Chelsea face new questions over how Roman Abramovich funded success

Tincanalley

Turns player names into a crappy conversation
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
10,031
Location
Ireland
Cynic is me says this is basically a message to other clubs to not mention a certain club's 115 charges, which have conveniently been swept under the carpet it seems after no news for a while. Else, face articles like these where their own club is brought into question.

Conspiracy maybe, I donno. Gut feeling says it just seems off.
I disagree. This is the worst possible time for this to break from the POV of city. Also McElroy quitting over Saudi influence, it all creates a bad vibe politically at a time when maybe people were hoping sportswashing concerns might fade from the front pages.
 

Teja

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
5,588
Cynic is me says this is basically a message to other clubs to not mention a certain club's 115 charges, which have conveniently been swept under the carpet it seems after no news for a while. Else, face articles like these where their own club is brought into question.

Conspiracy maybe, I donno. Gut feeling says it just seems off.
I disagree actually. If Chelsea have been doing it, then City most certainly have been as well. (the bits around indirect payments from company-a to company-b and not City to some football club)
 

tomaldinho1

Full Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2015
Messages
17,026
I disagree. This is the worst possible time for this to break from the POV of city. Also McElroy quitting over Saudi influence, it all creates a bad vibe politically at a time when maybe people were hoping sportswashing concerns might fade from the front pages.
Yeah surely this is good for those who want to see these clubs punished.
 

roseguy64

Full Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
12,135
Location
Jamaica
A new owner should be smart enough to have certain clauses in case something like this comes up. If not, it’s their own fault - due diligence and all that.

But the case will probably just be dated in the court or something similar, if it’s anything like City.
What kind of clauses are you talking about? To do what?
 

adexkola

Doesn't understand sportswashing.
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
47,859
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
The argument that only Utd, Arse and Pool are affected by City and Chelsea jumping the queue kinda falls flat on its face when you take into consideration the fact that Liverpool finished 7th or 8th quite often in those late Benitez, Woy, Queen Kenny and Brentan years, and us finishing 2nd twice in the last decade while missing out on CL half the time. Clubs like Everton or Villa flirted with relegation or got outright relegated precisely because in the years when they were good and could’ve kicked on with consistent European football, they got cockblocked by clubs who won the lottery, prudent financial management and careful squad building means diddly squat when it’s just a pissing contest between oligarchs and nation states at the top. If anything, the resentment against Fergie’s Utd and his superhuman feats post 04 have masked a lot of the deleterious effects of these teams, people would go ‘how bad can it be when Utd are still winning?’ and conveniently ignore everything else.
Saying this repeatedly doesn't make it true. They were (and are, in the case of Everton) awfully run. Leeds had a few runs in Europe but they were horribly run and then didn't escape the drop. Revenues from a few CL group stage games won't help you kick on to challenge for major trophies. If City/Chelsea wouldn't be where they are without a major injection of funds (this is true), the converse is also true: you aren't winning without a major injection of funds. And no that doesn't happen with a few runs in Europe.

Forget about United under Fergie. Look at United after Fergie. That we could still compete for trophies and hang close and qualify for Europe most years despite the SNAFU at all levels of management... THAT is a cockblock. Arsenal rebounding rapidly after the decade in the wilderness, bypassing teams that actually put the hard work in, THAT is a cockblock. I agree Chelsea and City are cockblocks as well. And yes if they get strung up on stupid rules then that's fine they know what they were doing. But they're not the sole cockblocks preventing other teams in the league from success. That narrative is lazy.
 

Hughie77

Full Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
4,079
Obviously Chelsea have done the same as City.. Will anything be done?? Imo no same as City do the Premier league and FA want transparency in clubs or do they want there Cash cow .. do they want another ESL to raise its head again.. if FA dock Chelsea points then what do they do to City.. ?
 

Buckie

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 10, 2019
Messages
191
Supports
Arsenal
3 match ban for Casemiro
Nah! Give Chelsea a huge fine and use the proceeds to give massive bonuses to the officials and VAR technicians. They have been doing a bang up job!
 

Bluelion7

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2021
Messages
1,192
Supports
Chelsea
Obviously Chelsea have done the same as City.. Will anything be done?? Imo no same as City do the Premier league and FA want transparency in clubs or do they want there Cash cow .. do they want another ESL to raise its head again.. if FA dock Chelsea points then what do they do to City.. ?
Huh?

I’m not sure where you would get that from these stories.

Not even sure what they did was illegal at the time they did it. Half the time they invent new rules just because of Chelsea. People are always telling me “Like when Chelsea broke the player loan rules” … but we didn’t, they made rules because of a loophole we showed them.

