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

[Trix]

On this one topic, I feel a modicum of respect has to go to the new owners.

When they took charge they had the books examined, found problems, immediately referred themselves to the relevant body. Todd and Co have done this bit by the books, not immediately lawyered up and tried to fight it.

I'd hope they take that into consideration when compared to City and whatever punishment they receive.

If any.

Get out of here..... They then went and spent £1bil whilst trying to circumvent every FFP rule in the book. The clubs historical financial irregularities are one thing they are not responsible for, but they deserve no respect whatsoever for how they've played the transfer market and their contempt for FFP regulations.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

Pretty sure that they're only going to get battered for everything that they've done subsequently

Have they breached anything under the new ownership?

I know they have changed the rules about contract lengths - but that is a recent change, and should not impact the deals already done.

I suspect they will get some sales done in June, and be in compliance with PL rules. Poch will probably be sacked post-July 1 - so that it impacts next fiscal year.

 

[rossdapep]

I think it's just down to it being so much more of a complicated sport than baseball, with so much required of a player, and then needing to be at the absolute top of their ability in multiple attributes at the same time to really be a great success.

It's not as simple as can hit good, throw good, catch good. You can be the best striker of a ball in the world and be useless as a footballer. The fastest, and useless. The strongest and useless. Best passes and useless.

It really does seem like they're actually stupid having done what they've done. This isn't a sport of role players. It's great.

There is also the fact that the team needs to have cohesion. Players can step on each others toes in football if they don't understand their roles etc, players need to be able to connect (passing, movement).

Multiple factors make a good team.

Baseball, and forgive me as I am not an expert at all, seems more like the team cohesion comes from communication and seems a lot more simpler (knowing which base to throw to, catcher knowing the pitcher, etc) whereas football you have 3 or more player interactions.

Not too mention the opposition are not static.

 

[newbie]

Get out of here..... They then went and spent £1bil whilst trying to circumvent every FFP rule in the book. The clubs historical financial irregularities are one thing they are not responsible for, but they deserve no respect whatsoever for how they've played the transfer market and their contempt for FFP regulations.

What about all the footballers, managers and agents who have cheated the system.

Surely some of them should be banned as well

 

[newbie]

Have they breached anything under the new ownership?

I know they have changed the rules about contract lengths - but that is a recent change, and should not impact the deals already done.

I suspect they will get some sales done in June, and be in compliance with PL rules. Poch will probably be sacked post-July 1 - so that it impacts next fiscal year.

chelsea broke the rules why is it relevant that the owners have changed?

What about the lost revenue for other clubs

Inflated transfer fees

We may have won a league World Cup

it could have been the difference between managers, go sacked or hide relegation or winning?

 

[razor1981]

Get out of here..... They then went and spent £1bil whilst trying to circumvent every FFP rule in the book. The clubs historical financial irregularities are one thing they are not responsible for, but they deserve no respect whatsoever for how they've played the transfer market and their contempt for FFP regulations.

I assume they are legally liable for that though. When you buy a business, you take on their liabilities as well as their assets.

If Boehly feels he was misled when buying the club, and subsequently suffers negative consequences as a result of previous owners' actions, I would've thought that's a matter for Todd's legal team to take up with Abramovich. The PL shouldn't absolve Chelsea of any previous breaches just because the ownership has changed hands.

 

[Rocksuperstar]

Get out of here..... They then went and spent £1bil whilst trying to circumvent every FFP rule in the book. The clubs historical financial irregularities are one thing they are not responsible for, but they deserve no respect whatsoever for how they've played the transfer market and their contempt for FFP regulations.

Abramovich did - there's nothing the new owners could've done to prevent it and wouldn't have known about it until they had their hands on the books.

I get it, they cheated, "Chelsea" should be punished, but the new owners I can't really fault for rule breaks on that side of things. Points deduction, retrospective adjustments to their finishing position and other sanctions maybe, but punishing the new owners for uncovering discrepancies from the previous owners and highlighting them would be counter-productive, if they want teams to be honest.

 

[newbie]

Agreed, but they have in effect confessed the moment they discovered it which, imo, deserves some consideration when dishing out punishment.

