chelsea lie - Grant knew he was getting job a week ago

[The Brit]

Can we believe anything those muppets say? The club constantly denied all the reports of bust-ups between jose and roman over the last 6-9 months and then were sitting there today confirming they were all true...they then said jose's departure wasn't planned or expected and yet clearly Grant was on the case

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a ... =1779&ct=5

[loz]

Come on Brit. I know you are angry and I totally understand why but don't let that anger reduce you to taking the Daily Mail's word!!

They have printed one pile of sh*t after another about Chelsea and Jose over the years and I bet you have rejected every one of them as fabricated bollocks!

[g3.7]

people only believe what they want to- if this was an article by the mail putting jose in a negative light how quickly would it be dismissed as nonsense?

[The Brit]

Come on Brit. I know you are angry and I totally understand why but don't let that anger reduce you to taking the Daily Mail's word!!

They have printed one pile of sh*t after another about Chelsea and Jose over the years and I bet you have rejected every one of them as fabricated b*****ks![/quote

Many people didn't believe the press when it came to talking about the bust-ups between jose and roman and they have been proved wrong...you're right to say i'm angry although it's pretty much an understatement...still haven't finished with the Kremlin wall

[g3.7]

do you think the daily mail is at all credible?

[The Brit]

Would you rather believe Kenyon than the Mail?

[g3.7]

I'll look at the quotes from all relevant parties, and make my own mind up.

[The Brit]

The reason why I was so deliberately bold with my subject heading is that we have all been on here over the last year slagging off the press stories and believing all the statements that have come out of Chelsea...it is clear however that they have been lying to us, covering up what was really going on...therefore where should our mistrust be placed now?...in the press or in the people running the club?

[g3.7]

you don't (and IMO shouldn't) have to make a choice about where to place your trust.

[youlots]

Rejecting this story as having any truth simply because it is the Mail would be the same as accepting everthing it has alleged as implictly true. The thing is though, there are quite a few direct quotes in there from named sources - not just paraphrasing from indirect sources. Moreover, it would be relatively easy I'd imagine to confirm when Grant applied for/was granted his full ticket. It seems to me that regardless of whether all of the "reportage" is wholly accurate, the allegations in the story are consistent with the theory that is gaining ascendancy relatively quickly that at the first meeting between the gang of three and Jose the other night (and as is usually the case as these things go) he was asked to resign. Jose would have known that to do so without some undertaking from the board that his compensation package would be unaffected and that he be paid out it in total, would be sheer madness because it could later be treated as an admission by him that he was not "ready, willing and able" to perform his contractual obligations (and therefore could be treated by the board as an anticpatory breach of contract). Accordingly, IMO the usual compromise was reached whereby their is a parting by way of "mutual consent", the usual PR statement is put out to this effect so as not to effect the transition process and there would be an agreement in-principle that the Deed of Release (to be executed between the parties in the coming days) would contain the usual reasonable restraint clause (ie. that Jose could not manage another PL club this season or even be brought on as an advisor to any PL club). What has all this legal gibberish got to do with the thread say you? Well, simply this, and no suprises I'm with Brit on this one: Ambramovich had told his closest cohorts (including Grant) that he would strike as soon as we had a run of less than positive results. That is it was a matter of when not if, and the earlier the better. I'm now of the view that bringing in Grant and openly letting the media know that you were having discussions with Goofy's brother/agent prior to the transfer window closing was merely part of the process of letting Jose know that bit by bit he was being undermined. Now why didn't Ambramovich and his cohorts do (in retrospect) the decent thing and just sack Jose at the end of last season? Because they wanted Jose to share the blame as much as possible (ie. a short string of average results) so as to feather the inevitable fall-out that the sacking was going to cause.

[BlueBosnian]

I also believe Jose had it coming since the start of this season.

[glory55]

Brit im sorry mate,but this story belongs in the Rumours section or better still the bin!

