15 hours ago, The Boehly Babes said:

Yup.

Not even looking at it in a biased way but the ‘skeleton’ of the squad is easily good enough to compete.

RJ - Best RB in world football.

Caiceido - Top 5 CM over the past 3 seasons in the PL

Palmer - Englands best player (when fit and free!)

Estevao - The NEXT big thing

JP - PL quality striker

Levi, Josh, Sarr are all extremely talented young CB’s with massive futures.

Cucu, Hato, Santos, Enzo are all good enough.

We essentially need a GK, an EXPERIENCED CB & a PL Quality LW to be taken seriously.

IF we were to address those issues and IF we were to avoid Europe entirely next season, there really is no reason we shouldn’t be domestically challenging.

We’d probably also need a new Manager and new SD’s and new Owners whilst we’re at it so maybe it is a pipe dream after all…

I think that one of the reasons United are so much improved this season is they have no European football and went out of domestic cups early. They have been able to pick their best team every week (injuries apart) and they did sign a couple of decent players last summer. Will be interesting to see how they do next season once they are back in European football and have to rotate again, unless they significantly improve the rest of the squad.

We looked a lot better last season when we were in the Conf League as we could put our second string out for every midweek game and rest the main players for the league games. We also went out of both domestic cups early which helped in that respect.

Of course we have numerous other issues but I think that may explain some of the reason for our poor league performance this season vs. last.

39 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

As I expected now the media are calling for all our trophies under Roman to be stripped, no doubt seeing what happened with the AFCoN final and thinking to award them to the runners up.

The other PL clubs said to have been contacted by Chris Masters and expressed thir views we should have received much harsher, long term punishments.

By media you mean the darlings?

8 hours ago, GarnachoCheese said:

Takes one to know one. Jordan is a twat, so is of good measure to see how much of a twat Aluko is.

True enough 👍

15 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Took your advice and had a (brief) read of the Sanctions Agreement

Some thoughts:

• The PL rule breaches (27 b.) are minor at best. Most relate to administrative requirements in reporting, timeliness and content of reports and a general obligation to act transparently. The only 'serious' ones were minor indiscretions that technically breached the rules for third-party ownership. Oh, and one (V.38) is just because the PL didn't get their cut of the Willian or Eto'o transfers. Pearl clutching in the extreme.
  
  

• In the absence of a PSR breach there was zero evidence of competitive advantage, so in that context our sentence is still far from lenient.
  
  

• The affected players all had 'minor' agents and a lot of other parties (eg family) advising them. It will be interesting to see how the FA approach this given the lax approach in other leagues/associations.
  
  

• BlueCo's self-report meant that Cech, Buck, Granovskaia and possibly Neil Bath's (as academy director) positions were untenable. The League seem to be at pains to state that a major reason for leniency is that none of the above are involved in the club anymore and are now outside jurisdiction. A cynic could say that BlueCo used this to oust them, I suppose...
  
  I actually don't buy the League's reasoning on that. If they saw fit to consider that the offending parties were no longer involved, why punish people who demonstrably had zero involvement? If the goal of punishment is deterrence, then why water down the punishment? (Not complaining obviously!)
  
  

• 17 b. (iii-v), where the League praises Chelsea's cooperation, also contains a clear admission that had the club never complied it had little chance of either identifying the breaches in the first place, or proving it to standard before a Commission. I tend to agree that it suggests the 'evidence' was actually quite limited for the purpose of legal proceedings, and much of the 'facts' were established only because the Club simply agreed with the League's position without contest.
  
  

• The PL suggest the 74 FA charges are more serious and are likely to attract a 'signficant sanction'. The PL also confirm that the FA's findings may trigger the currently-suspended 2-year transfer ban @Scott Harris. Again, I'm not entirely buying the 'leniency'...
  
  

• If England were still part of the EU, the FA charges would have an interesting legal showdown given recent rulings on restraint of trade for footballers. And having read the FA/FIFA rules for agents it seems that many would have skeletons in their closet. Rule J5 for example prevents Managers from having an interest in an organisation that acts as an agent; Erik Ten Hag is famous for using his own agency SEG.

