The Official Thread of Chelsea FC

[AQMP]

Chelsea really are a horrible club,rotten to the core.
Fans,players and owners are all the same at that club.

'Scuuuuse me!?!?

[under the bar]

Lol at the Rafa Out sign when the corner was being taken!!

[Main Street]

Accusing Norf Tyrone of being one-eyed when it comes to Chelsea is playing the man, not the ball. His fundamental question - what were Chelsea meant to do when one of their players came to them saying he believed he had been racially abused by the ref? - is a valid one. Heck, they can't even hang Ramires out to dry over this because even the FA are saying he made his accusation in good faith!

What were Chelsea to do?  Considering they have a past record of being wrong, not only being wrong but deliberately supporting the fabrication of vile accusations aimed against refs, eventually forcing them out of the game, then they could have proceeded with caution and examined the matter first before blabbering like a whiney bunch of spoilt weasels.
It is astonishing that this serious complaint was even made considering the flimsy, wafer thin evidence.
The FA have not only thrown out the case but say there is contradictory evidence. They can't say that players should not come forward with such accusations or say that if a player's accusation cannot be proven then he should be punished.
What has muddied these waters is that the accusation came from the EPL club with a proven disreputable record in this area.

[Norf Tyrone]

Accusing Norf Tyrone of being one-eyed when it comes to Chelsea is playing the man, not the ball. His fundamental question - what were Chelsea meant to do when one of their players came to them saying he believed he had been racially abused by the ref? - is a valid one. Heck, they can't even hang Ramires out to dry over this because even the FA are saying he made his accusation in good faith!

What were Chelsea to do?  Considering they have a past record of being wrong, not only being wrong but deliberately supporting the fabrication of vile accusations aimed against refs, eventually forcing them out of the game, then they could have proceeded with caution and examined the matter first before blabbering like a whiney bunch of spoilt weasels.
It is astonishing that this serious complaint was even made considering the flimsy, wafer thin evidence.
The FA have not only thrown out the case but say there is contradictory evidence. They can't say that players should not come forward with such accusations or say that if a player's accusation cannot be proven then he should be punished.
What has muddied these waters is that the accusation came from the EPL club with a proven disreputable record in this area.

What accusations did Chelsea make in the past that wasn't true?

Again you've refused to deal with the facts. I've made the same point several times but people are just ignoring it get their point across.

Before Chelsea were able to manage the event, their PR dept were already dealing with journalists querying the event. Read this bit carefully. The FAs rules state that Chelsea HAD to report the complaint as soon as Mikel reported it to them.

They had a choice then. Keep it under wraps ans be accused coffee a racist cover up, with the knowledge that the story would come out anyhow. Or make a statement.

There was a no win situation.

Considering Liverpool's past, some of your adjectives could be based on experience!

[AQMP]

Accusing Norf Tyrone of being one-eyed when it comes to Chelsea is playing the man, not the ball. His fundamental question - what were Chelsea meant to do when one of their players came to them saying he believed he had been racially abused by the ref? - is a valid one. Heck, they can't even hang Ramires out to dry over this because even the FA are saying he made his accusation in good faith!

What were Chelsea to do?  Considering they have a past record of being wrong, not only being wrong but deliberately supporting the fabrication of vile accusations aimed against refs, eventually forcing them out of the game, then they could have proceeded with caution and examined the matter first before blabbering like a whiney bunch of spoilt weasels.
It is astonishing that this serious complaint was even made considering the flimsy, wafer thin evidence.
The FA have not only thrown out the case but say there is contradictory evidence. They can't say that players should not come forward with such accusations or say that if a player's accusation cannot be proven then he should be punished.
What has muddied these waters is that the accusation came from the EPL club with a proven disreputable record in this area.

What accusations did Chelsea make in the past that wasn't true?

Again you've refused to deal with the facts. I've made the same point several times but people are just ignoring it get their point across.

Before Chelsea were able to manage the event, their PR dept were already dealing with journalists querying the event. Read this bit carefully. The FAs rules state that Chelsea HAD to report the complaint as soon as Mikel reported it to them.

They had a choice then. Keep it under wraps ans be accused coffee a racist cover up, with the knowledge that the story would come out anyhow. Or make a statement.

There was a no win situation.

Considering Liverpool's past, some of your adjectives could be based on experience!

That's it down to a tea.

[Norf Tyrone]

Accusing Norf Tyrone of being one-eyed when it comes to Chelsea is playing the man, not the ball. His fundamental question - what were Chelsea meant to do when one of their players came to them saying he believed he had been racially abused by the ref? - is a valid one. Heck, they can't even hang Ramires out to dry over this because even the FA are saying he made his accusation in good faith!

