Chelsea Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2013/14

grumpymunster

amiable wrote: »

Of course it's a siege mentality by others when you see posts like grumpy's and Phoenix claiming they all hate us. You at least are capable of arguing your point without resorting to such immaturity.

On Man United I would argue they are not backed by the Glazers rather they have built up their brand and support so much they are backed by their massive fan base.

Mathew Syed made some very valid and informed opinions known on SSN and for others to bash them away as anti Chelsea bile is naive IMO. People queue to bash Sky's hypebole and when they get an alternative sensible journo on it's dismissed by many.

I have the same opinion about Chelsea as I did in the 1980's and Roman has nothing to do with it.

You will please point out where my posts were immature.

It is noticeable how it is only capitalism as it is administered by RA which is brought into account. Nike record in clothing sales is questionable to say the least, it is a fact they are a design and marketing company and as such have never manufactured an item of clothing. However they do of course buy from the lowest bidder and are a perfect example of buy cheap sell high. Of course the fact that they are a major sponsor of worldwide sport makes this perfectly acceptable and pretty much beyond reproach. No logo is a decent enough book on the whole apparel industry. Labour laws as they apply in the EU are not the same as they in the rest of the world yet it is only RA who seems to be guilty of exploitation a man who actually did a lot of good in Chukotka where it is estimated he spent some US$1b on charities and such like.

Does this make the man a saint no doubt it but some people here decry any support of him. Is he any worse than the vast majority of other very successful companies or businessmen also I doubt this as well.

I do not know Matthew Syed personally Wiki tells me he is a socialist, hmmm a socialist having a pop at a successful businessman never heard the like of that before. Has Syed spoken of the exploitation of labour in the clothing contracts, alcohol abuse encouraged by sponsorship of clubs and competitions by beer companies, the abuse of the financial systems leading to the recession we find ourselves in helped by the title sponsors of the English premier league (which resulted in record fines for interest rate abuse). As I said I do not know him personally but perhaps his thoughts on these human rights abuses can be linked.

grumpymunster

Phoenix wrote: »

Id love to see Feruz,Chalobah and co given more of a chance next season

If Chal isn't wonder if he will get a loan at Palace reckon that would be perfect for him, should get oodles of game time.

amiable

grumpymunster wrote: »

You will please point out where my posts were immature.

Will I? I think I have already.

Being a socialist doesn't mean he's not entitled to an informed and educated opinion but throwing it out as anti Chelsea bile initially on your part is naive and in fact you have just proved your initial argument was wrong as to declare it anti Chelsea agenda and are now saying it's anti capitalist agenda.

Ps, nice to have you back

grumpymunster

amiable wrote: »

Will I? I think I have already.

Being a socialist doesn't mean he's not entitled to an informed and educated opinion but throwing it out as anti Chelsea bile initially on your part is naive and in fact you have just proved your initial argument was wrong as to declare it anti Chelsea agenda and are now saying it's anti capitalist agenda.

Ps, nice to have you back

What do you mean nice to have you back, I think you have mistaken me for someone see as I have not been on holiday yet?

You may think you have pointed it out in fact you have not so please indulge me and show me.

I have no memory of saying he is not entitled to his opinion you could point that out also. It is mutually not exclusive that having an anti capitalist agenda means he does not also have an anti Chelsea agenda, you say in post 6042 that anyone knowing Matthew Syed would know he is not anti Chelsea, I have stated I do not know him personally, do you? Or is that conjecture on your part?

Johner

grumpymunster wrote: »

If Chal isn't wonder if he will get a loan at Palace reckon that would be perfect for him, should get oodles of game time.

That would be a good loan for him.

amiable

grumpymunster wrote: »

What do you mean nice to have you back, I think you have mistaken me for someone see as I have not been on holiday yet?

You may think you have pointed it out in fact you have not so please indulge me and show me.

I have no memory of saying he is not entitled to his opinion you could point that out also. It is mutually not exclusive that having an anti capitalist agenda means he does not also have an anti Chelsea agenda, you say in post 6042 that anyone knowing Matthew Syed would know he is not anti Chelsea, I have stated I do not know him personally, do you? Or is that conjecture on your part?

It's not about knowing Syed personally as you well know it's simple case of doing a little research on him or having read quite a bit of his work in the past and knowing about what he writes before spouting it's merely anti Chelsea bile. So much so you resort to Wiki to learn more about him. I suppose it's on a par as the Blogs you used a source in the past to back up arguments.

I'm afraid I'm not going to indulge you as it appears you indulge yourself enough.

We both know what I meant about welcome back considering what you announced in the past on thread.

Keep up the siege mentality and delusion that everyone just hates Chelsea because of their wealth.

Zebra3

GavRedKing wrote: »

Thats not how he made his money.