  
  Also the rules say that any EU-national domiciled in England is eligible to be registered as an English agent. Do rules like this even apply post-Brexit??
  
  

• The Cypress Confidential release had limited impact. The PL clearly state (pg 5) that upon being made aware of the media allegations, it was the Club itself that investigated and dug up the necessary supporting evidence, not the media's files. Again were it not for the Club's intervention, the charges may never have had requisite proof.

Thanks again Sydney for another excellent informative post mate.👍

18 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Is it that they don't see it?

Or is it they do but do not want to pay the sort of money 4 top quality players would demand in wages, or give the control a top manager would want?

That's exactly what it is Ax. Everyone has know for years what it is we need to improve and compete at the very top. So do the owners. ,but their buy young potential talent transfer strategy is set in stone.

I received the following email from the Chelsea Supporters Trust earlier today. This thread seems the best place to post it.

"The Chelsea Supporters' Trust has issued the following statement regarding ticketing at Chelsea FC.

---

Chelsea’s ticketing system is broken. Fix it before anything else changes.

Chelsea’s ticketing system is failing its supporters, and this season has left many fans frustrated, confused and, at times, completely shut out.

Week after week, loyal supporters are logging on, queuing and paying for memberships, yet still coming away empty-handed or dealing with errors and inconsistencies. For many, following Chelsea now feels harder, more stressful and far less fair than it should be.

The biggest issue of all is this: supporters do not feel listened to.

The relationship between the club and its fans is not where it should be and requires urgent attention and improvement. Trust has been eroded, communication has fallen short, and too many supporters feel disconnected from decisions that directly affect whether they can attend matches.

Since the introduction of digital ticketing in August 2025, the experience has mostly deteriorated. Supporters have faced incorrect loyalty points, delayed sales, ineligible accounts securing tickets and last-minute £200 bundles released with minimal notice, while many have paid for “priority” memberships that have delivered little real benefit.

The club has acknowledged that parts of the system are not working as intended. Yet further major changes are now being considered. The club says these changes will create a fairer, more efficient system that improves safety, delivers positive change and learns from its peers. Those are the right aims, but supporters need to see how they will actually be delivered.

Supporters are not asking for more complexity. They are asking for a system that works.

Fix What Is Broken First

Significant changes have already been introduced this season. If more are now being considered, it raises a simple question: have the current issues actually been fixed?

Supporters want improvement, but not constant disruption. Right now, it feels like the system keeps changing while the core problems remain. Constant change does not build confidence, it damages it.

Fix the system first. Then talk about what comes next.

Multiple Changes, One Broken System

Multiple changes are being considered at the same time. The ballot process is only one part of this. Proposals also include minimum seat utilisation requirements, changes to ticket transfer and forwarding, and restrictions on away ticket distribution.

At the same time, supporters are dealing with a ticket exchange many do not trust and a transfer system that cannot always be relied upon. Confidence in these core systems must be rebuilt, including clear action on touting.

Taken together, this is a wide-ranging overhaul of how supporters access tickets. Introducing all of this while the current system is still falling short risks making a bad situation worse.

Loyalty Must Still Matter

There is clear scepticism among Chelsea supporters about the introduction of a ballot process. Supporters understand the need for improvement, but they do not want a system where loyalty is replaced by luck. For many, loyalty points represent years of commitment, time and money, and that commitment must continue to count.

Supporters will also want clarity on how any ballot would affect the season ticket waiting list and long-term loyalty.

The proposal to reduce the size of the family stand is also a major concern. At a time when the club should be encouraging the next generation, reducing space for families risks doing the opposite. Changes like this may offer short-term benefits, but risk long-term damage to Chelsea’s support.

Consultation Must Go Further

Engagement through the Fan Advisory Board and supporter groups is welcome, but it is not enough. Decisions of this scale need broader input, including direct supporter surveys and open forums before decisions are made.

If the club wants supporters to support change, it must involve them properly in shaping it.

