26 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

On his original post:

This is where reading the thread is important to understand the discourse.

here is a definition of the word 'initially'.

Yes, other people are often wrong. i agree.

Why was Petr Cech forced out?

Yes, change is inevitable. Uprooting the entire backroom, the manager and every single player that wasn't Reece James wasn't needed. Plungung us into mid-table turmoil for multiple seasons wasn't needed. Once again, please go back and read the thread. His argument is things were just as bad under Roman in 2003, every single poster is trying to tell him that's not the case. The likelihood is he's a young lad that doesn't remember the take over or likely wasn't a fan back then but to come in with such certainty and blatantly lie about what we all saw is bizarre.

I'm not aggressive, i'm merely tired of stupidity.

Petr Cech comments

“With the club under new ownership, I feel now is the right time for me to step aside”

"I am pleased that the club is now in an excellent position with the new owners and I am confident of its future success both on and off the pitch."

Neither Buck or Marina ended association with CFC immediately on takeover but as I pointed out it was inevitable that their resignations wouldn’t be too long coming and I would suggest that they were given little alternative but to walk away.

When RA took over from Ken Bates in 2003 the club were a game away from administration, Ken Bates has always denied that but the EuroBond needed repaying that’s a fact.In addition the loan from MH was called in.

Of course when RA came in from the perspective Chelsea supporters as a saviour and that indeed what he was but let’s not kid ourselves that the press, the owners of other clubs or indeed the supporters of other clubs welcomed him with open arms.Nor did certain sections of the press.

As I pointed out since day 1 there were certain journalists who went out of their way to create negativity around Chelsea and in particular RA.

20 minutes ago, C3blue said:

I do t think they are under duress, debt isn’t real anyway just CR’s and DB’s on a computer. Neither is money in general, it’s all an illusion. One giant house of cards.

That’s why it doesn’t bother me.

The Rayne group and the Government do have a lot to answer for and are crazy to think our great club is in better or safer hands with this mob than RA. Political point scoring.

He wasn’t in it for the money, they are. There ain’t going to be another RA.Now in a perfect world they make money and we win trophies but let’s not rewrite history.

I don’t know if this post is aimed at me , guess it is,

No where have I ever said that the club is in better hands than it was under RA but the reality is that RA through his nationality became the biggest threat to the very survival of Chelsea. That’s why I believe people need to gain perspective because quite simply once Russian invaded Ukraine the pressure on RA , which started going back to the issues around his visa, was only going to end up one way.

I genuinely wonder if people grasp how vulnerable the club was at that time . For instance had the government insisted that the £1.5 billion loan RA had in CFC been treated as an asset it’s not beyond comprehension that the debt could have called in

Of course I would prefer that he were still running the club or indeed a n other was running the club as he did but the reality is the RA set in train a process to sell the club and the chosen group were Blue Co.

US ownership now dominates the PL clubs that’s a fact. I doubt that there is one who is involved through benevolence it’s simply not how the work nor do they need involvement in sport to gain soft or even hard political power. RA was unique it at some point he was going to cease to be the owner the worse part of it was that it was rushed , forced and transition was never going to be easy.

Edited July 23, 2025Jul 23 by terraloon

Yeah that’s all history now, they are our new owners and as such have my support.

Moments like the 2 finals will endear them to us fans more. I actually don’t mind Boehly. I feel he see success on the pitch as key to success off it and he’s willing to spend to achieve it and that’s all we can hope for from owners really. RA made plenty of mistakes himself along the way.

Like I said there’s never going to be another RA and shock horror business men want to make money. Let’s hope they get money and we get success COYB.

8 minutes ago, C3blue said:

Yeah that’s all history now, they are our new owners and as such have my support.

Moments like the 2 finals will endear them to us fans more. I actually don’t mind Boehly. I feel he see success on the pitch as key to success off it and he’s willing to spend to achieve it and that’s all we can hope for from owners really. RA made plenty of mistakes himself along the way.

Like I said there’s never going to be another RA and shock horror business men want to make money. Let’s hope they get money and we get success COYB.

No, Im not any closer to or like the owners because of the cup wins. they can win it all, but Chelsea will be a better club when theyve gone and sold up to another company that doesnt want to sell the bridge. Ken Bates, despite being a sh*t, understood the value of CFC isnt the players but the ground.

Thank you Terraloon. People refuse to read what is put out. Hard to understand why they find it difficult to accept we were under duress. We were a seized asset from our owner, meaning we were close to being liquidated if a new owner was not found quickly. Perfectly said on the guilty by association. You simply CANNOT have individuals associated to Roman at that time, especially due to the geopolitical tensions - adding more to it, American owners. People here are simply ready to argue because they are choosing to be blind to differing opinions.