It was with deals with the Kremlin where himself and a few others bought state companies for feck all.

Before that he sold all sorts of stupid things like tyres, ducks, dolls before going onto taking over companies.

The Kremlin were involved in giving out the companies, if anyone was guility of anymurders or hits it was them.

Thats not calling Roman an angel.

The Kremlin/KGB/Russian mafia were all pretty much one and the same thing.

Abramovich, like the rest of the oligarchs, knew that their wealth had been stolen from the Russian people through corruption and enforced through murder.

They were all wrapped up in it. but who cares so long as he spends the proceeds of crime on the next best thing for Chelsea.

duploelabs

GavRedKing wrote: »

....and drop Mata?

Good god no! But remember the "Christmas tree" the formation of old

amiable

duploelabs wrote: »

Good god no! But remember the "Christmas tree" the formation of old

Does Jose play that formation?

GavRedKing

Zebra3 wrote: »

The Kremlin/KGB/Russian mafia were all pretty much one and the same thing.

Abramovich, like the rest of the oligarchs, knew that their wealth had been stolen from the Russian people through corruption and enforced through murder.

They were all wrapped up in it. but who cares so long as he spends the proceeds of crime on the next best thing for Chelsea.

If the Kremlin/KGB/Mafia were invovled in taking the riches and distributing it to their favourites in return for shares/loans then does that not mean Roman, directly wasnt involved it but was merely a puppet for a wider organisation or regime?

I cant see Roman going around murdering/torturing people back in the early 90's.

You show me any multi national that doesnt have shady dealings in its past and in turn, on its balance sheet.

Can you point me to these crimes that Roman has been charged with?

amiable

GavRedKing wrote: »

If the Kremlin/KGB/Mafia were invovled in taking the riches and distributing it to their favourites in return for shares/loans then does that not mean Roman, directly wasnt involved it but was merely a puppet for a wider organisation or regime?

I cant see Roman going around murdering/torturing people back in the early 90's.

You show me any multi national that doesnt have shady dealings in its past and in turn, on its balance sheet.

Can you point me to these crimes that Roman has been charged with?

IF it is true I'd say Roman would have been more a conductor than a puppet but that's IF

grumpymunster

amiable wrote: »

It's not about knowing Syed personally as you well know it's simple case of doing a little research on him or having read quite a bit of his work in the past and knowing about what he writes before spouting it's merely anti Chelsea bile. So much so you resort to Wiki to learn more about him. I suppose it's on a par as the Blogs you used a source in the past to back up arguments.

I'm afraid I'm not going to indulge you as it appears you indulge yourself enough.

We both know what I meant about welcome back considering what you announced in the past on thread.

Keep up the siege mentality and delusion that everyone just hates Chelsea because of their wealth.

I am afraid I have no idea what you mean about welcome back

GavRedKing

amiable wrote: »

IF it is true I'd say Roman would have been more a conductor than a puppet but that's IF

I'd agree with ya, theres more too it then what we know but hes managed to avoid jail time and charges largely due to his connections.

My main point is though his early years, if the articles are to be believed are relatively hard working, honest(within reason) entrepreneurship, I think he got a grant or investment or money from a will and set up his first business with it and grew from there.

Was there deals made with the devil (kremlin) yes along the way it be hard to argue there wasnt.

grumpymunster

GavRedKing wrote: »

If the Kremlin/KGB/Mafia were invovled in taking the riches and distributing it to their favourites in return for shares/loans then does that not mean Roman, directly wasnt involved it but was merely a puppet for a wider organisation or regime?

I cant see Roman going around murdering/torturing people back in the early 90's.

You show me any multi national that doesnt have shady dealings in its past and in turn, on its balance sheet.

Can you point me to these crimes that Roman has been charged with?

Not even in the past Gav what about those misfortunate textile workers in Bangladesh recently?

Actually I don't know if they still have but Adidas kept a factory open in Germany for some time so as it could say it manufactured in Europe - I am certain should it still exist that is where the Chelsea gear is made.

Good point about the alleged crimes of RA believe last time he was in court it found in his favour.

GavRedKing

grumpymunster wrote: »

Good point about the alleged crimes of RA believe last time he was in court it found in his favour.

I know he got arrested before I just think it was the late 80's and it was dealt with.

Something to do with one fo his companies and property of 3rd party or some sort, it was resolved at the time though.

grumpymunster

So Larry White loves Cavani, he is making noises like he knows he is coming

http://www.thesportreview.com/tsr/2013/07/chelsea-transfers-paris-saint-germain-edinson-cavani/?

grumpymunster

GavRedKing wrote: »

I know he got arrested before I just think it was the late 80's and it was dealt with.

Something to do with one fo his companies and property of 3rd party or some sort, it was resolved at the time though.

