A lot to address here. 

Firstly, should Abramovich have been sanctioned? I am no expert on this, and ultimately don't really understand fully the criteria for such powerful sanctions to be applied. It's an immense show of force from the government, and one that must ultimately be applauded if it has any impact on Putin and his war effort as a whole. I will fully support anything which helps give Putin a bloody nose, in any way at all. I suppose it comes down to whether there has been foul play on the part of Roman, and whether freezing his assets actually has any financial impact on Putin at all. There is certainly uncertainty on both fronts, particularly the latter. 

For all the (paper) talk of Roman being a villain, I have seen very little in the way of substance detailing what (if anything) he has actually done wrong (being Russian isn't a crime). The majority of the pitch fork mob seem disinterested in drilling into the specific detail, and have jumped straight to a firm guilty verdict on the basis of 'association'. That isn't good enough for me; with his nationality, standing, and (past) history in politics, it is of no surprise he has a historic relationship with Putin, as do many. Of course, for the majority of football fans, this is the excuse they have been waiting for since 2003, so they will naturally go with the narrative that suits. The evidence of his wrong doing (as provided by those who are so quick to condemn him), usually consists of a 5 year old image of him sitting in the same room as Putin. Obviously, anyone could produce a similar image with most world leaders, including our own Boris Johnson, doing the same thing. 

The latest, arguably more credible, evidence of his involvement is his links to companies who have provided steel to the Russian government, which may have been used to build tanks and the like. Now, once again, the link seems to lack many specific details, but I will admit this is one that has made me stop and think. It is the first actual link that I have seen between Roman and Putins war effort. I don't link it, I must admit. I would rather it wasn't there. That said, I would ask the question of whether, in itself, supplying steel represents any foul play on his part? When someone gets shot, you don't arrest the owner of the company who supplied the components to make the gun.  Regardless, how long has he been supplying this steel? 20 years or more?  Is supplying steel to the government of your home country in any way strange or wrong? If it was, why did we wait until now to intervene? Obviously, the answer is because of the invasion, however are we assuming he was complicit in the invasion of a country? A country that his mother was born in. A country that his own grandparents fled from during the Nazi invasion in 1942? I don't know the answer to that. Nobody does, I suspect. But it seems a hell of an assumption to make, and it's one the whole country seem to have decided is a closed book. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? I am not saying there is not a case for Roman to answer, there clearly is. I do however feel uncomfortable with how he has been scapegoated as some sort of war criminal, on the basis of really thread bare information. 

I understand that if Roman was in any way funding the Russian war machine, then it would be essential to freeze all UK assets to try and stem the flow of money to Russia, and ultimately Putin. But if Roman is selling steel to the Russian government, the the money is going in the other direction. Is there any evidence of Roman funding Putin in any way whatsoever? I am yet to see anything to support such a claim. 

Secondly, where the sanctions on Chelsea FC fair? Well as a life long Chelsea fan, naturally I think they were very harsh. They seem to be punishing all the wrong people. Ultimately, in the wider context, how football fans feel isn't important given what is happening in Ukraine. I fully get that. You can be fully with Ukraine, despise Putin, desperately want and end to the war, and still not want to see the football club you have followed for near on 40 years destroyed. That is allowed. Given that the government has granted a license to enable Chelsea fc to continue 'trading' it seems strange that they have effectively given us enough rope to hang ourselves with. As things stand, it is hard to see the business being even remotely sustainable, and therefore you ask why the license couldn't have been tweaked to enable fans to attend, at the very least. Surely there was a way to ensure that Roman was unable to extract any money from the club (has he ever made any profit from the club in 19 years? I believe he is owed £1.5B?) and enable business to continue with some sense of normality. I guess I am saying there could have been a pinch point whereby the club as a business was still effectively frozen, but not to the point where it is clearly just going to be starved into certain financial ruin. 

