wakelim 0 Report post Posted October 22, 2005 Some stats (as of 21st October 2005):Chelsea have played 9, won 9, scored 23, conceded 3 and are already 9 points clear at the top.Isn't this just ridiculous? At least when Manchester United, Arsenal and Liverpool had their little domains of power over the last 20 years there was a possibility of them losing one week. You didn't go along to see them knowing that their opposition was just going to sit back and defend, but that they would still win. With Chelsea it's a for-gone conclusion even before the game starts. It's so predictable that some betting companies have already stopped taking bets on Chelsea winning the league and are taking bets on who comes second. And there's still 21 games to go!Take other leagues' competitiors: Scotland - Rangers, Celtic, HeartsItaly - Juventus, AC Milan, Inter Milan, LazioSpain - Real Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia and moreGermany - Wermer Bremen, Bayern Munich, Schalke and moreIn all these countries it is still entirely close at the top of the table and you couldn't say for sure who would win the next fixture. And people are suprised about falling attendance figures?As most people know, the only reason Chelsea are so good is because they have a billionaire pumping endless ammounts of money into the club. They've spent in the region of ?240 million ($424M or 355M Euros) into Chelsea in the last three years or so. That's well over any ammount any club has ever spent in so short a time period. They now have some of the best players and staff in the world, and only by paying double what other clubs could afford for them. Isn't it about time UEFA or FIFA put a limit on the ammount of money clubs can spend on transfers etc.? Is it really fair that Chelsea can "buy" the Premiership year after year? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
niloc 0 Report post Posted October 22, 2005 Just pumping money into a club doesnt mean that they will win everything in sight.Look at real madrid ... they have loads of money , top footballers in the world and they havent won much recently.What really matters is that you get a manager that can get the players to play as a team. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
alperuzi 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2005 Having a lot of money may work in the short term, they may win 2-3 years but if you don't strenghten the foundation of the club itself it is bound to lose in the long term. That is why I consider some of the south american football (soccer for you yanks ) clubs to be the best in the world. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sportytalk 0 Report post Posted October 27, 2005 Yep, I'm anti-chelsea. Unfortunately, my team is no longer in the premiership although I'm convinced they will be again in the near future!I was really surprised when I heard that chelsea were knocked out of the cup yesterday in penalties by Charlton.So yeah, I reckon they're boring.This is only my opinion though! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeune 0 Report post Posted October 28, 2005 Just pumping money into a club doesnt mean that they will win everything in sight. Look at real madrid ... they have loads of money , top footballers in the world and they havent won much recently. What really matters is that you get a manager that can get the players to play as a team. 197317[/snapback] Real Madrid is different. How I wished I would be the one managing their transfers. They may have a lot of money but I guess they don't know how to spend their money wisely. They don't get the right results because either because Luxemburgo can't come up with the right combination of players to form a winning team or becasue they don't have the right players where they are most needed (Hint: defense). Chelsea on the other hand don't only have star-players they have a coach and a manager who knows what he needs and how to use them. But I have nothing against spending your money wisely or knowing the right combinations of players. What I am against, personally, is what is happening to chelsea know. They have the ability to buy whoever they want, a boss who will pay for the whims and caprices of his manager's "needs" and a style of play whose entertainment value is not much above nil. They have star players for almost every position and another star player substitute for him. Not many clubs can afford to do that. I am not a fan of the premiere league because I support Bayern but I really like it when Arsenal or West Ham play. Their style is exciting to watch. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Peaktao 0 Report post Posted November 12, 2005 Yeah... Chelsea is boring even though they now only won one in five matches. The core thought of this Russian sugar daddy thingy is "Money can't by you love" which proved so true. When Man Utd beat Chelski 1-0 last weekend, the whole nation, if not the whole world, was cheering on them. I, as a Liverpool fan, find it hard to admit cheering on Man Utd, but i'm sure ost of us did. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeune 0 Report post Posted November 12, 2005 When Man Utd beat Chelski 1-0 last weekend, the whole nation, if not the whole world, was cheering on them. I, as a Liverpool fan, find it hard to admit cheering on Man Utd, but i'm sure ost of us did. 203955[/snapback] I slept at 2 in the morning because of this. Yep. I did too. I was jumping all over my place like hell during the final 15 minutes or so. It was one pulsating encounter. But don't you think Darren Fletcher's goal was a bit lucky? I mean it looked like he wanted to pass the ball to Van Nistelrooy. I don't know. But one thing is for sure, it was a great match. I enjoyed it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
