What's new

Let's All Laugh At... Let's all laugh at Chelsea thread

Trix

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2004
20,146
337,059
I'm always happy when reports like these came out against Citeh, chelscum etc. But the very next second I know they will still be scott-free from all penalisations. The PL wouldn't dare to lay a finger on these massive clubs that can bring large followings and viewership to the league. They are not Portsmouth, Coventry or Charlton who we have seen were swiftly dealt with. It's really laughable FA do things so differently to PL and EFL.
When you say the PL won't dare lay a finger on them, who exactly do you mean? If they are found to be in breach of the rules the members are not going to give two fucks who the clubs are. In fact I'd say it's more likely they'd push for sanctions considering who they are and how they came to be who they are now.
 

Col_M

Pointing out the Obvious
Feb 28, 2012
22,883
46,140
I actually disagree.

Its like when a club goes into administration, gets a point deduction and even gets relegated.

Its the fans who suffer long term.

The owners move on and have a great life.

And finally, EVERY SINGLE Chelsea fan or employee knew, to some degree, something was going on.

At the very least they knew they were financially cheating
If you use that argument, then you have to acknowledge that the FA/EPL knew too and didn't do anything about it. The poor fans dont really have a choice other than to withdraw their support at the period of the club being successful. Not really their fault at all. It's the Owner. Fine them WHEN it happens not after they've pushed up the value, made a huge profit and sold it to someone gullible.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,632
It mentions in that article that UEFA have already fined Chelsea so further punishment from them isn't out of the question.

I'd like to see them stripped of the trophies they won during that period. I can't see the new owners being punished with a points deduction.
 

glacierSpurs

Well-Known Member
Sep 28, 2013
16,163
25,474
When you say the PL won't dare lay a finger on them, who exactly do you mean? If they are found to be in breach of the rules the members are not going to give two fucks who the clubs are. In fact I'd say it's more likely they'd push for sanctions considering who they are and how they came to be who they are now.
I meant these 'big plastic clubs' have such power and money that I feel PL doesn't seem to be able to afford them of any wrongdoings and tarnish the reputation of the league so will let things be forgotten and swept under the carpet.

But I gladly absolutely hope you are right in this. Just that the time since Citeh has found to be in breach of over 100 regulations and nothing has been done gave me no hope whatsoever that they will be punished soon, if at all.
 

g_harry

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2005
2,950
4,652
Let's remember we finished second to them during one of these seasons.

Them and man city have destroyed the fairness of the PL over the last two decades.

Shame Chelsea werent properly investigated while Abrahmovich owned the club. I suspect because journalists were too scared to and probably within reason.
This is exactly it, it's ok to investigate/release this info now Abrahmovich is gone. Joke.
 

Pochemon94

Well-Known Member
Aug 6, 2019
1,638
4,415
I can attest to this.
We recently had this jacket donated, Allsaints and with all the labels still on...$275! View attachment 134330

And we recently had a cardigan, literally, a simple ladies cardy that had all the tags and was priced at £595.00 FFS.
Last week, we sold a £600 pair of Valentino trainers for £150, again brand new and to keep it football related, two days ago I sold a brand new Burnley training top (long sleeved).
It never ceases to amaze me at how many brand new items we get donated.

Charity shops are a gold mine, if you can be bothered to root about a bit.
I work in clothing manufacturing in Los Angeles and work closely with a lot of high end clothing stores out here.

A lot of times if they have items that can't sell, and I mean like super discount 10% of its value type sell, they will bag em all up and drop them off to a donation center to get money back on their taxes at the full MSRP. We do the same with our blanks, if they don't pass QC and we can't sell them as "b" grades, we just end up donating them to homeless shelters and youth facilities.
 

bomberH

Well-Known Member
Jun 4, 2005
28,480
168,438
The new Chelsea board offered up all info when they realised shit had been going on. I understand that it would be unfair in that sense to punish them harshly (think Sugar/Scholar). However….. a suitable punishment would be not to fine them because of their apparent honesty but strip them of all trophies won since they’ve been dodgy. That way the current board aren’t affected/punished but the club are punished for past footballing crimes. That should happen.

