Search results

If he gets elected, I might become a Real Madrid member for a laugh. Since it's going for free.

On a scale of imminency, less or more imminent than having a manager?

Ah, so an improvement for us then. Sounds positive.

I agree. There have been various claims floating about. One I have seen is that part of his mutual agreement to terminate his employment had a clause that Chelsea still retain his rights to his contract and renumeration agead of his starting a future role. With anyone, not just us, as I read it...

I can say with certainty they wouldnt have specifically said to him, we will offer you employment without your employer's consent.

Not talking about commas in your grammar, but in the regulation. Two very different meanings with and without a comma. The club would not have approached him with the intent of offering him employment without his other clubs consent. It is the intent that is the the key part there.

Read the regulation, read what I said. Understand commas (or their lack of as well).

I'll believe it when he's holding up that shirt. There was a fee of nearly 50m agreed as part of an option to buy. Don't see us just so readily halving that for no real reason. Not this early in the window, when he is not going to a world cup, and there is time to for both sides to play the...

Sheikh Mansour took a case Slammed it on Todd's desk-a Paid the compensation cash For Enzo Maresca Anybody?

I'd be confident that the club did not approach him with the view of offering employment without the consent of the other club. Nor attempt to induce him.to terminate his contract.

Pissing myself. So many classic moments in there

If there is one club that seem to know how to exploit contractual loopholes, it is Chelsea. As we have seen with their Trenasfers, PSR creativity, Hotel sale, and circumnavigating punishment for blatant breaches of rules. They'll likely have something to push here.

'That'll do' Mediocrates

It was apparently in his contract to disclose any approaches, according to reports. He would have been in breach of contract if he hadn't. Which would then risk getting himself ,erm, sacked. The irony.

We have no idea what would have been in his mutual agreement to terminate his contract, or whether Chelsea have any basis to expect anything. People agree to all sorts of things when they leave a job, or have it in their original contract. Not working for a set period of time after, not going...

The club obviously seem to think he is. If all the reports that we approached him all the way back at the end of last year are true. They would have known he had 3.5 years on his contract at that point, which would have been 3 years at this point. So they woumd ahve always have gone in with the...

Depends. On how it was done. Clubs approach and speak to managers under contracts. Chelsea, of all clubs, will know this, having done it with their last - well every manager they have since even before the take-over. It will be for the professionals to decide

While it was known both of our last two managers were coming, Pep was formally announced on the 3rd of July, and Pellegrini on the 14th of June. So if anything, we are not 'behind' with this one.

Apologies, thought we had till monday for me to do the who is who of the playlist. But to be fair the whole thing was a bit fo a failure anyway. Will summarise at some point without hopefully distracting from the album at hand.

Windmills and landmarks today on here then lads?