Show Supporters the Evidence

The club has suggested that some of these changes could improve access. If that is the case, then show the evidence. If these changes are meant to deliver positive outcomes, the club should clearly explain how and provide the evidence behind them.

Any ballot process should be benchmarked against other clubs to ensure it genuinely benefits Chelsea supporters. The club should also explain how it would work and why it would improve access. If it is learning from its peers, supporters should be told which models are being used and how they will apply at Chelsea.

Without that transparency, there is no reason for supporters to have confidence in further change.

Do Not Ask More Until It Is Fixed

Supporters have been patient. They have adapted and raised concerns constructively. They should not now be asked to accept more change, more complexity or higher costs while the current system continues to fall short.

There must be a clear focus on fixing what is already in place before anything else is introduced, and supporters should not be asked to pay more until there is clear evidence the system has improved.

Fix the system, rebuild trust, and then talk about change, because right now supporters have heard enough promises and are still waiting to see real improvement."

You literally cannot make it up.

WHY ARE WE SCOUTING THE BUNDESLIGA AGAIN???

Bloke looks genuinely worse than Garnacho, and in the Bundesliga.

Edited March 19Mar 19 by Sconnie Blue

12 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

You literally cannot make it up.

WHY ARE WE SCOUTING THE BUNDESLIGA AGAIN???

Bloke looks genuinely worse than Garnacho, and in the Bundesliga.

🤣🤣🤣🤣

Rogers, Kudus, Ndiaye, or the plethora of French wingers? Nah.

Let’s get another Bundesliga winger who isn’t doing anything special in a league where no one defends.

Worked so well with Gittens and Mudryk.

6 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Rogers, Kudus, Ndiaye, or the plethora of French wingers? Nah.

Let’s get another Bundesliga winger who isn’t doing anything special in a league where no one defends.

Worked so well with Gittens and Mudryk.

More to the point, is he any better than Quenda who we have already signed for next season? All the evidence this season suggests we need a new CB, and keeper. yet there we are chasing yet another winger lol

Before we buy, Id like to see us get the best out of some of the existing players. In any case we have a few in the pipeline Quenda Satpaev Emegha Penders Barco Panichelli in fact almost anyone from Strasbourg including the coach.

New players primarily benefit Blue Co. in terms of trading. and disrupt the squad with the acting coach under pressure to utilise them or not based on commercial needs. The pending transfer ban could also assist the squad , curtailing the constant churning.

Blue Co are neither a friend nor an enemy, but certainly an opponent.

Im hoping for Europa League or Conference League next year. We will be competitive, I think we can win either of these and Blue Co will not make so much money. Good result all round. If we qualify for the Champions league thats fine too but suspect we will struggle as per this year. Its above our level just now.

Edited March 19Mar 19 by OTL

1 hour ago, Sconnie Blue said:

You literally cannot make it up.

WHY ARE WE SCOUTING THE BUNDESLIGA AGAIN???

Bloke looks genuinely worse than Garnacho, and in the Bundesliga.

Like the saying goes, the dogs (us) bark but the caravan moves on [into relegation and administration probably].

2 hours ago, OTL said:

Before we buy, Id like to see us get the best out of some of the existing players. In any case we have a few in the pipeline Quenda Satpaev Emegha Penders Barco Panichelli in fact almost anyone from Strasbourg including the coach.

New players primarily benefit Blue Co. in terms of trading. and disrupt the squad with the acting coach under pressure to utilise them or not based on commercial needs. The pending transfer ban could also assist the squad , curtailing the constant churning.

Blue Co are neither a friend nor an enemy, but certainly an opponent.

Im hoping for Europa League or Conference League next year. We will be competitive, I think we can win either of these and Blue Co will not make so much money. Good result all round. If we qualify for the Champions league thats fine too but suspect we will struggle as per this year. Its above our level just now.

Satpaev and Quenda are both 18 , they will both be nailed on starters!

Edited March 19Mar 19 by The Rising Sun
Information

3 hours ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Rogers, Kudus, Ndiaye, or the plethora of French wingers? Nah.

Let’s get another Bundesliga winger who isn’t doing anything special in a league where no one defends.

