Rival watch

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
I don't know how you can make a negative out of Bayern's play.I quite enjoy watching them even though,they,like many others (including us)find it very difficult against 9 men defences.
However,with Ribery coming at you from one wing and Robben on the other,plus their two strikers,I wish who ever plays them in the next round,good luck, 'cause they are going to need it!
I can just see Mourinho writing in those 9 Chelsea defenders,can't you?.....and praying for a few more red cards.....!
 
Right. Let's get our bets in early.

How many do we think Chelski are going to lose by, in the semis?
 
deedub93 said:
Can you explain that one Tots, I'm lost!
Click to expand...

There are two games one away and one at home ,so the games are over two "legs" 1st and 2nd.Apparently the Club have to pay Chelsea 2.8 million per game against them if he plays, and they say they cannot afford it,it must be some clause in the contract
 
UEFA have pointed out that Chelsea's clause in Courtois' contract is against the rules and therefore unenforceable:

”Both the UEFA Champions League and the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations contain clear provisions which strictly forbid any club to exert, or attempt to exert, any influence whatsoever over the players that another club may (or may not) field in a match.
”It follows that any provision in a private contract between clubs which might function in such a way as to influence who a club fields in a match is null, void and unenforceable so far as UEFA is concerned.
”Furthermore, any attempt to enforce such a provision would be a clear violation of both the UEFA Champions League and the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations and would therefore be sanctioned accordingly.”

In other words, **** you, Chelsea! <laugh>
 
So what happened to the domestic rule that loanes can't play agaisnt their parent club, why doesn't that apply to European football or is that rule one only used by the Premier League? as I noticed in Italian football you had players half owned by one club still able to play agaisnt the other club which owns the players rights.
 
"Chelsea fans are to start a collection to pay the £8,000 fine handed to manager Jose Mourinho by the Football Association for improper conduct in his side's recent defeat to Aston Villa."

Because there's one thing people know about Chelsea manager, it's that they're hard up for cash...
 
Boss said:
So what happened to the domestic rule that loanes can't play agaisnt their parent club, why doesn't that apply to European football or is that rule one only used by the Premier League? as I noticed in Italian football you had players half owned by one club still able to play agaisnt the other club which owns the players rights.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but that doesn't detrimentally effect a Spanish club playing against an English one.
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
Yeah, but that doesn't detrimentally effect a Spanish club playing against an English one.
Click to expand...

They shouldn't have restrictions, domestic or European as Chelsea effectively gained an advantage by loaning out Lakaku who could face their title rivals but not Chelsea but then again it meant they had to stick with torres!!
 
Boss said:
They shouldn't have restrictions, domestic or European as Chelsea effectively gained an advantage by loaning out Lakaku who could face their title rivals but not Chelsea but then again it meant they had to stick with torres!!
Click to expand...

I agree, but I suspect that the issue is that they've allowed Courtois to play, but put restrictions on it.
If they'd have either let him play without a fee or blocked him entirely, then I don't think there'd be a problem.
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
UEFA have pointed out that Chelsea's clause in Courtois' contract is against the rules and therefore unenforceable:

&#8221;Both the UEFA Champions League and the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations contain clear provisions which strictly forbid any club to exert, or attempt to exert, any influence whatsoever over the players that another club may (or may not) field in a match.
&#8221;It follows that any provision in a private contract between clubs which might function in such a way as to influence who a club fields in a match is null, void and unenforceable so far as UEFA is concerned.
&#8221;Furthermore, any attempt to enforce such a provision would be a clear violation of both the UEFA Champions League and the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations and would therefore be sanctioned accordingly.&#8221;

In other words, **** you, Chelsea! <laugh>
Click to expand...

UEFA act sensibly for once <ok>
 
"I don't think he'd throw that away."

Ending up in a sump pit in some remote oil field in Russia can be
quite a persuasive argument.
 
Having seen that report about their potential return to greatness, I have just one request: can somebody please inform the BBC that the entire football supporting population of England wants to see Liverpool win the league? It's not the first time they've been like this, as they were banging on about Liverpool's "return" after they won the 1995 Coca-Cola Cup, again with the assumption that fans of the other 91 league clubs had desperately been hoping for them to return to prominence rather than, say, wishing their own teams would gain prominence (or hoping the team they lived vicariously through could retain the title)

Liverpool fans have been waiting some time for them to return to the top, and there's no problem with that (barring those fans that become as obnoxious and entitled as Man Utd fans at their very worst once they got as much as a sniff of being in with a chance of the title...), but that's fans of one club and not all clubs, let alone the wider public. After all, if Spurs had a different management and coaching set-up from the start of the season to the shambles we've had and were in the position Liverpool were in right now, would we get the same sort of coverage? Of course we wouldn't.
 
The worst thing that could happen to English football would be for 'Pool to win the league.
 
Hoddle Is A God said:
The worst thing that could happen to English football would be for 'Pool to win the league.
Click to expand...

No, it would be the worst thing for YOU if we win the league. The worst thing for football is that clubs like Chelsea and City are injected with hundreds of millions of oil money that they have not earnt all from sugar daddies and buy 2 full squads, (send 1 of them on loan, Chelsea have 23 players on loan) and buy their way to success. Yea, ****ing great for football.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back