2 minutes ago, nonotnowjim said:

There is very little public evidence. Agreed.

Having worked in the area of UK sanctions in the past, I can say that the evidential threshold in the UK for them to be implemented is very high. Rumor or speculation alone is NOT sufficient to meet the burden of proof.

I have said already, but these decisions, in my experience, are not made on a whim or to make headlines. They are taken after hours of consideration, engagement and legal advice. Given Roman has the best lawyers that money can buy, I very much doubt the UK government have all of a sudden thought "f**k it - lets sanction Roman and 6 other billionaires, and get sued later, simply to make a point"

 

Is the sanctions threshold higher than the evidence to go to war? The US and UK swore Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and invaded Iraq on that basis, but it turned out to be a complete lie. If they can lie about something like that, it makes it very difficult for me to trust anything they say. Most governments say what serves their agenda or what they perceive will be popular with the public, and it is not always necessarily the truth.
I don't think Roman is innocent by any means but I also don't trust a lot of what the government says.

Rio Ferdinand has been quoted as saying, or tweeting that "this is no longer about Roman abramovich, it is a direct attack on Chelsea FC"

Mohamed Alkhereiji, the guy leading the Saudi Media Takeover bid is apparently a Chelsea fan and he plans to renew key players contracts and redevelop Stamford Bridge. I hope either him or Nick Candy are the ones to takeover since they're both fans and would want to redevelop the club rather than turn it into a cash cow. 

2 minutes ago, TheSage said:

Is the sanctions threshold higher than the evidence to go to war? The US and UK swore Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and invaded Iraq on that basis, but it turned out to be a complete lie. If they can lie about something like that, it makes it very difficult for me to trust anything they say. Most governments say what serves their agenda or what they perceive will be popular with the public, and it is not always necessarily the truth.
I don't think Roman is innocent by any means but I also don't trust a lot of what the government says.

Amen to that, trust the UK government about 0.01% more than you can the crooked US government.

1 minute ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

Mohamed Alkhereiji, the guy leading the Saudi Media Takeover bid is apparently a Chelsea fan and he plans to renew key players contracts and redevelop Stamford Bridge. I hope either him or Nick Candy are the ones to takeover since they're both fans and would want to redevelop the club rather than turn it into a cash cow. 

What's to stop the government they suddenly decide they care about the people of Yemen and then sanction these owners?

Were  this Liverpool that Roman owned how do we think the Kopities would be reacting in our place?

Probably molotovs thrown at number 10 and thr houses of parliament burgled.

Just now, axman2526 said:

What's to stop the government they suddenly decide they care about the people of Yemen and then sanction these owners?

I think the difference is that Roman wasn't sanctioned because he was Russian, he was sanctioned because he had ties to Putin. If Roman was just a rich Russian he wouldn't have been sanctioned or forced to sell the club. I don't know much about this guy but he might just be Saudi Arabian and not necessarily tied to the atrocities of their government. 

9 minutes ago, nonotnowjim said:

There is very little public evidence. Agreed.

Having worked in the area of UK sanctions in the past, I can say that the evidential threshold in the UK for them to be implemented is very high. Rumor or speculation alone is NOT sufficient to meet the burden of proof.

I have said already, but these decisions, in my experience, are not made on a whim or to make headlines. They are taken after hours of consideration, engagement and legal advice. Given Roman has the best lawyers that money can buy, I very much doubt the UK government have all of a sudden thought "f**k it - lets sanction Roman and 6 other billionaires, and get sued later, simply to make a point"

 

It depends what you mean by proof. If the proof is that Roman owns a steel company that supplies the steel to make tanks that are currently invading then that alone is not quite enough, because supplying the steel could just be another business contract, or one that simply keeps the army equipped as a defensive/upkeep measure.

Would you say that the gov have irrefutable evidence that Roman supports the current invasion? It's not as though the gov have never made mistakes have they?
I do expect more professionalism from a government but it just seems like all these companies like 3 and Barclay's just need to be seen to do something, rightly or wrongly and I think the gov are the same.