Worked so well with Gittens and Mudryk.

Mudryk wasn’t from Bundesliga

14 hours ago, terraloon said:

Good read .

In terms of accreditation of agents is one thing but love it or hate it there are strict rules around that and by using third parties the club knew exactly what they were doing. I would add that although no proof I am 100% certain we aren’t the only club that an acted / acts in such a way.

What pisses me off with all this is if it wasn’t going to impact on PSR , which as we know is clearly the case, why didn’t the club just put it through the normal and correct process ? It surely can only have been because RA and his team knew the payments wouldn’t be in accord with regulator bodies regulations

The regulations are simply that all payments can only be made to four parties - player, agent, exempt legal counsel and selling club. The payments Abramovich made were commissions, reimbursements and 'finders fees' made to family and other intermediaries. It used to be legal until FIFA took a strong stance on outlawing third-party player ownership (remember the Tevez/Mascherano saga). The examples were made nearly 5 years after the rules were introduced though, so Abramovich clearly knew what he was doing. There's no clear evidence of tax evasion, unlike say the Neymar transfer where the fee was deliberately underreported so that payments could be made to avoid tax. In that context some of the payments seem stupid, like an extra 7m paid to Hazard's agent John Bico directly by Abramovich.

That said, with Abramovich and others unable to defend themselves, we won't be able to get an alternate explanation. Maybe Roman was short on his round at the bar and he had to pay back Bico, who knows.

14 hours ago, terraloon said:

I am conflicted about the self reporting . On one hand I wonder if they really had to self report but on the other the consequences of non reporting and an investigation further down the line digging up the issues probably outweighs all concerns . Too many knew about those skeletons and just as in the Luton case it only takes one whistleblower or the like of the Cypress Files

On balance I think they had no option but to self reporting and following the speed in which UEFA acted to settle for me their was a belief in BlueCo that matters couldn’t be proved even to a standard of beyond reasonable doubt.

It does tell us why so many senior officials resigned that’s for sure and the timings of those resignations I suspect tells us quite a lot . Particularly as none are named and as they are no longer in football or I assume will ever be able to work in football again.

In the academy player ruling it’s common place for charges to follow to the individual that committed the offence.

I agree. The club had a much stronger position for negotiation once it had worked out many of the charges would never meet standard of proof but has also resulted in the club accepting blame where none could be proved, and importantly, on the basis of mere assumption. The affected parties could not explain their side of the story.

The charges will follow to the individual, we saw this with Fabio Paratici at Spurs. Flipside of that is that none of the other people (including the 'unauthorised' agents mentioned) are within the PL or FA's jurisdiction. Given that they could not be compelled to participate in the investigation they have not been investigated and absent any statue of limitations or double jeopardy rules, you'd think it would be open to the PL/FA to investigate if they worked in football again. Of the names I speculated only Neil Bath would be affected as the others are unlikely to work in PL/England ever again anyway.

Far too many are minimising the size of the fine / sanction it’s the biggest ever. As you say there seems to be a suggestion around the FA Charges but what I am still unsure of is why the PL and FA in effect have both investigated when the norm usually is that it would only be one of them .

The FA regulate agents and clubs' use of agents, so in fact the primary investigation about the use of 'unauthorised' parties is actually theirs. The PL's jurisdiction is limited to competitive advantage, third-party ownership and essentially administrative/procedural offences for not following the PL's prescribed rules.

It's a big fine for essentially a bunch of bookkeeping offences, nearly double the 5.5m dished out to West Ham for their egregious third-party ownership debacle.

The sanctions agreement does confirm that any FA breach warranting a transfer ban will trigger our suspended transfer ban so I expect to have a one-window ban at least. The funny part is that it has been documented that around 100m cash has been set aside to pay the impending fines so between the UEFA, PL and potential FA settlements the accountants are actually going to be looking at a spare 50m bonus!

Edited March 19Mar 19 by SydneyChelsea

The PSG game was one of the most painful performances I have ever sat through, possibly THE most painful. I felt less pain losing cup finals, and it was a different type of pain too. This is something I have never felt as a Chelsea fan, probably as close to heart broken as I have ever been when it involves this club.

