Liverpool FC Forum

by **el_stinger** » Sat Feb 11, 2006 4:40 am

My brother is a Chelski supporter since he was a kid, even though he grew up in Basingstoke and should support Reading...anyway, he thinks its the best thing since sliced bread that Moaninho and Russian Mafia Man came and bought a history for the club.

by **Liverpool 4 EVA** » Sat Feb 11, 2006 4:57 am

Well, the manager Chelsea have absolutely suits the club and supporters, they are all the same.

No grace, no class and not a very long history.

by **Liverpool 4 EVA** » Sat Feb 11, 2006 5:01 am

Sabre wrote:
Primodua, even Real Madrid is not that rich! They were heavily in debt until Perez sold their training ground in Madrid a couple of years ago and with the proceeds they became debt free - not for long. I suspect, at the rate they are going. Their turnover has been boosted by Becks' and merchandising but he's 30 now and when he does leave them or retire, they'd be heavily in debt again.

They already are in debt. I hope another strike of political corruption won't save them again. And I also hope no moron says it was not political corruption, because the facts are well known.

*But* disliking Real Madrid as I do, I must be fair and admit that they have given to football great nights. A decade under Florentino Perez, can't sum up more than 100 years of history. In which they have won 9 Top european titles and UEFA cups, and cup winner cups. They're basts, but they have history. Chelski has not. That's a difference.

Always a pleasure to read your posts Sabre lad

Yeah as much as I dislike Madrid for some of our dealings with them, they have an amazing football history and culture.

Perez somehow managed to really mess up a really good football team with some great players, Redondo....Makelele....Fired Del Bosque after winning the Primera....

The European cup that was won under Perez could arguably be seen as Sanz's really as it was mostly his team.

by **Liverpool 4 EVA** » Sat Feb 11, 2006 5:02 am

Gracias King Rafa wrote:I see Cheatski are releasing some sort of centenary DVD,with their (lack of) history it should last all of five minutes!!

by **onizukaeikichi** » Sat Feb 11, 2006 11:10 am

indeed i think the credits will roll on for the rest of the 45 minutes , with the words "Special thanks to Mr Roman Abrobi-tch for his support" and it will repeat again and again in the DVD

by **red_guy** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 6:17 am

Just wondering...what did Chelski fans thought / react after the Boro game?

by **Espionage** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 8:33 am

lol!!!!!!!!!

I was wondering the same thing, I cant wait to hear Mourniho's comments..... I bet the the other team cheated, or they parked the bus, or the ball wasnt over the line, or they counter-attacked too much.

I didnt see the game but i read the review, to be fair to Chelsea it sounded alot like our game against them at Anfield: Down 2-0, change to 3-5-2 and still cant score a goal only to be beaten on the counter-attack and recieve a somewhat undeserving 3-0

Hopefully this will be the start of a bad run of form, though I dont want the fu#king Mancs to catch them!!!

by **inglis5** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 11:51 pm

Great article from today's Observer - http://observer.guardian.co.uk/sport/story/0,,1707832,00.html

Abramovich pleas shouted down in parish of Shankly

Sunday February 12, 2006
The Observer

Roman Abramovich must have a sense of humour after all. How can a man who permits himself only one facial expression per game lecture anyone about being more demonstrative in their support?
If Abramovich wants Chelsea fans to feel more like singing, how about dropping admission prices for next season instead of putting them up? How about knocking down that tat at the Fulham Road end so the sun can get to the beach? Sorry, pitch. If Chelsea attracted more away fans the home supporters would actually have someone to sing at. But, if they want to be blown away by an atmosphere like Anfield's, that memorable night last May when the Chelsea directors confessed the noise inside the ground was 'almost frightening', the bad news is that even in football there are some things money just can't buy.

Liverpool and their extremely vocal support go back a long way, and if the passion generated on the terraces last season in any way helped the team to their unlikely triumph in Istanbul it was a fair reward for the club's commitment to their working-class fanbase over the years. Like Manchester United, who also recognise that many loyal supporters have limited means and other expenses to meet, Liverpool have steadfastly refused to take the mickey with ticket prices. When you have been put on the map by someone from Scottish mining stock this sort of collectivism comes naturally enough.

