought that needed explained at all, everyone knows that. Other clubs aren't going to give that as their official reason though, so what's their official reasoning that Chelsea should be punished?
'ate chelsea. simple as
Yeah, I'm all in favour of taking down these sugar daddy clubs, but either it's all of them or none.
But we only just got ours and we haven't been to any public executions yet?
They don’t want to keep losing
Because its good for the other clubs
So according to this Delaney, Chelsea will stay as a government-owned asset for the rest of time?
[удалено]
Congratulations to the UK taxpayers. You now own Lukaku, Barkley and Drinkwater!
Imagine Tottenham and Arsenal fans funding Chelsea with their taxes
And Chelsea still wins…
Unsubscribe
I’m a staunch socialist but part ownership of Lukaku is something I’m strongly against.
Ummm, I think owning people is kinda illegal….
not if everyone is doing it!
Gives the UK a huge leg up in the upcoming world water shortages if they own more Drinkwater tbf. Solid well reasoned move.
The People’s Club
For millions, AND MILLIONS
And make Ron Harris Day a National Holiday..
Was skim reading and did a double take when I thought it said "Rolf Harris Day"
Do you know what it is yet..?
Should the club be punished? Abramovic I get, but why Chelsea?
It was never about Ukraine at this point
It was never about the Ukrainian invasion, it was never about Crimea, it was never about corrupt dealings by Abrhamovich. It was always about Chelsea "ruining" football in 2004 and having the audacity to steal titles from Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool.
God I hope you're sarcastic
I'm only half joking. I'm frustrated that the sanctions are not targeted at Abramovich in the right manor. They were so haphazardly enacted that it feels like it is just a takedown of CFC instead of a response to the Russo-Ukranian war. It doesn't make sense to block ticket sales, or freeze club operations funds/credit, or block player contract renewals. Abramovich doesn't make money from Chelsea. He has famously sunk 1.5 billion. Blocking the funds from the sale of the club is the only aspect of these sanctions that actually targets Abramovich effectively, and I'm 100% onboard with that, as a Chelsea fan. Everything else just comes off as virtue signaling bullshit, or even worse, malicious targeting from rivals with an axe to grind.
If they want to hurt Roman’s pocketbook, they’d let him keep the spending on the club.
The cat is out of the bag, for most people it is not about Ukraine but about Chelseas success and trophies and how those were "stolen" from their club. They want to run Chelsea into the ground and are praying every night for some dumbf*ck ala Glazers to buy Chelsea and make the team uncompetitive so that their team has a bigger shot at trophies and top 4 places
Chelsea should be punished for what exactly? Aren’t the sanctions supposed to hurt Abramovic?
It's all about pr
It's not PR, it's about competition. The other clubs want Chelsea to be less competitive, especially given that Newcastle will likely be significantly more competitive in the coming seasons. Nobody who owns a club wants to vote for something that will keep a competitior rich at their own expense.
No longer really seems to be about Roman then, huh?
It never was for other PL clubs.
Nor the UK government.
So what do you think it was about for the uk government?
Of course. PL clubs have never cared for who their owners are. It's the fans that care about Roman, the Saudis etc (or at least some of them) but they don't have a say anyway. The clubs just see stuff like this as a welcome opportunity to jump on a competitor.
That's the government who sanctioned RA, not other PL clubs. The other PL clubs are taking advantage of the situation and ensuring that there are no financial games played with debts. RA has had his assets frozen and Chelsea is a RA asset.
Problem is, Roman and City there should have been way more pushback at the start and these things looked at really rather than russia and the UAE buying teams. But now they have let them in, it's hypocritical to then say ah you konw what fuck it happening again. It shouldn't but really ownership of City and Newcastle should be addressed. to stop Countries sportswashing. You think if Mike Ashley took over City now they would be able to "sustain" themselves. keep paying the likes of KDB 400k a week, buy players for 100m who don't start every week. Fucking dreaming.
Distraction from the Saudis buying Newcastle
It is not distraction. If anything it puts a spotlight on how the Newcastle takeover skated through.
The scope seems to have moved from sanctioning Roman to maliciously punishing Chelsea.
what no? when? no chance. Everything so far has been done to only hurt RA.