The way PSG just toyed with us, playing the ball about effortlessly, they were brilliant and we just had to sit and accept it. I have had to mostly just reflect over the past few days because I had so few words left in me to really go in on this sh*t like I usually do, because that performance left me feeling more hopeless about Chelsea than I ever have in my life. For the first time ever, we looked like Champions League minnows, this is what the owners, directors, coaches and players have reduced us to. The way PSG played their football is nothing more than a pipe dream for us, this group will never ever be capable of getting anywhere close to it, and if any Chelsea fan actually thinks that is possible, then they are living in a completely different reality (and I know there are a lot still out there). I mean, do some of these fans even watch our football? How do they look at us and then look at PSG or Bayern Munich and think this lot has any chance of reaching that level? These squads are brilliant with elite football IQ, where is that in this Chelsea squad?

I can't even delude myself into the belief that things could eventually work itself out and this squad grows into something special.....Well I never really did in the first place, but you always look for something to put your hopes on. I don't even think James, Caicedo or Palmer get into that PSG side. James doesn't have the legs to play at the pace PSG play and is a permanent injury risk, Caicedo is too reckless, Estevao may make it, Palmer doesn't even look half the player he was when he first joined and has an ever increasingly unlikeable ego, and as for the rest......it hurts to even think about. There are actual idiots amongst our fanbase looking forward to the day Mudryk comes back. Seriously, look how pathetic things have become that you have had to distort reality and pin your hopes on a guy who was so sh*t before his drugs ban that he was relegated to playing nothing but Conference League group games against teams you had never heard of.

There is no future where this squad reaches a high level. Face reality, Clear Lake f**ked us, and no matter what the twat Finkelstein says, it's not "f**king obvious" they are building one of the best sides in the world. The only painfully obvious thing is how our club has been humiliated, embarrassed, mocked relentlessly, and run in way I haven't seen at this level in a long time. There is no future for this club under this ownership other than a painful one.

6 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

The PSG game was one of the most painful performances I have ever sat through, possibly THE most painful. I felt less pain losing cup finals, and it was a different type of pain too. This is something I have never felt as a Chelsea fan, probably as close to heart broken as I have ever been when it involves this club.

The way PSG just toyed with us, playing the ball about effortlessly, they were brilliant and we just had to sit and accept it. I have had to mostly just reflect over the past few days because I had so few words left in me to really go in on this sh*t like I usually do, because that performance left me feeling more hopeless about Chelsea than I ever have in my life. For the first time ever, we looked like Champions League minnows, this is what the owners, directors, coaches and players have reduced us to. The way PSG played their football is nothing more than a pipe dream for us, this group will never ever be capable of getting anywhere close to it, and if any Chelsea fan actually thinks that is possible, then they are living in a completely different reality (and I know there are a lot still out there). I mean, do some of these fans even watch our football? How do they look at us and then look at PSG or Bayern Munich and think this lot has any chance of reaching that level? These squads are brilliant with elite football IQ, where is that in this Chelsea squad?

I can't even delude myself into the belief that things could eventually work itself out and this squad grows into something special.....Well I never really did in the first place, but you always look for something to put your hopes on. I don't even think James, Caicedo or Palmer get into that PSG side. James doesn't have the legs to play at the pace PSG play and is a permanent injury risk, Caicedo is too reckless, Estevao may make it, Palmer doesn't even look half the player he was when he first joined and has an ever increasingly unlikeable ego, and as for the rest......it hurts to even think about. There are actual idiots amongst our fanbase looking forward to the day Mudryk comes back. Seriously, look how pathetic things have become that you have had to distort reality and pin your hopes on a guy who was so sh*t before his drugs ban that he was relegated to playing nothing but Conference League group games against teams you had never heard of.

There is no future where this squad reaches a high level. Face reality, Clear Lake f**ked us, and no matter what the twat Finkelstein says, it's not "f**king obvious" they are building one of the best sides in the world. The only painfully obvious thing is how our club has been humiliated, embarrassed, mocked relentlessly, and run in way I haven't seen at this level in a long time. There is no future for this club under this ownership other than a painful one.