Dkw again adding nothing to the conversation aside from calling me bluhazed and terrible because I have my own thoughts. Free thinking must be a new/hard concept to you mate?

Edited July 23, 2025Jul 23 by Clown Lake

16 minutes ago, bluelightening said:

No, Im not any closer to or like the owners because of the cup wins. they can win it all, but Chelsea will be a better club when theyve gone and sold up to another company that doesnt want to sell the bridge. Ken Bates, despite being a sh*t, understood the value of CFC isnt the players but the ground.

Yeah but don’t let it ruin ur enjoyment mate, life’s to short.

1 hour ago, terraloon said:

Petr Cech comments

“With the club under new ownership, I feel now is the right time for me to step aside”

"I am pleased that the club is now in an excellent position with the new owners and I am confident of its future success both on and off the pitch."

Neither Buck or Marina ended association with CFC immediately on takeover but as I pointed out it was inevitable that their resignations wouldn’t be too long coming and I would suggest that they were given little alternative but to walk away.

When RA took over from Ken Bates in 2003 the club were a game away from administration, Ken Bates has always denied that but the EuroBond needed repaying that’s a fact.In addition the loan from MH was called in.

Of course when RA came in from the perspective Chelsea supporters as a saviour and that indeed what he was but let’s not kid ourselves that the press, the owners of other clubs or indeed the supporters of other clubs welcomed him with open arms.Nor did certain sections of the press.

As I pointed out since day 1 there were certain journalists who went out of their way to create negativity around Chelsea and in particular RA.

I don’t know if this post is aimed at me , guess it is,

No where have I ever said that the club is in better hands than it was under RA but the reality is that RA through his nationality became the biggest threat to the very survival of Chelsea. That’s why I believe people need to gain perspective because quite simply once Russian invaded Ukraine the pressure on RA , which started going back to the issues around his visa, was only going to end up one way.

I genuinely wonder if people grasp how vulnerable the club was at that time . For instance had the government insisted that the £1.5 billion loan RA had in CFC been treated as an asset it’s not beyond comprehension that the debt could have called in

Of course I would prefer that he were still running the club or indeed a n other was running the club as he did but the reality is the RA set in train a process to sell the club and the chosen group were Blue Co.

US ownership now dominates the PL clubs that’s a fact. I doubt that there is one who is involved through benevolence it’s simply not how the work nor do they need involvement in sport to gain soft or even hard political power. RA was unique it at some point he was going to cease to be the owner the worse part of it was that it was rushed , forced and transition was never going to be easy.

So the new owners forced out the upper management straight away when it was unneeded, you're agreeing with me?

3 hours ago, terraloon said:

When they took over the club really was under threat. It was operating under a license that would not have been renewed post 1/6 of that year. There wasn’t any money in bank accounts that had all been frozen indeed RA had to inject capital past his sanction date.

As for it not being under duress I think that is where so many haven’t worked through the consequences because it really was under threat and as for assets the club had effectively become an asset of HM Government who because of the anti RA rhetoric would have had no issues about allowing the club to be would up after all none of the proceeds of sale or indeed distribution from insolvency would have ended up in the public purse.

It was seized, yes. But there was no way the government was going to liquidate the club, a 2Bn asset with ties to the area and livelihood of so many Brits would have been near impossible to be picked apart immediately. The club was not in any danger.

It was clearly a ploy by the government to squeeze Roman either to sell all his assets in the UK(because of politics) or cooperate with the government to do their bidding.

Either way the club would have been safe. The only "Duress" part of it is if we were sold to a billionaire that was going to use the club as a passive income generator.

19 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

So the new owners forced out the upper management straight away when it was unneeded, you're agreeing with me?

None of us know what changed because the plans were very much that both Buck and Marina would stay around We can only speculate at to was it unneeded or where there no other options?

The only thing I can remember is the club self reported matters to UEFA, The PL &The FA immediately following the takeover? Both were directors .

Chelsea chairman Bruce Buck is to step down from his role on 30 June, with co-owner Todd Boehly set to succeed him.

American Buck, 76, who had been chairman since Roman Abramovich became owner in 2003, was set to continue in the role after the takeover of the club by a Boehly-led consortium last month.

A change of direction means he will now support the club as a "senior adviser".

"Now is the right time to step down and let new ownership build on the strong foundations we have in place," he said.

"The owners have a compelling vision for Chelsea's future, and I look forward to helping them achieve it in this new role alongside our incredible staff, players, coaches and supporters."