Not sure how giving extra money to CSKA Moscow (wasn’t his son involved with them?) is in the realm of under the table payments to beat teams to players and coaches.

And to those wondering: I believe there were provisions in the sale related to the club starting with a clean slate. What they are still negotiating is actually extra allowances owed to Chelsea for the FAs extreme reaction affecting the stability of the club at a deep level.

Almost all of City’s major charges revolve around lying to the FA about events as well. Clearlake is opening up everything with a super deep dive, making every attempt to actually help the FA. On fan forums that may not matter, but in the real world it’s a pretty substantial difference.
 

UpWithRivers

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
3,587
What does it matter. The extreme consequences is 12 points deducted and a fine. That's a minor inconvenience. What will Newcastle and other clubs do? Fudge the books and become successful in 2,3 years with a small risk of a 12 point fine or do it legitimately over 6-10 years plus.
 

C'est Moi Cantona

Full Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
8,553
What does it matter. The extreme consequences is 12 points deducted and a fine. That's a minor inconvenience. What will Newcastle and other clubs do? Fudge the books and become successful in 2,3 years with a small risk of a 12 point fine or do it legitimately over 6-10 years plus.
Agree with this sentiment, if Chelsea and more so City are to be punsihed, then do it properly, titles lost, relegated, etc. The last thing I want is a points deduction that is going to do very little longterm, and some token fine.

This will just allow their fans to shut everyone down by saying they have been fully punished and that's the end of it.

The punishment has to fit the crime or it's not worth it.
 

The Corinthian

I will not take Mad Winger's name in vain
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
11,006
City and Chelsea should just be torn down and any titles they won given to whoever came 2nd.

Also the semi final in 2009 between them and Barca - who is worse, Roman's dirty money or Barca paying off refs?
 

Lightbringer

Full Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2016
Messages
1,788
Most Chelsea and City fans seem to have no idea their clubs cheated to all their titles, so they are as happy as a legit clubs fans would be!
 

FujiVice

Full Member
Joined
May 8, 2013
Messages
7,196
Retrospective point deduction for 2009/10 season, United first English club to win 5 titles on the trot :drool:
Once Chelsea and City get their points deductions, this will be how the record books read it.

Manchester United:
2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13.
 

Get In Scholesy

Full Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2010
Messages
3,997
Location
The Plains of Nineveh
Ah nothing like faux outrage at things that were blatantly obvious in 2006.

Football is a cesspool currently, I doubt anything substantial will come from this - feck all will be done.

However both Chelsea and City should punished removed from the football association. As well as any other club that has taken this route.
 

Juicy Juiced

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 11, 2023
Messages
298
I was always shocked how well he was recieved in UK. I am from ex comunist country and I know how people like him came to money.
Usually buying public companies for 1-100 euros then selling their assets to other countries, and leaving thousands people without jobs and pensions. Fecking criminals.
 

Dr. StrangeHate

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2013
Messages
5,370
League title count look like if both Chelsea and City had there's rescinded?

The utter shite United have had to put up with! We are the most hard done by from all this cheating:

Arsenal: 3
Manchester United: 5
Liverpool: 4
Tottenham Hotspur: 1

2004–05 Chelsea[f] (2) Arsenal (8) Manchester United (6) Portugal José Mourinho
2005–06 Chelsea (3) Manchester United (13) Liverpool (6) Portugal José Mourinho
2006–07 Manchester United (16) Chelsea (2) Liverpool (7) Scotland Alex Ferguson
2007–08 Manchester United[e] (17) Chelsea (3) Arsenal (6) Scotland Alex Ferguson
2008–09 Manchester United[f][k] (18) Liverpool (12) Chelsea (5) Scotland Alex Ferguson
2009–10 Chelsea (4) Manchester United (14) Arsenal (7) Italy Carlo Ancelotti
2010–11 Manchester United (19) Chelsea (4) Manchester City (4) Scotland Alex Ferguson
2011–12 Manchester City (3) Manchester United (15) Arsenal (8) Italy Roberto Mancini
2012–13 Manchester United (20) Manchester City (4) Chelsea (6) Scotland Alex Ferguson
2013–14 Manchester City[f] (4) Liverpool (13) Chelsea (7) Chile Manuel Pellegrini
2014–15 Chelsea[f] (5) Manchester City (5) Arsenal (9) Portugal José Mourinho
2015–16 Leicester City (1) Arsenal (9) Tottenham Hotspur (9) Italy Claudio Ranieri
2016–17 Chelsea (6) Tottenham Hotspur (5) Manchester City (5) Italy Antonio Conte
2017–18 Manchester City[f] (5) Manchester United (16) Tottenham Hotspur (10) Spain Pep Guardiola
2018–19 Manchester City[l] (6) Liverpool (14) Chelsea (8) Spain Pep Guardiola
2019–20 Liverpool (19) Manchester City (6) Manchester United (7) Germany Jürgen Klopp
2020–21 Manchester City[f] (7) Manchester United (17) Liverpool (8) Spain Pep Guardiola
2021–22 Manchester City (8) Liverpool (15) Chelsea (9) Spain Pep Guardiola
2022–23 Manchester City[m] (9) Arsenal (10) Manchester United (8)
Isn't Liverpool supposed to be 3, not 4?
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
50,221
Location
Birmingham
All state funded and oil clubs are doing it. You’re naive if you think Newcastle aren’t currently doing it either. For them, it’s a cheap and easy way to move expenses off their books.
 

