Chelsea FC

[Dod101]

Latest news is that Abramovich has put Chelsea up for sale at a price of £4 billion. Is this 'new' news though?

Dod

[BobbyD]

Chelsea not allowed to sell tickets, buy players or sign new contracts. They have 10 contracts expiring this season, notably Rudiger, Azpillrceta, Christiansen and Drinkwater.

[Laughton]

Can't sell tickets! Wow!
I don't go to football matches but I wonder how many tickets for the rest of the season are unsold at the moment?
Do away supporters generally buy tickets well in advance?
Presumably no fans (from whichever side) can buy tickets for cup ties yet to be drawn?? Could that lead to Chelsea home cup fixtures being played to empty grounds?

[Spet0789]

As rival fans used to sing: “When your Russian goes to jail you’ll be f’ed.”

Chelsea was London’s 4th club when Abramovich began pouring his dirty money in. If they descend back to League 2 it will be no more than fair.

[CryptoPlankton]

As rival fans used to sing: “When your Russian goes to jail you’ll be f’ed.”

Chelsea was London’s 4th club when Abramovich began pouring his dirty money in. If they descend back to League 2 it will be no more than fair.

Objectively, that assertion really doesn't seem to stack up. In the previous 6 seasons, [expletive deleted] were the only London club to finish higher than them in the Premier League. Also, they won the FA Cup, Cup Winners Cup, and League Cup while, as far as I can tell, Spurs were the only team (other than [expletive deleted]) to win a significant trophy (League Cup). When Abramovich took over, they had already qualified for the Champions League, finishing 4th the previous season.

Having said that, what does it matter? I really don't care what happens to them, good or bad - it's inconsequential in the grand scheme of things...

[BobbyD]

Can't sell tickets! Wow!
I don't go to football matches but I wonder how many tickets for the rest of the season are unsold at the moment?
Do away supporters generally buy tickets well in advance?
Presumably no fans (from whichever side) can buy tickets for cup ties yet to be drawn?? Could that lead to Chelsea home cup fixtures being played to empty grounds?

League tickets varies quite a lot based on the 3 PL teams I've bought tickets from.

They have around 28,000 season tickets, and haven't sold extra tickets for their next FA cup game, let alone future rounds.

My favourite restriction is probably:

Chelsea will be allowed to pay costs associated with travel to and from fixtures, to a maximum of £20,000 per game. This could affect Champions League away fixtures, starting with next week’s game against Lille.

- https://inews.co.uk/sport/football/chel ... ge-1509599

...and if this drags on for 4 more years they'll have zero players left under contract!

[BobbyD]

As rival fans used to sing: “When your Russian goes to jail you’ll be f’ed.”

Chelsea was London’s 4th club when Abramovich began pouring his dirty money in. If they descend back to League 2 it will be no more than fair.

Objectively, that assertion really doesn't seem to stack up. In the previous 6 seasons, [expletive deleted] were the only London club to finish higher than them in the Premier League. Also, they won the FA Cup, Cup Winners Cup, and League Cup while, as far as I can tell, Spurs were the only team (other than [expletive deleted]) to win a significant trophy (League Cup). When Abramovich took over, they had already qualified for the Champions League, finishing 4th the previous season.

Having said that, what does it matter? I really don't care what happens to them, good or bad - it's inconsequential in the grand scheme of things...

Objectively it's going to come down to a matter of timescale. Chelsea were on the rise with Ranieri, but you don't have to go back too much further to find them in Div 2, and then solidly mid-table for a spell. 4th is an exaggeration, and they were in the best form, whether or not they'd consolidated that in to being clearly a better class is somewhat debatable.

[Spet0789]

As rival fans used to sing: “When your Russian goes to jail you’ll be f’ed.”

Chelsea was London’s 4th club when Abramovich began pouring his dirty money in. If they descend back to League 2 it will be no more than fair.