Ah sure that could happen to a bishop ..... Ammm ok bad analogy ha ha

grumpymunster

Flo coming back to work in the Acadamy, nice to see still remember some pretty good goals he scored for us.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2353919/Tore-Andre-Flo-Chelsea-youth-coach.html

Zebra3

GavRedKing wrote: »

If the Kremlin/KGB/Mafia were invovled in taking the riches and distributing it to their favourites in return for shares/loans then does that not mean Roman, directly wasnt involved it but was merely a puppet for a wider organisation or regime?

You think a mere puppet walks out a situation like 1990s Russia as a billionaire? Really? :rolleyes:

GavRedKing wrote: »

I cant see Roman going around murdering/torturing people back in the early 90's.

Few mafia bosses actually carry those crimes out themselves.

GavRedKing wrote: »

You show me any multi national that doesnt have shady dealings in its past and in turn, on its balance sheet.

There are plenty but that's beside the point. We are talking about how one individual became a billionaire.

GavRedKing wrote: »

Can you point me to these crimes that Roman has been charged with?

Billionaires don't usually get charged with crimes. Can you guess why that is? :rolleyes:

duploelabs

Anyone know what David Luiz is in for surgury for?

GavRedKing

Zebra3 wrote: »

You think a mere puppet walks out a situation like 1990s Russia as a billionaire? Really? :rolleyes:

Never said he was a puppet but he wasnt the main player in this and he was certainly wealthy and rubbing shoulders with the elite prior to any loans/share deal.

Few mafia bosses actually carry those crimes out themselves.

so hes a Mafia boss now as well?

There are plenty but that's beside the point. We are talking about how one individual became a billionaire.

Ok so, name some multi billionare coperations or individuals that have gotten their wealth by baking cookies and selling puppies?

Billionaires don't usually get charged with crimes. Can you guess why that is? :rolleyes:

Because they're not guility of what people accuse them of, no matter how much people want them to be.

GavRedKing

duploelabs wrote: »

Anyone know what David Luiz is in for surgury for?

He broke his nose in the Confed cups so I'd assume its for that.

Tubbs4

duploelabs wrote: »

Anyone know what David Luiz is in for surgury for?

His nose. It got broke during the group stages

Too late or slow

duploelabs

ah, just found out its for his nose

MaroonAndGreen

Hope we dont sign Rooney.. if we do get him, and he then turns in some top performances, we are only likely to get the best out of him for a year or two I reckon, not worth the investment

grumpymunster

Seen as we don't have to go too mad on the transfer fee why not just offer Lowandowski a shed load of money and see if we can tempt him with the bright lights of London.

QikBax

grumpymunster wrote: »

Seen as we don't have to go too mad on the transfer fee why not just offer Lowandowski a shed load of money and see if we can tempt him with the bright lights of London.

They're not going to sell for less than 25 million, if at all

grumpymunster

jamc wrote: »

They're not going to sell for less than 25 million, if at all

Ah sure 25m is not much when it is Mafia money ha ha.

No was comparing it to ST£50m for Nando and much the same or a bit more for Cavani, at that £25m allows a little leeway on salary.

grumpymunster

Love to see this attitude from players, the lad is talented (if a little difficult to handle apparently) and would not be too surprised if he does make it back.

http://www.turkish-football.com/news_read.php?id=4851

grumpymunster

Absolutely no references at all but this site has been right before. Cannot see it happening but would love it great player.

http://www.ghanasoccernet.com/chelsea-set-for-yaya-toure-bid/?

McDave

Bayern Munich sporting director Matthias Sammer has said the club has no plans to move for Chelsea defender David Luiz at the moment.

http://espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/1490442/bayern-no-move-luiz-planned?cc=5739

Emphasis added.

GavRedKing

Yaya's had as many good days as hes had bad days TBH.

PLus getting a player of his age in will hold back other players and cost us a bomb, no thanks.

grumpymunster

My God shocked, would love him fantastic player

peteeeed

Seems we have increased our bid for ruddy to 7m according a few different news sources this evening

GavRedKing

I've no interest in Toure TBH, hes just gone on 30 and on stupid wages.

Zebra3

GavRedKing wrote: »

Never said he was a puppet but he wasnt the main player in this and he was certainly wealthy and rubbing shoulders with the elite prior to any loans/share deal.

You were the one that introduced the word 'puppet' into the debate.

GavRedKing wrote: »

so hes a Mafia boss now as well?

Was. Have you actually read up on what Russia was like during the 1990s?

GavRedKing wrote: »

Ok so, name some multi billionare coperations or individuals that have gotten their wealth by baking cookies and selling puppies?

Plenty have got rich through internet related products whether they be services or hardware manufacturers. Just one example.

GavRedKing wrote: »

Because they're not guility of what people accuse them of, no matter how much people want them to be.