If that happens, I’m 1 million percent organising a parade the following day for our league title. And I’ll be singing ‘Championes’ every single game for the rest of my life. Couldn’t care less re all the comments coming our way, I’ll just put my hand in their face and sing Championes.
 

Col_M

Pointing out the Obvious
Feb 28, 2012
22,883
46,140
The new Chelsea board offered up all info when they realised shit had been going on. I understand that it would be unfair in that sense to punish them harshly (think Sugar/Scholar). However….. a suitable punishment would be not to fine them because of their apparent honesty but strip them of all trophies won since they’ve been dodgy. That way the current board aren’t affected/punished but the club are punished for past footballing crimes. That should happen.

If that happens, I’m 1 million percent organising a parade the following day for our league title. And I’ll be singing ‘Championes’ every single game for the rest of my life. Couldn’t care less re all the comments coming our way, I’ll just put my hand in their face and sing Championes.

Two problems with this.

1) You’d have the other clubs that were impacted want to sue. That would be relatively easy if Chelsea have already highlighted the misdemeanours.
2) clubs would make dodgy deals with new buyers to get out of punishment. One billionaire friend will sell to another billionaire friend and hey life goes one with no comebacks.
 

Misfit

President of The Niles Crane Fanclub
May 7, 2006
21,472
35,853
Banhammering the new ownership for the old management would be a little unfair - especially as they came clean. But some sanctions needed (financial/transfer ban/Europe ban etc) and the club itself loses any and all "honours" won in the offending periods.
 
Last edited:

arnoldlayne

Well-Known Member
Aug 20, 2007
1,114
1,184
Matt Syed tried to his best.

Unfortunately a lot of those tabloid journos were more interested in the perks than the truth.
I think I read that RA often put super injunctions in threatening journalists and papers so financially they could not do anything at all
 

spurs9

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
12,018
34,901
I get what you're saying and you do make a good point but how can the club be allowed to get away with cheating for that length of time. Even if it was the owner's fault, the entire club and fanbase have benefited.

At the very least, if they don't deduct points etc they should strip Chelsea of every trophy won in that period.
I'm pretty sure one of the reasons our 12 point deduction and FA Cup ban were overturned was because the "financial irregularities" happened under previous ownership, so I doubt there would be anything other than a fine unfortunately.
 

spurs9

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
12,018
34,901
Initially it was a large fine and points deduction. Sugar used the argument that he was a new owner and shouldn't be held responsible which offered mitigation. The points deduction remained but was NOT shown on league tables (it was argued that it would psychologically impact the team's performance) but the fine increased. I can't remember if the points were reinstated and replaced with a further increase in the fine.
We were thrown out of the FA Cup too. You are talking about the 1st appeal when the points were halved (to 6) but the fine increased and the FA Cup ban was upheld, but Sugar took it to a arbitration tribunal, who found that the FA had been heavy handed and dismissed the point deduction and reinstated us to the FA Cup, we did get a fine though.
 

Trix

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2004
20,146
337,059
I'm pretty sure one of the reasons our 12 point deduction and FA Cup ban were overturned was because the "financial irregularities" happened under previous ownership, so I doubt there would be anything other than a fine unfortunately.
People keep pointing this as a precedent but this was nothing to do with FFP as it wasn't around then. There are far more cases around Europe and in this country too where breaking FFP rules have far harsher penalties. Also needs to be said it is not the EPL that hand out the punishments for any rule breaking, all they do is investigate and find the teams guilty of the charges or not.. It is a separate independent committee who set the punishment's.
 

Led's Zeppelin

Can't Re Member
May 28, 2013
7,449
20,554
Banhammering the new ownership for the old management would be a little unfair - especially as they came clean. But some sanctions needed (financial/transfer ban/Europe ban etc) and the club itself loses any and all "honours" won in the offending periods.
Agreed.

But by the same token, the new owners paid for a reputation unfairly won.

Any losses the new owners incur as a result of the same legal identity receiving g an appropriate punishment should really be a matter between them and Abramovic, not for the football authorities to adjudicate on and compensate them for.

After all, they acquired all the benefits of the trophies unfairly won, and the football status acquired as a result, , so they should have to deal with all the consequences of the cheating that built all of that too.
 
Top