horsechoker

The Caf's Roy Keane.
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
50,536
Location
The stable
Chelsea fans should be made to go around the neighbourhood and knock on doors informing people they are Chelsea fans.

I wouldn't want one in my area.
 

Bluelion7

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2021
Messages
1,192
Supports
Chelsea
Paying extra for Bertrand Traore IS a travesty.

So this lists …$7m in payments, over 12 years, most of those years not being covered by FFP or regulatory that would have made them necessary to bypass anything … they don’t know for sure if they were reported, they have no direct links to the money going to the people they are implying the money went to like they do in City’s emails … and most of this was self reported already (the Cyprus stuff is coming from Clearlake) by a company that had a clean slate agreement in place after the club they were purchasing was forced to void almost all revenue and lost many core players in a lockdown arbitration specialists have already deemed extreme?

Got it.

The Conte one would be interesting if you had the kind of evidence you do against City, because it would actually be within a relevant timeline. But there are no direct ties, or moronic emails detailing who the money is going to. They are just unknowns on paper that you would have trouble actually getting info on because Roman no longer owns the team.

I think including Robben, Ivanović and others though … why? I mean, couldn’t Roman have simply bought Robben an entire super yacht back then without reprocussion? Back when the PL hadnt thought of pretending to be allergic to money?
 

Bluelion7

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2021
Messages
1,192
Supports
Chelsea
I was always shocked how well he was recieved in UK. I am from ex comunist country and I know how people like him came to money.
Usually buying public companies for 1-100 euros then selling their assets to other countries, and leaving thousands people without jobs and pensions. Fecking criminals.
Sorry, but the program he received his shares under was called “Shock therapy” and it was introduced by Americans primarily. Yeltsin was losing his grip on how to privatize over time, and agencies including the CIA, said there were at least 3 movements to return Russia to hard line communism if something extreme wasn’t done quickly.

Pensions were not a financially backed thing at that point, assets could not remain state controlled, and extreme inflation was already rampant and something these programs were designed to fight. The weakness is they couldn’t put other regulatory structures in place at the same speed… and the efforts needed more protection.

People can argue the merits of Shock Therapy, and Putin has basically forced most of the privatized assets to be re-sold to the state over two dr ares after taking down Yeltsin (including Abramovich btw) … but the program they acquired their assets through was legal and monitored.
 

Rooney in Paris

Gerrard shirt..Anfield? You'll Never Live it Down
Scout
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
35,277
Location
In an elephant sanctuary
Sorry, but the program he received his shares under was called “Shock therapy” and it was introduced by Americans primarily. Yeltsin was losing his grip on how to privatize over time, and agencies including the CIA, said there were at least 3 movements to return Russia to hard line communism if something extreme wasn’t done quickly.

Pensions were not a financially backed thing at that point, assets could not remain state controlled, and extreme inflation was already rampant and something these programs were designed to fight. The weakness is they couldn’t put other regulatory structures in place at the same speed… and the efforts needed more protection.

People can argue the merits of Shock Therapy, and Putin has basically forced most of the privatized assets to be re-sold to the state over two dr ares after taking down Yeltsin (including Abramovich btw) … but the program they acquired their assets through was legal and monitored.
Oh my God this guy again.
 

Juicy Juiced

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 11, 2023
Messages
298
Sorry, but the program he received his shares under was called “Shock therapy” and it was introduced by Americans primarily. Yeltsin was losing his grip on how to privatize over time, and agencies including the CIA, said there were at least 3 movements to return Russia to hard line communism if something extreme wasn’t done quickly.

