We officially have an incompetent board

[abister1]

19 hours ago, Deino said:

My grief with Emenalo is youth progression into the first team squad

He doesn't have anything to do with progressing youth into the first squad. That's the manager's brief.

[abister1]

12 hours ago, Barrettinator said:

You only have to look at Conte's decision to play Azpi at RWB today rather than Zappacosta.

That was a far too defensive move which backfired. Say what you like about Moses but even when we are up against it he will run at the opposition a few times. 7 defensive players (Azpi, Rudi, Cahill, Christensen, Alonso, Kante, Bakayoko) was far too much. We literally bent over and took it like a bitch from them.

[Stim]

Nah, for all their possession they barely threatened Cortouis. Conte set us up to not lose and it was probably the best plan he had with the lack of options in the squad. If fabregas said f**k it and chopped down the ginger kid we could have got a point.

Or am I still not allowed to say a wednesday away game changes the prep for a saturday game against the strongest team in the league?

[dkw]

13 hours ago, Barrettinator said:

Where was all this defending when fans were having a go at players like Mikel and Kalou for years and years? I wonder why it was almost non existent.

Again, your just making stuff up, they both are defended the same as Cahill. Why as you saying it was different? Are you insinuating something?

[TheFunkeyGibbon]

I love it. OP thinks he knows how to do everything at a football club but is, at a guess, just about qualified to make the tea. [emoji849]

Let's face it a clubs have up and downs and all clubs make mistakes selling players. We are no different from the rest.

[Samdwich]

4 hours ago, dkw said:

Again, your just making stuff up, they both are defended the same as Cahill. Why as you saying it was different? Are you insinuating something?

awfully defensive here pal

[Barrettinator]

4 hours ago, dkw said:

Again, your just making stuff up, they both are defended the same as Cahill. Why as you saying it was different? Are you insinuating something?

Oh it was most definitely different. They weren't defended to this degree at all. But I reserve my comments.

Edited October 1, 2017 by Barrettinator

[dkw]

42 minutes ago, Samdwich said:

awfully defensive here pal

In what way? If you have something to say then just say it.

[dkw]

27 minutes ago, Barrettinator said:

Oh it was most definitely different. They weren't defended to this degree at all. But I reserve my comments.

And why do you think that was?

[Osgood is Good]

And surprise, surprise, out of nowhere the veiled accusation, speaks volumes about the accuser. What prompted this I wonder.

Edited October 1, 2017 by Osgood is Good

[Slojo]

5 hours ago, dkw said:

And why do you think that was?

Because they're black!!!

Jokes aside, Mikel & Kalou have been defended a lot actually. I can remember criticising Mikel & Kalou and sometimes outraging whenever they put in poor performances (I was a kid at the time) and I used to get a lot of stick for it.

Most people on this forum know Gary shouldn't be our first choice at the back, but he deserves to have respect for what he's done. It was the exact same with Kalou & Mikel, always put in effort, Kalou would score that important goal every now and then, Mikel would raise his game when it was needed every now and then (CL final & plenty of times against United) but both of them were never good enough to start, incredibly inconsistent. 

[Slojo]

5 hours ago, Barrettinator said:

Oh it was most definitely different. They weren't defended to this degree at all. But I reserve my comments.

I advise you to jump to the John Obi Mikel thread on this forum and see just how much he was defended, it was the same as Cahill, people were disrespectful to Mikel and were rightfully ridiculed, a lot of people criticised his performance and wanted him sold, people had different opinions. Most people on this forum know Cahill shouldn't be a first choice starter, I don't see what your issue is. 

[yorkleyblue]

On 9/30/2017 at 00:54, Barrettinator said:

...........................some petty whining stuff..................................

Tell me, what time exactly is the right time to criticise anything Chelsea related if at all you think criticism is a thing that should exist within the fanbase. And I'm throwing this question to @coco, @yorkleyblue and anyone else in here who has a different opinion. I'm genuinely curious.

The right time to criticise  anything is when you have the full facts.  You know nothing about the inner workings of the club, the transfer market or the informal discussions clubs have with players, agents and other clubs.  You claim to know exactly who does what within the board and start a thread based on that wonderful inside knowledge, criticising that board. 

