Official Chelsea Supporters Thread

No problem.

Onto another topic. Do you think Chelsea would be where they are now if Roman never bought the club...:D

50/50... we were semi-regular in th champs league before he bought us (every second year lets say) and with Ranieri we could have held a top4 spot for a while. Though he would have gotten sacked (like Rafa will be) because of his annoying fcking subs and general lack of ability to kill a game off. That said - had it not been for Roman's money two crucial things would not have happened. We would not be part of the "Group 8+1+2+3" Big European clubs. That coupled with only sparse Champions League football means that we could have been an Everton (though we were better without abramovich than everton are now to be honest)...

I definitely think that winning the League would have been a mountainous hurdle without the oney but to say we were completely off the top is wrong. Maybe we'd be like Pool are now :p

There is a second flavour though. Chelsea were at the time nearly 100million pounds in debt. Word was that if we didn't find a sugar-daddy we could have gone bankrupt (!) and then I'd be posting in other team's threads like theratman...

DO you reckon you could have done better had Prick and Midgett not bought you guys out?
 
50/50... we were semi-regular in th champs league before he bought us (every second year lets say) and with Ranieri we could have held a top4 spot for a while. Though he would have gotten sacked (like Rafa will be) because of his annoying fcking subs and general lack of ability to kill a game off. That said - had it not been for Roman's money two crucial things would not have happened. We would not be part of the "Group 8+1+2+3" Big European clubs. That coupled with only sparse Champions League football means that we could have been an Everton (though we were better without abramovich than everton are now to be honest)...

I definitely think that winning the League would have been a mountainous hurdle without the oney but to say we were completely off the top is wrong. Maybe we'd be like Pool are now :p

There is a second flavour though. Chelsea were at the time nearly 100million pounds in debt. Word was that if we didn't find a sugar-daddy we could have gone bankrupt (!) and then I'd be posting in other team's threads like theratman...

DO you reckon you could have done better had Prick and Midgett not bought you guys out?

Surprised you went into a lengthy response considering we had this argument a while back. I agree with your response. I seem to remember you had a different view.

Onto our Americans. I personally think we would be in the same situation whether we had them or not. People think it's because of the Americans. they clearly have short memories as they were not at Liverpool in the 90's and early 00's when Liverpool were at times worse off than they are now. To me the Americans are just a media nuisance, nothing more, nothing less.
 
Last edited:
Surprised you went into a lengthy response considering we had this argument a while back. I agree with your response. I seem to remember you had a different view.

Onto our Americans. I personally think we would be in the same situation whether we had them or not.

Though it is their debt that is holding you back right now. Also history seems to point out that they are not good at keeping promises when it comes to stadiums and the like. I think I posted a Wiki link a while back in the Liverpool thread about it.

As far as my views on Chelsea before Abramovich, I just don't think they were a "small side" which is what most people were on about. I never at the time said we were Top Drawer, but we weren't minnows by any stretch of the imagination.
 
Most certainly not. The money did make a difference, but Chelsea were almost a regular top 4 before he bought the club, the money managed to turn that position concrete.
 
Most certainly not. The money did make a difference, but Chelsea were almost a regular top 4 before he bought the club, the money managed to turn that position concrete.

Dude - we were on a very very thin line. It could have conceivably gone either way. The main thing Roman's money did was get us into the big boy club of Europe and help expand the ECL spots so that there could be a Big 4.
 
So, new major signings for us, maybe we are looking a bit thin up front, Drogba, Anelka, Kalou and Sturridge as strikers, with 2 of them off for ACN.

I know Malouda can fill in up front well, perhaps we will revert to a 4-3-3 or 4-5-1 during the ACN with Anelka up front, but what if he gets injured?

Other than that, midfield looking deadly, with Joe Cole and Yuri Zhirkov both to come back still, plenty of attacking in there.

I know this will get shot down, but the Ashley Cole/Jose Bosingwa combo seems to be the best wingback pairing in the league to me. They are both very potent going forward and very good at defending, they allow the narrow diamond to work perfectly by providing the width.
 
Ashley Cole - best left back

Glen Johnson - best right back
 
Evra was the best left back. Last season he was dissapointing.
 
How was he disappointing:confused: He was an NB part of a record breaking defense:erm: (I know it wasnt quite the same after his return form injury but he still put in some great performances e.g. the Inter game)
Cole has been disappointing for the past two seasons (maybe longer)
 
Last edited:
O Shea and and Jonny Evans was also part of that defence. Are they also the best in the world?
 
Last edited:
How was he disappointing:confused: He was an NB part of a record breaking defense:erm: (I know it wasnt quite the same after his return form injury but he still put in some great performances e.g. the Inter game)
Cole has been disappointing for the past two seasons (maybe longer)

:erm:

bwaaaahahahahahaha.

Cole was awesome last season. What are you smoking? Also - that record breaking defense had more to do with Vidic/Ferdinand/VDS than your wingbacks. :rolleyes:

Eish - sometimes you make me laugh so much...
 
:erm:

bwaaaahahahahahaha.

Cole was awesome last season. What are you smoking? Also - that record breaking defense had more to do with Vidic/Ferdinand/VDS than your wingbacks. :rolleyes:

Eish - sometimes you make me laugh so much...
He was aiight :rolleyes:
but Evra was/is better
 
:erm:

bwaaaahahahahahaha.

Cole was awesome last season. What are you smoking? Also - that record breaking defense had more to do with Vidic/Ferdinand/VDS than your wingbacks. :rolleyes:

Eish - sometimes you make me laugh so much...

Vidic/Ferdinand/VDS didn't play all thise games together. Evans played quite a few, and O'Shea did well considering how many other positions he's played in.

As for the Evra/Cole debate, I'd give it to Evra. He's had a much better season both defensively and on the attack. And if you recall what a menace Cole used to be for Arsenal on attack, then dbecks is right, he had an average season by his standards. Also, afaik, one of the only things Hiddink changed when he first started at Chelsea was the positional play of both wingbacks. If they were having such an awesome season, why would he do that?

But, as for the best wingback pairing, I guess PoiZoNouZ is correct. Though if I had to change something, I'd get rid of Bosingwa's monobrow.
 
They were leaving the defence too exposed. Scolari is not a brilliant tactician or someone who is good with defence.

So how is someone who is leaving the defence too exposed an awesome defender? He is part of the defence.
 
So how is someone who is leaving the defence too exposed an awesome defender? He is part of the defence.

Not according to Scolari's system. Scolari's instructions were stupid. Hiddink's were good. Cole still played awesomely even though he had more defensive duties. Did you watch Scolari-Chelsea play? It was atrocious. I always maintained that.
 
Last edited:
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X