 

Finally, how are Chelsea fans supposed to feel? This is one that irks me. The whole nation seems to have decided that we, as Chelsea fans, deserve this. Why? Being a Chelsea fan doesn't make us any more or less compassionate about what is happening in Ukraine. I fully condemn those who sang Romans name during the minutes applause for Ukraine during the Burnley game. That was a really stupid thing to do. I respect peoples right to wish to support Roman, but the timing was crass. and But it doesn't mean that all Chelsea fans are 'Putin bots' as has been suggested in the media. Many, like me, are massively emotionally invested in what is happening in Ukraine, but wish to retain an open mind when it comes to Roman. He is an owner who has done amazing things for our football club. If I am presented with undeniable evidence of wrong doing in relation to the Russian invasion, I am entitled to change my opinion on him. And believe me I would. But I certainly won't be doing it because I am effectively told to by the media. The other stick we are being beaten with is the notion that we should never have supported Roman in the first place because of his 'dirty money'. I am not going to get into that, as we have had 19 years to talk about that (as have the government, who didn't have a problem with his money until now), but what I would say, is that it is completely ridiculous for rival fans and the media to have expected us to take some sort of action when Roman took over, on account of the uncertainty in relation to how his wealth was obtained. Do people actually think we should have walked away from the club we supported for decades on account of said uncertainty? Were we not supposed to celebrate the trophies? Get real. Rival fans have hated us for a reason for the last 19 years. Jealousy. Granted, they aren't jealous now, but let's not pretend that any other fan base would have acted any differently (see the comparable situations at Man City and Newcastle for reference). 

 

Ultimately, this is going to be a rough rider both in the short term, and quite possible the mid to long term. My advise would be to buckle up, avoid trolls on social media, and focus on the football (which we are still pretty good at). We are down, but not out. 

12 hours ago, axman2526 said:

3 "serious" bidders have offers on the table.

https://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2022/3/10/22971665/at-least-three-serious-bidders-for-chelsea-to-push-ahead-with-process-reports

The Swiss (I hate Roman) and US proposal, the Ricketts family (owners of Chicago Cubs) and @Munkworth favorite euphemism, I mean, NYJ owner...

lovely eh, or bad options imo but I guess of you are in the fire the frying pan looks pretty nice.

@Valpo @USATim 

Can any of you offer any feedback on these potential owners? Or any of our other US fans.

I don't follow baseball but the Ricketts are way better than Woody Johnson.  They took over the Cubs in 2009 and won a title in 2016.

Before that the last time they had won a title is 1908.

They were known for a long time as "The Loveable losers"

That said they are Cubs fans from before they even owned the club.  No guarantees that they will even care about Chelsea.  

To be fair I read that Woody Johnson actually is a Chelsea fan from when he was our ambassador.  But he's also a Jets fan and that has gotten then no where.

I will have to read up on the Swiss bidders I know nothing about them.

38 minutes ago, Mana said:

Nick Candy still wants to buy our club. Considering he's a Chelsea fan like us, I rather have him take charge. I want the next owner to have passion for our club.

He will be attending the Newcastle game.

Hearing way too much about him at the moment, it makes me suspicious that nothing will happen there. 

Klopp says what the government have done is right. All anyone gives a sh*t about is getting rid of CFC. Outside our own fan base absolutely nobody wants us to survive.

As long as we can form a new Chelsea and take 6'000 fans to away games at the likes of Tunbridge Angels and wreck the places.

12 minutes ago, enigma said:

This happened under Bates too. We were in debt to about 100m, right? 

From memory, I think we were 80m in debt at the time.

18 hours ago, Mana said:

Three just ended sponsorship until further notice...

 

 

We should remember who decided to back away from us when this whole thing gets sorted. Three needs Chelsea, the reigning Champions of the World to promote their pretty garbage mobile network in all honesty. They won't get a bigger outlet for sponsorship than us. 

 

I hope once this who thing calms down and we move onto the next chapter.. because we will.... Three is f**ked right off and we have a sponsor who wants to support us. 

22 minutes ago, Snedger said:

Klopp says what the government have done is right. All anyone gives a sh*t about is getting rid of CFC. Outside our own fan base absolutely nobody wants us to survive.

As long as we can form a new Chelsea and take 6'000 fans to away games at the likes of Tunbridge Angels and wreck the places.

To be fair, it's not really a surprise. Football is football, there is no loyalty. Klopp will be gone in a couple years most likely, why would it bother him? I'm pretty sure if it was happening to Utd or Liverpool, we would be saying the same thing as they are about us. 

I'm going to Tweet and call Three and ask them how I cancel my contract, I probably won't as it'll be too much but if every Chelsea fan does this it'll really pi** them off!