When someone called you up on that, you posted a load of links to such famously accurate sources as Bleacher Report, The Mirror, The Mail, and Goal.com.  Hardly official minutes of a Chelsea board meeting, are they?

As I said, you and I know absolutely nothing about what has happened regarding transfers and the running of the club but you prefer to rely on randoms on twatter and ITK "journalists" who either cut and paste some other idiots rubbish, or try to make themselves look good by making sh*t up, or embellishing at the very best. 

I prefer not to make hasty and uninformed judgements about most things in life, and particularly about the club I love.  Maybe you could try to do the same.

[Barrettinator]

On 10/2/2017 at 02:39, yorkleyblue said:

The right time to criticise  anything is when you have the full facts.  You know nothing about the inner workings of the club, the transfer market or the informal discussions clubs have with players, agents and other clubs.  You claim to know exactly who does what within the board and start a thread based on that wonderful inside knowledge, criticising that board. 

When someone called you up on that, you posted a load of links to such famously accurate sources as Bleacher Report, The Mirror, The Mail, and Goal.com.  Hardly official minutes of a Chelsea board meeting, are they?

As I said, you and I know absolutely nothing about what has happened regarding transfers and the running of the club but you prefer to rely on randoms on twatter and ITK "journalists" who either cut and paste some other idiots rubbish, or try to make themselves look good by making sh*t up, or embellishing at the very best. 

I prefer not to make hasty and uninformed judgements about most things in life, and particularly about the club I love.  Maybe you could try to do the same.

Right. Sure. While you conveniently ignore the Telegraph and London Evening Standard sources as well.

Quick question: What's your opinion on the way Bates ran the club?

[TheChelseaBlues]

Somehow I don't think the answer and ensuing banter is going to be quick

[yorkleyblue]

7 hours ago, Barrettinator said:

Right. Sure. While you conveniently ignore the Telegraph and London Evening Standard sources as well.

Quick question: What's your opinion on the way Bates ran the club?

Evening Standard is a rag as bad as the rest.  The Telegraph isn't much better when it comes to actual news.

Bates was a tosser of the highest order, but saved the club and brought us to the dizzy heights we have reached now.  What is your point?

[mbh]

11 hours ago, Barrettinator said:

 

Quick question: What's your opinion on the way Bates ran the club?

Was the revolutionary that save our club, not too everybody's taste, should have carried out the electrification of the fence though, that would have kept the riff raff out. 

PS. Special mention too a certain Mr H.

[Slojo]

I don't trust the media at all. 

Not sure if you guys are on twitter but there was a parody football media account on there called ForestEchoNews which had parody journalists that used to tweet fake stories. One of the most notable accounts "Simon Rowntree" during the time of the Euro's tweeted that David De Gea has been part of a sex scandal and been sent home. This resulted in The Sun, Daily Mail, The Mirror all those other pages even Guillem Balague tweeted about it. 

But literally what this proven is that the media barely actually do any work, they just copy off each other. Every source had "from inside sources" when there were no investigations or PR people at the Spanish Teams hotel, they just copied it all off some parody account that got so many people believing in the rumour. That's how crap media is today, all that fiasco when it was probably some fat kid who thought of something funny to say and tweeted it. 

Don't believe me? Look for yourself https://www.joe.co.uk/uncategorized/david-de-gea-euro-2016-65946 They've all deleted their news articles about it now to save the embarrassment. But that's sports journalism today, nothing at all is trustworthy.

I genuinely don't believe they have anything solid on this club, sure they'll know a bit about transfers when it's coming out of the club, but that's about it. Inside the club, I don't trust them on anything. So we don't really know who makes the decisions on the club, people still think Torres was an Abramovich signing despite Carlo saying he wanted Torres at the club when he was given a 100 million war chest in January. 

Edited October 10, 2017 by Slojo

[Barrettinator]

On 10/10/2017 at 04:01, yorkleyblue said:

Evening Standard is a rag as bad as the rest.  The Telegraph isn't much better when it comes to actual news.

Bates was a tosser of the highest order, but saved the club and brought us to the dizzy heights we have reached now.  What is your point?

How do you know it was all down to Bates' decisions then? Did you know the inner workings of the club? Where you in meetings with him? Etc, etc.

I'm just using your logic.

[Barrettinator]

21 hours ago, Slojo said:

I don't trust the media at all. 