26 minutes ago, Deino said:

It was seized, yes. But there was no way the government was going to liquidate the club, a 2Bn asset with ties to the area and livelihood of so many Brits would have been near impossible to be picked apart immediately. The club was not in any danger.

It was clearly a ploy by the government to squeeze Roman either to sell all his assets in the UK(because of politics) or cooperate with the government to do their bidding.

Either way the club would have been safe. The only "Duress" part of it is if we were sold to a billionaire that was going to use the club as a passive income generator.

We are going to have to agree to disagree.

I certainly wouldn’t have wanted to test the resolve or approach that HMG would have taken . The irony is that the license still recognised the directors as being “ in charge” so had the club not been able to pays its liabilities because of the sanctions they would have to acted to either appoint administrators or an insolvency practitioner.

4 minutes ago, terraloon said:

None of us know what changed because the plans were very much that both Buck and Marina would stay around We can only speculate at to was it unneeded or where there no other options?

The only thing I can remember is the club self reported matters to UEFA, The PL &The FA immediately following the takeover? Both were directors .

Chelsea chairman Bruce Buck is to step down from his role on 30 June, with co-owner Todd Boehly set to succeed him.

American Buck, 76, who had been chairman since Roman Abramovich became owner in 2003, was set to continue in the role after the takeover of the club by a Boehly-led consortium last month.

A change of direction means he will now support the club as a "senior adviser".

"Now is the right time to step down and let new ownership build on the strong foundations we have in place," he said.

"The owners have a compelling vision for Chelsea's future, and I look forward to helping them achieve it in this new role alongside our incredible staff, players, coaches and supporters."

You're just agreeing with me again, i don't really understand.

At least we both agree the new owners chose to uproot the entire club and plunge us into turmoil for multiple seasons.

31 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

You're just agreeing with me again, i don't really understand.

At least we both agree the new owners chose to uproot the entire club and plunge us into turmoil for multiple seasons.

The reason to uproot the entire club was due to the worries of connection we still had with Roman, who at the time was believed to have connections to Putin. What are you not understanding? Your name has Ukraine in it funnily enough….

American owners, buying a club that was seized by England due to the owner having ties to Russia/Putin who had JUST started a war with Ukraine… any lightbulb clicking yet? Hello…?!?!

8 minutes ago, Clown Lake said:

The reason to uproot the entire club was due to the worries of connection we still had with Roman, who at the time was believed to have connections to Putin. What are you not understanding? Your name has Ukraine in it funnily enough….

American owners, buying a club that was seized by England due to the owner having ties to Russia/Putin who had JUST started a war with Ukraine… any lightbulb clicking yet? Hello…?!?!

Hi mate, good to have another nonsense post from you. 71 and counting!

Would love to know Petr Cech's connection to Putin,

Or Jason and Reisse Griffin.

Or Neil bath.

Or Tommy Tuchel.

Any update would be appreciated, thanks x

1 hour ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

You're just agreeing with me again, i don't really understand.

At least we both agree the new owners chose to uproot the entire club and plunge us into turmoil for multiple seasons.

You clearly don’t understand and that’s the problem.

You said this “So the new owners forced out the upper management straight away when it was unneeded, you're agreeing with me?”

If you can’t work out that from it not being needed to it happening something significant happened . As I keep pointing out there would be an assessment made by others around guilt by association. But what we do know is that matters were reported to the FA, PL and UEFA regarding incomplete information being send under RAs tenure .

Tuchal Lots of rumours out there

Neil Bath . Not sure but odd seeing as he had just been promoted

Jason & Son . This may help but then again may not be relevant

2 hours ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Hi mate, good to have another nonsense post from you. 71 and counting!

Would love to know Petr Cech's connection to Putin,

Or Jason and Reisse Griffin.

Or Neil bath.

Or Tommy Tuchel.

Any update would be appreciated, thanks x

He was connected to Roman. You might not be playing along here, are you really this thick mate? Im starting to believe so.

Will you ask me again how the rest were? 🤨

Edited July 23, 2025Jul 23 by Clown Lake

The reason they uprooted the entire club was so they could rebuild from the ground up. They had a strategy to be successful. And I know there's a lot of negative ninnies on here, but it IS working.

The alternative strategy in my opinion would have seen us become what man united have become.

It's brutal, but it's business. If you keep enough of the old regime around it's hard to change anything. It has nothing to do with Putin. It has to do with bringing fresh blood in to implement a completely different strategy.

47 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

The reason they uprooted the entire club was so they could rebuild from the ground up. They had a strategy to be successful. And I know there's a lot of negative ninnies on here, but it IS working.

