CHELSEA FC - Malaysian Fan

[thteh86]

Just before Roman came, where were Chelsea? Top 4 when Liverpool was still with Gerrard Houllier? When Tottenham, Newcastle were shit? When Leeds Utd dropped? When Bolton weren't as good as last season?

Arsenal don't show result when George Graham was with them, and when Arsene came, it started to evolve by buying reasonable players. No major changes in terms of owners nor any improvements in terms of finance.

Man Utd weren't a successful team when Alex Redcheek cameby, he built it himself and helped the club to earn their own cash, plus they didn't spend a penny on Beckham, Giggs, Scholes who shone during the 90s. Yes, they did spend quite a lot on some players, but other than Veron who is arguably the worst Manure's purchase, no players have been overpaid. But never forget, they were the richest club through success. (I Hate Myself)

Liverpool? Alright, how on earth would you say we buy success? Our record signing was Cisse and he was only around 15 million if I am not mistaken, he didn't show what he did in France but what the heck, Drogba was about 30 million pounds. He was shit too when he 1st came. Which other player did we pay big money for? Kuyt for 10 million? 3 times less than the amount paid to buy Sheva and although he came later, he scored the same amount of goals and has played less minutes than Sheva in the league. Sissoko who has proven to be a bargain compare to Tiago, Huth, Mendes.... where are they now?

I am sort of okay with Chelsea paying for big names, but with a few cheaters last season and a FUCKing sore loser Mourinho, who can never lose to anybody, not even Barcelona which is one of the biggest team in Europe. To me Chelsea is like a Real Madrid(never liked Real Madrid), buying big names instead of developing their own products.

And before Mourinho came, it was the tinkerman Claudio Ranieri who is the coach of Chelsea. A manager who got sacked within a season with Valencia can still manage to obtain a 2nd place in the league after the cash in.

Don't argue that you are poor, compare yourselves with us Liverpool, who is the richer city, who bought the wrong players, who hired the wrong coach?

 

[oneGSR]

You have a point there, but, when you make an offer of 70m dollar (or pound cant remember) for a player, i think that's just wrong/ridiculous

Munky, that is not wrong/ridiculous.
Nobody batted an eyelid when other teams were forking out 40 and 50 million during recent summers.

Liverpool have spent nearly 120 million in three years, United closer to 200 million. They are not far behind Chelsea in the spending stakes, they just don't have a high profile benefactor and Liverpool haven't yet gone through a high profile takeover.

Unfortunately for United, their high profile takeover was negative for the club and has left them in debt but had it been the other way round, I'm sure you would've seen some big european stars playing in red this season.

 

[thteh86]

Munky, that is not wrong/ridiculous.
Nobody batted an eyelid when other teams were forking out 40 and 50 million during recent summers.

Liverpool have spent nearly 120 million in three years, United closer to 200 million. They are not far behind Chelsea in the spending stakes, they just don't have a high profile benefactor and Liverpool haven't yet gone through a high profile takeover.

Unfortunately for United, their high profile takeover was negative for the club and has left them in debt but had it been the other way round, I'm sure you would've seen some big european stars playing in red this season.

how many players have liverpool bought and how many have chelsea bought? And 200 million is a lot compare to 120 million. Is that what you call not far behind?

By the way, nice to have a Chelsea supporter here as we can always debate with each another, I'm sure that nobody can change your own mindset about how good Chelsea are as a team.

 

[oneGSR]

So, do u think Liverpul dont spent big money after 120million??

Everyone goes on about Chelsea buying big money on player and not thinking about the future.
But this is all part of the 10 year plan that Chelsea are putting in place, to win trophies be the best in the world, be financially sufficient, build a bigger stadium, and to bring on their football academy. The only difference is that Chelsea are able to do it quicker than anyone else has ever been able to do.

if buying players will ensure we win in each of the next 20 years, then let's do it. After all it is not illegal. It is a free market. Let those who think the likes of Bolton, Spurs, Wigan or West Ham, who have really done well this term, will win anything without spending big continue to dream on. After all, Barca's buying of Ronaldhino and Eto'o has directly accounted for their success after six years in the cold. You are deluding yourselves if you think titles come by chance or cheaply. Man U bought big when no one else could. Benitez at Liverpool wants cash to buy players and they are thinking of getting a big investor to match Chelsea's spend-power. Let's see if Arsenal win anything this term. I bet not. And the unravelling of the young team will be something to watch.