I'm really not sure if I'm dealing with ignorance or innocence.

MaroonAndGreen

Whats yere views on Lukaku leading the line next season?

Is he good enough as a first choice lone striker for a league winning team?

I mean, hes no RVP....

GavRedKing

Zebra3 wrote: »

You were the one that introduced the word 'puppet' into the debate.

After your claims of him being the main man.

Was. Have you actually read up on what Russia was like during the 1990s?

I'm going to need proof of Roman the Mafia boss TBH,saying he was doesnt make him a Mafia boss no matter how dodgy Russia was in the 90's.

Plenty have got rich through internet related products be they be services or hardware manufacturers. Just one example.

I still wouldnt call that a "friendly" world or environment to make your money, theres plenty of dodgy deals regarding shares and buy outs of companies that have gone global nearly overnight on the internet, business is business at the end of the day.

I'm really not sure if I'm dealing with ignorance or innocence.

Neither I'd reckon, unless you can forward me proof of all Romans wrong doings and convictions, while hes not an angel, he aint Mafia kingpin knee capping and murdering people on his way to the top in the 90's

GavRedKing

MaroonAndGreen wrote: »

Whats yere views on Lukaku leading the line next season?

Is he good enough as a first choice lone striker for a league winning team?

I mean, hes no RVP....

Still reckon hes raw but if we sign another CF to improve on Ba/Torres and Lukaku is fighting and learning from them he should be fine.

If push comes to shove and we sign nobody and go into next season with our current 3 I'd be confident enough but I still think we can improve on what we got.

grumpymunster

Zebra3 wrote: »

Plenty have got rich through internet related products whether they be services or hardware manufacturers. Just one example.
.

Is that why almost every manufacturer spends a good chunk of their time in court fighting over patent rights. Google Samsung & Apple.

Various governments across the world might have something to say with regard to their filing of taxes.

grumpymunster

GavRedKing wrote: »

Still reckon hes raw but if we sign another CF to improve on Ba/Torres and Lukaku is fighting and learning from them he should be fine.

If push comes to shove and we sign nobody and go into next season with our current 3 I'd be confident enough but I still think we can improve on what we got.

ST£54m is too steep for Cavani would be better if only for a few years spend dosh on Gomez his record would be at least equal and possibly only 20% of the price. Seems to fancy Florence don't know why been there nowhere near as nice as London.

peteeeed

Tore Andre flo is back at the club as a coach for the academy

peteeeed

more on di rossi from the daily mirror interesting that it mentions wallace going to roma on loan next season , forgot all about him

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/chelsea-transfers-daniele-de-rossi-2022405?

GavRedKing

grumpymunster wrote: »

ST£54m is too steep for Cavani would be better if only for a few years spend dosh on Gomez his record would be at least equal and possibly only 20% of the price. Seems to fancy Florence don't know why been there nowhere near as nice as London.

Gomez would only happen if they got Lewandoski though and on that front I'd rather Lewandoski then Gomez, Gomez is too slow for the EPL and would offer nothing to the build up or quick football we play.

Cavani or Lewandoski woul dbe perfect fits but Cavanis price and Lewandoskis Bayern inentions probably rule both out.

Time will tell though, only 4 days until the players are back at Cobham with Jose.

peteeeed

van ginkel is on his way

http://www.chelseafc.com/news-article/article/3227800/title/agreement-reached-for-transfer-of-van-ginkel

GavRedKing

peteeeed wrote: »

van ginkel is on his way

http://www.chelseafc.com/news-article/article/3227800/title/agreement-reached-for-transfer-of-van-ginkel

As long as he isnt loaned out straight away I'll be happy.

Probably means no De Rossi but at 30, hes the wrong signing for us anyway IMO.

GavRedKing

Van Ginkel deal is reported to b ein and around 12-15 Million. :eek:

Although thats probably with add-ons.

grumpymunster

GavRedKing wrote: »

Gomez would only happen if they got Lewandoski though and on that front I'd rather Lewandoski then Gomez, Gomez is too slow for the EPL and would offer nothing to the build up or quick football we play.

Cavani or Lewandoski woul dbe perfect fits but Cavanis price and Lewandoskis Bayern inentions probably rule both out.

Time will tell though, only 4 days until the players are back at Cobham with Jose.

Gomez apparently been told by Pep he is not needed at BM and has apparently put his house on the market. At €10m a far better option than Cavani he is too hot and cold for my liking.

getuponthis

So what sort of player is Van Ginkel and how could we expect him to fit into the squad? Haven't seen him play other than a few YouTube clips which can make average players look like messi.
And it's good to see a player come through our (unofficial) youth academy!

The wiki contributors are quick, he already plays for Chelsea apparently!!

Techless

What type of midfielder is he - attacking or defensive ?