Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 11253867)

Mods

1 week ban for Swan please and his awful cheating team

Originally Posted by Swan (Post 11253869)

After spending all that, and the awful way in which we're playing, i think that's punishment enough :hmph:

Originally Posted by GiRTh (Post 11253913)

About time. What they're doing is ridiculous.

I heard a Chelsea fan on Talk sport saying he wants his Chelsea, currently tenth, back. Before Abramovich came along with his filthy stinking blood money tenth was a good finish for Chelsea. Looks like they have got their Chelsea back.

If they finish above fifth or above I'll be surprised.

Originally Posted by Swan (Post 11253919)

That's utter bollocks by the way.

96/97 - 6th
97/98 - 4th
98/99 - 3rd
99/00 - 5th
00/01 - 6th
01/02 - 6th
02/03 - 4th

We were consistently fighting for top 4 7 years before Roman

Originally Posted by GiRTh (Post 11253930)

Its disgraceful what they're doing cuz its so blatant.

Usually a deal like Murdyk would be over say three years at 90 mill that's 30 mil a year. By brokering a deal over 10 years its cut to 9 mil a year. Did they think anyone was not gonna spot it.

IF they were subtle I might've given them a bit more respect but very happy the loophole is being closed

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper (Post 11253931)

They were going into administration if they hadn't got Roman.

Originally Posted by GiRTh (Post 11253933)

True but its his blood money that made them what they are.

Originally Posted by GiRTh (Post 11253933)

True but its his blood money that made them what they are.

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper (Post 11253934)

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Swan (Post 11253940)

Also like how City, who were much worse than Chelsea before they got brought by Saudis, never get half the sh!t Chelsea do!

You think their billions are legit and fair in a part of the world where regular people are lucky to eat daily?!

Originally Posted by Swan (Post 11253937)

Slim, only a few weeks ago you were happy to have blood money purchase Liverpool if it were to change their current piss poor performances too, don't throw stones and all that.

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper (Post 11251539)

I'd rather go back to man u being the most dominant financial team in the league, and us being 2nd/3rd, because at least then you have a chance. But these oil money teams are just on a different level. City don't sell out their ground at times and still rake in more sponsorship money than anyone else because of their honest guv, it's all above board sponsorship deals.

What Klopp has done these last 6 years is perhaps the most historic run in league history. Won every trophy in the game, 3 year run of 97/99 points, and all on a smaller budget than Brighton, but none of that would have happened without Barca injecting 142m into the team for Coutinho. Chelsea have spent more in 6 months than we have in the last 10 transfer windows combined, and they were going into administration before Roman came in, so if you want to compete at the top of the league, this is what you have to have behind you these days, and that's depressing.

I saw this coming a mile off and pointed out in 19 that this was all built on sand. I don't think we'll end up with oil money anyway. I wouldn't put it past FSG to screw us over with more Americans. If there is any chance in the world that LFC can screw this up, they absolutely will. Had the chance to get Dubai in 05/06 - which is the most sanitised version of mid east money possible (tourism), but we backed out and sold to owners who nearly put us into admin.

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper (Post 11253946)

Eh? Liverpool built themselves up to where they are, we didn't get there from a stimulus package as we were about to go out of business due to not being able to pay the bills. The 2 clubs are not the same.

Even our recent title was won on a budget.

Originally Posted by Swan (Post 11253965)

Point is, you were saying only the other day you didn't care who owned Liverpool as long as they pumped money into the club..

"half times beheadings in the centre circle" (i know you wasn't serious, but you must get my point)

And the game has changed since then, it's more a money business now than ever.

Originally Posted by GiRTh (Post 11253927)

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

And you got it only three times out of the seven

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper (Post 11253966)

Come on, dude, you used a joke I made, knowing it was a joke. You can tell my serious opinion in the post above. Football is the way it is today because of Roman. Maybe if he didn't buy chelsea, a couple of years later, some other billionaire would have pumped money into a club and then football would have been the way it is because of him, instead. I know we're all protective of our clubs, but you have to be realistic. He was the first, so he gets the blame. It's not a personal vendetta against Chelsea.

Originally Posted by Swan (Post 11253978)

Doesn't change the fact you're completely wrong about Chelsea being a team finishing in 10th before Roman.

The "Italian Connection" changed Chelsea's fortunes in the mid to late 90's.

Know your facts before talking utter sh!te and being wrong next time..



Things change, that's life, that's business. And no club, barring the odd one off season, were ever going to challenge Utd or Arsenal, or even Liverpool when it came to overseas money back then. Big money for "lesser" teams, teams almost but not quite there was actually a good thing for football imo. And also, Chelsea didn't actually change their team that much in Roman's first season. The foundation was already built before Roman and Jose.

I just think it's bollocks how everyone gets on their moral high horse when it comes to Chelsea.

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper (Post 11254000)

It's not Chelsea, it's roman. That was my point about no one challenging united - they earned all of that right, they were marketing geniuses as soon as they started winning, they had sponsors on everything. and were raking it in. That's how a successful businesses should be. I'd hate to see united on 30 league titles and 10 CL's but they earned it, they didn't take shortcuts.