2 minutes ago, TheSage said:

Is the sanctions threshold higher than the evidence to go to war? The US and UK swore Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and invaded Iraq on that basis, but it turned out to be a complete lie. If they can lie about something like that, it makes it very difficult for me to trust anything they say. Most governments say what serves their agenda or what they perceive will be popular with the public, and it is not always necessarily the truth.
I don't think Roman is innocent by any means but I also don't trust a lot of what the government says.

For the UK's part in the Iraq war, clearly mistakes were made by the Labour government of the time, and full responsibility for those mistakes was taken by Tony Blair (PM at the time)

Personally,  I don't think it is reasonable to compare the current sanctions regime and the due process that is followed by the current UK government when making those decisions, to the Iraq war  of almost 20 years ago, when led by a different government.

3 minutes ago, sonic90 said:

It depends what you mean by proof. If the proof is that Roman owns a steel company that supplies the steel to make tanks that are currently invading then that alone is not quite enough, because supplying the steel could just be another business contract, or one that simply keeps the army equipped as a defensive/upkeep measure.

Would you say that the gov have irrefutable evidence that Roman supports the current invasion? It's not as though the gov have never made mistakes have they?
I do expect more professionalism from a government but it just seems like all these companies like 3 and Barclay's just need to be seen to do something, rightly or wrongly and I think the gov are the same.

I have no idea to the question in bold. I am only speaking from previous experience of UK sanctions, in which the burden of proof has always been very high, well tested, and decisions made only after substantial legal advice.

Saudi owners are fine. The UK has absolutely no problem with murdering journalists in embassies or executing 81 people on a Saturday without any getting a fair trial first. We just sell them weapons and weapon platforms.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-60722057

4 hours ago, timetowaste said:

 

Not a fan of Lampard snaking Roman there, expected better from him 

The lad is still sulky from getting sacked. His interview is totally in contrast to Antonio Contes who was asked about Chelsea and he said he loves the club and feels bad for the fans.

Who Is Mohammed El Khereiji? Potential Chelsea Buyer - Plan To Renew Rudiger's contract and rebuild Stamford Bridge - 247 News Around The World

For anyone who wants to read more about this guy. He already has experience in redeveloping stadiums too so that could work to our advantage.

12 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

Mohamed Alkhereiji, the guy leading the Saudi Media Takeover bid is apparently a Chelsea fan and he plans to renew key players contracts and redevelop Stamford Bridge. I hope either him or Nick Candy are the ones to takeover since they're both fans and would want to redevelop the club rather than turn it into a cash cow. 

To be honest, I would be happy with anyone that keeps us afloat! Saudi guy would rank top for me, Todd Boehly 2nd. I don't think Candy has enough money.

12 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Were  this Liverpool that Roman owned how do we think the Kopities would be reacting in our place?

Probably molotovs thrown at number 10 and thr houses of parliament burgled.

Yep - they are irrational/delusional at the best of times.

4 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

Who Is Mohammed El Khereiji? Potential Chelsea Buyer - Plan To Renew Rudiger's contract and rebuild Stamford Bridge - 247 News Around The World

For anyone who wants to read more about this guy. He already has experience in redeveloping stadiums too so that could work to our advantage.

I think it's a pretty good collection of bidders considering the timing of the sale. Both Candy and Saudi Media have said all the right things regarding stadium development so I'm quite excited. 

United have a manager who worked for Lokomotiv Moscow, so they can't really talk

13 minutes ago, nonotnowjim said:

For the UK's part in the Iraq war, clearly mistakes were made by the Labour government of the time, and full responsibility for those mistakes was taken by Tony Blair (PM at the time)

Personally,  I don't think it is reasonable to compare the current sanctions regime and the due process that is followed by the current UK government when making those decisions, to the Iraq war  of almost 20 years ago, when led by a different government.