What were Chelsea to do?  Considering they have a past record of being wrong, not only being wrong but deliberately supporting the fabrication of vile accusations aimed against refs, eventually forcing them out of the game, then they could have proceeded with caution and examined the matter first before blabbering like a whiney bunch of spoilt weasels.
It is astonishing that this serious complaint was even made considering the flimsy, wafer thin evidence.
The FA have not only thrown out the case but say there is contradictory evidence. They can't say that players should not come forward with such accusations or say that if a player's accusation cannot be proven then he should be punished.
What has muddied these waters is that the accusation came from the EPL club with a proven disreputable record in this area.

What accusations did Chelsea make in the past that wasn't true?

Again you've refused to deal with the facts. I've made the same point several times but people are just ignoring it get their point across.

Before Chelsea were able to manage the event, their PR dept were already dealing with journalists querying the event. Read this bit carefully. The FAs rules state that Chelsea HAD to report the complaint as soon as Mikel reported it to them.

They had a choice then. Keep it under wraps ans be accused coffee a racist cover up, with the knowledge that the story would come out anyhow. Or make a statement.

There was a no win situation.

Considering Liverpool's past, some of your adjectives could be based on experience!

That's it down to a tea.

Ha ha. Faking predictive txt. New tablet!

[ONeill]

It's not as simple as that Norf and I suspect you know it. Chelsea ruined the refereeing careers of Anders Frisk (death threats, allegations unfounded), Overbo (death threats, accused of cheating) and almost did it again with unfounded allegations. To say they HAD to act doesn't hold up. A swift/immediate internal investigation would've revealed that there was no substance to the allegation. Given the negative publicity the club has received in recent years, surely that was the sensible action.

Graham Poll also had allegations from Chelsea withdrawn. It's a pattern that they don't seem to be learning from.

What are your honest opinions of the Abramovich Chelsea - the club they are now (a lot more successful) to the club you knew growing up? To me, it's not Chelsea anymore.

[Tony Baloney]

It's not as simple as that Norf and I suspect you know it. Chelsea ruined the refereeing careers of Anders Frisk (death threats, allegations unfounded), Overbo (death threats, accused of cheating) and almost did it again with unfounded allegations. To say they HAD to act doesn't hold up. A swift/immediate internal investigation would've revealed that there was no substance to the allegation. Given the negative publicity the club has received in recent years, surely that was the sensible action.

Graham Poll also had allegations from Chelsea withdrawn. It's a pattern that they don't seem to be learning from.

What are your honest opinions of the Abramovich Chelsea - the club they are now (a lot more successful) to the club you knew growing up? To me, it's not Chelsea anymore.

An awful shower of scum. They are simply employing the dark art of the smear campaign beloved of Russian oligarchs. Still the refs should be thankful they have found no Polonium 210 in their halftime brew.

[deiseach]

I'm not going to defend Chelsea either as a club or about previous incidents, but in this case they had no choice but to report Clattenburg. As Norf Tyrone has pointed out, they HAVE to report these incidents. Let's imagine you were racially abused. Would you have any faith in a system which begins with having a chat behind closed doors, just to see if you are on the level? I'm reminded of the scene in Cracker where Penhaligon is told by DCI Wise after she accuses Beck of raping her to cut out the hairy-arsed lesbian stuff and come and have a drink with her mates. And no, I'm not comparing racial abuse to rape, but there has to be a process for dealing with this kind of thing and it shouldn't begin with one of the interested parties investigating itself.

[AQMP]

"In this case, the player and club were correct in reporting the matter to The FA and it was appropriate and proper for such an allegation to be thoroughly investigated".

That is from the FA statement. 

Chelsea made two errors in the process. 1)  Some PR idiot leaked to the press that the "inappropriate language" was racist in nature.  2) CFC and/or Ramires should at least write to Clattenburg saying along the lines that they had no choice but to report however they now accept that, while acting in good faith, Ramires was mistaken.

Apart from that this has been done to death.

[deiseach]

Apart from that this has been done to death.

Since when has that ever stopped us before?

[AQMP]

Apart from that this has been done to death.

Since when has that ever stopped us before?

Indeed, long may it continue.  Now about Luis Garcia's "ghost goal"...

[deiseach]

Indeed, long may it continue.  Now about Luis Garcia's "ghost goal"...

Twas never a goal. Which made it all the sweeter!

[deiseach]

Question for Chelsea fans. Was the reception Rafael Benitez got yesterday primarily a function of the treatment of Roberto Di Matteo or an expression of an overarching contempt for Rafa?

[johnneycool]

Question for Chelsea fans. Was the reception Rafael Benitez got yesterday primarily a function of the treatment of Roberto Di Matteo or an expression of an overarching contempt for Rafa?

You'd have thought the Chelsea fans would be marching on the bridge looking for the head of the man who sacked their beloved 'Robbie DM' and replaced him with the odious Rafa Liverpool Benitez?

No wait, you don't cut your nose off to spite your face.

Chelsea fans should suck it up as they're only part of the play thing that belongs to the Russian fella with all the gas.