Not sure if you guys are on twitter but there was a parody football media account on there called ForestEchoNews which had parody journalists that used to tweet fake stories. One of the most notable accounts "Simon Rowntree" during the time of the Euro's tweeted that David De Gea has been part of a sex scandal and been sent home. This resulted in The Sun, Daily Mail, The Mirror all those other pages even Guillem Balague tweeted about it. 

But literally what this proven is that the media barely actually do any work, they just copy off each other. Every source had "from inside sources" when there were no investigations or PR people at the Spanish Teams hotel, they just copied it all off some parody account that got so many people believing in the rumour. That's how crap media is today, all that fiasco when it was probably some fat kid who thought of something funny to say and tweeted it. 

Don't believe me? Look for yourself https://www.joe.co.uk/uncategorized/david-de-gea-euro-2016-65946 They've all deleted their news articles about it now to save the embarrassment. But that's sports journalism today, nothing at all is trustworthy.

I genuinely don't believe they have anything solid on this club, sure they'll know a bit about transfers when it's coming out of the club, but that's about it. Inside the club, I don't trust them on anything. So we don't really know who makes the decisions on the club, people still think Torres was an Abramovich signing despite Carlo saying he wanted Torres at the club when he was given a 100 million war chest in January. 

Guillem Balague is bottom of the barrel when it comes to football journos. Only one worse than him is Tancredi Palmer. Not really saying much when you mention him tbh. 

[Osgood is Good]

On 10/10/2017 at 05:01, yorkleyblue said:

Evening Standard is a rag as bad as the rest.  The Telegraph isn't much better when it comes to actual news.

Bates was a tosser of the highest order, but saved the club and brought us to the dizzy heights we have reached now.  What is your point?

He's just stirring the pot again, to try and give his own comments some sort of credibility. Anyone who deliberately attempts to drag racism, as he did, into a discussion when it has not been mentioned is a "wrong-un" for me, and definitely not trustworthy.

[yorkleyblue]

On 10/11/2017 at 14:28, Barrettinator said:

How do you know it was all down to Bates' decisions then? Did you know the inner workings of the club? Where you in meetings with him? Etc, etc.

I'm just using your logic.

No you're not, you're just being a smug prick, so I'm now finished with this "discussion"

[just]

On 10/10/2017 at 02:20, Barrettinator said:

Right. Sure. While you conveniently ignore the Telegraph and London Evening Standard sources as well.

Quick question: What's your opinion on the way Bates ran the club?

Met Ken a few times. When we were sh*t, when were fighting for our very existence, and the last time on the evening of our CL home debut against AC Milan. On that night on the staircase leading from Bluebells I had the privilege of talking to him and telling him how much I appreciated what he had done to save CFC. The emotion of the occaision and talking about our recent history affected him and me and I will remember it as long as I live.

My first hand opinion of Ken Bates is of a genuine man with flaws but with a grim determination and a bellicose attitude that we desperately needed to survive in those dark days. Make no mistake he loved Chelsea and everything he did, right or wrong, was with the heartfelt conviction that it was in the best interest of the club.

IMO you are not fit to mention his name.

[Barrettinator]

On 10/13/2017 at 04:11, yorkleyblue said:

No you're not, you're just being a smug prick, so I'm now finished with this "discussion"

Ah beautiful. I'm a prick for using the exact same logic you used. So what does that make you then? Takes one to know one, I guess. Enjoy!

[Barrettinator]

18 hours ago, just said:

Met Ken a few times. When we were sh*t, when were fighting for our very existence, and the last time on the evening of our CL home debut against AC Milan. On that night on the staircase leading from Bluebells I had the privilege of talking to him and telling him how much I appreciated what he had done to save CFC. The emotion of the occaision and talking about our recent history affected him and me and I will remember it as long as I live.

My first hand opinion of Ken Bates is of a genuine man with flaws but with a grim determination and a bellicose attitude that we desperately needed to survive in those dark days. Make no mistake he loved Chelsea and everything he did, right or wrong, was with the heartfelt conviction that it was in the best interest of the club.

IMO you are not fit to mention his name.

Not sure what on earth you're on about but it might do you a world of good to take a look at my last few posts and see the point of me bringing Bates up at all. But if you want to be an idiot, go right ahead.