donjazet:


Your statements reeked of massive dislike or hate for mourinho there is no doubt about that. I simply hope with time you realize that you were totally wrong in slandering him the way you are doing now.
Mourinho is the greatest manager Chelsea ever had.
Peace.

donjazet:
[size=14pt]Know your history[/size].
The battle of Stamford Bridge

Chelsea are poised at the crossroads as acrimony between Ken Bates (right) and Matthew Harding (left) threatens their ambitions for the club.
David Hellier reports
David Hellier Saturday 11 November 1995

It was a comment from one of his friend's wives at a christening party over the weekend that is said to have finally persuaded Ken Bates, the chairman of Chelsea Football Club, to hit out against fellow director Matthew Harding, the would-be pretender to his throne.
"Isn't it time you said something back?" said the woman to Bates, who for months has, by his own standards, kept his counsel against the background of what he believes has been a Harding-inspired whispering campaign.

This week the long-awaited bust-up between the two men began in earnest. First Bates blasted Harding after Harding sent him a letter containing his resignation from Chelsea Village, the club that owns the assets of Chelsea Football Club: "This man isn't fit to run my club," Bates declared.

Yesterday Bates escalated the battle by writing to Harding, dramatically withdrawing his directors' privileges, barring him from the press lounge and players' bar and accusing him of causing the club embarrassment in the boardroom.


Harding, a lifelong supporter of the club who has spent the whole of this week away in New York on business, flew back, declaring that he was "amazed" by a series of vitriolic attacks from Bates.

"I wasn't aware it was a battle or a war. But I'm not going to pack up my kit and walk away," he said yesterday. Earlier in the week he admitted what many people have believed has been his intention ever since he lent the club pounds 5m for the building of its North stand two and a half years ago - he wants to be its chairman.

For anybody close to the action at Stamford Bridge, however, there has never been a question of if the two men fall out, but when.

Apart from a brief honeymoon period after Harding lent the first pounds 5m to the club for the development of the North stand, the two men have worked in growing disharmony.

Bates said yesterday: "He's been very nice to my face while at the same time courting young journalists, the ones who are impressed with being courted by a rich young man. What he hasn't realised is that almost step by step everything he's been doing has been reported back to me..."

When the North stand opened last November, Bates refused to acknowledge any debt to Harding in the club programme. He wrote that it would be wrong to thank one person alone for the new stand, that it had been the result of the efforts of everyone associated with the club.

More recently he used the programme to point out to supporters that the rent Chelsea now pays to Harding's company, Stardust, effectively puts pounds 3 on each person's ticket price.

Told that Harding was trying to win over the fans' support for his threatened challenge, Bates thought it prudent to let the fans know that Harding's assistance was not coming free.

On Harding's part, he is said to have been briefing sections of the media about his difficulties with Bates. He has hinted that the manager, Glenn Hoddle, has an uneasy relationship with the man and that Hoddle would be unlikely to stay on when his current contract expires at the end of the year if Bates is still at the helm.

And at the recent Player of the Year Awards evening he was openly telling people that there was only one man holding Chelsea Football Club. There were no prizes for guessing who he meant.

Behind all the huff and puff of two men with big egos falling out lies the seemingly intractable problem facing both men: how to elevate Chelsea into the group of eight to 10 football clubs that have the wherewithal to dominate English football.

The two men line up like this: Bates, who does not appear to be a terribly wealthy man in his own right apart from his shareholding in Chelsea Village, saved the club from possible extinction in 1981 when he bought it for a nominal sum and took on its debts.

He fought and won an 11 year-old battle with property developers who owned the site at Stamford Bridge and wanted to turf the football club out and replace the stadium with a residential complex. Now he plans to raise new funds to build two new stands for the part of the stadium that have not yet been modernised and add to this a hotel complex, a car park and a residential block. He speaks for 100 million of the club's 102 million shares.

Harding is said to be worth around pounds 140m, most of which stems from his 30 per cent plus share-holding in Benfield, the London reinsurance group. He was paid a salary last year of pounds 3.25m and receives millions of pounds a year in shareholders' dividends.

A lifelong supporter, he responded to an advertisement in the Financial Times placed by Bates soon after the appointment of the current manager, Hoddle. He has so far lent the club the pounds 5m for the North stand - repayable in 2008 - and he has put up another loan of pounds 5m for the purchase of new players. Each time Chelsea sell a player, this goes down to reduce the money they owe to Harding.

