The Most Hated Club in the Prem

No, you're right. They only did it once in a row each.

So that's what £300m buys you these days, eh? Not one, but two semi-final appearances - and in a row, too!

 

Yes, and?

 

And a better squad than Liverpool, hooray!
Dont worry Im sure Gerrard can inspire your team to finally win the league title.

 

Yeah, me too. And we've still got a soul. It's a win-win, right across the board.

 

Is that Dubai International knocking? Better hope so, only way Gerrards ever winnging the league, well that or doing what he almost and should have done the previous summer....

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are certain elements of Chelsea that i can't stand. Notably Mourinho's hypocrisy e.g callin Andy Johnson a diver when his Porto side cheated it's way to the UEFA Cup and he's got the likes of Drogba, Robben and Cole in his team. His novelty has worn off now and he's becoming more absurd every week.

Prior to the late 90's Chelsea had done ******** all but then a few cups come along followed by the Russian who buys them the title. It's doesn't sit well with me. It seems so fake. The likes of Manchester United, Liverpool and Arsenal all have illustrious histories but Chelsea don't - or at least didn't until 1997ish onwards. Now they are arguably THE force in the U.K and maybe Europe. I'm also seeing Chelsea shirts everywhere on kids and even men - who should know better really.

 

You're saying that only teams who've won things in the past should be allowed to win things in the future? Or that teams shouldn't be allowed to increase their fanbase?

 

It's against the rules to spend money if you dont have a big history right?

Oh it isnt, I gues some people just dont like upsetting the usual order at the top.

 

Gosh, a booming echo from inside a house of cards. That's not something you see all that often.

As to spending money, it's not the point. Any club would spend additional resources if they came by them. We'll do it when the Dubai deal goes through. Some clubs would just do it with a bit more, shall we say, panache. Genuine elan, if you will. Abramovich's Chelsea are like Billy Bunter in the world's biggest, gaudiest sweet shop, right in the midst of a total sugar meltdown. "We're going to be the biggest club in the UK in five years, we're going to be the biggest in the world by 2014! Why else would they have hired me, a living God!" (Peter Kenyon, except the last bit, which I may have made up).

And it's not even that Chelsea bought any titles - not really. They didn't; but they bought the ingredients and the recipe. In Harrods, on credit. I could buy the ingredients and recipe for Tartare of sea scallops with creme fraiche and caviar, served in chilled basil consomme and I could even make a pretty decent fist of creating it ... but I still wouldn't be Gordon Ramsay. That fact alone seems to elude Chelsea and every single last one of their fans and "fans". So you end up having silly arguments about whether or not Chelsea's previously barren trophy cabinet has or has not been given added lustre by the £300m that have been spent on it since Abramovich came along.

The reason the "ABC brigade" now vastly outnumbers the ABU brigade in all parts of the UK except Liverpool and pockets of Manchester, is precisely because recognition of this simple truth is beyond most of the people now careering through the world on the Chelsea bandwagon. People who point out that without Abramovich Chelsea would - at best! - be crudding about in the same Villa/Spurs territory they inhabited before his arrival and, more probably, in actual fact down in the Championship with Leeds because their financial world imploded after one too many Winston Bogardes are "jealous". Which is absurd. Plenty of such people are rightly miffed at the crass and presumptious behaviour of the nouveau-riche, but it's hardly unexpected or unusual from the King's Road club. Nor is it much of an aspirational trigger to fans of other clubs. No one really wants to be Chelsea. Notice how few, if any, Spurs fans really spend much time bemoaning Abramovich' apparently late decision to fly on beyond White Hard Lane and park his helicopter up west instead?

As Ben Elton once said about Paul Daniels: "I wish I had your money, baldy, but at least my wife can bear to touch me."

That's not jealousy. That's clarity.

 

Do you really think most fans think that way? Or do you think most fans read the tabloid headlines and the out-of-context quotes and just kinda play at hating Chelsea?



There are only two clubs in the world of football that I could say I hate. They are Leeds United and Liverpool.


Liverpool just ******** me off in a big big way. No taste or style.

 

jealously does play a part, no doubt, but everyone hates a social climber, particularly one that likes to tell people how better than them they are now.

