While I'm probably missing something, surely the transfer ban is going to keep Sarri in his job considering there's got to be a very small number of managers who Chelsea would want to take over that would be willing to spend a season trying to make the most of what they have available?
Is that the Higuain who played against Spurs in the 2-2 against Juventus, or Neil Ruddock in a wig ??
What about all those"youngsters" Chelsea's got out on loan. Don't they have one or two "aces" among them?
You're forgetting about someone else who's been out of work for a while now... please log in to view this image
The irony is the transfer ban might be the exact thing the team's needed for years, as it might force them to use some of the youngsters who clean up at U18 and U21 level but have any chance of getting into the first team blocked off. Players such as Fiyako Tomori, Mason Mount, Izzy Brown and Tammy Abraham will certainly fancy their chances
I think it's one of those where the ref should both give the penalty and book the player for simulation. Stupid move by the Fulham keeper, all of whom have been **** this season, but a ridiculous reaction by Mane, too. Pretty standard behaviour from him, though. He's been doing it since his Southampton days and never gets called on it. I can remember one game that he had for Saints against us when he could've gone off about three times over with dives and fouls. Ridiculous.
There was a slight tug by the keeper but not enough to warrant a penalty in my opinion, we see far worse at every single corner and 99% of the time nothing is ever given. The referee should have waved it away for Mane`s theatrics alone, it was an embarrassing display of diving. Also, there is no chance that penalty would have been given if it was for Fulham, and in the unlikely event that it was, there would have been mass media outcry and outpourings of grief.
I can remember one game that he had for Saints against us when he could've gone off about three times over with dives and fouls. ---------------- He was very embarrassing on that day, in his defence you went in on him very hard from the start and the ref gave nothing. But still, no need to be doing that. Superb player though.
The Times is reporting that SirJim Ratcliffe remains interested in buying Chelsea. However, he's not interested in meeting Roman's whopping £2.5 billion asking price. That's already discounted from the original £3 Billion that has been snubbed in China and the States. He's said to be interested at something like £2 billion. If you factor in the debt to the Russian......sorry, Israeli owner, of around £1.4 billion, that values what's left at around £600m. That's a pretty good indicator of the real value of a club that doesn't own its pitch, has a current ground that's long since had its day and is next to impossible to develop profitably. The club has tried and failed to find a site to redevelop elsewhere, whilst cheating in developing a way around FFP, that will be unlawful under FFP 2.0. Chelsea have been very successful in the last 15 years but it's been based upon money that they're not going to be getting in the years ahead, no matter the wealth of their owner. Joe Lewis gets some clog but he's addressed the issue of the stadium that Liverpool, Chelsea and even United haven't been willing to grasp. Looking at big clubs across Europe - Bayern, Juve and Atletico have built new stadiums. Barcelona and RM are going ahead with massive redevelopment, PSG want to upgrade. Big clubs are moving forward, I'm glad that we're doing the same. Sure, it's jam tomorrow but I like bosses that take difficult choices and meet challenges head-on. It's the way to progress.
If Roman wants to walk away with ego high and zero loss, then surely he would sell for 1.4 bn ?? The quoted figures suggest he wants to make 100% profit on his total stake (I guess that is an "altruistic" owner for ya) .
They're all in it for the money. Citeh's owners aren't doing this without an eye to the pay off. Why would people who live to become richer, enter an industry awash with cash to emerge poorer? The £1.4 billion that can be traced to Roman is unlikely to be the end of it. I'm sure that there's been money passed around in brown envelopes to seal the deal, grease the wheels, remove the problem, etc. The bloke's a crook. Why wouldn't he get some Chinese club to pay £60m for a washed up player like Oscar and then return over half of it as part of another deal? If the football authorities cared to investigate, I'm sure that there's dodges and rule breaking that we can't imagine at this point. Take the Russian's money away and all there is, is debt. The fact that Trade Indemnity won't insure a deal with CFC for more than £5,000 says all you need to know. I've got that on a couple of ****ing credit cards.
I think Citeh's owners are slightly different, money isn't quite such an issue, exposure and cleaning up their image is more to do with it.
The minimum has to be "zero sum" at the end. For Roman, the Chelsky project has an ego aspect, and perhaps some "money transfer" opportunities for his personal wealth. For the Arab oil money, in addition to the ego aspect there is the possibility for some good international PR spin for them (their nation, its businesses etc) . One thing I do like about Uncle Joe is that Spurs is SOLELY business. His public involvement/intervention in on/off pitch matters regarding THFC is near zero.
Exactly, the best way for him to make money is to make Spurs both successful and sustainable, and sell at the Top of the Market.