Well said.

It pains me to say it, but I am getting strong Nottingham Forest vibes with our club now. Two time European Cup winners, run horrendously behind the scenes, employing a succession of weak, underperforming managers that fail to get near the elite manager that was once in place. Ultimately relegated to spend an entire generation in a footballing wilderness and cas strapped on the edge of a financial abyss.

8 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

8 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

The regulations are simply that all payments can only be made to four parties - player, agent, exempt legal counsel and selling club. The payments Abramovich made were commissions, reimbursements and 'finders fees' made to family and other intermediaries. It used to be legal until FIFA took a strong stance on outlawing third-party player ownership (remember the Tevez/Mascherano saga). The examples were made nearly 5 years after the rules were introduced though, so Abramovich clearly knew what he was doing. There's no clear evidence of tax evasion, unlike say the Neymar transfer where the fee was deliberately underreported so that payments could be made to avoid tax. In that context some of the payments seem stupid, like an extra 7m paid to Hazard's agent John Bico directly by Abramovich.

That said, with Abramovich and others unable to defend themselves, we won't be able to get an alternate explanation. Maybe Roman was short on his round at the bar and he had to pay back Bico, who knows.

I agree. The club had a much stronger position for negotiation once it had worked out many of the charges would never meet standard of proof but has also resulted in the club accepting blame where none could be proved, and importantly, on the basis of mere assumption. The affected parties could not explain their side of the story.

The charges will follow to the individual, we saw this with Fabio Paratici at Spurs. Flipside of that is that none of the other people (including the 'unauthorised' agents mentioned) are within the PL or FA's jurisdiction. Given that they could not be compelled to participate in the investigation they have not been investigated and absent any statue of limitations or double jeopardy rules, you'd think it would be open to the PL/FA to investigate if they worked in football again. Of the names I speculated only Neil Bath would be affected as the others are unlikely to work in PL/England ever again anyway.

The FA regulate agents and clubs' use of agents, so in fact the primary investigation about the use of 'unauthorised' parties is actually theirs. The PL's jurisdiction is limited to competitive advantage, third-party ownership and essentially administrative/procedural offences for not following the PL's prescribed rules.

It's a big fine for essentially a bunch of bookkeeping offences, nearly double the 5.5m dished out to West Ham for their egregious third-party ownership debacle.

The sanctions agreement does confirm that any FA breach warranting a transfer ban will trigger our suspended transfer ban so I expect to have a one-window ban at least. The funny part is that it has been documented that around 100m cash has been set aside to pay the impending fines so between the UEFA, PL and potential FA settlements the accountants are actually going to be looking at a spare 50m bonus!

The regulations are simply that all payments can only be made to four parties - player, agent, exempt legal counsel and selling club. The payments Abramovich made were commissions, reimbursements and 'finders fees' made to family and other intermediaries. It used to be legal until FIFA took a strong stance on outlawing third-party player ownership (remember the Tevez/Mascherano saga). The examples were made nearly 5 years after the rules were introduced though, so Abramovich clearly knew what he was doing. There's no clear evidence of tax evasion, unlike say the Neymar transfer where the fee was deliberately underreported so that payments could be made to avoid tax. In that context some of the payments seem stupid, like an extra 7m paid to Hazard's agent John Bico directly by Abramovich.

That said, with Abramovich and others unable to defend themselves, we won't be able to get an alternate explanation. Maybe Roman was short on his round at the bar and he had to pay back Bico, who knows.

I agree. The club had a much stronger position for negotiation once it had worked out many of the charges would never meet standard of proof but has also resulted in the club accepting blame where none could be proved, and importantly, on the basis of mere assumption. The affected parties could not explain their side of the story.