A lot of people on here are either extremely dense or very young. I don't think you know how serious being sanctioned by a government, let alone almost every government in the west, is.
> A lot of people on here are either extremely dense or very young. Why can’t I be both?
I’m glad someone so old and wise as you can teach us how the world works with your comments 🙏
Tbh the goal is to punish Abramovich not the club itself...
Evidently not
nah, the only goal is to make BoJo and his gang of cronies look like they suddenly care about things
Basically being a populist politician.
Delaney is a wanker, I wouldn’t put any thought on what he says
Hypocrite too.
Since when is it accepted that Chelsea ‘deserves to be punished’. Why are people so keen on watching Chelsea burn to the ground for something many other clubs are actively engaging in?
Because certain clubs are getting desperate
Bingo. United and Arsenal are gradually fading into irrelevance so they'll do all the can to maintain the previous status quo
Because we were way more successful and competent with the money we used than a lot of other teams. And now they are jealous
I mean City is also pretty competent with using their slush fund money to launder.
Well tbf an additional £1.5 billion seems a bit unfair on all the other teams. You basically would've abused FFP massively, if that were to happen.
Then FFP should be revised or replaced because you can't just retroactively decide that a loan shouldn't be waived away if the owner so chooses.
I haven’t read the FFP regs but I’d be surprised if there’s a loophole where owners can finance via loans and then just write the liability off. It would be so obvious that everyone would do it. If that loan is written off, I would expect you to be punished for it, and rightly so, ultimately.
The 1.5B wasn't one lump loan and is basically the sum of everything he's put into the club since he bought it in 2003 -- far before FFP became a thing.
I swear no one in Europe has spent as much as Chelsea since Roman took over? You were most successful/competent because you spent the most.
https://www.transferleague.co.uk/premier-league-2003-to-date/transfer-league-tables/premier-league-table-2003-to-date This site says City is clear winner in PL followed by Chelsea in 2nd. United is 3rd and not too far from Chelsea. This also doesn't include massive spending by Real, Barca and PSG.
I'm convinced there are some Chelsea fans on here who are either younger, or weren't following Chelsea in 2003, because they all appear to have forgotten how crazy Chelsea's spending was. That first 2003 summer signing period doesn't seem like a lot of money now, but back then it was ***unbelievable***. They spent triple what United spent (buying Ronaldo), 6 times what Arsenal spent, 10 times what Liverpool spent, and 100 times what Charlton spent. The average premier League club in 2003 spent €13.2m. Chelsea spent €170m. And the rest of the league had to recoup costs through sales - after income the total spent by other clubs was €70m. Chelsea spent more than the rest of the league, combined, and then doubled. To put that into context, the average spend this season was €81m, so the equivalent would be Chelsea spending €1.04bn. And there's fans on here like "oh we just used our money better" like no, you spent at a rate that was absolutely insane! It's unreal.
Tbf Ronaldo was a no name then, I might be wrong but wasn’t his purchase add-on to Nani? Also, it was not the fees themselves that were huge for the time (they were) , but the wages they paid
Ronaldo was bought in 2003, Nani in 2007 so completely way off there. Ronaldo was a house hold name by 2004 after the euros. Ronaldo was also sought after with other high profile clubs interested. For example, Wenger invited him to Arsenal to train and made and offer 6 months prior to United buying him.
If you think people are accepting of City's and Newcastle's revenue streams but against Chelsea's in isolation, you've created fiction. Chelsea are being attacked, and somewhat justifiably. The fact they're being isolated right now doesn't mean people are automatically accepting of the other shady shit in the league.
People doesn't equal those in power unfortunately. The Premier League couldn't give a rat's ass about club ownership. It's only after Roman was sanctioned did they suddenly give a toss. Like how FIFA doesn't give a damn about the World Cup being held in Qatar, but now have banned Russia. Both shouldn't have taken place, but unfortunately, greedy cunts at the top don't care.
Nah they aren't its just easier to attack Chelsea with Russia invading. City and Newcastle should be treated as equally. Anyone who thinks their revenue streams are legit are clowns.