 

[thteh86]

There is much naval-gazing taking place in football at the moment. A lack of goals in big games; two-thirds of the Premiership looking to avoid relegation with stifling tactics; the empty seats at many stadia; and, in the case of Liverpool fans, the dip that follows any 'high' in life, be it heroin, caffeine or sugar. If you go up, you can only come down again. Sometimes with a bang.

Romance in football may have been on the decline for a while; but last season's Champions League proved it is alive and well, just obscured from time to time. But Chelsea are the equivalent of a man who has never given his wife a bunch or flowers, and who goes down the pub with his mates on Valentine's Day. Chelsea are the death of footballing romance.

First of all, I don't have any great hatred of Chelsea. Sure, they've never been one of my favourite clubs, and there's always been plenty to dislike about them (not least, the loathsome Ken Bates). But there was always plenty to like, too: namely their annual soft-bellied capitulation at Anfield. They rolled over, and were tickled.

Chelsea suddenly got some money in the 1990s, but it was a wealth comparable to other top clubs. They shopped in the same stores as the rest, albeit ones in a more trendy milieu. Now they don't so much shop as own the shop. And not just any shop. They own Harrods. (Actually, the owner of their neighbours, Fulham, owns Harrods –– but this is Footballing Metaphor Harrods).

They have it all. Money, talent and a prime location to entice the world's best. They have a collection of brilliant footballers, marshalled by a remarkable manager.

How can football ever be a fair competition with such radical financial disparity? Plenty of clubs have had outside investment in the past, but it's been of a smaller nature, and a temporary boost. As much as £100m might buy you some good players, and maybe even the occasional trinket, but not sustainable success. Unlimited money buys you a chance at unlimited success.

Other 'rich' clubs have built their wealth on the back of success on the pitch, and a broad fan base. It's been assembled over a period of time. Football has never seen anything like Abramovich's Chelsea before.

It's one thing having lots of money, another spending it wisely. For the most part Chelsea have done just that, and in Mourinho they have a man who can control the players and get them to subvert their egos. The players themselves know that they are all dispensable.

Chelsea are in the envious position of being able to pay tens of millions for a player and happily sell him twelve months later for a massive loss if a better player comes along, or the first one fails. It simply makes no difference.

Liverpool, Arsenal, even Manchester United, have to justify any significant outlay; just one expensive mistake in the transfer market can lead to long-term problems. I'm sure Alex Ferguson will eternally regret not spending the £28m on Seba Veron in a more effective manner.

Since Abramovich arrived in 2003 Chelsea have spent approaching £300m on transfers. In return they have recouped a incredibly small percentage from sales. Again, it makes little difference to them. Abramovich spending £10m is like you or I spending £10 on a CD, and if we don't like it, we'll just write it off as a mildly inconvenient loss. It might irk us, but it won't break us.

Premiership clubs need to be careful, prudent; Chelsea do not. They could go out and buy a whole new £300m team in January if they wished. They have that massive safety net. Money doesn't buy success; but unlimited money makes it far, far easier to succeed.

Sour Grapes

It's not bitterness or sour grapes at Chelsea's success. It's just that, in my eyes, it's hollow success because of the grotesque expenditure that ensured it.

In the hands of Ranieri that money wasn't necessarily a godsend; that could have been interesting. In the hands of a top manager, it makes them virtually unbeatable. How did they attract a top manager? By having tons of cash. Without that money, Chelsea would almost certainly not have Mourinho.

While I (obviously) never liked Man United's dominance in the 1990s, I couldn't help but grant them grudging respect. Ferguson spent money, but he also developed his own players. I also felt that a good team could always come along and usurp them.