The charges will follow to the individual, we saw this with Fabio Paratici at Spurs. Flipside of that is that none of the other people (including the 'unauthorised' agents mentioned) are within the PL or FA's jurisdiction. Given that they could not be compelled to participate in the investigation they have not been investigated and absent any statue of limitations or double jeopardy rules, you'd think it would be open to the PL/FA to investigate if they worked in football again. Of the names I speculated only Neil Bath would be affected as the others are unlikely to work in PL/England ever again anyway.

The FA regulate agents and clubs' use of agents, so in fact the primary investigation about the use of 'unauthorised' parties is actually theirs. The PL's jurisdiction is limited to competitive advantage, third-party ownership and essentially administrative/procedural offences for not following the PL's prescribed rules.

It's a big fine for essentially a bunch of bookkeeping offences, nearly double the 5.5m dished out to West Ham for their egregious third-party ownership debacle.

The sanctions agreement does confirm that any FA breach warranting a transfer ban will trigger our suspended transfer ban so I expect to have a one-window ban at least. The funny part is that it has been documented that around 100m cash has been set aside to pay the impending fines so between the UEFA, PL and potential FA settlements the accountants are actually going to be looking at a spare 50m bonus!

Interesting.

I might be 100% wrong but I take the view that both UEFA and now the PL recognised that without access particularly to RA then it was always going to be incredibly difficult to meet the levels of comfortable satisfaction or beyond reasonable doubt.

For me it made sense for the club to in effect take a caution but to do so they had first to accept culpability( even if they did with their fingers crossed ) so whilst we have to take it on the chin I for one don’t read too much into the club accepting the PLs published version of events.One thing for sure it’s made good press.

Put another way save a couple of the minor issues if the PL had been sure they would have put their evidence to an IC . Thinking something is so and being able to prove it aren’t one and the same that’s for sure!

Why it surprised me that both the PL and the FA are proceeding is that in the PL rules there is a clear route for investigations that potentially breach the two jurisdictions will be transferred to the FA.

I too agree we are likely to get a sporting sanction of some sort from the FA . It may as you say be a transfer ban could even be squad limit or something of that sort. I still wouldn’t rule out a points deduction. Theres one thing for sure the FA will indeed be licking their lips at that significant sum still in reserve.

By self declaring they was able to force out the previous board with I’m guessing very little if any pay offs and NDA’s while announcing how the club wasn’t being run properly.

These after all are the good guys from America. CIA good, KGB bad.

1 hour ago, C3blue said:

By self declaring they was able to force out the previous board with I’m guessing very little if any pay offs and NDA’s while announcing how the club wasn’t being run properly.

These after all are the good guys from America. CIA good, KGB bad.

I don't think Bruce Buck or Marina were short of a few bob after they shared a £50m bonus fee for their "role" in the sale of the club !

1 hour ago, Sexyfootball said:

I don't think Bruce Buck or Marina were short of a few bob after they shared a £50m bonus fee for their "role" in the sale of the club !

Is that what they got…..nice work if you can get it.

Edited March 20Mar 20 by C3blue

1 hour ago, Sexyfootball said:

I don't think Bruce Buck or Marina were short of a few bob after they shared a £50m bonus fee for their "role" in the sale of the club !

I wouldnt have wanted to be Buck in the negotiation on how to split that bonus, he`ll be lucky if Marina "let" him have a tenner.

Edited March 20Mar 20 by dkw

Looks like Starmers lawyers realise they will lose if it goes to court, Roman said the money goes to all parties involved in the war (russians included), BUT Starmer thinks it should all go to Ukraine

Inside World Football

UK prefers negotiated settlement with Abramovich over fro...

March 20 – The UK government has opened the door to talks with Roman Abramovich, offering fresh negotiations over the £2.35 billion of frozen fund generated from the sale of Chelsea, despite threateni

1 hour ago, dkw said:

I wouldn't have wanted to be Buck in the negotiation on how to split that bonus, he`ll be lucky if Marina "let" him have a tenner.

LOL.

I think Marina did end up with north of £35m of it 😎

Young enough to enjoy spending it too !

River Plate are close to reaching an agreement with BlueCo for the loan of youth players

Club is just doing anything at this point. I don’t see how this helps the club or the players involved.