If Chelsea had not cheated, it could’ve affected who got Champions League over multiple season Spurs and Arsenal could’ve financially been a far better place Villa again a better place could’ve affected who won the league and who got relegated.

maybe we would have won a title if city and Chelsea had not cheated

 

[Trix]

What about all the footballers, managers and agents who have cheated the system.

Surely some of them should be banned as well

If they can be proved to have broken the rules, absolutely. I doubt they do it so out in the open as Chelsea have though.

 

[Tucker]

they broke the rules why is it relevant that the owners have changed?

Because there’s legal precedent set by Spurs and Alan Sugar back in the 90s.

Tottenham On This Day: Alan Sugar’s Finest Hour At Spurs

<p class="MsoNormal">Few Tottenham supporters would say that there were any high-points in Alan Sugar's time as Chairman at Tottenham....

hotspurhq.com

 

[newbie]

Because there’s legal precedent set by Spurs and Alan Sugar back in the 90s.

Tottenham On This Day: Alan Sugar’s Finest Hour At Spurs

<p class="MsoNormal">Few Tottenham supporters would say that there were any high-points in Alan Sugar's time as Chairman at Tottenham....

hotspurhq.com

you got me

still I hope they get screwed

 

[Trix]

Abramovich did - there's nothing the new owners could've done to prevent it and wouldn't have known about it until they had their hands on the books.

I get it, they cheated, "Chelsea" should be punished, but the new owners I can't really fault for rule breaks on that side of things. Points deduction, retrospective adjustments to their finishing position and other sanctions maybe, but punishing the new owners for uncovering discrepancies from the previous owners and highlighting them would be counter-productive, if they want teams to be honest.

Abramovich did - there's nothing the new owners could've done to prevent it and wouldn't have known about it until they had their hands on the books.

I get it, they cheated, "Chelsea" should be punished, but the new owners I can't really fault for rule breaks on that side of things. Points deduction, retrospective adjustments to their finishing position and other sanctions maybe, but punishing the new owners for uncovering discrepancies from the previous owners and highlighting them would be counter-productive, if they want teams to be honest.

It won't be those charges that fuck them imo, it'll be the ones they are desperately trying to avoid this season and going forward that will.

I don't think they even considered they'd get more than a financial penalty until Everton got stung with points. That's why they didn't care.

Because there’s legal precedent set by Spurs and Alan Sugar back in the 90s.

Tottenham On This Day: Alan Sugar’s Finest Hour At Spurs

<p class="MsoNormal">Few Tottenham supporters would say that there were any high-points in Alan Sugar's time as Chairman at Tottenham....

hotspurhq.com

Is it a precedent when it's two different governing bodies?

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

chelsea broke the rules why is it relevant that the owners have changed?

What about the lost revenue for other clubs

Inflated transfer fees

We may have won a league World Cup

it could have been the difference between managers, go sacked or hide relegation or winning?

Just a couple of thoughts - the discussion was on any mitigating factors if Chelsea are found in breach - and that the new ownership "reported" the malfeasance when spotted as a mitigating factor. Then it turned to "well Chelsea will be in trouble for what the new ownership has done". So my question was related to that - have they (new owners) actually breached any rules yet? (I know they have to sell by the end of the fiscal year, but they still have time to remedy that).

 

[Rocksuperstar]

If Chelsea had not cheated, it could’ve affected who got Champions League over multiple season Spurs and Arsenal could’ve financially been a far better place Villa again a better place could’ve affected who won the league and who got relegated.

maybe we would have won a title if city and Chelsea had not cheated

Yep, all true, so how will financially punishing Chelsea now change all that's happened already? Same with City, any sanctions on previous seasons will be a token gesture. Their fans have had the joy, celebrated the trophies, etc. so while it needs addressing and some sort of punishment involved, why should Boehly have to shell out for Abramovich's piss taking?

Would've, could've, should've - hindsight is 20/20, I don't know what an appropriate punishment would be for either City or Chelsea, all I do know is that if I bought a house and found a body in it with a knife stuck in it's back, I wouldn't expect to be picking up the custodial sentence for reporting it as the new owner. A huge, huge, HUGE amount of responsibility needs to be placed on the PL for ignoring this going on for so long that now, when they come to investigate the matters at hand, it's a mountain that's possibly just too high to climb.