It is less clear what guides a club put on the map by a preposterously young Russian oil billionaire. Chelsea can be most things with Abramovich's money, but they can never be Liverpool. And they will never be popular either if they really want John Obi Mikel and Freddy Adu, or if they continue to irritate real talent scouts by snapping up the best two or three players at junior tournaments before farming them out across Europe on loan. People can cope with the richest club in the Premiership, managers are willing to take on the challenge of competing with the strongest team, but it is beginning to be whispered, with more than a trace of resentment, that Chelsea are using their money to sign players they don't need just so no one else can have them.

Bill Shankly - 'The socialism I believe in is not really politics; it is humanity, a way of living and sharing the rewards' - would not have approved.

--------------

I really wish I could be as articulate in my dislike of Chelsea (rather than just calling them a bunch of :censored:

...)

by **Rastalovich** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 12:23 am

Typical journalist.

Chelsea made a loss of around 150million, they fill the stadium they have, with people w8ing to pay to get in. The last thing they`re gonna do is drop prices.

Chelsea is/are no longer a fan based team/club with an attitude towards fans outside of how to break even after spending so much monies.

If u`r making losses, and have a high demand, u`r not gonna cut prices. I think the reporter needs to pick a less obvious subject.

lol it`s exactly what I meant in the other thread, it probably took him all week to come up with that text.

by **inglis5** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 12:36 am

I agree with a lot of what you say Rastalovich but I think you're missing the point of what the journo is saying. The problem for Chelsea is that for some games demand for tickets is not high enough. Their fan base is still very small, even compared to the other London clubs, so much so that they have to advertise in the London Evening Standard for some games.

Although they can charge what they want for league games - bringing in the glory hunters, corporate fans etc - they cannot do the same for other, less glamourous ties. The point he is making is that Liverpool have a large core of fans who would go and watch the team play, irrespective of the opposition and that if Chelsea were to look after the core fans that fan base would grow over time... (meaning in maybe 100 years they may be able to fill their ground on a regular basis)

by **vlady16.1** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 1:22 am

what i keep wondering about is how long can they sustain these losses -- 140 mill is alot of money -- i don't care if he has a billion he just can't sustain this for long -- the real problem is that even though they are in year 3 their turnover was down this year and their losses went up -- where are these new sources of revenue??? i'm an engineer not an accountant but this is not good -- they don't sell out for all games -- i just can't wait until romans wifey says "roman i need another fabrage egg" and roman sells cheski to buy it

by **blues brothers** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 8:34 am

you are all sad scouse gits !!!!!
you are so bitter and twisted !! How many points behind!!!
you will NEVER win the league again with overweight and slow strikers(fowler)
we have so much class , but you would never recognise class if it was a premiership trophy(oh you dont have one!!) Stop living in the past and get a grasp on reality you are now a third rate team 18 points behind the back to back champions!!
if you add up the points difference between chelski and you over last 3 seasons it is 77 points!!!!
Oh and i was a chelsea fan in the 70's when we were :censored:

but still beat you in the fa cup 4-2
robben for an oscar Ha ha
blue forever :blues:

by **Santa** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:20 am

A.B. wrote:Crespo: "No, no we didn't lose, we drew 3-3 !!"

so where's your medal now? fuc king w@nker

by **supersub** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:42 am

blues brothers wrote:you are all sad scouse gits !!!!!
you are so bitter and twisted !! How many points behind!!!
you will NEVER win the league again with overweight and slow strikers(fowler)
we have so much class , but you would never recognise class if it was a premiership trophy(oh you dont have one!!) Stop living in the past and get a grasp on reality you are now a third rate team 18 points behind the back to back champions!!
if you add up the points difference between chelski and you over last 3 seasons it is 77 points!!!!
Oh and i was a chelsea fan in the 70's when we were but still beat you in the fa cup 4-2
robben for an oscar Ha ha
blue forever

Evertonian on a wind-up :rasp

Champions of Europe :buttrock

by **Rafa D** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 10:34 am

IGNORE C@CK HEADS-----0------0-----

Liverpool FC Forum

Chelsea fans - no class - Money can't buy you everything

Who is online