Pensions were not a financially backed thing at that point, assets could not remain state controlled, and extreme inflation was already rampant and something these programs were designed to fight. The weakness is they couldn’t put other regulatory structures in place at the same speed… and the efforts needed more protection.

People can argue the merits of Shock Therapy, and Putin has basically forced most of the privatized assets to be re-sold to the state over two dr ares after taking down Yeltsin (including Abramovich btw) … but the program they acquired their assets through was legal and monitored.
Wow.
 

Bluelion7

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2021
Messages
1,192
Supports
Chelsea
Oh my God this guy again.
Yep, that’s me. Mr actual information.

I get bothered by these posts that imply a few people “stole” money that rightfully belonged to all citizens … without understanding any of the historical context or intricacies of the situation.

“Belonging to all Russians” = socialism and communism… which they were again trying to break the foothold of.

The Shock therapy system on deciding how to Lend for sale resources was designed by Western Democracies, and done through legal programs. What happened to those people, and how they were forced to sell later, different story. Without it, one of three groups would have reformed the USSR within 5 years. That s the conclusion of every competent intelligence network in the planet.

You can blame Putin for tearing it all down through coercion and direct threats. But criticizing Russians who took advantage of the program WE asked them to use in the beginning is hypocritical.

It’s like I was pointing out with Navalny: when he says Kleptocracy, he means people weren’t adhering to purist Socialism, not free market democracy. He is a hard line communist, not some laureate for free will of the people. But younger people these days seem to have no grasp of this at all. They revere him.

And the company that created nearly 75k jobs in 20 countries, and some of the first functional solar furnaces for conservation of metals and energy … they are the bad guys.
 

Rnd898

Full Member
Joined
May 7, 2022
Messages
875
Supports
Chelsea
Obviously there's been some dodgy dealings there but the whole football agent business seems very unregulated and therefore ripe for under-the-table payments.

Since the agents aren't actually employed by the clubs it's probably very easy to abuse the system, whether it's to keep parts of the agent commissions out of FFP jurisdiction or just some good old tax-evasion purposes for the agents themselves. Many of the deals mentioned in these latest articles re. Chelsea finances fall under pre-FFP times so the latter seems quite likely.

I for one find it really hard to believe many other clubs aren't guilty of similar arrangements if someone were to open that can of worms. Not because the clubs themselves are necessarily up to something dodgy but rather because the agents most definitely are.

edit: I doubt any of this will come as a surprise to the current owners though. They did their due diligence and self-reported many of these transactions to the authorities, probably in hopes that their co-operation will grant a bit of leniency when the time comes for a punishment. Could also explain why the club have been doing so much transfer business in the last year or so if they expect a transfer ban to be in the cards at some point?
 
Last edited:

Rooney in Paris

Gerrard shirt..Anfield? You'll Never Live it Down
Scout
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
35,277
Location
In an elephant sanctuary
Obviously there's been some dodgy dealings there but the whole football agent business seems very unregulated and therefore ripe for under-the-table payments.

Since the agents aren't actually employed by the clubs it's probably very easy to abuse the system, whether it's to keep parts of the agent commissions out of FFP jurisdiction or just some good old tax-evasion purposes for the agents themselves. Many of the deals mentioned in these latest articles re. Chelsea finances fall under pre-FFP times so the latter seems quite likely.

I for one find it really hard to believe many other clubs aren't guilty of similar arrangements if someone were to open that can of worms. Not because the club themselves are necessarily up to something dodgy but rather because the agents most definitely are.
To an extent, I agree it's unregulated, but not particularly because the rules are poor (they are generally speaking quite clear), it's just that the enforcement is wank.

Well I say the rules are clear, those on ownership are weak, and the decisions around this are quite opaque.
 

Hughie77

Full Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
4,079
Huh?

I’m not sure where you would get that from these stories.

Not even sure what they did was illegal at the time they did it. Half the time they invent new rules just because of Chelsea. People are always telling me “Like when Chelsea broke the player loan rules” … but we didn’t, they made rules because of a loophole we showed them.

Not sure how giving extra money to CSKA Moscow (wasn’t his son involved with them?) is in the realm of under the table payments to beat teams to players and coaches.

And to those wondering: I believe there were provisions in the sale related to the club starting with a clean slate. What they are still negotiating is actually extra allowances owed to Chelsea for the FAs extreme reaction affecting the stability of the club at a deep level.

