Chelsea V Man City Pre- Match Thread.

[coulsonblue]

In that picture the stadium is empty before they get off the pitch?

Very suspect.

They weren't playing at home.

Not one person in the crowd?

Didn't see the game but were they playing behind closed doors?

was moved to Moscow so only 5000 turned up

 

[Chi-town blues]

In that picture the stadium is empty before they get off the pitch?

Very suspect.

They weren't playing at home.

Not one person in the crowd?

Didn't see the game but were they playing behind closed doors?

More then half of the stadium looked empty during the game .

 

[Andouble]

Huge game. Chelsea are in great form at the moment with Torres firing them in. We are coming off the back of a terrific derby win. Wembley semi final, winner should go on to take the cup. Come on city! I believe.

They lost today. And they lost to Southampton 2 days before beating United in the replay. 2 dodgy goals v Sunderland.

Maybe they've improved a bit but they aren't blowing the doors down.

 

[pudge]

Relevant to our interests perhaps? (From the Telegraph)

Is that the press trying to harm Chelsea's chances of winning on Sunday by creating a false rumour?

How is it false?

 

[MCFC BOB]

Relevant to our interests perhaps? (From the Telegraph)

Is that the press trying to harm Chelsea's chances of winning on Sunday by creating a false rumour?

How is it false?

False wasn't the correct word to use.

But that still doesn't make my question any less valid. When Mancini and Balotelli had a brawl shortly before the striker left the press printed several pictures of the fight and, as usual, there were claims on here that the pictures had been printed in the public to disrupt the City camp. So why is the Chelsea scuffle story any different to the ones that are usually criticised on this forum when they're about City?

 

[fullydavid]

hey - thought you guys might appreciate this.
<a class="postlink" href="https://twitter.com/fullydavid/status/322523952310259712" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">https://twitter.com/fullydavid/status/3 ... 2310259712</a>

David.

 

[pudge]

Is that the press trying to harm Chelsea's chances of winning on Sunday by creating a false rumour?

How is it false?

False wasn't the correct word to use.

But that still doesn't make my question any less valid. When Mancini and Balotelli had a brawl shortly before the striker left the press printed several pictures of the fight and, as usual, there were claims on here that the pictures had been printed in the public to disrupt the City camp. So why is the Chelsea scuffle story any different to the ones that are usually criticised on this forum when they're about City?

Both instances happened in public so I for one am glad whoever was stupid enough to propose such an idea the first time round wasn't that stupid enough to say it again.

 

[MCFC BOB]

How is it false?

False wasn't the correct word to use.

But that still doesn't make my question any less valid. When Mancini and Balotelli had a brawl shortly before the striker left the press printed several pictures of the fight and, as usual, there were claims on here that the pictures had been printed in the public to disrupt the City camp. So why is the Chelsea scuffle story any different to the ones that are usually criticised on this forum when they're about City?

Both instances happened in public so I for one am glad whoever was stupid enough to propose such an idea the first time round wasn't that stupid enough to say it again.

I'm not sure what you mean. Could you explain?

 

[pudge]

False wasn't the correct word to use.

But that still doesn't make my question any less valid. When Mancini and Balotelli had a brawl shortly before the striker left the press printed several pictures of the fight and, as usual, there were claims on here that the pictures had been printed in the public to disrupt the City camp. So why is the Chelsea scuffle story any different to the ones that are usually criticised on this forum when they're about City?

Both instances happened in public so I for one am glad whoever was stupid enough to propose such an idea the first time round wasn't that stupid enough to say it again.

I'm not sure what you mean. Could you explain?

Mario and Mancini's 'brawl" happened on the training ground. A training ground that is open to the public and the press.

Lampard and Luiz had their lovers tiff on the pitch during a televised game.

Both instances actually physically happened, in a public domain at that, how reporting them could be seen as "agenda driven" is stupid.

So whoever proposed the idea that the publication of pictures of Mario and Mancini's spat was to disrupt the club, im glad they are not stupid enough to repeat it now.

Mmmmmmmmmmmm kay?

 

[Indestructable]

Can anyone clarify what kit we are wearing on Sunday?

Home kit

Cheers