The alternative strategy in my opinion would have seen us become what man united have become.

It's brutal, but it's business. If you keep enough of the old regime around it's hard to change anything. It has nothing to do with Putin. It has to do with bringing fresh blood in to implement a completely different strategy.

This is also a great point. Roman ties definitely had a hand to it, but ultimately regardless of reasoning it was a great call we are witnessing in hindsight. Starting from zero is what you want to do if you want massive changes.

2 hours ago, Clown Lake said:

He was connected to Roman. You might not be playing along here, are you really this thick mate? Im starting to believe so.

Will you ask me again how the rest were? 🤨

Can you answer to each individual i raised and let me know what their connection was to Putin and why they were sacked?

You're allowed to google them if you don't know who they are. x

4 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Can you answer to each individual i raised and let me know what their connection was to Putin and why they were sacked?

You're allowed to google them if you don't know who they are. x

Omg ☠️😂

1 minute ago, Clown Lake said:

Omg ☠️😂

74 - 0 on the post:worthwhile ratio now

12 hours ago, Clown Lake said:

Starting from zero is what you want to do if you want massive changes.

Quite possible the worst take on anything I have ever seen, well done.

9 minutes ago, dkw said:

Quite possible the worst take on anything I have ever seen, well done.

Did you not know if you want to win, then you sell all your winners?!

On a level where you are just colleagues in a workplace and talk about stuff I think the new owners go around talking to people and every day you go around you hear this that and another thing that is very plainly obvious culture of the place. You start to identify people and things that are keeping up the culture and seem strong about it.

Now this starts to conflict with the broader idea of the plan you want to instill in your new club. Talk openly about it inside the club and conflicts start to arise. Some people you need to move on and others you lose when they want to leave. Tuchel was pretty public case on this.

The rock starts to roll (no pun intended) and you find yourself in a situation where you have replaced most of the staff.

The players essentially are much easier to move so to say as moving players is very normal to top level sports.

In their big plan the slashing of the salary bills was clearly one aim. One good way of doing is to invest in young players and when you are buying young players you have the potential of selling them on for a good fee. They did that.

This actually started only when we hired the team of directors. People have laughed about the size of the squad, transfer fees and contract lengths. Now we need to reduce the size of the squad which is on as we are talking. Contract length is something that seems other clubs start to do as well. Okay not 7-9 years but it used to be 3-4 years and now 5-6 years looks normal in this summer window in the case of young players. Maybe we'll see other clubs doing that as well and the norm comes to be around 6-8 years or so.

We also made a bold move on hiring Enzo Maresca. That looked weird choice and it has been rocky road but at this very moment people are looking at our club and starting to see the big picture and see us as a threat we used to be.

Not sure who is laughing right now. Everyone's been super sceptical of the plan and pretty much everything is being scrutinized as it was when Roman took over. Now people are seeing positives of the decisions. Inside and outside.

We just needed to be patient. Which is a word that was never associated with Chelsea FC under Roman especially. That word never was part of our DNA.

We are still in a building phase and might dip back to something average because we are at such a delicate stage with such a young squad. Hopefully we go from strength to strength.

Anyway I think it looks a bit optimistic right this moment.

3 hours ago, dkw said:

Quite possible the worst take on anything I have ever seen, well done.

Still adding nothing. Still no opinion, just a shell mate.

3 hours ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Did you not know if you want to win, then you sell all your winners?!

You two make a great duo, “The Echo Chambers”. You cant see or hear anything outside of your opinion and dkw or you just go around reinforcing each other’s abuse.

Matter of fact… you both love to claim I am this person, or that person, Im starting to think you're both the same person.

Can any mods or admin check this please? 🤭

Edited July 24, 2025Jul 24 by Clown Lake

31 minutes ago, Clown Lake said:

Still adding nothing. Still no opinion, just a shell mate.

You two make a great duo, “The Echo Chambers”. You cant see or hear anything outside of your opinion and dkw or you just go around reinforcing each other’s abuse.

Matter of fact… you both love to claim I am this person, or that person, Im starting to think you're both the same person.

Can any mods or admin check this please? 🤭

This is the equivalent of "i know you are, you said you, but what am i?"

Really disappointing seeing the standard of fan choosing to support Chelsea in recent years dip so much. Overseas fans used to follow us because of a love for the club and culture, now we get the likes of you who picked a team on Fifa 24 and stuck with it. Such a shame.

1 hour ago, Clown Lake said:

Still adding nothing. Still no opinion, just a shell mate.

If you wrote anything even close to being worthy of commenting on then I would, so far its just total and utter nonsense. So I wont.