Chelsea Thread - 2023/24

[super_city_si]

He's been injured, and lost some form this season, although I'd not judge him based upon our entire team being terrible.

I think the subtext is that he wanted wage parity with Kepa, and that wasn't going to happen.

So, a little like Mount (imo) he left because he wanted more money.

Cheers. I think he’s twice as good as kepa but maybe the injuries have taken their toll.

 

[bennyboy]

How's it looking squad wise now.

 

[ASHCFC]

Cheers. I think he’s twice as good as kepa but maybe the injuries have taken their toll.

There are quite a few keepers better than Kepa!

Kepa is a good shot stopper, but can't command his box at corners, doesn't like catching the ball, and is not great with the ball at his feet.

Way too many negatives for me.

 

[RobinHood]

There are quite a few keepers better than Kepa!

Kepa is a good shot stopper, but can't command his box at corners, doesn't like catching the ball, and is not great with the ball at his feet.

Way too many negatives for me.

And ignores manager's orders.

 

[ASHCFC]

And ignores manager's orders.

Haha. Yes, that was not a great moment.

To his credit he's never lost confidence, and has been super patient when not preferred. He's a good pen stopper.

Pochettino's goalkeeping team apparently think they can unlock an improved keeper in him - maybe working on some of the things I've already mentioned.

I hope he does step up as he's a top lad from what I can tell.

 

[KS55]

:)

Everything is not not an FFP dodge either. I remember you trying to convince me that giving 7 and 8 year contracts wasn't an FFP dodge either, shortly before rules were put in place to stop the FFP dodging part ....

Chelsea have bought too many players on good wages, they were looking FFP-fucked quite frankly. Along comes Saudi to take some excess players away. It's not just the money received as you well know, it's the wages being freed up. I doubt anyone else in Europe would be paying those players those wages, so Chelsea have benefitted from Saudi's investment much more than City would if, say, Bernardo would go there. I am guessing Chelsea, at the end of the window, will have miraculously complied with FFP.

Forgive people for being suspicious, especially given the PIF links to Chelsea's owners. And especially after the shit we get for any alleged wrong-doing.

The Saudis are just moving from a football backwater to become a competitive country. Maybe they just spotted an opportunity which was Chelsea’s need for a fire sale. Paying over the odds is simply their way of ensuring the players and clubs say yes. The money is small change for them. Was our buying up of Arsenal’s players part of some plot?
PIF link is so tenuous as to be nugatory.

 

[halfcenturyup]

PIF link is so tenuous as to be nugatory.

As tenuous at the "associated" links being taken into account now for sponsorship?

How much has PIF invested in Clearlake? I read one report that it was billions. Is it so hard to think a billion more may be invested for a few favours? Or that a billion may be withdrawn if favours aren't forthcoming? Small change to them, as you say.

Look, I am not really bothered, even if it sees me miss out on my fun watching Chelsea squirm under FFP. But, once again, it is the inconsistency. "Associated" sponsorships are bad and need to be reviewed and approved, but "associated" transfers shouldn't be looked at? That is my only point.

 

[KS55]

As tenuous at the "associated" links being taken into account now for sponsorship?

I think Clearlake have a limit of 5% for any one investor. I did see some fake maths ‘proving’ that Pif‘s stake meant they had an interest of about 1% of Chelsea.
If your statement reflects any sort of truth, we are in real trouble given the breadth of Silverlake’s portfolio!

 

[schfc6]

There are quite a few keepers better than Kepa!

Kepa is a good shot stopper, but can't command his box at corners, doesn't like catching the ball, and is not great with the ball at his feet.

Way too many negatives for me.

Are you linked to a keeper? As you and the Rags are desperate for one.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I think Clearlake have a limit of 5% for any one investor. I did see some fake maths ‘proving’ that Pif‘s stake meant they had an interest of about 1% of Chelsea.
If your statement reflects any sort of truth, we are in real trouble given the breadth of Silverlake’s portfolio!

Not if the sponsorship is at fair value. Any similar tests for transfers was my question, I guess. Anyway, enough. I am sure they will change the rules if there is a sniff City are involved somehow :)