Chelsea lose a game shocker oh well, you can't win every game. We played badly, we lost, we deserved to lose, Bolton deserved to win. ho-hum. Spurs? 5th best team in London.
A reality check Juve had it last week, You have experienced it this week. Nothing gained or loss yet.
Re: Chelsea lose a game shocker forgive me monkee, i've been out to a party all day and am severly *#*#*#*#*#ed up with booze. we didn't play badly at all, we just didn't take the chances we made and didn't make enough chances to take...if that makes any sence at all at this stage.......boy, what a party. Anyway, rambler me man. Not that it's in any way relevant but i feel like saying it, so here you go. *#*#*#*# you and your piss ant club that lives on past glories of over half a century ago. you're nothing in this day and age, relegation is the only thing your lot will be fighting this year, much like most years. you've won nothing of note in two decades and you have the balls to come on here and try to mix it up with us Cop on to yourself fella. you would love to have somebody like abramovich buy your pathtic club and take tehm out of the doldrums of despair they have entered. Your jealousy sees no end. first team to do the double...isn't that what your pathetic support like to spout. poor bastards can't even get that right. yes, ive been on the booze, but, in the morning i'll be okay, you'll still be shyte mate... PPS...don't bother to reply as i'll probably delete it. in short...*#*#*#*# off.
Ouch...me aching head.... The morning after.... Flipin head is pounding, snow is falling, supposed to get a foot here today, nice....really....flipin nice...... Message to self. Don't post when drunk at night.
Re: Ouch...me aching head.... Yeah I heard those alcopops are really nasty on the old hangover Have you got your kids to start watching Chelsea yet? Now is as good a time as any, surely in the next game there will be a backlash from The Tinkerman's boys, should be interesting to watch.
Re: Re: Ouch...me aching head.... Nah, my lads ( 9 and 11) are typical young Americans right now. It's all PS2, x-box, baseball and basketball etc etc etc. I even had the "no dad, it's soccer not football" argument with the eldest one a short while ago Two local derbies coming up next, should be interesting. The tactic of choice against us lately has been to pack the back and hope for something on the counter.The bad thing from our point of view is that this is actually working and we can expect to see much much more of it in games to come. Ah, well. Villa next in the cup. A win will steady the ship.
Re: Re: Chelsea lose a game shocker Last week a channel 5 programme took a somewhat irreverent and comical look at the Abramovich takeover at Chelsea. The part that really made me laugh was where they were talking about how he had looked at other clubs first. Having turned down ManU as too expensive he was apparently just about to sign on the doted line at Spurs. He was flying back to Heathrow in his helecopter when he noticed a rather attractive ground below. He asked who owns that ground and the rest is history! I wonder what rambler would have thought of that?
Re: Re: Re: Chelsea lose a game shocker Not a lot really. Sounds like a load of crap to be honest. One of those urban myths. It's not a big deal to me whether we have a sugar daddy or not so it doesnt bother me either way. It wouldnt fill me with any great pride to see Tottenham buy their way to greatness in such an extravagant way. It would take away the real soul of the football club for me. Make it in to some kind of savage-like whore if you know what I mean. I suppose for you lot though it's wicked because it is the only way you were ever going to get big.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Chelsea lose a game shocker Well to be honest I don't really see your point, all premier clubs buy players if they can afford too, and some clubs are more wealthy then others. Is it just a matter of the number of players that concerns you? I don't think we are doing anything that any other Premier club would do given the opportunity. I don't believe anyone who says they would rather play in the 4th division with the products of their youth policy then buy good quality players from outside the club. Your argument sounds a bit puritanical to me, you can't get anything unless you have suffered. Well I have been a chelsea fan since the 60's and boy have I suffered.
Oh, i think he would wet his knickers Dr Int. if they ever got such a person to return them to the so called "glory days".In fact they would all be hailing him as returning spurs to when they had a bit of success and actually were for a short time considered a big club. I'm quite sure they would relish the idea of not having to buy discarded players anymore. Btw...how is Poyet doing these days eh? Human nature comes to the surface when faced with something you really want and see your neighbour has, i don't hold it against Rambler, he's just being openly jealous. The first thing you say is "well, i didn't want it anyway" Childish, but natural and certainly true in his case.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Chelsea lose a game shocker I can't begrudge a fan like yourself who has obviously paid his dues and stuck with his team through thick and thin, so good luck to you. As regards to your point, of course top clubs will have to, and have always imported talent - but to a varying degree. The great Manchester United side of the 90's was a perfect mixture of home grown and talent and expensive buys. You have to remember that clubs like Manchester United, Liverpool and Arsenal have earnt their success and built their clubs from scratch, so the money they spend on players is money the clubs have generated themselves. The difference with Chelsea is your current money has not been earnt. It is nothing more than a gift. Also, none of the money will help English football. None of it will filter down the leagues helping our tiered structure that is so vital. Instead it will be used on players in foriegn leagues, further limiting the chance for home bred English players to break through. The national team will suffer because of this. It will also inflate the cost of signing players and paying their wages, further distancing the footballer from the average fan and causing more problems that has plagued English football in recent months. It is a farcical situation, and sadly one that other clubs may have to employ to keep up. It could actually cause the death of football as we know it. Already this season has been accused of being the most boring premiership ever. I just hope Chelsea fail and English football will return to some normality.
