Roman Abramovich hands over ‘stewardship and care’ of Chelsea football club

[n01efc]

I see the Chelsea fans continue to chant the name of their beloved Russian owner - stupid idiots.

 

[GoldenToffee]

All of this won't remove all those beautiful trophies won by his dirty Russian money. A terrible shame. All those years we were run by the cleaner than clean William H Kenwright re-mortgaging his house to hand us a transfer war chest and won diddly squat, while Chelsea were able to dip into Abramovich's filthy footballing finance fund to the tune of hundreds of millions to buy themselves success.

 

[Mr K.Dilkington]

All of this won't remove all those beautiful trophies won by his dirty Russian money. A terrible shame. All those years we were run by the cleaner than clean William H Kenwright re-mortgaging his house to hand us a transfer war chest and won diddly squat, while Chelsea were able to dip into Abramovich's filthy footballing finance fund to the tune of hundreds of millions to buy themselves success.

Satire?

 

[GoldenToffee]

Satire?

 

[Mr K.Dilkington]

You don't know who's serious and who's a parody on this forum!

 

[MisterJ]

With this they will - its not so much the stealing part that is at fault (lets face it every jurisdiction that I know of has some kind of seizure process), its the way in which they are also allowing it to continue as a going concern whilst also banning its operation as a going concern, for which I can think of no precedent here or in anyone else's law.

I mean how on earth can ticket, merchandise and some refreshment sales be banned? The club is actually a separate entity to Abramovich.

Ultimately, doesn't he profit from any monies made by the club?

That's why they're doing this, so the club generates no revenue at all by which he might benefit.

It's harsh on the club and their supporters, but they've had 20 odd years of success off the back of his money; now they are paying the price for this.

 

[gonetomorrow]

Ultimately, doesn't he profit from any monies made by the club?

That's why they're doing this, so the club generates no revenue at all by which he might benefit.

It's harsh on the club and their supporters, but they've had 20 odd years of success off the back of his money; now they are paying the price for this.

It does seem harsh. I dunno.

 

[Mr K.Dilkington]

Ultimately, doesn't he profit from any monies made by the club?

That's why they're doing this, so the club generates no revenue at all by which he might benefit.

It's harsh on the club and their supporters, but they've had 20 odd years of success off the back of his money; now they are paying the price for this.

I don't think they should have to pay the price. I doubt there's very many clean banknotes amongst all the premier league owners, especially Newcastles, I'm not sure this is the best approach to the situation.

 

[ClausThomsen]

The guy has been sanctioned for his links to Putin and Chelsea are an asset of his.

I don't think that's remotely harsh. It's the fact that standards and rules around ownership are incredibly soft, apathetic and easily skirted around with political and financial clout that is the problem - not the harshness of sanctions.

 

[Saint Domingo]

I see the Chelsea fans continue to chant the name of their beloved Russian owner - stupid idiots.

That’s what modern football has done to fans now. The 24/7 relentless mocking media coverage has now driven fans to the point where they’d rather have a successful club than not be associated with a man propping up Putin’s regime.

I’m not sure if a new generation of Chelsea fans will be able to put up with being on the outside looking in like almost every team in England is.

 

[Mr K.Dilkington]

The guy has been sanctioned for his links to Putin and Chelsea are an asset of his.

I don't think that's remotely harsh. It's the fact that standards and rules around ownership are incredibly soft, apathetic and easily skirted around with political and financial clout that is the problem - not the harshness of sanctions.

Thats what frustrates me with this situation, there's no consistency. Newcastle being able to be bought before this is baffling to me.

 

[nikom court]

i dont see the difference between the chelsea backed russians,
newcastle backed saudis bombing yemen
psg,man city backed arabs with horredous human rights breaches.
how many countries have the yanks invaded in the last 50 years?
the government are just picking what wars are important and whats trivial
sportswashing at best!

 

[GoldenToffee]

Thats what frustrates me with this situation, there's no consistency. Newcastle being able to be bought before this is baffling to me.

Just wait until the Champions League final is held in Jeddah in a few years time. Money makes a lot of people turn a blind eye to absolutely anything. You'll have Newcastle lifting the trophy with a squad worth about 2b pounds, and some fella outside having his head cut off with a butter knife for stealing a chicken.

 

[GP_Monty]

Seeing for the first time all the restrictions placed on Chelsea. Quite stringent.
I'm watching that Kaveh joker on Sky sports talking about the situation like he is an official spokesman. He's a clown, everything prefixed " I'm told", "A source tells me", "I'm led to believe" does anyone take him seriously?

Proper chancer that lad

 

[MisterJ]

I don't think they should have to pay the price. I doubt there's very many clean banknotes amongst all the premier league owners, especially Newcastles, I'm not sure this is the best approach to the situation.

I have a lot of sympathy with the fans and you're right, there are a lot of other club owners that also wouldn't stand too close a scrutiny of their activities.

However, it's undeniable that the owner is close to a regime that have invaded another sovereign nation with no provocation, pulling Europe and potentially the world closer to war than anything seen since 1939. There have to be consequences for anyone associated with such a regime.