In addition he recently acquired the freehold site at Stamford Bridge from the Royal Bank of Scotland for pounds 16.5m. Chelsea pay him a rent of pounds 1.5m a year.

Apart from obvious personality conflicts - Harding dislikes Bates' politics and does not have time for Bates' rather forthright manner - the two men differ in their approach to how Chelsea should go forward into the future.

Bates insists the club needs to reduce its reliance on the football side. Hence he wants an income stream that brings a greater percentage of revenue from merchandising, from catering, from selling flats and running a hotel.

Harding would rather build up the team further first, adding to the considerable sums Hoddle has already spent on new signings, a strategy Bates condemns as short-term.

So far Harding has not invested a single penny in the shares of Chelsea Village, considering the value Bates puts on the shares to be too high.

Bates reckons that the assets of Chelsea, which include the players' registrations, the goodwill of the club's name and merchandising opportunities, and the potential gate revenue and the potential for development value the company at around pounds 50-60m.

Some City bankers, and obviously Harding, dispute such a valuation. They point to the fact that Chelsea does well if it breaks even in a year on a revenue not much more than pounds 10m (Manchester United made a profit of pounds 20m on turnover of more than pounds 60m last year). They say the players' registrations might fetch a valuation of around pounds 15m and that the franchise as it now stands is probably not worth much more than that.

However, Harding's problem is that Bates has no intention of selling the club - unless he is offered a premium price. Bates says that Harding would have to offer him around pounds 60m for the company and be prepared to invest another pounds 40m in players and redeveloping the stadium. Put up or shut up, is the thrust of his message.

Harding may be rich, but he is not yet in the Jack Walker league. Walker, who has pumped millions into Blackburn Rovers and walked away from the sale of his steel company with cash of more than pounds 400m.
For Harding to buy Bates out he would have to sell his holding in Benfield - it is by no means certain how much he would get for it if he did, or how much the company would be worth without him - and then use most of his wealth to take control of Chelsea. Once he has paid out Bates there is no certainty there would be any money left for players, let alone the modernising of the ground.

Where Chelsea go from here remains unclear. It seems unlikely that the two men, after this latest spat, can continue working together. But it is also unlikely that Harding, Chelsea fanatic as he is, will or even can withdraw all his money (for one thing he can not call in his money on the North stand until 2008 anyway).

But if the worst happens and Harding tries to starve Chelsea of money for transfers, Bates' loyalists were yesterday suggesting that he is determined to carry on without Harding's financial assistance.

If the two can not resolve their differences, Chelsea may struggle to raise new funds, although Bates said yesterday he was in discussion with a number of financiers concerning the development of the new south stand.
Prior to Harding's involvement Bates, using the advice of Macarthur and Co, a small City merchant bank, toured the City in search of investors to assist him in getting his development plans on the road. There was no help forthcoming until Harding emerged.

Recently he has lunched merchant bankers in the City, but not with universal success. One banker said he would have worked for Bates if he was sure he would be paid up front. Bates insisted on a success-only fee and the business relationship broke down.

In the end this might be enough to secure a truce, however unlikely that may seem right now.
Hurt though he may be by Harding's supposed sniping campaign, Bates may yet come around to the fact that his aims at Chelsea could be badly affected by turning his nose up at Harding's cash and Harding, if he is to be taken at his word, is too big a fan of the club to do anything that will cause it long-term harm.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/the-battle-of-stamford-bridge-1581435.html

Ibime:



Very interesting. . . .nice read. I only caught the tail end of Matthew Harding era and was not sure exactly what his financial interest in the club was.

donjazet:


Will it be way out of line to say his death(helicopter crash) is very suspicious? N

Ibime:


No, the helicopter pilot was not qualified for navigation by instrument reading only. Weather was bad on that day and he needed to climb to a higher altitude as a low cloud meant he would be running into hills. He tried climbing in poor visibility using instrument reading only and tailspun out of control. With the low clouds and hilly terrain that day, he should have cancelled the flight by law but it was his first contract with Harding and he was desperate to impress.

nateevs:


He spent more money than any other one ever did. That's not hate, it's the truth.