The only punishment that I can think of that will even go a half step toward a fair response to the level of shithousery would be points deductions but I'm also aware that there will be a hundred legal challenges to explore and that, ultimately, it'll come back to the fact that the PL did nothing to prevent it then, didn't intervene when it was clear some fishy stuff was going on, and have let all of this slide for over a decade.

 

[GutBucket]

Just a couple of thoughts - the discussion was on any mitigating factors if Chelsea are found in breach - and that the new ownership "reported" the malfeasance when spotted as a mitigating factor. Then it turned to "well Chelsea will be in trouble for what the new ownership has done". So my question was related to that - have they (new owners) actually breached any rules yet? (I know they have to sell by the end of the fiscal year, but they still have time to remedy that).

Yeah, new ownership just needs to sort that 3 year FFP period which they will by sales. That will be their only punishment, losing the likes of Colwill, Palmer, Enzo Fernandes etc. Hopefully nobody overpays for Gallagher and Broja. They gambled on being CL regulars and it will be even harder for them after those sales. Plus new manager every year or so.

 

[Trix]

Yep, all true, so how will financially punishing Chelsea now change all that's happened already? Same with City, any sanctions on previous seasons will be a token gesture. Their fans have had the joy, celebrated the trophies, etc. so while it needs addressing and some sort of punishment involved, why should Boehly have to shell out for Abramovich's piss taking?

Would've, could've, should've - hindsight is 20/20, I don't know what an appropriate punishment would be for either City or Chelsea, all I do know is that if I bought a house and found a body in it with a knife stuck in it's back, I wouldn't expect to be picking up the custodial sentence for reporting it as the new owner. A huge, huge, HUGE amount of responsibility needs to be placed on the PL for ignoring this going on for so long that now, when they come to investigate the matters at hand, it's a mountain that's possibly just too high to climb.

The only punishment that I can think of that will even go a half step toward a fair response to the level of shithousery would be points deductions but I'm also aware that there will be a hundred legal challenges to explore and that, ultimately, it'll come back to the fact that the PL did nothing to prevent it then, didn't intervene when it was clear some fishy stuff was going on, and have let all of this slide for over a decade.

It's due diligence though isn't it, it's the same as any other business.

 

[tommo84]

Just a couple of thoughts - the discussion was on any mitigating factors if Chelsea are found in breach - and that the new ownership "reported" the malfeasance when spotted as a mitigating factor. Then it turned to "well Chelsea will be in trouble for what the new ownership has done". So my question was related to that - have they (new owners) actually breached any rules yet? (I know they have to sell by the end of the fiscal year, but they still have time to remedy that).

They will apparently be in breach of PSR on a much bigger scale than Everton have been unless they make a lot of sales before 30 June. That breach will be mostly down to the spending of the new regime.

 

[Rocksuperstar]

It won't be those charges that fuck them imo, it'll be the ones they are desperately trying to avoid this season and going forward that will.

I don't think they even considered they'd get more than a financial penalty until Everton got stung with points. That's why they didn't care.

Is it a precedent when it's two different governing bodies?

Oh, what they're doing under tables and behind counters to try and grease wheels or exacerbate metaphors since he took charge, not a clue, I have no idea what shit housery these large-mart types get up to (and I'm sure they do, even if it's writing off a Tesco sandwich as a Waitrose sandwich for work expenses).

 

[Trix]

Yeah, new ownership just needs to sort that 3 year FFP period which they will by sales. That will be their only punishment, losing the likes of Colwill, Palmer, Enzo Fernandes etc. Hopefully nobody overpays for Gallagher and Broja. They gambled on being CL regulars and it will be even harder for them after those sales. Plus new manager every year or so.

They need to find over £100mil in a two week period in a market where no one has any money. That 100mil of course needs to be profit selling the likes of Fernandes doesn't help one bit.

 

[Marty]

They need to find over £100mil in a two week period in a market where no one has any money. That 100mil of course needs to be profit selling the likes of Fernandes doesn't help one bit.

And not only does nobody have any money, it's slap bang in the middle of the European Championships where players do not want to focus on anything else than performing for their nation.

Assuming Chelsea's most saleable assets are there, of course.