That team was Arsenal. For a while the Gunners had a sublime football team, built on a medium-range budget. They spent big occasionally – only when they had to. But they're entering a transitional phase just as Chelsea step up another gear. I never resented Arsenal their success. I do resent Chelsea.

I don't find Chelsea's football boring. I find their money boring. Their style of play may not please everyone, but it's the age-old formula of world-class goalkeeper, super-tight defence, strong midfield, and a clutch of players who can score goals, allied to strength in depth.

The 4-5-1 formation doesn't make it less exciting. I'm sure Real Madrid would kill for some of Chelsea's defensive stability. Chelsea have some great attacking players, but they don't take the risks associated with other great attacking sides. And why should they? They don't need to. When you don't concede goals, you only need to score one. None of that bothers me.

Had Chelsea evolved over a number of seasons, making the odd expensive signing but picking up players of the quality of Robben, Essien, Wright-Phillips, et al, for reasonable fees by good scouting, then I'd respect them. But they were all the 'obvious' players that only the biggest pot of gold could buy.

Although they'd have struggled to attract him, I'd like to have seen Mourinho managing Chelsea without Abramovich's backing (i.e. the Russian had not come to England). Mourinho would have them challenging for the top with his canny methods, but he'd have to work with players who were not his first choices. Or his second, or even third choices.

It would be a really interesting four-way race for the title, without Chelsea's obscene wealth. As it stands, Chelsea can spend their way to another league title. I'm sure even Chelsea fans would enjoy that more; they may not admit it now, but it will dawn on them in time.

Obscene

Chelsea's wealth does so much. It allows them to unsettle their rivals. They have the power and wealth to influence the media. A bid for Gerrard, a rumour about Henry, an approach for Ashley Cole. You just know stories will appear in the papers ahead of the Champions League game next week. You can set your watch by it.

Their expenditure has also driven up the prices for other teams. Just when transfer fees were getting sensible, Chelsea blew it all out of the water. They can't have it all their own way, but they can have what they want often enough. They can't buy everything: Gerrard said no, Henry said no, and others have failed to be enticed. But they can still buy the best players at clubs unable to resist the ruble.

Cup competitions remain the best place to beat Chelsea. Any team can have an off day, and underdogs can prosper in the lack of pressure. Liverpool were able to do that very thing last season. The pressure was all on Chelsea. We've seen it in the Carling Cup this week.

Chelsea's quality and depth will see them win nearly all of their league games. Those they don't will be rendered insignificant.

Cup competitions – devalued for so long – may return to become the only interesting thing in English football. Teams cannot dominate cup competitions. Cup competitions rely more on luck, and that element of risk, of chance, could add spice to an increasingly predictable footballing landscape.

And 'competition' is the operative word. Look at the sport of the summer in England: cricket, and the Ashes series. The Australian cricket team are like the Man United of the mid-90s: snarling, intensely competitive, arrogant, talented, and hard to beat.

And yet the Aussies looked almost happy to lose the series. Unbelievable! I've never seen such smiles from men not used to being beat: it would be like Keane, Ferguson and Neville happily applauding a crushing defeat. The Aussies were not happy at being second best, but because at long last they'd been given a good game (or rather, five five-day tests) that could have gone either way.

Their sport became meaningful again. And that's the danger football faces: Chelsea's success will be great for them, just a death knell for the game itself. (At least until Abramovich disappears.)

And then Chelsea's success will become meaningless. Because no-one else will care.

read this if you're free.

Illegal stuffs? I can name you a few, John Mikel Obi, Ashley Cole and also the Leeds Utd's scandal. Not illegal? Answer me that then...When there's money, so what? We won the Champions League, the FA Cup, although Mourinho claims that we never really beaten Chelsea at all.

 

[thteh86]

So, do u think Liverpul dont spent big money after 120million??

Everyone goes on about Chelsea buying big money on player and not thinking about the future.
But this is all part of the 10 year plan that Chelsea are putting in place, to win trophies be the best in the world, be financially sufficient, build a bigger stadium, and to bring on their football academy. The only difference is that Chelsea are able to do it quicker than anyone else has ever been able to do.

if buying players will ensure we win in each of the next 20 years, then let's do it. After all it is not illegal. It is a free market. Let those who think the likes of Bolton, Spurs, Wigan or West Ham, who have really done well this term, will win anything without spending big continue to dream on. After all, Barca's buying of Ronaldhino and Eto'o has directly accounted for their success after six years in the cold. You are deluding yourselves if you think titles come by chance or cheaply. Man U bought big when no one else could. Benitez at Liverpool wants cash to buy players and they are thinking of getting a big investor to match Chelsea's spend-power. Let's see if Arsenal win anything this term. I bet not. And the unravelling of the young team will be something to watch.

You forgot about the title winning Arsenal, who didn't spend much. Like I said before, Man Utd didn't win much after spending big. Who did they buy with more than 5 million pounds when they won the treble in year 1999?

When Man Utd spend big, who did they spend on? And how often? Veron 28m, Ruud 19m, Rooney 30m, Ferdinand 30m, Carrick 14m and a few more. But not to forget, they sold Veron to Chelshit for half the price, Ruud for 10 and the rest did perform. What about Chelshit? Veron out for free, Crespo out for ???, Tiago was a nobody, Kezman? Huth? Scott Parker? Mutu? Can you tell me how much have they lost? Read the article pls

 

[Duke Red]

Whilst most clubs earned their wealth, Chelsea inherited theirs. Distinct difference which makes it harder to earn respect.

 

[-fRëɧt¥£3R-]

ohhh..................... Lennon

 

[oneGSR]

8 goals in the last 2 games. can u believe that?

when Drogba has a bad patch, we have Sheva to carry the load!

We're starting to hit our gears, just in the nick of time. Ballack & Lampard are starting to combine better.not forget, drogba & sheva too.
Cudicini is getting more comfortable. J.Cole is coming back from injury. And A.Cole is improving too.

After what should be a relatively easy match against West Ham at home, we have

Bremen away,
Man U away,
Bolton away,
Sofia home, and
Arsenal home.

Just in the nick of time, indeed!

 

[oneGSR]

Full-time: Chelsea 1 West Ham 0... some good play by Chelsea last nite, especially Joe Cole on the odd occasion he got the ball... good passing & a great free-kick from Geri to get the goal... good stuff all round, I say!

keep going Chelsea!! "cucuk angin" MU!! haha..

 

[oneGSR]

like Jose said, if we lost. that's not our problem. haha...





dead barca!!

 

[oneGSR]

Didier Drogba produced a moment of outrageous brilliance to keep Chelsea's title hopes burning brightly with a 3-2 win at Goodison Park.

see this...
http://www.footytube.com/2006/12/17/everton-2-3-chelsea-2/

 

[^Dreamerz^]

credits to drogba, bringing alive chelsea twice...
but i have to say reading did well to put on a fight...
unlucky for ashley cole.. seldom see mistake from chelsea's play, this will be a memorable one..

 

[m3 power]

whats u guys prediction tonite? final les blues vs the gunners? fkos les blues aite? haha.

 

[Basil Basil]

long live chelsea...........

 

[Jose]

how come this tread senyap already ? c'mon guys bring it back alive !

 

[zephyr3d]

lol... i guess itz the matter of getting the real chelsea fans to speak up.

 

[koolspyda]

i'm sorry to see your gaffer had to go.

we miss you jose. & damn MU got lucky in coming meeting.

damn, less color words now from the blues. i just hope you dont turn into a spurs. stylish attacking but rubbish defence.

 

[virtouso vvti]

1 day (not minute) of silence pls...

this is the saddest day for chelsea fc...
farewell jose... u would be greatly missed...

Roman 'I'm-filthy-rich' Abramovich <---- sore loser!!!

 

[Saga Continue]

that sore looser make what chelsea is rite now....