FBS:
Truth be told, they (manure) might be a tough nut to crack, but there is NOTHING inspiring about their play at the moment. And as you might have guessed, I REALLY DON'T CARE. Come Sunday, 3 points na the koko.

Diademk07:
Sorry, I thought I was on manutd thread..

Senile old man

Nihilist:


Let me ask you this.

Assuming you hadn't seen that clip before, and you saw only up to where KDB received the ball and someone asked you what would happen next...

Would you predict that:

A KDB turns and passes to Kolarov in space on his left
B KDB turns and passes the ball to Busquets on his right

raumdeuter:


Controlling a ball and passing to an open Kolarov is Pep style, Or Fernandinho falling is Pep style or John Stones falling asleep and failing to receive a simple pass

Nihilist:



Options!!!!

Club Page!

Mehn I never hear those names in a minute.

A40 you sef be dyed in the paint triple OG mack daddy. No wonder you and Dayo support a club by criminals. Una be the original sinners. Na people like you and Dayo make God use flood kill everybody during Noah's time...e be like say una ancestors tamo that ark last last.

A40:

That 04/06 period mandem was young and out of control. Thank God we don turn new leaf now sha.

That una lungu na Sodom and Gomorrah oh! Abule Egba. So so joint and ashawo full everywhere Jesus must not meet you for there na hell fire straight

nateevs:
John Terry to miss crucial clash with Utd after suffering Ankle set-back.

Nihilist:


Never mind JT, where Zouma at?

We need to get rid of Cahill ASAP.

ProfTea6:

Niilist, you are yarning dust in that sexuality thread. I will be back for you. ediot.

“When he decided to go to a direct competitor then love stories are over.” That was Jose Mourinho on Frank Lampard, the then-Chelsea manager clearly hurt that his precious boy’s exit to New York had a stopover in Manchester. So if Jose Mourinho’s ‘welcome’ at Stamford Bridge is less than warm, he can have no cause for complaint – no longer wanted by Chelsea, he went to a direct competitor and the love story could be over.

He has already been back at Stamford Bridge once as an opposition manager but that was 2010 and that was Inter Milan; their meeting was a quirk of the Champions League draw. Now he is at Manchester United, another of England’s elite clubs and a fierce rival of Chelsea’s ever since Roman Abramovich rode into town clutching his rubles. After years of plotting to end United’s dominance of English football, he is now plotting to restore it. No wonder Sky Sports have dubbed it THE RETURN.

Six of the Chelsea side that were impressive in beating Leicester on Saturday won the title with Mourinho just two years ago, with several of those players having reportedly turned on their manager in his final months at the club. Yet another said last year, when asked about Mourinho by journalists, that “he is special for you, not for me”. After comprehensive defeats against Liverpool and Arsenal, Chelsea manager Antonio Conte needs a ‘f*** you’ victory against opposition better than Watford or West Ham. Motivation is not in short supply.

Manchester United fans – in the main – accepted the defensive tactics that brought a point at Anfield on Monday as avoiding defeat was paramount against a Liverpool side (largely) sweeping all before them, but will Mourinho be forgiven for parking the bus again? Chelsea have not been playing with the frightening verve of Liverpool so should really be regarded as beatable. Would a 1-1 draw (currently the bookies’ favourite scoreline) be acceptable to United when it could leave them seven points off the top of the table and five behind Liverpool before the clocks change?

Even without the sub-plots, this would be a fascinating clash. Conte’s switch to a 3-4-3 makes them a very different proposition to Liverpool, whose full-backs were pinned back by United’s diligent wing play on Monday. If United try and run Victor Moses and Marcos Alonso out of this game, David Luiz will happily exploit the extra space in the middle. And United – less than three days after facing Fenerbahce – are unlikely to have the same appetite and energy to press as they displayed at Anfield. It all points to a slightly more open game. We hope. Surely.

Nihilist:


Can't argue with this analysis.

nateevs:


No. I cannot as well. Jose will definitely try to use Valencia and Young to pin Moses and Marcos. In the middle of the park, I am guessing he will also try to use Fellaini to watch Kante's forward runs. It's easier for them at SB because the pitch is smaller.