Edited March 11, 20224 yr by GregStarz

1 hour ago, Snedger said:

Indeed. And yet the UK continues to sell arms to Saudi Arabia that are used in Yemen where civilians have been killed. Government hypocrisy.

Yemen: UK to resume Saudi arms sales after humanitarian review - BBC News

Whilst the UK government gives itself a year to stop using Russian oil, it needed a headline grabbing action against Russia and this was the easiest and most spectacular option. And still, with an English football club condemned, Putin cracks on.

Exactly. Why couldn't they stop the Russian oil dependence with immediate effect. Its all very hypocritical. They will argue it will hit the economy and common man hard. How about the common people of the club. Not the footballers but the everyday people their jobs and income are associated with the club that may be severely impacted by all this. 

41 minutes ago, mclovin83 said:

A lot to address here. 

Firstly, should Abramovich have been sanctioned? I am no expert on this, and ultimately don't really understand fully the criteria for such powerful sanctions to be applied. It's an immense show of force from the government, and one that must ultimately be applauded if it has any impact on Putin and his war effort as a whole. I will fully support anything which helps give Putin a bloody nose, in any way at all. I suppose it comes down to whether there has been foul play on the part of Roman, and whether freezing his assets actually has any financial impact on Putin at all. There is certainly uncertainty on both fronts, particularly the latter. 

For all the (paper) talk of Roman being a villain, I have seen very little in the way of substance detailing what (if anything) he has actually done wrong (being Russian isn't a crime). The majority of the pitch fork mob seem disinterested in drilling into the specific detail, and have jumped straight to a firm guilty verdict on the basis of 'association'. That isn't good enough for me; with his nationality, standing, and (past) history in politics, it is of no surprise he has a historic relationship with Putin, as do many. Of course, for the majority of football fans, this is the excuse they have been waiting for since 2003, so they will naturally go with the narrative that suits. The evidence of his wrong doing (as provided by those who are so quick to condemn him), usually consists of a 5 year old image of him sitting in the same room as Putin. Obviously, anyone could produce a similar image with most world leaders, including our own Boris Johnson, doing the same thing. 

The latest, arguably more credible, evidence of his involvement is his links to companies who have provided steel to the Russian government, which may have been used to build tanks and the like. Now, once again, the link seems to lack many specific details, but I will admit this is one that has made me stop and think. It is the first actual link that I have seen between Roman and Putins war effort. I don't link it, I must admit. I would rather it wasn't there. That said, I would ask the question of whether, in itself, supplying steel represents any foul play on his part? When someone gets shot, you don't arrest the owner of the company who supplied the components to make the gun.  Regardless, how long has he been supplying this steel? 20 years or more?  Is supplying steel to the government of your home country in any way strange or wrong? If it was, why did we wait until now to intervene? Obviously, the answer is because of the invasion, however are we assuming he was complicit in the invasion of a country? A country that his mother was born in. A country that his own grandparents fled from during the Nazi invasion in 1942? I don't know the answer to that. Nobody does, I suspect. But it seems a hell of an assumption to make, and it's one the whole country seem to have decided is a closed book. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? I am not saying there is not a case for Roman to answer, there clearly is. I do however feel uncomfortable with how he has been scapegoated as some sort of war criminal, on the basis of really thread bare information. 

I understand that if Roman was in any way funding the Russian war machine, then it would be essential to freeze all UK assets to try and stem the flow of money to Russia, and ultimately Putin. But if Roman is selling steel to the Russian government, the the money is going in the other direction. Is there any evidence of Roman funding Putin in any way whatsoever? I am yet to see anything to support such a claim. 

Secondly, where the sanctions on Chelsea FC fair? Well as a life long Chelsea fan, naturally I think they were very harsh. They seem to be punishing all the wrong people. Ultimately, in the wider context, how football fans feel isn't important given what is happening in Ukraine. I fully get that. You can be fully with Ukraine, despise Putin, desperately want and end to the war, and still not want to see the football club you have followed for near on 40 years destroyed. That is allowed. Given that the government has granted a license to enable Chelsea fc to continue 'trading' it seems strange that they have effectively given us enough rope to hang ourselves with. As things stand, it is hard to see the business being even remotely sustainable, and therefore you ask why the license couldn't have been tweaked to enable fans to attend, at the very least. Surely there was a way to ensure that Roman was unable to extract any money from the club (has he ever made any profit from the club in 19 years? I believe he is owed £1.5B?) and enable business to continue with some sense of normality. I guess I am saying there could have been a pinch point whereby the club as a business was still effectively frozen, but not to the point where it is clearly just going to be starved into certain financial ruin. 