Almost all of City’s major charges revolve around lying to the FA about events as well. Clearlake is opening up everything with a super deep dive, making every attempt to actually help the FA. On fan forums that may not matter, but in the real world it’s a pretty substantial difference.
It's probably City Chiefs who's grassed them up, as its not fair to just poke one corrupt club. So City can now drag out there issues with The FA another few years and it will drag on and on.. . Realy don't give to hoots because NOTHING will get done .. as Money talks ask Barcelona !! Probably paid that ref who screwed Chelsea over In CL semi .. never get that game back..
 

noodlehair

"It's like..."
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
16,044
Location
Flagg
What amazes me is how people are repeatedly presented with stuff like this yet still convince themselves they're watching a non corrupt sport where no game or competition can possibly ever be fixed or have an agenda attached to it.

Players will pretend they've been punched in the face if someone pushes air towards their arm jurt to try and cheat a win, and clubs will happily break any rule they won't get caught or punished for, or even just hope they won't. There are zero repercussions for either (unless you're Juventus). What's the obvious thing to conclude from that when it comes to the integrity of the actual games which invariably have millioms of pounds associated to them?
 
Last edited:

Bluelion7

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2021
Messages
1,192
Supports
Chelsea
It's probably City Chiefs who's grassed them up, as its not fair to just poke one corrupt club. So City can now drag out there issues with The FA another few years and it will drag on and on.. . Realy don't give to hoots because NOTHING will get done .. as Money talks ask Barcelona !! Probably paid that ref who screwed Chelsea over In CL semi .. never get that game back..

Well, in that case he only fair solution would be the forced sale of the club and cutting them off from all revenue for a year, AND making it illegal to re sign many of their current players.

Chelsea has already been through all that.

The funny thing about my points on the history lessons is they never say I’m wrong, or anything like that. They just say “wow”, generally. They probably don’t even know who people Jeremy Sachs are.

They don’t care that there is a distinction between wealthy Russians forced to sell their assets back to the state like Abramovich, and actual oligarchs with the war of Putin like Oleg Deripaska.

The US said there was a massive difference; hence why Roman hasn’t been sanctioned in the US.

But Britain was fully comfortable shutting down trading on a public company based on something they knew to be a lie. It’s affected thousands of jobs, hundreds of thousands of peoples pensions and retirement plans.

They did this damage to a company that no longer had real links to Abramovich just to justify shutting down a sports team (they said Evraz produced Russian tank Steel… which was proven untrue).

I personally think that’s pretty messed up, and they in turn think I’m crazy for thinking it’s messed up.


And yes…. I would love to have that moment against Barca back ….
 

Hughie77

Full Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
4,079
Well, in that case he only fair solution would be the forced sale of the club and cutting them off from all revenue for a year, AND making it illegal to re sign many of their current players.

Chelsea has already been through all that.

The funny thing about my points on the history lessons is they never say I’m wrong, or anything like that. They just say “wow”, generally. They probably don’t even know who people Jeremy Sachs are.

They don’t care that there is a distinction between wealthy Russians forced to sell their assets back to the state like Abramovich, and actual oligarchs with the war of Putin like Oleg Deripaska.

The US said there was a massive difference; hence why Roman hasn’t been sanctioned in the US.

But Britain was fully comfortable shutting down trading on a public company based on something they knew to be a lie. It’s affected thousands of jobs, hundreds of thousands of peoples pensions and retirement plans.

They did this damage to a company that no longer had real links to Abramovich just to justify shutting down a sports team (they said Evraz produced Russian tank Steel… which was proven untrue).

I personally think that’s pretty messed up, and they in turn think I’m crazy for thinking it’s messed up.


And yes…. I would love to have that moment against Barca back ….
And me so Utd could win another CL..
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,300
Location
Manchester
Exactly. With all the money in football these days a fine is not even a slap on the wrist. My post was more about point deductions and relegations or stripping of titles. It’s never going to happen. Our footballing authorities haven’t got the stomach for the fight because they have too much invested in cosying up to these clubs and their dodgy but very wealthy owners.
Everton say hi!

You spoke too soon
 

matt10000

Full Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2018
Messages
1,314
Location
Salford UK
What does it matter. The extreme consequences is 12 points deducted and a fine. That's a minor inconvenience. What will Newcastle and other clubs do? Fudge the books and become successful in 2,3 years with a small risk of a 12 point fine or do it legitimately over 6-10 years plus.
This is the point. If you drew up a business plan and account for the reduction it is still a good business plan. Same as those clubs who deliberately go in admin, agree pay 5p in the pound and then do it all again.

Until rhe pundits is so harsh that it isn’t worrh the risk clubs with crappy owners will always do it