This is where I believe Hazard and Pedro are key to tilting the game. Assuming Moses and Marcos are successfully pinned, Hazard and Pedro will have to double as wing outlets and forwards so we don't isolate Costa. If they bring their A game, then it will be a busy day for United. I set-up will open up space in the middle.

Defensively, I don't see them doing much damage. Kante can hold Herrera and Fellaini on his own. Matic on Pogba and our wing backs on their overlapping wingers. Jose will not attack us with full backs. Not at SB.

This is how I see it unfolding. I hope for 3pts.

Nihilist:


I expect Diego to pick up a card in this game though. His tussle with Bailly will likely be a key factor in determining the outcome of the game as both are clearly agberos by nature.

My only concern in the game is Matic. I suspect that Jose will go for the early goal and then look to shut up shop. Either way, we would need a real dynamic presence in the middle of the Park and I don't think Matic is dynamic(or creative enough) to be cause mayhem there. I think that Matic should be encouraged to just sit for us in this game like he used to do 2 years ago and let Kante do the running. Alternatively we play Fabregas to control the tempo from deep safe in the knowledge that he has 5 defenders behind him.

donjazet:
Neutral in this one

Kolade354:
lyk seriously
Fucck mou,the love story is over.

donjazet:

With the imminent appointment of José to man united, I am suddenly Doubting my loyalty to Chelsea football club, I am sort of confused who I'll support right now and this is my reason.

I knew about football in 2002 at the age of 13 through the world cup that year, we were the only house that had cable in the area then and pple flocked our house to watch national matches. This made me pick an interest in football but I really didn't know much about any team bar Nigerian team.
I then knew about the EPL in 2003 but wasn't a fan of any team. Pple around me were mostly arsenal fans then because of kano nwankwo but I wasnt really influenced.

I was a neutral for about 2years and within this period was when José came to the EPL. And of course left everyone in football in awe. He changed the dynamic of football in england. He introduced a new formation in england that no one could match (433). He exuded great exuberance and charisma that inspired many and dare I say he was loved by all except of course our bitter rivals (arsenal, Liverpool and man u) who now had a new competitor.

And this was when I made my choice!!! By the summer of 2006, at 16, Chelsea had just won the trophy back to back, [size=16pt]thus making mourinho a 4th time consecutive league winner.[/size] My arsenal friends then were silenced by this man and thus I made my decision. This man literally drew my attention to Chelsea and I loved his success and I loved the ambition of this club hence my decision to support them.

The first time he left, I was really angry and sad, although he can't be exonerated of all blames, he wasn't the root cause, players were forced on him and this led to an array of issues, I was hurt but decided to continue to support basically because I was consoled by the fact that he was going far away, not a rival and more so he had already laid a solid foundation upon which we would build. Years passed and I was correct, the club built on that foundation and became one of the powerhouses in Europe. He himself would go on to acclaim more successes along the way and setting records.. THIS MAN WENT ON A NINE YEAR UNBEATEN HOME LEAGUE RECORD WITH THREE DIFFERENT TEAMS. I could be forgiven for saying he was directly responsible for the success which we have had and for that I will forever be grateful to him.

All these years my love for Chelsea grew more, I decorated my locker and room in secondary school and now university with Chelsea colours stickers and paraphernalia, I have had the highs and lows, I have enjoyed mocking arsenal fans till date, in all, I have enjoyed being a Chelsea fan.

When he came back the second time, I was happy and anxious to see how well things would turn out to be then, because it would be an understatement to say the club was very unstable. He came and tried his best. He was fired and now...

Now he is moving to a direct rival and I am at a crossroad as to who to support because I still adore his success and tactical acumen. Pls what do I do?

You see, in football, there are really heartbreaking moments you experience, as a Chelsea fan we've had dozens of that!!!b Mourinhos inter Milan winning us, iniestas late goal against us, lampard scoring against us with a major league rival, peter cech almost dying on the pitch, john terrys penalty miss in a champions league final!!! And many more! But these are MOMENTS one will eventually recover from because they are scarce, but in this case, we will be faced with this debacle day in day out. Because you can't wish mourinho be successful and wish Manchester united, a major rival succeed. You get?? And as I said he was the reason I first joined this club although I have grown to really love our club!! I still love him very much!!!


People might want to say you're not a true fan or shit like that but no!!! That's not true, its just that I acknowledge the fact that he brought me here and now I dont know if I can stand being his rival.