Fulham, for example, lost every single bit of goodwill the previously well-liked club had during their Al fayed backed rise from the 4th tier, purely due to their "new" fans' "we'll never play you again" attitude, wherever they played.

They'd become a sporting embodiment of Harry Enfield's Loadsamoney character, and like (new) Chelsea fans, took delight in their "shut your mouth and look at my wad" view of life.

 

Yeah I can appreciate that viewpoint, but a lot of the time, the general perception is inaccurate at best thanks to the reasons I listed above.

 

Depends what you mean by fans. My definition precludes such an attitude to anything contained in a tabloid.

Hmmm. Well we're clearly doing something right if a Chelsea fan thinks we have no taste or style. That's a bit like being told you don't seem very well versed in classical literature ... by Victoria Beckham.

 

Well no, it's akin to pinching your assistant youth manager and promoting him to God.

 

FHHFFIVGHGHGHEEE TGHIIIIIYYYYMEEEZZ
(Five times)


Liverpool are in serious danger of contracting MASSIVE Club Disorder (MCD) from the likes of City, Newcastle and Tottenham.

Doctors orders are that you'd better win something that isn't a) shit, b) lucky or c) inspired by one (ONE) player or of course d) all of the above.

 

Oh I see, dragging me into this little hissy fit are you? Talking out of your arse btw. I'd rather be relegated than be you.

 

Well I overstated the point. I don't think..... no, no I haven't ever had a hissy fit on these boards because I'm not 7.

Director of Football? What the ******** is that? Chelsea are moving towards recruiting younger and younger players for two reasons: they are less susceptible to the Chelsea Tax and to get in line with FIFA's future regulations on home grown players, so Frank Arnesen's position within the club is highly important.

Obviously, a Tottenham fan (Taarabt) couldn't have anything bad to say about recruiting youngsters who aren't ready for the first team.

 

Oh come on. Look at it the other way round. Imagine if we had shit loads of newly acquired cash and just popped round to Stamford Bridge to browse through your entire club set up?

We had just started to sort ourselves out after an especially mediocre period and Arsensen was part of that. I couldn't give a shit what he does at Chelsea, the fact was he was ours. So don't make out that we're somehow overreacting or misguided when we call you total classless c-nts. It's well deserved.

Good luck to Arsensen though, having discovered Shevchenko and Ballack he appears to be on a real f-cking roll.

 

His role isn't to discover players like Sheva and Ballack.

He's done a good job actually, seeing as the youth set up was completely neglected in the past we have some good youngsters on the way through.

Thanks for him!

 

Oh I'd be very angry. Very angry indeed. However, you likened his roll change to a heavy demotion which is just bollocks really.

 

No it's bull$hit Its easy for teams to say I dont want to be like that, when they cant be.

When a similar situation happens, then you can really see how a club's supporters would respond.

 

Bless you. I'm assuming that was a sneeze, because the alternatives are too unpleasant to contemplate.

The obverse of which, Status Avaritia Disorder (SAD), is suffered by clubs who, for all their ghastly bling, still find themselves embarrasingly desperate to one day be as big as Manchester City, Newcastle United or Tottenham. There's a particularly virulent strain on the loose in west London at the moment.

Arf ... wake me when your club secretary upsizes his annual silver polish order from the current one small tube of Asda's Own Tin Buff. Or alternatively when you've actually got a player who can carry you from bought-in minimum expectations to self-generated glory on the scale familiar to the big clubs in world football.

A cute hypothetical, given the unprecedented nature of what's unfolding down at Chelsea. But never mind that, thanks for at least agreeing with the essentials of my characterisation.

 

Oh dear.

 

Tell me a team that's won the league without outspending most of their opponents. Don't say Arsenal, very few teams can compete with them financially.

For all your criticism of Chelsea, you might realise that if not for them, United would have won the league last season and would be completely untouchable this season. Is that what you'd prefer? Liverpool fans seem very sensitive of the number of titles they've won over United.

Let's face it, if Chelsea were finishing in mid-table year after year, no-one would be criticising them. Similarly people wouldn't criticise Bolton's style of football if we were in constant relegation battles, and weren't continually duffing up those media-darlings Spurs, Arsenal and West Ham.

If you're being criticised it generally means you're doing something right.