 

Finally, how are Chelsea fans supposed to feel? This is one that irks me. The whole nation seems to have decided that we, as Chelsea fans, deserve this. Why? Being a Chelsea fan doesn't make us any more or less compassionate about what is happening in Ukraine. I fully condemn those who sang Romans name during the minutes applause for Ukraine during the Burnley game. That was a really stupid thing to do. I respect peoples right to wish to support Roman, but the timing was crass. and But it doesn't mean that all Chelsea fans are 'Putin bots' as has been suggested in the media. Many, like me, are massively emotionally invested in what is happening in Ukraine, but wish to retain an open mind when it comes to Roman. He is an owner who has done amazing things for our football club. If I am presented with undeniable evidence of wrong doing in relation to the Russian invasion, I am entitled to change my opinion on him. And believe me I would. But I certainly won't be doing it because I am effectively told to by the media. The other stick we are being beaten with is the notion that we should never have supported Roman in the first place because of his 'dirty money'. I am not going to get into that, as we have had 19 years to talk about that (as have the government, who didn't have a problem with his money until now), but what I would say, is that it is completely ridiculous for rival fans and the media to have expected us to take some sort of action when Roman took over, on account of the uncertainty in relation to how his wealth was obtained. Do people actually think we should have walked away from the club we supported for decades on account of said uncertainty? Were we not supposed to celebrate the trophies? Get real. Rival fans have hated us for a reason for the last 19 years. Jealousy. Granted, they aren't jealous now, but let's not pretend that any other fan base would have acted any differently (see the comparable situations at Man City and Newcastle for reference). 

 

Ultimately, this is going to be a rough rider both in the short term, and quite possible the mid to long term. My advise would be to buckle up, avoid trolls on social media, and focus on the football (which we are still pretty good at). We are down, but not out. 

The best post i have read on the forum.. if there was an attempt to stop Putin unfortunately there is only one. At the moment it just shows a desperation by politicians to show that they are doing something.. While for decades they have been appeasing dictators like Putin, Xi Jinpang, MBS, Qatar and so on.. 

This is also a time when we have 2 bit journalists using this as an opportunity to bring out the their hatred and jealousy.. the hypocrisy my lord is outstanding.. by the same logic anyone who supported the IRAQ war should have assets siezed.. the US for what it did in Afganisation. Saudi for Yemen. and so on..

24 minutes ago, Jangz said:

The best post i have read on the forum.. if there was an attempt to stop Putin unfortunately there is only one. At the moment it just shows a desperation by politicians to show that they are doing something.. While for decades they have been appeasing dictators like Putin, Xi Jinpang, MBS, Qatar and so on.. 

This is also a time when we have 2 bit journalists using this as an opportunity to bring out the their hatred and jealousy.. the hypocrisy my lord is outstanding.. by the same logic anyone who supported the IRAQ war should have assets siezed.. the US for what it did in Afganisation. Saudi for Yemen. and so on..

Brilliant and articulate😍

1 hour ago, Valpo said:

I don't follow baseball but the Ricketts are way better than Woody Johnson.  They took over the Cubs in 2009 and won a title in 2016.

Before that the last time they had won a title is 1908.

They were known for a long time as "The Loveable losers"

That said they are Cubs fans from before they even owned the club.  No guarantees that they will even care about Chelsea.  

To be fair I read that Woody Johnson actually is a Chelsea fan from when he was our ambassador.  But he's also a Jets fan and that has gotten then no where.

I will have to read up on the Swiss bidders I know nothing about them.

Just read this in DMonline.

Newcastle director Jamie Reuben 'considers making an offer to buy Chelsea' - but his billionaire father and uncle would have to sell the 10 per cent stake in The Magpies they only acquired five months ago in Saudi takeover

• Jamie Reuben is the Chelsea-supporting son of billionaire investor David Reuben
• The businessman's father owns about a tenth of Newcastle with brother Simon
• The 35-year-old could bid for Chelsea and eye a new stadium, a report has said
• Any deal could require his wealthy relatives to pass up their stake in Newcastle

So many rumours and names being thrown about, it's easy clicks for the papers. 