Think what you will if that is what pleases you. I can assure you it has nothing to do with jealousy. Read my previous post to see what is bothering me.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Chelsea lose a game shocker You appear to be arguing for a continuance of the status quo which, in case you haven't noticed, doesn't exactly leave Spurs battling for the top position. Presumably you were also decidely against Sugar investing money in your team, were you? Chelsea, Leeds, Fulham, and many others have had money invested in them by 'sugar-daddys' over the years. So what? It was said some time ago that the only league club that actually made money was ManU and even then the amounts were miniscule in comparison to the investment involved. Football in Britain, indeed, in the whole of Europe, has been unprofitable for quite a few years now an that's a shambe - But to place the blame at the door of one club is idiotic. Also, I seem to remember that most of the money that has been spent HAS been spent in English clubs - not abroad - so what the hell are you on about.
You are a scholar and a gentleman, sir... I've only seen the end of the 2nd half, (see the rest tonight, hopefully), so can't really comment on the game but it appears we rather lost our way in the 2nd half. As you say, the JT OG was a bit lucky - these things happen. We've only got ourselves to blame for not putting more away in the 1st half.
I read that post and it's total rubbish. The successful "Liverpool" side you are banging on about for starters was one i saw many times during the late 70s and 80s.Players came up through the youth system did they?You need to check that out. You sir, are a fool.They are the first side in English football to filed a team with a non English player as they bought 'em...Fa Cup final, late 80's (can't remember which one)...so, just that point alone tells me you know nothing about the history of the game. You have this romantic notion that every team had an academy that supplied them their players. The facts of the matter are that only the exceptional class of '92 from Manchester have that distinction in this day and age.Even that has been a thing of the past as they splurged record setting prices in England... Record transfer for a keeper Record transfer for a defender Record transfer for a midfielder Record transfer for a striker ...i mean, just what exactly are you on about?Those 4 players ther alone are not much shy of the whole bunch brought in by Ranieri, although not all at once, but, since it's amount of money spent you are banging on about that renders that point null. You don't have a clue, seriously lad. Another point that tells me you know absolutely nothing about the history of the game. Arsenal built their success from scratch? Check that out as well and you'll see their success isn't built on anything domestic....unless you're talking about the great Arsenal sides of the 1930's. They have taken the mantel of "foreign players only" in latter seasons. Again i'm amazed that you fail to see this...then again, wait, i'm not really....human nature with the green monster will blind anybody. Now, what else are you banging on about...oh, yes, the pathetic argument that Abramovichs money has gone overseas??? I have to take another look at your post just to see if you really did type something as stupid as that......um, yes you did...well, no surprise there really... Anyways, it has been well documented and published in several newspapers, (you can read right?) that the trickle down effect of the multimillions Abramovich has brought to London has gone directly into the English game of football and in the economy itself, albeit in a more general way there as he paid off the debts of the club. Just as a glaring example that surely even somebody as close minded as you must have stumbled upon is the open admission by the West Ham board that the money from Abramovic for Joe Cole and Glen Johnson staved of administration?He paid cash up front....a scholar of the game such as yourself missed this?????? Now...is there anything else you wish to say here......
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Chelsea lose a game shocker I am sure the money Southampton and Blackburn recieved will be used exclusively for purchase and develpoment of foreign players as well.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Chelsea lose a game shocker 1. Even most pundits agree that Roman's money is staying in the Permiership. Aside from Mutu, Crespo and Makelele, the buys have all been domestic. Although saving West Ham probably isn't important, since it "dirties" their survival, right? 2. Arsenal academy built? I'm sorry, is that the same team that currently numbers two England players in their first choice 11? (Well, when they're not suspended.) They've got Cole, we've got Terry. How's that domestic?? Unless Inter, Ajax and Milan are now considered Arsenal academies? 3. The rotten financial situtation of the Permiership. Well, you know who you've got to thank for that? Your boy Sugar. Before the Premiership was inaugurated, it was he that led the charge to beak away from the old Division 1 because he felt his "big" club wasn't getting enough back, but had to share it with the little clubs. It certainly wasn't ManUtd. leading that call - they hadn't won a title in ages. So there you are, hoisted on the petard of your own greed. So when Roman shows up to buy Chelsea, he's just doing what Sugar intended - making sure the money and the trophies stay with the big teams. Too bad you're not one of those anymore. 4. The national team will suffer. How? At the most recent friendly, England fielded a team with 5(!) Blues on the pitch at once. Considering how successful other national teams have been at assembling a core at both national and club level, I fail to see what your problem is.