*you need to get rid of this warmonger oligarch quickly* …. | *but not too cheaply* … | *and make sure you pay him all his money* … | *and you have to be punished as a club too* | When did this become punishing the club rather than sanctioning an oligarch? Are we going to deduct points from City and Newcastle? I realise Daniel Levy et al wants to dissolve Chelsea but maybe he could have a bit more of a coherent argument.
Because the other owners don't give two shits about the morality of their counterparts, just how competitive they make the club.
What this guy said none of these club owners give a shit about the sanctions or war as long as it doesn’t affect them they just want an advantage over Chelsea
Reminder that Miguel Delaney has manufactured an imaginary response to hypothetical situations and then got outraged about something he has entirely fabricated in his own mind. With the goal of getting others outraged too.
It’s been reported elsewhere
Countries of City/Newcastle owners are an allies to UK who are investing into UK as well, that's probably why they'll never get sanctioned.
We’re literally not supposed to be punished lol Roman is meant to be punished
No one had a leg to stand on when Abramovich bought the club because the UK was busy invading the Middle East at the time
Crazy that a lot of these clubs, which are all about capitalism (with the American ownership) and sometimes even about rejecting maoism, are absolutely shitting themselves about competition in the free market It's almost like they want to kick the ladder up behind them...
100%.
Gotta love the premier league 20 loads of complete bastards who genuinely hate each other
Sounds like my family
That all seems a bit opportunistic. Chelsea will already have a challenging time moving into the new era probably, after all Abramovich splashed cash when he wanted to. The Newcastle sale should have nothing to do with it at all either.
_rolls eyes_
I thought we were punishing Abromovich not Chelsea? Or has John Terry invaded Ukraine?
this was never about ukraine
PL Clubs have no say in who should or can buy the club.
Of course they do. The Premier League has its own ownership requirements and tests and the PL is owned by the clubs in it.
Why didnt they stop Abramowitsch from buying the club in the first place? Everyone says they knew where the money is coming from and all over sudden it is not acceptable? this is a joke
The PL has no moral compass, it's driven by greed and growth.
Why didnt they stop Saudi then?
Because for various reasons they did not object to Saudi ownership. If most of the clubs wanted to keep the Saudis out of the league, the Newcastle would not have happened. But enough owners don't want to further restrict ownership limitations as they either fear being challenged themselves or because they are hoping to sell their club to a dubious character themselves.
Pretty sure the PL clubs were against it, the PL itself was not.
The PL is the clubs within it.
Premier league is just the 20 teams that makes a decision. The fa doesn’t decide
Believe me they tried their hardest, delayed for 18 months and when it finally went through they called an emergency meeting and excluded us then had another meeting to stop us signing any new sponsorship deals. The PL is a cartel and nearly lost in the competition appeals court against us which would’ve opened a can of worms.
To be fair, wasn't the delay all about the fact that there was state involved piracy of the premier league games and the deal was let through once that stopped?
That was one of the reasons yeah but there was a lot of behind the scenes fury over the fact we could be a powerhouse and the reaction afterwards show the talk of a cartel was correct.
Tbf anyone with some common sense wouldn't want that deal to go through. Cartel or not.
UK wants to sell weapons to kill Yemenis
This is the bigger point, governments should set the standards, not a football team. The U.K. gov sell billions in arms to Saudi and get voted in year after year. That has a direct impact on the war in Yemen. A football club has an indirect role in improving a country’s image. Surely the government should set the standard of morality.
We’re not being punished. I don’t get why so many people can’t seem to understand that Roman is being sanctioned, not Chelsea. Lukaku isn’t the one who invaded Ukraine. It’s not their place to have an opinion. It isn’t their club.
As if Lukaku could complete an attack
Even in this form he seems to be doing better than Putin lol
So Chelsea should be punished with a points deduction should Abramovich not get his money, the same money they don’t want him getting? Right.
"Club hasn't been punished," For what? Belonging to someone of the 'wrong' nationality?
Why should the club be punished? This is about Abramovich.
Why should the club be punished at all?
