Chelsea hit with 74 FA charges for alleged rule breaches

Citizen of Legoland said:
Of course they should be punished. You can’t just break rules and expect wrongdoings to get written off when the ownership changes. That’s the buyer’s fault, they should ensure that they have a way to make a claim against the seller for any financial punishments received in this way or accept the risk.
Click to expand...
The seller is not in a position to pay any damages. He was forced to sell the club.
He was a crook. It was bent Russian money but as (insert political party here) were desperate for money, no one asked the right questions (because they didn't want to hear the answers.)

If the new owners had not flagged it up, the useless bastards running football would never have found out.
It's why no one is asking why the rags have at least 2 sets of accountancy books.
Why punish someone for being honest?
 
Three years, this has reared it's head, after due diligence. Why so long?

Different era, but let's not forget their hotel and women's team sales still being investigated by UEFA (although dubiously cleared by Prem).

Cheating fuckers all round!
 
Blue Mist said:
The seller is not in a position to pay any damages. He was forced to sell the club.
He was a crook. It was bent Russian money but as (insert political party here) were desperate for money, no one asked the right questions (because they didn't want to hear the answers.)

If the new owners had not flagged it up, the useless bastards running football would never have found out.
It's why no one is asking why the rags have at least 2 sets of accountancy books.
Why punish someone for being honest?
Click to expand...
That’s a fair point but that’s the new owners’ decision. They could have stayed quiet about it but if it came to light later and there was evidence that a “thorough due diligence process” had been undertaken (possibly in partnership with a third party) then the situation would be very serious for them. So yes, punish them much less severely but you can’t totally ignore it.
 
waspish said:
Think this through now some owner cheats like fuck then sells the club to a mate he cheats like fuck and sells it to a mate! Sorry it’s Chelsea football clubs who are cheats they got the sporting advantage! Imagine if they didn’t get Hazard we did or another team? Because he only went to Chelsea because he and his agent got paid of the books by the Russian
Click to expand...
Sorry but you’ve not thought it through. If a bent owner sells to a bent mate no one would know about crooked deals. That is my point.
The Premier League is worth hundreds of millions, the FA is the most prestigious name in the football world and yet between them the only system to detect fraud/theft is a new owner 'fessing up (or a criminal hacking a clubs emails)

Look at the rags. They admitted to the world they were skint. They sacked Doris in the canteen and a few others and then spent 200 million. When people asked questions they said we were looking at the wrong accounting books !!
No one has decided to examine their accounts, no one has asked the dippers where they have got their money from and yet, because someone is being honest they get punished. How is that right ?
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I have no problem with Chelsea. I am glad they knocked United off their perch for a while. It is the corrupt PL leadership and their hypocrisy that bugs me most. Are we seriously expected to belive that LFC, MUFC, and AFC have not paid agents and players off book cash bonuses (to avoid tax). City are being hammered for Ya Ya Toure's image rights deal (four years before FFP came in). All major players in the world had similar deals. In fact the Inland Revenue allowed it at that time. We were cleared by CAS of breaching UEFA FFP but the PL launched a witchunt going back 15 years. United breached UEFA FFP but there was no investigation by the PL.
Click to expand...
Out of order, disgraceful post. You should be banned.
You are alleging that when the rags signed the world renowned Bebe from Neverheardof F.C. for 7 million pounds it was somehow bent. Did you not watch the 2 games he played for them?
 
Blue Mist said:
The seller is not in a position to pay any damages. He was forced to sell the club.
He was a crook. It was bent Russian money but as (insert political party here) were desperate for money, no one asked the right questions (because they didn't want to hear the answers.)

If the new owners had not flagged it up, the useless bastards running football would never have found out.
It's why no one is asking why the rags have at least 2 sets of accountancy books.
Why punish someone for being honest?
Click to expand...
Why punish someone for being honest?
Now there’s a can of worms you’re opening…
 
Citizen of Legoland said:
That’s a fair point but that’s the new owners’ decision. They could have stayed quiet about it but if it came to light later and there was evidence that a “thorough due diligence process” had been undertaken (possibly in partnership with a third party) then the situation would be very serious for them. So yes, punish them much less severely but you can’t totally ignore it.
Click to expand...
I'll pick out one part of your post 'if it came to light later '
How would it ever come to light. (Bar hacked emails) ?
The rags openly stated people were looking at the wrong set of accounts when the media queried their spending and yet no one batted an eye lid.
The whole set up is a joke. If you are honest you get punished, if you are bent, who cares.
 
It was almost a footnote on Sty radio news at 5:00 today, whereas the news of our 115 charges was the main headline on Radio Two, the day they were announced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top