Objectively, that assertion really doesn't seem to stack up. In the previous 6 seasons, [expletive deleted] were the only London club to finish higher than them in the Premier League. Also, they won the FA Cup, Cup Winners Cup, and League Cup while, as far as I can tell, Spurs were the only team (other than [expletive deleted]) to win a significant trophy (League Cup). When Abramovich took over, they had already qualified for the Champions League, finishing 4th the previous season.

Having said that, what does it matter? I really don't care what happens to them, good or bad - it's inconsequential in the grand scheme of things...

6 seasons is a ludicrously short period.

In terms of silverware when Chelsea were bought, [expletive deleted] were then (and still are) head and shoulders London’s premier club. Then Spurs. Then Chelsea and West Ham broadly level. But West Ham had the far far larger fan base when Abramovich came in.

If you disagree, you don’t know the London football scene.

[CryptoPlankton]

As rival fans used to sing: “When your Russian goes to jail you’ll be f’ed.”

Chelsea was London’s 4th club when Abramovich began pouring his dirty money in. If they descend back to League 2 it will be no more than fair.

Objectively, that assertion really doesn't seem to stack up. In the previous 6 seasons, [expletive deleted] were the only London club to finish higher than them in the Premier League. Also, they won the FA Cup, Cup Winners Cup, and League Cup while, as far as I can tell, Spurs were the only team (other than [expletive deleted]) to win a significant trophy (League Cup). When Abramovich took over, they had already qualified for the Champions League, finishing 4th the previous season.

Having said that, what does it matter? I really don't care what happens to them, good or bad - it's inconsequential in the grand scheme of things...

6 seasons is a ludicrously short period.

In terms of silverware when Chelsea were bought, [expletive deleted] were then (and still are) head and shoulders London’s premier club. Then Spurs. Then Chelsea and West Ham broadly level. But West Ham had the far far larger fan base when Abramovich came in.

If you disagree, you don’t know the London football scene.

Blimey. Well, you did say "when" Abramovich took over, at which time they had clearly been consistently better than both Spurs and West Ham for several years. In fact, in my 50 odd years of watching football, I certainly wouldn't consider them to have been inferior to those two overall - and they were an extremely fashionable and well followed club when I was a nipper. But, as it is so completely and utterly unimportant, I'll gladly concede that I'm not hip enough to know the London "football scene" as well as you.

[Spet0789]

As rival fans used to sing: “When your Russian goes to jail you’ll be f’ed.”

Chelsea was London’s 4th club when Abramovich began pouring his dirty money in. If they descend back to League 2 it will be no more than fair.

Objectively, that assertion really doesn't seem to stack up. In the previous 6 seasons, [expletive deleted] were the only London club to finish higher than them in the Premier League. Also, they won the FA Cup, Cup Winners Cup, and League Cup while, as far as I can tell, Spurs were the only team (other than [expletive deleted]) to win a significant trophy (League Cup). When Abramovich took over, they had already qualified for the Champions League, finishing 4th the previous season.

Having said that, what does it matter? I really don't care what happens to them, good or bad - it's inconsequential in the grand scheme of things...

6 seasons is a ludicrously short period.

In terms of silverware when Chelsea were bought, [expletive deleted] were then (and still are) head and shoulders London’s premier club. Then Spurs. Then Chelsea and West Ham broadly level. But West Ham had the far far larger fan base when Abramovich came in.

If you disagree, you don’t know the London football scene.

Blimey. Well, you did say "when" Abramovich took over, at which time they had clearly been consistently better than both Spurs and West Ham for several years. In fact, in my 50 odd years of watching football, I certainly wouldn't consider them to have been inferior to those two overall - and they were an extremely fashionable and well followed club when I was a nipper. But, as it is so completely and utterly unimportant, I'll gladly concede that I'm not hip enough to know the London "football scene" as well as you.

That’s a generously worded response. I apologise for the last sentence of a hastily written post, after quite a few drinks!

My point is that in terms of historical performance (measured by average league position and silverware), Chelsea were far behind [expletive deleted] and appreciably behind Spurs. I would put them perhaps a little ahead of West Ham but those measures but with a much smaller fan base.