Search results

Haha. There is that :) We love Azpi in our house. Gutted for him as he hasn't started for ages. We should really have let him go last season. He's been an amazing servant of our club.

A mate? Haha. If Abramovich was 'hand in glove' with Putin, don't you think he'd have been given enough of a heads up to be able to sell Chelsea? As a (City) forum member said a few days back, he is just a business opportunist that made his fortune in ways I'm guessing many billionaires do...

Raheem is as happy as can be. He's picking up stupid money for being totally useless. Should be the first player out the door in my opinion. Great bit of business by City to jog him on.

Shows how little you understand sir. Thankfully other forum members who've already posted in recent days offer a more informed/less trolling point of view.

It will take a miracle at this moment for us, but loving the idea bro. You guys don't need our unlikely help though. It's in your hands. Your title. Me and the lads were literally just saying that our only source of happiness tonight is that you've stopped the Gooners winning the league...

Agree. Tonight we basically started with no recognised attackers, unless you count Sterling (I don't). Lamps is a Chelsea legend and will, always be loved. But as a manager he seems to making what is already a tough job even tougher.

I can see/ feel why you say that. Maybe there is. One way or another it's a disjointed mess.

You're not wrong.

I don't see this as particularly relevant tbh.

I said 'safer'. Not safe. Mediocrity is your word. Most of football don't seem to agree. I guess we'll just have to see.

There's been a connection between Rangers and Chelsea for many years. A good Chelsea friend of mine had a Rangers tattoo.

I'd be the first to say (and in fact recall saying specifically on this forum previously) that Man City are suberbly run as far as having a single cohesive approach to being a successful football club. Maybe one of the best. All I was ever saying is that everyone makes mistakes at first, and...

I'm not here, and have no desire to critique Mansour or City. My posts today were actually focused on Pochettino's apparently imminent appointment as Chelsea manager. If you want someone to critique your owner, maybe try UEFA or the FA :)

You're still going on about the issue of involvement mate, despite me already explaining to you that I only referred to Mansour as an example (given this is a City forum) to point out that all owners, and especially new ones, will make mistakes.

Yeah, okay. You're choosing to focus on one point of criticism of Boehly in order to contrast it favourably with your owner. My point is that I'm sure Mansour has likely made mistakes too, albeit different ones. It's easy to judge when your club is stable and established in it's identity. You...

Chelsea have a team of people, just like every other top club. And just like every other top club, I'd guess that the owner has ultimate sign-off on big appointments. As a fan of another team it's easy to have a bit of a laugh at Chelsea right now, and fair play. However, despite Boehly...

I don't understand what you're saying here.

I don't think you'll find many Chelsea fans professing love for Pochettino. After all, he's a Spud, at least until such time as he proves otherwise. I'd guess that most Chels are like me - pragmatic about the appointment given where we've been since the change of ownership. I don't know much...

:) This line has made me laugh. Much needed during these crazy times at Stamford Bridge. Appreciated :) Saw this muppet on the telly last night singing in his car. Would really appreciate it if the good people of Los Angeles would keep him there.

I'd want to be paid to be a spud. Makes sense.