Tough! Because Boro didn't even get us up to a sweat, was the dullest, boring training jog our boys have had in a long time, and will be really up, for sticking it up the Sigg on Sunday!.......................
Dragon,that's not what I read from the BBC who said it was a tough match for Swansea. Somebody's wrong and I don't think that it's the BBC. What are you doing on the Spurs board anyway,is yours dull and boring like last night's match?
District,wtf does this post have to do with you? You're a Chelsea mod so mind your own effing business. He's old enough and ugly enough to answer for himself. Yes ok Spurf,we don't want him crying do we? Hello Dregs,I'm scraping the bottom of the barrel answering you.
I am. 3 now, definitely an OG for the second Yeah I've said for awhile that Luiz should play either as a midfielder or fullback. As a centre back he's just too mad, particularly if you're trying to play a disciplined, compact defence like most Chelsea sides do.
To be fair they are outscoring you Monterray haver had a bit about them, I reckon, certainly better than Al-Ahly yesterdat and probably better than Corinthians were too.
What was the 3rd goal all about?! Hazard has been world class! I hear Corinthians have brought along a strong following, they'll be well up for it.
Further proof that The Simpsons has been an embarrassing shadow of its former self for ten years... please log in to view this image
At half time yesterday they showed their fans seeing off the team as they headed to the airport, looked like they were just arriving back after winning it!
'I'm worried because Yaya for us is really important. To lose him for 40 days in January will be a big problem.' - Roberto Mancini. The main problem being that January doesn't have 40 day! You can see his point though, especially as the Ivorian's just scored the killer goal at St James'. Ba's goal: please log in to view this image
So I see that everyone is ecstatic that ManC have "halved their loss". Well it's pretty relative isn't it. To just about any other team a £97.9m loss would be a catastrophe. Apparently wages are £178m (up from £151m) against turnover of £231m (up from £153m). But that's not even half the story is it? Just how is that turnover comprised? Dodgy deals with linked companies perhaps? It certainly hasn't come from revenue from the later stages of the Champions League has it! I would be very interested if anyone has the breakdown of how the turnover is comprised, particularly how they could generate an extra £80m. It seems to me that without their "unique sources of funding" (and I mean the sponsorship as well, not just the money they're given), the club is clearly not financially viable. But will financial fair play sort this abuse out? No chance!
Indeed. Reading the breakdown, I see that their ( totally non-incestuous, of course) deal with Etihad "helped" commercial revenues double from £48.5mil to £96mil, despite the fact that their wage bill went up again from £151mil to £178mil, apparently they managed to cut their operating loss to " only" £101mil. And the rest of us are supposed to try and compete with this sort of financial firepower!