Chelsea spent £150m in his first transfer window, back in 03/04, so no need to rewrite history :laugh:

Originally Posted by Swan (Post 11254002)

So you're saying the league is worse off now, because of all the money being spent, and teams that couldn't dream of challenging Utd, are now, and have dethroned them?

Also, no one wants to acknowledge that massively inflated prices Chelsea payed for players, if, before Roman, we approached, we'd have paid half the amount.

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper (Post 11254009)

Not just the league, but football is worse off. i'll even concede that if it was just Roman it would be manageable, but now we have your mob spending half a bill this window (if they get enzo), Newcastle will be guaranteed top 2 in 5 years, city will be top 2 forever, and then what happens? United can spend with them, but your lot won't be able to sustain this.

If Liverpool got Qatari owners and won 10 leagues on the trot, I'd obviously enjoy it, but it wouldn't improve the sport, and I'd more than likely have stopped watching. Football shouldn't be about owners - it should be about clubs, managers, and players.

I don't begrudge you what happened at Chelsea, because I'm self aware enough to know that if our clubs were reversed, I'd be laughing about the tears, too, but just trying to give an honest view on what's happened over the last 20 years, and going forward.

Originally Posted by Swan (Post 11253978)

Doesn't change the fact you're completely wrong about Chelsea being a team finishing in 10th before Roman.

The "Italian Connection" changed Chelsea's fortunes in the mid to late 90's.

Know your facts before talking utter sh!te and being wrong next time..

Originally Posted by Swan (Post 11254018)

Yeah i suppose what you say is fair enough.

I guess teams are becoming more like franchises, like in American sport. The passion will always be there though.

But it's unfair to say Chelsea were sh!t before Roman, yeah he did have us challenging for Leagues, but we were on the brink imo before he arrived. To say Chelsea were going under financially just before Roman might have some truth, but you'll remember as well as anyone, that last game face off for top 4 between Chelsea and Liverpool, which we won. That CL money would have kept us afloat.

6 years before Roman -
3 Top 4 finishes
2 FA Cups
1 League Cup
1 Cup Winners Cup
1 Super Cup

That is not a 10th finishing team. So Girth is completely wrong about Chelsea being sh!t before Roman. We were on the up. That can't be denied. We'll never know of course, but without Roman, i feel Chelsea were only a season or 2 away from challenging for the PL.

If we wanna talk about ACTUAL sh!t teams paying for Trophies, lets all pop over to the blue side of Manchester!

Originally Posted by GiRTh (Post 11254025)

You won the premier league/first division one time before the blood money. :shrug:

Originally Posted by GiRTh (Post 11254029)

Before the blood money, you were also rans, you were Aston Villa. Villa went one way and you went the other :thumbs:

Originally Posted by Swan (Post 11254018)

Yeah i suppose what you say is fair enough.

I guess teams are becoming more like franchises, like in American sport. The passion will always be there though.

But it's unfair to say Chelsea were sh!t before Roman, yeah he did have us challenging for Leagues, but we were on the brink imo before he arrived. To say Chelsea were going under financially just before Roman might have some truth, but you'll remember as well as anyone, that last game face off for top 4 between Chelsea and Liverpool, which we won. That CL money would have kept us afloat.

6 years before Roman -
3 Top 4 finishes
2 FA Cups
1 League Cup
1 Cup Winners Cup
1 Super Cup

That is not a 10th finishing team. So Girth is completely wrong about Chelsea being sh!t before Roman. We were on the up. That can't be denied. We'll never know of course, but without Roman, i feel Chelsea were only a season or 2 away from challenging for the PL.

If we wanna talk about ACTUAL sh!t teams paying for Trophies, lets all pop over to the blue side of Manchester!

Originally Posted by Swan (Post 11254034)

Carry on being wrong :wavey:

You keep trying to make me feel guilty with the "blood money" crap, or trying to make some weird point? Blood is on your hands too with the device you're typing your incorrect rubbish on. So if we want to be petty, we can go there. Like how slaves in sh!thole countries make the phones we use everyday for 4 pence a month. Or the appalling way slaves are used in the Lithium Mines so we can all keep up with useless bollocks on twitter 24/7. Blood is on the hands of all of us.

Get off your moral high horse.

Originally Posted by GiRTh (Post 11254036)

The ECL was an easier competition to get into back then. Proof being that Arsenal qualified for over 20 years in succession under Arsene Wenger. Well done for making it 3 times in 7 years.:thumbs:

Originally Posted by GiRTh (Post 11254041)

Come again. Bit heavy. Lets keep ti to football and blood money in football

Originally Posted by Swan (Post 11254050)

You keep talking about "blood money", well it exists everywhere, im just pointing out the hypocrisy. Blood on the hands of people is fine when it benefits you. But when Chelsea dominate Arsenal for 20 years, it all of a sudden becomes "wrong". :shrug:

Originally Posted by GiRTh (Post 11254111)

Nice of you to make it personal. When did I mention this was about Chelsea V Arsenal.

This is why Chelsea fans are so horrific. You were absolutely nothing before the Oligarchs blood money. Its true, come to terms with it. That disgusting humans beings stinking money that he obtained with blood on his hands made you the club you are today. Without it you would be nothing.

Imagine if Ken Bates was chairmen. Its laughable to think you would have won leagues never mind Champions leagues under Ken Bates. If you're happy with it though, then that's OK.:thumbs: