Waconda Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 3 minutes ago, swanker said: Is that right! Who owns England? History of England's land ownership and how much is privately owned today - Countryfile.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swanker Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 Just now, swanker said: Is that right! 2 minutes ago, VT05763 said: Who owns England? History of England's land ownership and how much is privately owned today - Countryfile.com Apparently the church of English owns quite a bit of land. They’ll still go around with their collection plates asking for money to fix a church roof. People are happy to give as well! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 1 hour ago, swanker said: Apparently the church of English owns quite a bit of land. They’ll still go around with their collection plates asking for money to fix a church roof. People are happy to give as well! Thing is, the vast majority of their land is churchyards and cemeteries. Unsuitable for development. You only have to think how many parishes there are in England and think the C of E has churchyards in each one, often multiple churchyards, and you soon get to a huge total acreage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 15 hours ago, ExiledAjax said: They are in a huge cashflow hole. No one knows for sure, but I heard Athletic reporter Matt Slater estimating that they may have 'only' £40-60m cash in the bank. So essentially they probably have enough cash to get to the end of this season, but beyond that who knows. The start of next season is a huge date for other reasons as well. I've looked at the PL handbook and a few things jump out. Although RA is not a registered director of Chelsea Football Club Ltd, or its parent Chelsea FC plc, or its parent company Fordstam Ltd which is the company in which RA directly holds 100% of the shares. However, he could potentially be classed as a "Director" for the purposes of the PL handbook. Note the definition: Rule A.1.71 applies only to Rules H1 to H9, and those only apply to Director's Reports. They essentially exclude a person who is deemed equivalent to a director from needing to bother with the nitty gritty of financial reports and the like. "Control" is a bigger definition that I won't copy here, but essentially RA comfortably meets the definition of having 'Control' because he owns 100% of Fordstam Ltd, which owns 100% of Chelsea FC plc, which owns 100% of Chelsea Football Club Ltd. So, in my opinion, RA is a 'Director' of Chelsea Football Club Ltd for the purposes of the PL handbook. This is important because if you then look at section F of the handbook (in particular F.1.13) you see that the happenings of the past few days mean that if this isn't resolved by the start of next season (ie the first game of the PL on 6 August), the PL could feasibly suspend Chelsea from its competitions, and also from 'Approved Competitions', which include the Champions League. Now, it is unlikely that the PL will exercise those powers given that Chelsea are such a prominent member of their organisation, but it goes to show just how serious this could be for the Club. Also, 5 months feels like a long time, but tell that to Derby fans. Essentially this is why I think RA originally wanted to hand over "Control" to the charitable trust. He needed to remove the accusation that he had 'Control' over the club as he anticipated the sanctions, and knows that they put Chelsea onto a sticky wicket regarding the 2022/23 season. So we now know that he is, or was, a Director as defined: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60720343 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 (edited) 29 minutes ago, chinapig said: So we now know that he is, or was, a Director as defined: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60720343 Interesting. Supports my analysis (if I do say I do say myself). However the BBC don't quite get it right as they don't quite distinguish between a statutory director under the Companies Act 2006, and the wider definition of Director that the PL use in their handbook. The paragraph "Removing an owner from a board would usually trigger the sale of the shares, a process that Abramovich had instigated on 2 March after after the threat of sanctions was raised in Parliament." Is not quite correct as RA was not on "the board" per the Companies Act 2006 (although he could potentially be deemed a shadow director, but that would likley need court determination). I'd need to check the handbook to see why removing one "director" would "usually trigger the sale of the shares" as that wouldn't be the case under the Companies Act 2006. EDIT: I've checked the handbook, I honestly don't know what basis the BBC are using for this statement. If anyone else can think of a reason why the removal of a shadow director would trigger a sale of shares in a standard company then please say.* Regardless, this is the PL enforcing their handbook, EDIT (having re-read the handbook): and if Chelsea and RA accept this disqualification then it removes the threat of Chelsea being penalised further at the start of next season. *there could be items in the articles of association, but that would be surprising and unusual. Edited March 12, 2022 by ExiledAjax 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swede Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 Perhaps the sixth richest club in England's current owner will buy the club he really wanted in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 8 minutes ago, Swede said: Perhaps the sixth richest club in England's current owner will buy the club he really wanted in the first place. I think `Are you a very nice man?` is a key question in the fit & proper owners test. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loco Rojo Posted March 12, 2022 Share Posted March 12, 2022 Made me smile anyway 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Red Posted March 13, 2022 Share Posted March 13, 2022 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted March 13, 2022 Share Posted March 13, 2022 12 minutes ago, Northern Red said: Good piece on this from Barney Ronay: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/mar/11/shouldnt-someone-in-football-also-care-about-the-war-in-yemen-just-a-little 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyClapper Posted March 13, 2022 Share Posted March 13, 2022 17 minutes ago, chinapig said: Good piece on this from Barney Ronay: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/mar/11/shouldnt-someone-in-football-also-care-about-the-war-in-yemen-just-a-little Really good piece. Ronay writes intelligently on most subjects IMHO. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daored Posted March 14, 2022 Share Posted March 14, 2022 A BBC investigation has uncovered new evidence about the corrupt deals that made Roman Abramovich's fortune. The Chelsea owner made billions after buying an oil company from the Russian government in a rigged auction in 1995. Mr Abramovich paid around $250m (£190m) for Sibneft, before selling it back to the Russian government for $13bn in 2005. His lawyers say there is no basis for alleging he has amassed very substantial wealth through criminality. The Russian billionaire was sanctioned by the UK government last week because of his links to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Mr Abramovich's assets have been frozen and he has been disqualified as a director of Chelsea Football Club. The Russian billionaire has already admitted in a UK court that he made corrupt payments to help get the Sibneft deal off the ground. He was being sued in London by his former business associate Boris Berezovsky in 2012. Mr Abramovich won the case, but he described in court how the original Sibneft auction was rigged in his favour and how he gave Mr Berezovsky $10m to pay off a Kremlin official. BBC Panorama has obtained a document that is thought to have been smuggled out of Russia. The information was given to the programme by a confidential source, who says it was secretly copied from files held on Mr Abramovich by Russian law enforcement agencies. The BBC cannot verify that, but checks with other sources in Russia have backed up many of the details in the five-page document. The document says that the Russian government was cheated out of $2.7bn in the Sibneft deal - a claim supported by a 1997 Russian parliamentary investigation. The document also says that the Russian authorities wanted to charge Mr Abramovich with fraud. It says: "The Dept. of Economic Crimes investigators came to the conclusion that if Abramovich could be brought to trial he would have faced accusations of fraud… by an organised criminal group." Watch Panorama Roman Abramovich's Dirty Money is on BBC One, Monday 14 March, at 20:00 GMT and on BBCiPlayer afterwards Panorama tracked down Russia's former chief prosecutor, who investigated the deal in the 1990s. Yuri Skuratov did not know about the secret document, but he independently confirmed many of the details about the Sibneft sale. Mr Skuratov told the programme: "Basically, it was a fraudulent scheme, where those who took part in the privatisation formed one criminal group that allowed Abramovich and Berezovsky to trick the government and not pay the money that this company was really worth." The document also suggests Mr Abramovich was protected by former Russian President Boris Yeltsin. It says law enforcement files on Mr Abramovich were moved to the Kremlin and that an investigation by Mr Skuratov was stopped by the president. The document says: "Skuratov was preparing a criminal case for the confiscation of Sibneft on the basis of the investigation of its privatisation. The investigation was stopped by President Yeltsin … Skuratov was dismissed from his office." Mr Skuratov was sacked after the release of a sex tape in 1999. He says it was a stitch-up to discredit him and his investigation. He said: "This whole thing was obviously political, because in my investigations I came very close to the family of Boris Yeltsin, including via this investigation of the Sibneft privatisation." Mr Abramovich remained in the Kremlin inner circle when Vladimir Putin came to power in 2000. The document contains details of another rigged auction two years later, involving a Russian oil company called Slavneft. Mr Abramovich formed a partnership with another firm to buy Slavneft, but a rival Chinese company was planning to bid almost twice as much. Many powerful people - from the Kremlin to the Russian parliament - would have stood to lose out if the Chinese won the auction. The document says that a member of the Chinese delegation was kidnapped when they arrived in Moscow for the auction. "CNPC, Chinese company, a very strong competitor, had to withdraw from the auction after one of its representatives was kidnapped upon arrival at Moscow Airport and was released only after the company declared its withdrawal." The kidnapping story is backed up by independent sources who did not know about the document. Vladimir Milov was Russia's deputy energy minister in the run up to the Slavneft sale. He didn't comment on the kidnapping story, but he said senior political figures had already decided that Mr Abramovich's partnership would win the auction. "I said, look, the Chinese want to come in and they want to pay a much bigger price. They say it doesn't matter, shut up, none of your business. It's already decided. Slavneft goes to Abramovich, the price is agreed. The Chinese will be dragged out somehow." There is no suggestion that Mr Abramovich knew anything about the kidnapping plot, or played any part in it. His lawyers told the BBC the kidnap claim "is entirely unsubstantiated" and he has "no knowledge of such incident". Different factions had been fighting for control of Slavneft and there was widespread opposition to the Chinese bid. Whatever the reason for the Chinese withdrawal, Mr Abramovich's partnership had the only bid left on the table. And they bought Slavneft at a knockdown price. Mr Abramovich's lawyers say allegations of corruption in the Slavneft and Sibneft deals are false, and he denies he was protected by Mr Yeltsin. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daored Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 Chelsea today asking for cup game against Boro to be played behind closed doors as can’t sell tickets to their fans l. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 14 hours ago, daored said: A BBC investigation has uncovered new evidence about the corrupt deals that made Roman Abramovich's fortune. The Chelsea owner made billions after buying an oil company from the Russian government in a rigged auction in 1995. Mr Abramovich paid around $250m (£190m) for Sibneft, before selling it back to the Russian government for $13bn in 2005. His lawyers say there is no basis for alleging he has amassed very substantial wealth through criminality. The Russian billionaire was sanctioned by the UK government last week because of his links to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Mr Abramovich's assets have been frozen and he has been disqualified as a director of Chelsea Football Club. The Russian billionaire has already admitted in a UK court that he made corrupt payments to help get the Sibneft deal off the ground. He was being sued in London by his former business associate Boris Berezovsky in 2012. Mr Abramovich won the case, but he described in court how the original Sibneft auction was rigged in his favour and how he gave Mr Berezovsky $10m to pay off a Kremlin official. BBC Panorama has obtained a document that is thought to have been smuggled out of Russia. The information was given to the programme by a confidential source, who says it was secretly copied from files held on Mr Abramovich by Russian law enforcement agencies. The BBC cannot verify that, but checks with other sources in Russia have backed up many of the details in the five-page document. The document says that the Russian government was cheated out of $2.7bn in the Sibneft deal - a claim supported by a 1997 Russian parliamentary investigation. The document also says that the Russian authorities wanted to charge Mr Abramovich with fraud. It says: "The Dept. of Economic Crimes investigators came to the conclusion that if Abramovich could be brought to trial he would have faced accusations of fraud… by an organised criminal group." Watch Panorama Roman Abramovich's Dirty Money is on BBC One, Monday 14 March, at 20:00 GMT and on BBCiPlayer afterwards Panorama tracked down Russia's former chief prosecutor, who investigated the deal in the 1990s. Yuri Skuratov did not know about the secret document, but he independently confirmed many of the details about the Sibneft sale. Mr Skuratov told the programme: "Basically, it was a fraudulent scheme, where those who took part in the privatisation formed one criminal group that allowed Abramovich and Berezovsky to trick the government and not pay the money that this company was really worth." The document also suggests Mr Abramovich was protected by former Russian President Boris Yeltsin. It says law enforcement files on Mr Abramovich were moved to the Kremlin and that an investigation by Mr Skuratov was stopped by the president. The document says: "Skuratov was preparing a criminal case for the confiscation of Sibneft on the basis of the investigation of its privatisation. The investigation was stopped by President Yeltsin … Skuratov was dismissed from his office." Mr Skuratov was sacked after the release of a sex tape in 1999. He says it was a stitch-up to discredit him and his investigation. He said: "This whole thing was obviously political, because in my investigations I came very close to the family of Boris Yeltsin, including via this investigation of the Sibneft privatisation." Mr Abramovich remained in the Kremlin inner circle when Vladimir Putin came to power in 2000. The document contains details of another rigged auction two years later, involving a Russian oil company called Slavneft. Mr Abramovich formed a partnership with another firm to buy Slavneft, but a rival Chinese company was planning to bid almost twice as much. Many powerful people - from the Kremlin to the Russian parliament - would have stood to lose out if the Chinese won the auction. The document says that a member of the Chinese delegation was kidnapped when they arrived in Moscow for the auction. "CNPC, Chinese company, a very strong competitor, had to withdraw from the auction after one of its representatives was kidnapped upon arrival at Moscow Airport and was released only after the company declared its withdrawal." The kidnapping story is backed up by independent sources who did not know about the document. Vladimir Milov was Russia's deputy energy minister in the run up to the Slavneft sale. He didn't comment on the kidnapping story, but he said senior political figures had already decided that Mr Abramovich's partnership would win the auction. "I said, look, the Chinese want to come in and they want to pay a much bigger price. They say it doesn't matter, shut up, none of your business. It's already decided. Slavneft goes to Abramovich, the price is agreed. The Chinese will be dragged out somehow." There is no suggestion that Mr Abramovich knew anything about the kidnapping plot, or played any part in it. His lawyers told the BBC the kidnap claim "is entirely unsubstantiated" and he has "no knowledge of such incident". Different factions had been fighting for control of Slavneft and there was widespread opposition to the Chinese bid. Whatever the reason for the Chinese withdrawal, Mr Abramovich's partnership had the only bid left on the table. And they bought Slavneft at a knockdown price. Mr Abramovich's lawyers say allegations of corruption in the Slavneft and Sibneft deals are false, and he denies he was protected by Mr Yeltsin. A little bit more here on how Abramovich used crooked deals and criminal connections to emerge victorious from Russia's "aluminium wars", which killed an estimated 100 people. Also on how his connections to Putin allowed him to "acquire" assets from other oligarchs. https://www.europeanceo.com/profiles/oleg-deripaska-and-the-russian-aluminium-wars/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 7 minutes ago, daored said: Chelsea today asking for cup game against Boro to be played behind closed doors as can’t sell tickets to their fans l. that is hilarious. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 9 minutes ago, daored said: Chelsea today asking for cup game against Boro to be played behind closed doors as can’t sell tickets to their fans l. Citing "sporting integrity" as the reason. You couldn't make it up... 2 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numero Uno Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 18 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said: Citing "sporting integrity" as the reason. You couldn't make it up... Don’t you just wish the FA would tell them to **** off and I mean use the actual words not some 54 paragraph statement. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East Londoner Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 1 hour ago, daored said: Chelsea today asking for cup game against Boro to be played behind closed doors as can’t sell tickets to their fans l. Why can’t Boro sell the away allocation or is that too simple 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Rob Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 28 minutes ago, East Londoner said: Why can’t Boro sell the away allocation or is that too simple Think it's more a case of where does the revenue go. Chelsea could - I would imagine - donate their share, meaning Boro and the FA still get their cut. Who knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said: A little bit more here on how Abramovich used crooked deals and criminal connections to emerge victorious from Russia's "aluminium wars", which killed an estimated 100 people. Also on how his connections to Putin allowed him to "acquire" assets from other oligarchs. https://www.europeanceo.com/profiles/oleg-deripaska-and-the-russian-aluminium-wars/ Yeltsin- and the oligarchs- predated Putin. Something that gets glossed over at times (not suggesting you are). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East Londoner Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 13 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said: Think it's more a case of where does the revenue go. Chelsea could - I would imagine - donate their share, meaning Boro and the FA still get their cut. Who knows. I did see on twitter also that Boro would have to take responsibility for the away fans it sold tickets to and wouldn’t have access to who was banned etc Theres no chance of it being behind closed doors though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 2 hours ago, daored said: Chelsea today asking for cup game against Boro to be played behind closed doors as can’t sell tickets to their fans l. Why should the Boro fans miss out? Playbthe game and let Boro keep all the gate money. Chelsea are unbelievable! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Watts Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 1 hour ago, Bristol Rob said: Think it's more a case of where does the revenue go. Chelsea could - I would imagine - donate their share, meaning Boro and the FA still get their cut. Who knows. It shouldn't make any difference. Competition rules split the gate revenues 45/45/10 between the club and the FA. So whether Chelsea fans are there or if Boro sell out the entire ground just to themselves the same money would make it's way to Stamford Bridge....or whereever the FA decide it should go. The decision to not allow them to sell tickets makes it all very murky when cup competitions come into play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Watts Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 Just read that Chelsea have already sold a handful of tickets before the sanction was placed on them. Meaning the tickets were there to to buy and the fans simply....didn't! Many "big" clubs will sell out their allocation very quickly. The fact that Chelsea didn't says a lot more about there fanbase than anything else. "Play it behind closed doors because our fans can't be arsed!" Following that pattern, the Chelsea loving owner up the road could apply for all games at Milletts Memorial Stadium to be played behind closed doors! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvio Dante Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 The “behind closed doors” aspect (which I’d flagged as likely on cup games when sanctions were announced) was always going to happen. There are a couple of aspects here though… - Boro sold tickets before the sanctions were announced. Therefore they act as a “pre sanction” revenue stream for Chelsea under the split Steve identified, and are perfectly allowable under the sanctions regime. It’s the same as Chelsea being allowed to admit season ticket holders to all intents and purposes - And here’s the rub. If Chelsea are successful in their representation, it naturally follows that any pre existing tickets sold should not be honoured as away fans can’t buy tickets to provide revenue to Chelsea (thereby reducing sporting integrity). So they would be duty bound to play any game behind closed doors. Thereby refusing to admit any season ticket holders. Not very bright these cockernees…. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty Swallocks Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 8 minutes ago, Steve Watts said: Just read that Chelsea have already sold a handful of tickets before the sanction was placed on them. Meaning the tickets were there to to buy and the fans simply....didn't! Many "big" clubs will sell out their allocation very quickly. The fact that Chelsea didn't says a lot more about there fanbase than anything else. "Play it behind closed doors because our fans can't be arsed!" Following that pattern, the Chelsea loving owner up the road could apply for all games at Milletts Memorial Stadium to be played behind closed doors! Chelsea would have had staggered sales priority much like we had for the Bournemouth game, only with more levels. I’d imagine they were only at the start of priority sales when the sanctions got placed. They would have sold the game out easily. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppyDAZE Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 1 hour ago, RedM said: Why should the Boro fans miss out? Playbthe game and let Boro keep all the gate money. Chelsea are unbelievable! The neck on 'em. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChippenhamRed Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 4 hours ago, daored said: Chelsea today asking for cup game against Boro to be played behind closed doors as can’t sell tickets to their fans l. I had 0.01% sympathy for Chelsea. That’s now dropped to 0. Great response from Boro though - having absolutely none of it! https://www.mfc.co.uk/news/a-statement-from-middlesbrough-fc 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 The Chelsea Supporters’ Trust have at least urged the club to withdraw their request. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/mar/15/chelsea-want-middlesbrough-fa-cup-tie-behind-closed-doors-roman-abramovich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Batman Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 (edited) This whole "behind closed doors". When fans were allowed back in after covid, it was home fans only, (albeit lower numbers) so what's the issue? Are they saying that there are too many home fans in there to play against now? Edited March 15, 2022 by The Batman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 What a complete embarrassment! The Middlesbrough response though! Ironic in the extreme! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcfc01 Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 (edited) 30 minutes ago, chinapig said: The Chelsea Supporters’ Trust have at least urged the club to withdraw their request. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/mar/15/chelsea-want-middlesbrough-fa-cup-tie-behind-closed-doors-roman-abramovich Withdrawn - as previously mentioned above. https://www.mfc.co.uk/news/fa-statement-chelsea-remove-closed-doors-request Edited March 15, 2022 by bcfc01 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colemanballs Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 I'm confused. I know they can't sell tickets, but what is to stop them giving tickets away? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said: Yeltsin- and the oligarchs- predated Putin. Something that gets glossed over at times (not suggesting you are). The looting of state resources happened under Yeltsin. Everyone didn't get share certificates in them, as one poster here has suggested, they were just sold massively under market value to criminals. To stay an oligarch though you need to give Putin your support or you might find yourself suddenly suicided like Boris Berezhovsky. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILINFRANCE Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 54 minutes ago, chinapig said: The Chelsea Supporters’ Trust have at least urged the club to withdraw their request. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/mar/15/chelsea-want-middlesbrough-fa-cup-tie-behind-closed-doors-roman-abramovich You have probably already seen it, but David Squire's view on the situation. https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2022/mar/15/david-squires-on-the-fall-of-chelsea-roman-empire 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS2 Red Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 Oh no! How will they cope without getting a private jet? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 12 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said: You have probably already seen it, but David Squire's view on the situation. https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2022/mar/15/david-squires-on-the-fall-of-chelsea-roman-empire Yes, I love Squires' stuff. Ross Barkley fridge magnets! Shame comments aren't open to see Chelsea fans outraged and tying themselves in knots defending their hero. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRIAN WILSON Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 4 minutes ago, BS2 Red said: Oh no! How will they cope without getting a private jet? Oh No, you poor elitist pricks - Just ask FGR / Exeter how they travelled to Carlisle 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrick's Marvels Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 12 minutes ago, chinapig said: Yes, I love Squires' stuff. Ross Barkley fridge magnets! Non-magnetic, too! 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 Just now, Merrick's Marvels said: Non-magnetic, too! Yes, it's the little touches you can easily miss that make him so funny. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grifty Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 9 minutes ago, BRIAN WILSON said: Oh No, you poor elitist pricks - Just ask FGR / Exeter how they travelled to Carlisle Why does that make them elitist? They travel on planes to reduce the journey/travel time so players are fresher for the match they have to play. They're not doing it to laugh in the face of lower league clubs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChippenhamRed Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 27 minutes ago, BS2 Red said: Oh no! How will they cope without getting a private jet? Pretty sure a group of 20-odd millionaires could probably stump up for their own private jet if they wanted. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted March 15, 2022 Author Share Posted March 15, 2022 5 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said: Pretty sure a group of 20-odd millionaires could probably stump up for their own private jet if they wanted. or even Easyjet! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILINFRANCE Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 (edited) 18 minutes ago, grifty said: Why does that make them elitist? They travel on planes to reduce the journey/travel time so players are fresher for the match they have to play. They're not doing it to laugh in the face of lower league clubs. You are correct, but, if you have ever played football to any reasonable level, you will know that the body becomes more delicate the higher you go. Whereas, at my level, we would meet in the car park and drive in convoy, Premier League and the like need first class travel with all the space and comfort that comes with it. It is the same with injuries: where we would run it off or, if it was serious, receive the ‘magic sponge’ or, even, in extreme cases, smelling salts, you will have noticed how the Premier League stars (and Rotherham under Neil Warnock) crumple immediately to the floor and require several minutes of specialist treatment. Poor old Chelsea, I say. Edited March 15, 2022 by PHILINFRANCE 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 35 minutes ago, BS2 Red said: Oh no! How will they cope without getting a private jet? 4 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 Starting to like Boro & Steve Gibson 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Med/MadHatter Posted March 15, 2022 Share Posted March 15, 2022 2 hours ago, Red-Robbo said: The looting of state resources happened under Yeltsin. Everyone didn't get share certificates in them, as one poster here has suggested, they were just sold massively under market value to criminals. To stay an oligarch though you need to give Putin your support or you might find yourself suddenly suicided like Boris Berezhovsky. And many other "heart attack" victims, and people who suddenly "fall out" of windows, plus the lawyer from Portland whose helicopter blew up 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Oil Services Posted March 16, 2022 Share Posted March 16, 2022 17 hours ago, Red-Robbo said: Neil Hannon's greatest line, fer me, is the one about Mike Gatting, Gatt's insatiable gut/appetite and the Ball of the Century at Old Trafford in 1993 when Shane Warne bowled Gatt's "for a buggering duck", in his song "Jiggery Pokery:" "If it had been a cheese roll it would never have got passed me" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 16, 2022 Share Posted March 16, 2022 22 hours ago, Red-Robbo said: The looting of state resources happened under Yeltsin. Everyone didn't get share certificates in them, as one poster here has suggested, they were just sold massively under market value to criminals. To stay an oligarch though you need to give Putin your support or you might find yourself suddenly suicided like Boris Berezhovsky. Agreed- massively under market value sale was what happened, loans for shares and all that. Yes, agreed for the most part...think he initially did a solid job reigning them in given how they not far off ran the Russian State- but yes there was a report from the time in 2000, when he said that the way they acquired their fortune would not be investigated, IF they stayed out of politics especially if it opposed him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombsy Posted March 16, 2022 Share Posted March 16, 2022 Trump looking to buy Chelsea? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slippin cider Posted March 16, 2022 Share Posted March 16, 2022 Wouldn’t give tuppence for the club … Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted March 16, 2022 Author Share Posted March 16, 2022 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Coombsy said: Trump looking to buy Chelsea? his best buddy… Edited March 16, 2022 by exAtyeoMax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 16, 2022 Share Posted March 16, 2022 4 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said: his best buddy… Lives in Bedminster. Bedminster, New Jersey. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted March 16, 2022 Author Share Posted March 16, 2022 3 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said: Lives in Bedminster. Bedminster, New Jersey. blimey…it's a sign Hopefully Steve isn't still looking for investment 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS2 Red Posted March 16, 2022 Share Posted March 16, 2022 Woody Johnson? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 16, 2022 Share Posted March 16, 2022 57 minutes ago, BS2 Red said: Woody Johnson? Yep. In partnership with Dick Cox and Nobby Plonker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS2 Red Posted March 16, 2022 Share Posted March 16, 2022 1 minute ago, Red-Robbo said: Yep. In partnership with Dick Cox and Nobby Plonker. They are doomed to fail as Mike Hunt is in. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.