Jump to content
talkfootball365
  • Welcome to talkfootball365!

    The better place to talk football.

Chelsea Discussion


football forum

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

Why? They had a Russian pleb who elevated them to heights they could've only dreamt of by borrowing them 1.5 billion pound. 

Fuck'm

They had a long history before the Russian pleb appeared. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sign up to remove this ad.
8 minutes ago, Rick said:

They had a long history before the Russian pleb appeared. 

If that's what you want to believe then good for you mate. I'll continue to believe that they were a mediocre club that won the Russian lottery. 

I'm not saying I want them destroyed.. but it would be nice to see how they operate on a level playing field instead of being financially doped.

Edited by LFCMadLad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

If that's what you want to believe then good for you mate. I'll continue to believe that they were a mediocre club that won the Russian lottery. 

I'm not saying I want them destroyed.. but it would be nice to see how they operate on a level playing field instead of being financially doped.

I didn’t say it was a successfully history, just that they didn’t start existing in The early 2000’s. 

My point was that I don’t want to see the club destroyed. I don’t want any club to be destroyed. These twats who own clubs like PSG & City & Newcastle are temporary custodians of something more important than they are. Clubs will exist before and after being some rich prick’s plaything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rick said:

I didn’t say it was a successfully history, just that they didn’t start existing in The early 2000’s. 

My point was that I don’t want to see the club destroyed. I don’t want any club to be destroyed. These twats who own clubs like PSG & City & Newcastle are temporary custodians of something more important than they are. Clubs will exist before and after being some rich prick’s plaything. 

Ignore him, he is just being a wally.. xD 

We were a regular top 6 side in the 7 seasons prior to Abramovich turning up with his sack loads of cash... sometimes even finishing above Liverpool.... City on the other hand were bang average before the money.. B|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people like to pretend the 90's didn't happen. We were a fairly strong cup side.  2 FA Cups, 1 Cup Winners Cup, 1 Super Cup & 1 League Cup. We also almost bloody won the league in 99'. But aside that, the purchasing of Vialli and Gullit actually sparked Chelsea revolutions , propelling us towards the Russian money. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An offer from the Ricketts family to buy Chelsea has been ‘knocked back’ amid fan backlash though the club looks increasingly likely to end up in the hands of US investors, according to reports.

A bid from Saudi Media Group has already been rejected, as has an offer from New York Jets owner Woody Johnson, though successful parties have yet to receive confirmation from Raine in a process that is becoming rather more drawn-out and messy than Chelsea would have wanted.

But, according to the Financial Times, two bids are almost certain to make the final cut: an investor group led by Todd Boehly – who owns the Los Angeles Dodgers – and a consortium led by US billionaires Josh Harris and David Blitzer.

That duo already own NBA team the Philadelphia 76ers and have a stake in Crystal Palace – which they would need to sell – while they have also recruited Sir Martin Broughton and Lord Sebastian Coe to be part of their bid.

An offer from the Ricketts family – who own the Chicago Cubs baseball team – had initially been expected to make Raine’s shortlist, but FT suggest that may no longer be such a certainty following a backlash from supporters which has severely weakened their chances.

Edited by Bluewolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allegedly if Harris and Blizter are chosen to be the preferred bidders then a deal to sell there stakes in Crystal Palace 'can be agreed in 30 seconds'. So I imagine that means John Textor would become 80% owner, which everybody at Crystal Palace seems to be in favour of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bluewolf said:

An offer from the Ricketts family to buy Chelsea has been ‘knocked back’ amid fan backlash though the club looks increasingly likely to end up in the hands of US investors, according to reports.

A bid from Saudi Media Group has already been rejected, as has an offer from New York Jets owner Woody Johnson, though successful parties have yet to receive confirmation from Raine in a process that is becoming rather more drawn-out and messy than Chelsea would have wanted.

But, according to the Financial Times, two bids are almost certain to make the final cut: an investor group led by Todd Boehly – who owns the Los Angeles Dodgers – and a consortium led by US billionaires Josh Harris and David Blitzer.

That duo already own NBA team the Philadelphia 76ers and have a stake in Crystal Palace – which they would need to sell – while they have also recruited Sir Martin Broughton and Lord Sebastian Coe to be part of their bid.

An offer from the Ricketts family – who own the Chicago Cubs baseball team – had initially been expected to make Raine’s shortlist, but FT suggest that may no longer be such a certainty following a backlash from supporters which has severely weakened their chances.

The Boehly bid I think would be the best for Chelsea. Martin Broughton was our chairman for a brief moment in history - appointed by Gillett and Hicks to oversee the sale to FSG. He made no secret that he was an absolutely massive Chelsea fan, but also said he would be looking for a new owner for Liverpool that would be the kind of owner he'd want at his club.

We ended up with FSG, who while I think they're a bunch of cunts for: trying to trademark the word "Liverpool" and the Liver bird (because that's stupid, how can they claim to own the name of a city or icons of the city)... there's no doubt that the way they've run us is miles ahead of where we were under Gillett & Hicks and David Moores.

He's a successful businessman, loves Chelsea, identified good prospective owners for us and got that sale through... I think if Chelsea can have him onboard with ambitious owners, they'll have someone at the top of the club that's got experience as a chairman of a football club who loves the club... and at very least knows what good football ownership should look like (theoretically).