I think Chelsea are great for the future of English football. Cole, Lampard, Johnson and Terry are all tremendous prospects. The've done more for English football in recent years than say Arsenal, who are more concerned with developing French talent, or Man Utd who seem to prefer buying overrated £15 million portugese one trick ponies these days.
This is something I think Chelski have done really well, or Ranieri more like, he's kept an English core of players. This is what got ManYoo so much success under Ferguson in the 90's and still in this decade. Not just the top players like Scholes, Ferdinand and Beckham, but also others like Butt, Gary/Phil Neville etc.. A*senal on the other hand have underachieved because although they've got a French core, which has helped, when you look at the talent on the pitch they should have won more titles and certainly done a lot more in Europe than they have done. Liverpool are similar, but worse because Houllier only picks up the French league players that Wenger doesn't want.
Clanblue, lets keep the childish insults to a minimum eh as it only shows you in a negative light The Liverpool team of that era bares not resemblence to the Chelsea of today. They did not have an open cheque book. They had to buy wisley. Abramovich can throw and most likely will throw £100+million at Chelsea during every off season. Please dont compare your club to arguably the greatest club side Britain has seen. So what if Man Utd broke transfer records at one point. believe it or not Spurs have broken the record transfer at various times in its history (Greaves, Peters, Gazza to name a few). WHat we are talking about is a club that can have funds of £100 million when it feels like it. This is something totally new. No one with even a fraction of RA money has been willing to spend this amoun, not even Blackburns Jack Walker (who at least was a life long fan of the club) This devalues the league, and believe you me, if this situation were occuring at Spurs I would actually feel quite embarassed by it. Fancy your chances ? try me, anything you wanna know I am here to help ..... It was in referance to George Grahams team that had plenty of success (although they would bore the pants off you whilst achieving it). Most of that team came up through the ranks. Anyway, it's not that I said buying players is wrong if you had actually understood my previous posts. Chelsea have brought in some English players . I wonder how many more will be though. It seems to me every player you are linked with plays in Italy or Spain - failing that you want to give £50 million to Arsenal for Henry. How do you expect to get above Arsneal by giving them that sort of dosh ? If Arsenal had two brain cells to rub together they would bite your hand of for that money. Wenger says selling Henry would destroy Arsenal. So I wonder would he say that a career ending injury to Henry would destroy Arsenal too ? And he wouldnt have the "consolation" of 50 million either. What a pratt Wenger is. I am getting off topic here Hmm yeah but unlike you I am a Gentlemen. I hope you think about what I have said this time a little bit more constructively thus enabling you to give a more reasoned response. I am not attacking your club, I am more worried about the consequences it will produce. I wish you were able to take off your blue coloured spectacles and see the broader picture for a change.
If you aren't attacking the club, you sure picked a very inappropriate time and thread to come to the Chelsea board and start sharing your ideas with us. Seriously, what does anything you say have to do with Chelsea v. Bolton?
and whom are you to talk?? hail S*urs.. champions of the bottom-table!!!! youve overachieved!! congrats!!! and my apologies to you chelsea supporters for reading this response to that prat sendorange~
Rambler, Please try and understand because this isn't really rocket science, you know. 1. English football being increasingly linked with high finance didn't start with Chelsea and RA. As has been mentioned before your boy Sugar had more than a passing influence in the issue. 2. We have spent a lot of money recently but, when viewed over the past few years, our spending hasn't been any more than quite a few other clubs - it's just that ours has been over a very short period. Both Chelsea and Spurs have one thing in common. Not being 'Big' clubs any more mean they're not considered by young lads who are considering where they want to play. David Beckham's from Leytonstone, isn't he? North London... And yet where did he dream of playing as a young lad. You mention Liverpool... and yet a lot of their success was based on young Scottish lads coming down to where there were already Scottish players playing. How fair is that? The truth is that the world IS unfair... and with things a bloody sight more important than football. Your righteous indignation has better targets than Chelsea football club.
Who cares what Spurs as a club have done in relation to my post as an individual? I'm a football fan who knows about the game and is making points relating to a discussion at hand. If you want to act like an 8 year old kid tossing garbage around instead of adding anything intelligent, then I suggest you keep it to yourself. I think that's something that can apply to quite a number of trolls who have been posting over the past few days.....on all sides.....
What point are you making? That Arsenal has underachieved because the core of their players are French? If Arsenal has under achieved, I'd imagine that 17 other preminership teams would take their results, including Spurs...