You cant offer 'K*nyon or The Mail' as I have no time for either of these c**ts!

[reefplayer]

Now i understand why the team has been playing badly... They all knew there is something wrong behind the scene which ultimately affected their morale and spirit to win games. 'Set up' that was what i called it. It all went smoothly until Roman or Keyon bring in 1st Frank Arnesen and 2nd Avant Grant. These two are idiots. And that Peter Keyon, only knows about counting his money in his bank.

I also suspects those lousy players that were previously sold are all bought by Arnesen. Damn it. Its disruptive to the team.

[Alan]

One the subject of the Daily Mail, here's Patrick Collins' thoughts on Jose leaving:

Slack of jaw and dull of wit, the fans paraded their protests at the gates of Stamford Bridge.

Their numbers were small but their capers caught the eye of the television cameras, as they intended. One man, louder and dafter than the rest, described Jose Mourinho as The Messiah. Depressingly, nobody laughed.

Mourinho himself would have been delighted by their adulation, thrilled by the furore his departure had provoked. The Prime Minister, no less, declared him 'one of the great characters of the game'.

Hitherto sane pundits informed us that a shining light had disappeared from the sport. Air-headed matrons scribbled acres of lurid tosh about the tragic loss of football's sexiest man. And as a sombre nation plunged into a period of mourning, my own thoughts turned to the men and women of the South Central Ambulance Service. If a single incident could capture the essential Mourinho, then it was surely the way he behaved towards those dedicated public servants at the Madejski Stadium last October.

You may recall the details: Chelsea's goalkeeper Petr Cech suffered a severe head injury following a collision with a Reading player. The paramedics treated him briskly and skilfully, but Mourinho later announced that Cech was: 'Thirty minutes in the dressing room, waiting for an ambulance . . . if my goalkeeper dies in that dressing room, it is something English football has to think about.'

In fact, the ambulance had arrived within seven minutes and Cech was in hospital just 19 minutes later. In seeking to make a cheap and vengeful point against a football club, a man earning a total of around ?10 million per year was willing to smear scrupulously efficient public service workers who were earning a basic salary of ?19,166.

Now, some might think that despicable, others would be less indulgent.

But at a time when history is being rewritten, when we are being encouraged to lament the passing of a red-blooded character who lightened our lives with his chirpy chatter and gave not a fig for stale convention, we do well to remember the way he defamed those ambulance workers.

But then,Mourinho was well practised in casual defamation.You will remember April 2005,when he traduced a respected referee named Anders Frisk by effectively accusing him of accepting a bribe from the Barcelona coach, Frank Rijkaard, during a Champions League tie with Chelsea. It was wicked nonsense, of course. And later, much later,Mourinho conceded his error. But Frisk received death threats which forced him into premature retirement, while Mourinho was given a brief touchline ban and a wrist-slapping fine.

Nor should we forget his vile and calculated slander of Arsene Wenger,which provided the moronic mobs with abusive ammunition: 'I think he is one of these ? how do you call it in English?

? voyeurs. He is someone who likes to watch other people.' He later added:'We have a file of quotes from Mr Wenger about Chelsea that is 120 pages.' So, not just foul-mouthed,but paranoid as well. The man simply reeked of class.

And his arrogance was unchecked.Just a few months ago,he accused Manchester United's Cristiano Ronaldo of showing him insufficient respect. This, he attributed to Ronaldo's 'difficult childhood', with 'no education'.

Mourinho is from a privileged background while his young fellow countryman was raised in harrowing poverty, but no compassion was shown. Sir Alex Ferguson's retort was withering: 'There are people from very poor backgrounds who have principles, whereas there are others who are educated but have no principles at all.

And that,without question, question, is the case here.' If all this suggests that I have little affection for Mourinho, then that impression is correct.

Of course, he has considerable ability; anybody who can win the Champions League with Porto is undeniably gifted.

Equally, anybody who cannot win the same prize after spending ?186m of his Chelsea employer's improbable fortune may have questions to answer.