Also thank fuck the Saudi Media Group has been ruled out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cicero said:

🚨 According to people with knowledge of the matter, 2 bids backed by US billionaires have become the frontrunners to win the £3bn race to purchase Chelsea FC

🔷 Investor group led by Todd Boehly
🔷 Private equity billionaires, Josh Harris and David Blitzer

(via @FT) #CFC

— ChelsTransfer (@ChelsTransfer) March 24, 2022

Todd Boehly has held talks with senior members at Chelsea about his vision, he’s in the driving seat. ( @Nathan_Gissing ) pic.twitter.com/aa3chqzc15

— Pys (@CFCPys) March 24, 2022

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/03/2022 at 13:45, Cicero said:

Be that as it may, publicly saying all Muslims are the enemy isn't going to bold well, particularly when you want to take over a successful club where the fans are very hesitant on who the new owner is. 

It's the very reason screening processes exist. Their bid has been universally protested against by the Chelsea Supporters Trust, add the Muslim community and Muslim players we have on the team and staff members, I cannot see them making the final cut. 

In fairness, the statement was made by their father, who they have tried to distant themselves from. 

image.png.3704399960eba40af8f23de0da37fb

It is a very Chelsea thing to say though so he has that on his side.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/03/2022 at 13:45, Cicero said:

Be that as it may, publicly saying all Muslims are the enemy isn't going to bold well, particularly when you want to take over a successful club where the fans are very hesitant on who the new owner is. 

It's the very reason screening processes exist. Their bid has been universally protested against by the Chelsea Supporters Trust, add the Muslim community and Muslim players we have on the team and staff members, I cannot see them making the final cut. 

In fairness, the statement was made by their father, who they have tried to distant themselves from. 

image.png.3704399960eba40af8f23de0da37fb

It is a very Chelsea thing to say though so he has that on his side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Him getting poisoned along with 2 Ukraining peace negotiators does indicate that he's fallen out of Putin's good books.

I was just wondering the same thing... If these reports are accurate they were clearly designed to disrupt the process but if Abramovich is such a buddy to Putin as they claim you might have thought he would be given the heads up in advance, unless he was either deemed collateral damage or just in the wrong place at the wrong time.. Maybe Putin was not all that impressed with Abramovich taking part at all?? 

I have also been wondering how all this is going down with all these rich Russian Oligarchs who have suddenly found themselves subject to sanctions and asset freezes... they have gone from one cushy number and the freedom to do pretty much as they please to be being as popular as the black plague.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Certainly foiling a few narratives...

Not really, Putin and Abramovich will always be closely tied together because of their very close history together. And it's also not as though Putin hasn't turned on oligarchs he was once close with before.

I don't think it's foiling any narratives, it's just a new chapter in their relationship.

3 minutes ago, Bluewolf said:

I was just wondering the same thing... If these reports are accurate they were clearly designed to disrupt the process but if Abramovich is such a buddy to Putin as they claim you might have thought he would be given the heads up in advance, unless he was either deemed collateral damage or just in the wrong place at the wrong time.. Maybe Putin was not all that impressed with Abramovich taking part at all?? 

I have also been wondering how all this is going down with all these rich Russian Oligarchs who have suddenly found themselves subject to sanctions and asset freezes... they have gone from one cushy number and the freedom to do pretty much as they please to be being as popular as the black plague.. 

I think it's that.

Putin's come to expect his oligarchs to fall in line - he's even made pretty open threats against them. I don't think he likes that Abramovich has been keen to speak on behalf of Russia at Zelensky's request.

And, yeah I suspect many of these oligarchs are absolutely furious with Putin. They've suddenly lost their cushy and carefree lives getting to do what they want, their assets in Russia are now worth significantly less than they were a month ago. And it could be that poisoning Abramovich but non-lethally sends a message to other powerful oligarchs close to Putin that it's important for them to fall in line with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Not really, Putin and Abramovich will always be closely tied together because of their very close history together. And it's also not as though Putin hasn't turned on oligarchs he was once close with before.

I don't think it's foiling any narratives, it's just a new chapter in their relationship.

Not having any of that.

Everyone and their dog who views Chelsea as a footballing rival have now suddenly become experts in Russian politics overnight, and its been shoved profusely down our throats that Roman is 100% in Putin's pocket and is somehow benefiting from this invasion considering his shares in military steel. 

This news has undoubtedly rustled a few narratives and agendas in that regard, when really all it took to see that Roman wanted no part in this was the fact he is Ukrainian born to Ukrainian parents. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Not having any of that.

Everyone and their dog who views Chelsea as a footballing rival have now suddenly become experts in Russian politics overnight, and its been shoved profusely down our throats that Roman is 100% in Putin's pocket and is somehow benefiting from this invasion considering his shares in military steel. 

This news has undoubtedly rustled a few narratives and agendas in that regard, when really all it took to see that Roman wanted no part in this was the fact he is Ukrainian born to Ukrainian parents. 

I think more people assumed that Putin was in Roman's pocket tbh.

Even if he's been poisoned, there's nothing that can separate Roman Abramovich from Putin. From introducing Putin to Boris Yeltsin, to handpicking his cabinet and "right hand man" - he's been a key Putin ally up until getting poisoned.

US intelligence is also expressing doubt that he's been exposed to poison... so it could all just be bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

football forum
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...