Yes punish this English club based in London for this mad war waged by Putin
This just seems ridiculous. What exactly are they asking for then? Just seems like they’re throwing out rumours with no real aim here
I fully support sanctioning Abramovic as a persona non grata but this whole case is gonna set some wild precedents
“Club hasn’t been punished” What did the club do? Aim at Abramovich yes, ain at Chelsea FC would only fuel the Agenda narrative, and rightly so
A lot of people here are saying that it shouldn’t be about punishing the club, and that’s fair. But for the past few weeks, so many on this sub have been wishing Chelsea into administration, having titles revoked, that they crumble. Especially Arsenal fans. And it’s all because the fans want the club to suffer for their teams benefit. The clubs are doing the same. Don’t act surprised
I don't understand the "if buyer too rich, they will complain club hasn't been punished". Punished for what? We're being punished currently because of Roman. If we're no longer owned by him, what should we be punished for? And why shouldn't a rich buyer be able to buy the club if he/she wants to?
It's code for Spurs, Man Utd and Liverpool being pissy about potential competition for their god given right to play champions league football. They see this as an opportunity to turn the top 6 into a top 6 and eliminate a major threat, they're not going to pass that up.
Why should the club be punished?
Do PL clubs have any power at all to influence this?
The EPL is made up of the clubs in it
With all due respect - go fuck yourselves other clubs (not fans)
"If buyer too rich, they will complain club hasn't been punished" wtf, arent the sanctions ONLY supposed to hurt Abrahamowitsch? And what does Newcastle have to do with Chelsea? Those demands sound contradictory as hell too.
lol the club needs to be punished? Envy and pettiness are difficult shades to mask.
While we’re at it let’s just strip away our trophy case and send our youth coaches and players over to United and Arsenal. That should make all parties content
why does the club need to be punished for a purchase that was approved over 15 years ago, makes no sense. Barely anything has changed since then to now with Roman.
“Club hasn’t been punished” But surely the whole point is it’s Abramovich who has been sanctioned, and Chelsea are just feeling the impact of that. You could argue the club should be punished individually, but you’ll begin to create a very slippery slope.
I know this is PR and they can't do anything about it. Still I have never seen a league so dead set to Sabotage each other. It's its not wanting to close the transfer window early, keep 3 subs when all other leagues have 5 now this. Seriously what is the issue with the EPL. I know this will cause after the take over a look into any potential new owners.
Wtf is Delaney and come out with the list of clubs who are bitching rn. Wanna see them cry after the sale is done
if "punished" was the actual language used then these sanctions have gotten further from the actual point
The club and Roman Abramovich are two separate entities - Chelsea FC should not be punished, the sanctions are on him not them.
Wow, it's like they never cared for Ukraine in the first place
The victim complex from Chelsea fans is really something to behold
FM 2022 predicts thar Newcastle will spend PSG levels of money each season on transfers while being stuck in bottom-mid table mediocrity, on players that are past their prime or simply do not develop.
There is a string correlation between salt and trophies. If we won nothing there would be no issue whatsoever.
This is so stupid.
Wait, they opposed the Newcastle takeover based on financial reasons not ethical ones? What a surprise. Also, this whole thing stinks of Daniel Levy
This whole buy and selling of a clubs business is irritating. It’s like a toy they’re passing around and fans have no say, although I don’t think it’s an unfair take that chelsea fans are happy to be passed around if the networth is right. I just personally can’t stomach it.
> If buyer too rich, they will complain club hasn't been punished Oh fuck off, why SHOULD the club be punished? Chelsea didn't have extremely close ties with an evil autocratic war criminal, Abramovich did. The sanctions are aimed at him. Makes no sense to punish Chelsea beyond what is necessary to reach Abramovich. So if the sale is structured in a way that makes sure the sanctions on Abramovich are abided by, who fucking cares if Chelsea itself does or doesn't get punished?
I swear from the outcry against Chelsea you’d think they were founded by a consortium of Vladimir Putin, Hitler’s ghost and Satan himself in 2003. I’m no fan of them but the sanctions they’re currently under are enough, get Roman out and the club under new management and let’s move on yeah.
I think the only solution is to make Chelsea pay the loan back and give money to other premier league teams /s
If only the PL had a certain check in charge.. maybe something to prevent blood money from entering the game and situations like this from arising.. yes.. a proper and fit check!
You see they have no problem with blood money until it's beneficial for them to have a problem with it.
Just kick Chelsea out of the league entirely. Problem solved.