Did Blair suffer any sanctions (apart from resigning his position) for his part in the war? If not, how exactly did he take responsibility?  Maybe it's just me, but I think it is naive to think the government's modus operandi is any different from 20 years ago, regardless of the party in power. Anyway, I don't want to derail the thread, so I'd leave it at that.

9 minutes ago, nonotnowjim said:

I have no idea to the question in bold. I am only speaking from previous experience of UK sanctions, in which the burden of proof has always been very high, well tested, and decisions made only after substantial legal advice.

Boris' statements say that the oligarchs are sanctioned as they support the war and have blood on their hands, so they must have hard evidence that Roman is supporting the war, otherwise that is quite the slander. But as I said just supplying the steel doesn't make him a war supporter, especially if it was supplied before he had knowledge on the war happening.

All I'm saying is that the gov can definitely be doing all this on a technicality, and through pressure of needing to be seen to do something. But time will tell if we get to see the evidence, as of now I do reserve my love for the man despite everything he has done and is doing for the Chels, but there is a chance he is everything they say he is.

33 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Were  this Liverpool that Roman owned how do we think the Kopities would be reacting in our place?

Probably molotovs thrown at number 10 and thr houses of parliament burgled.

Don't forget they'd be nicking the wheels off the Rolls.

22 minutes ago, nonotnowjim said:

To be honest, I would be happy with anyone that keeps us afloat! Saudi guy would rank top for me, Todd Boehly 2nd. I don't think Candy has enough money.

I think Candy would probably be backed by a consortium but no details have emerged yet on who or what the consortium would. Personally I'd rank Candy slightly ahead of Boehly mostly because he is a Chelsea fan and has experience in real estate which could be useful for the Bridge. Boehly has done great things for the American team he owns and seems to have a decent knowledge on football compared to most American owners but I can't help but be wary because of United and Arsenal. Nothing against American owners, but I'd have to be really convinced by him.

43 minutes ago, TheSage said:

Is the sanctions threshold higher than the evidence to go to war? The US and UK swore Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and invaded Iraq on that basis, but it turned out to be a complete lie. If they can lie about something like that, it makes it very difficult for me to trust anything they say. Most governments say what serves their agenda or what they perceive will be popular with the public, and it is not always necessarily the truth.
I don't think Roman is innocent by any means but I also don't trust a lot of what the government says.

The Eton chums have such a high threshold of sanctions that they decide to turn a blind eye on the UN saying that the Newcastle owner is directly involved in war crimes in Yemen while freezing RA and other oligarchs luxury assets for having a steel company that possibly sells steel to the Russian government. Hypocrisy at its highest level. As if taking someone’s Rolex while paying millions of £ per day to the Russian government for oil and gas is going to help the Ukrainians. These tories have gone the populist, trumpian road. I am no tory sympathiser but hopefully some real conservatives take hold of the party and rid of the populist extremists that run this country since 2016.

But here I go, I promised not to get involved again in this topic! It must be the wine I’ve drunk for lunch.

45 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

Who Is Mohammed El Khereiji? Potential Chelsea Buyer - Plan To Renew Rudiger's contract and rebuild Stamford Bridge - 247 News Around The World

For anyone who wants to read more about this guy. He already has experience in redeveloping stadiums too so that could work to our advantage.

Well him and his kids being fans is a good start. If the article is accurate he sounds like a good buyer.

https://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2022/3/12/22974229/hyundai-temporarily-suspend-already-expiring-chelsea-sponsorship

Hyundai following 3 and ditching us.

17 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

https://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2022/3/12/22974229/hyundai-temporarily-suspend-already-expiring-chelsea-sponsorship

Hyundai following 3 and ditching us.

When we get back on our feet these sponsors can go f**k themselves. Hopefully we issue a statement to never use them again. 

The government and Co are trying to Bury the club.