Sanctions are normally put on terrorists or regimes.

Can't see why they need to freeze the club just change the Bank Accounts so that all revenue and expense accounts are UK owned so the holding UK banks can then block any funds going to Russia or Abramovich.

Then ask the market to find a buyer in excess of £1.5bn and place the £1.5bn into an escrow account only to be released to Abramovich once the sanctions are removed. That may be over 30 years away!

 

Some more details from Matt Law on what a takeover by Todd Boehly might look like for the club's on-field prospects.

At the time, a source close to the American, who studied at the London School of Economics, told Telegraph Sport: “If Todd manages to buy Chelsea, or any other Premier League football club, then he will do it to win. Look at what he has done with the Dodgers. This would be no type of Kroenke ownership, he would want to be fighting with Manchester City and Liverpool, and Barcelona and Real Madrid in Europe".

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/03/11/todd-boehly-takeover-would-keep-chelsea-hunt-footballs-biggest/

Read this, someone savvy enough to see through the bullsh*t of economic sanctioning

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/11/russia-sanctions-boris-johnson-vladimir-putin-ukraine

Update on the Ricketts that isn't good news for Chelsea if they took over the club.

I talked to a guy at work who is a cubs fan.  He doesn't like them.  Says they got rid of a lot of players and coaches from that championship team soon after they won it and doesn't think they spend what they could spend on the team.  And I checked out what he was saying and it's legit.

Chicago is about the 3rd largest media market in the US.  The first two NY and LA have their teams spending on the very high end of Major League Baseball.  The Chicago cubs however spend well below the league average.  Tellingly they spent only a bit over half of what the Chicago White Sox spent who are from the same city and media market.  This is made even worse by the fact that in my estimation the cubs are the more popular of the two teams.  

 

 

2 hours ago, Jon9344 said:

We should remember who decided to back away from us when this whole thing gets sorted. Three needs Chelsea, the reigning Champions of the World to promote their pretty garbage mobile network in all honesty. They won't get a bigger outlet for sponsorship than us. 

 

I hope once this who thing calms down and we move onto the next chapter.. because we will.... Three is f**ked right off and we have a sponsor who wants to support us. 

Just saw this, credit to Trivago. Three can f*ck off with their ugly logo.

Edited March 11, 20224 yr by yaz

1 minute ago, yaz said:

Just saw this, credit to Trivago. Three can f*ck off with their ugly logo.

Think Nike Is considering backing off also which is ridiculous. Roman hasn’t made a penny off the club

Since Roman was not going to profit from the sale of the club and currently cannot sell it, how about being able to give the club away? Could he just sign it over to the Candy man or whoever the best option is?

13 minutes ago, yaz said:

Just saw this, credit to Trivago. Three can f*ck off with their ugly logo.

We want sponsors who will support us in the Good times... and the Bad. I hope that all this is remembered when a new owner comes in and we continue normal jogging. 

 

Well played Trivago..... F**k off Three. I hope Nike see sense and don't just jump on the bandwagon.

Statement from the Chelsea Supporters Trust. Will be meeting fans from 12 noon on Sunday.

https://chelseasupporterstrust.com/wp-content/uploads/QA.pdf

Edited March 11, 20224 yr by Boyne

8 minutes ago, Boyne said:

Statement from the Chelsea Supporters Trust. Will be meeting fans from 12 noon on Sunday.

https://chelseasupporterstrust.com/wp-content/uploads/QA.pdf

Will have to see what the eventual new owners think. Could be like the glazers and tell the fans to do one, will run the club as they please.

4 hours ago, Zeta said:

Maybe those of us being optimistic about the situation will be shown wrong. Maybe we are in a house on fire and soon the wage bill will crush us in to administration then liquidation and the club is no more.

But I chose to believe Roman will put the clubs interests first and won't let that happen.

Even if it did, been one wonderful ride 🙂

I was thinking about it, we are one of very few clubs in Europe to have won what we've won. There are probably about 10 other clubs who have done more, if that. We really were fortunate to have been taken over and had the success we did. Not even PSG have managed to achieve a single CL trophy yet, but we have 2, and came close a couple more times to getting our hands on the trophy. Considering the competition in the PL and Europe during our successful periods, we have done amazing. It's a privilege to have experienced all that success and those trophies.