Sadly, accountability is not Mourinho's strongest suit.Self-promotion is his forte. I recall the day that Chelsea won their second Premiership title in April 2006.

While the players were celebrating, Mourinho sought to steal the limelight with a series of stage-school pouts. He threw his winner's medal into the crowd.

'I have one from last season,' he explained. 'I cannot keep everything I have. The man who caught it will go home with a fantastic memory ? or he will go to ebay and make a fortune.'

Within three crass sentences,he reduced a resounding triumph to a squalid boast.

Now, there are several reasons why Chelsea are so widely disliked, from the clumpingly inept machinations of their chief executive, Peter Kenyon, to the mirthless posturing of Roman Abramovich. (Incidentally, did you ever see anything so assiduously rehearsed as his recent walk-out at Aston Villa?)

And did you ever see anything quite so hilariously absurd as the press conference at which Kenyon revealed all the presentational skills of David Brent? When he pledged undying loyalty to Avram Grant, although declining to award him a contract, one half expected Guus Hiddink to come blundering through a nearby curtain inquiring: 'When do I start?'

But I suspect the principal reason for their deep unpopularity can be traced to the man who was once their manager.

For all the money at his disposal, Mourinho failed to produce beautiful or thrilling or even routinely watchable football teams. Instead, he turned out sides which were difficult to beat. It wasn't nearly enough.

Sure, we must give him credit for his virtues. He constructed effective strategies and persuaded impressionable players to play for him.He greatly improved footballers like Joe Cole and John Terry, and he brought out the badge-kissing best in Frank Lampard.

YET he wanted to be recognised for something more than football. He saw himself as an original thinker, a man of ideas. And as the tributes gush,much is made of his latest intellectual spasm; the embarrassingly convoluted allegory involving supermarkets and superior omelettes. I am reminded of Gordon Strachan's response to Eric Cantona's iconic outburst all those years ago: 'If a Frenchman goes on about seagulls,trawlers and sardines, he's called a philosopher. I'd just be called a wee Scottish bum talking crap.'

Cantona justly deserved the rebuke.

But while we are on the subject of just deserts,we must not overlook the men and women of the South Central Ambulance Service, who continue to wait for an apology from the Special One.

As he rides off into the sunset, smiling his smugness and waving his wad,I suspect they are far from his thoughts. But they know the real worth of Jose Mourinho. He's not The Messiah. He's a rather unpleasant little man.

I've highlighted the bits that particularly made me laugh, total s****, except the part about the press conference yesterday.

[footiemadman007]

I don't think it was a "chelsea lie" as you put it Brit just because Grant has said that he knew he would be getting the job a week ago - you've got to think of it, after reading it again (without the sense of anger towards the clubs decision), as though Avram had a feeling of things around the camp and therefore wanted to see whether he could get the right Pro Licence just in case the situation worsened. As it happens the situation did and Abramovich gave Mourinho his marching orders.

Something I picked out from the article:

"Summer signing Florent Malouda said: "There was a different atmosphere in training today, more serious.

"The new coach made much of the importance of physical power and also insisted we shoot more and from any distance. It was not a revolution in tactics, but he also wants us to be more secure in defence.""

I am liking what I read there.. and also here: (apparently Mourinho's words)

"Mourinho himself called on fans to back the team, saying yesterday: "I don't want the supporters to chant my name if they get a bad result. I don't want players to threaten to leave because I have left. I don't want demonstrations of any sort.""

If we can keep the squad as it is and hope that they move on from this situation and give Avram the chance - perhaps all the players thinking of leaving should start to think of waiting till the summer and see where they've all come to - we might see this as the start of a new, strong, Chelsea; but without the guidance of Mourinho which every supporter is saying that we need in order to succeed.

Now - lets back the lads against the Red Manc Scum and back Grant and Stevie C!!

P.S. At least we still have Stevie C - who know how Mourinho worked and knows all the players!