handbags at highbury!

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Is anyone else watching the Arsenal V Man Utd match right now? It's fantastic viewing!

Vicky (Vicky), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:34 (twenty years ago)

1-1 already, and Graham Poll missed a definite penalty when Pirez was brought down by syvestre. And the antics in the tunnel beforehand! I wonder if sky will get fined for not managing to bleep out Keane's swear words directed at Viera?

Vicky (Vicky), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:36 (twenty years ago)

I don't think I've ever heard highbury so loud. It's certainly not a library tonight.

They're having a go at each other as well, Giggs told Gary Neville to eff off

Vicky (Vicky), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:39 (twenty years ago)

This is the most entertaining match I've seen for years! Arsenal have found their form again, some of their passing has been sublime.

Vicky (Vicky), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:39 (twenty years ago)

Fuck, Sportworld didn't show that. All we got was Graham Poll talking to Keane.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:40 (twenty years ago)

God I'm glad I took a sick day.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:40 (twenty years ago)

2-1 to the arse! Bergkamp's on fire

Vicky (Vicky), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:40 (twenty years ago)

36 years old and still amazing!

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:41 (twenty years ago)

Got to question the keeper there...

Vicky (Vicky), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:41 (twenty years ago)

Game's been amazing so far, more like an old firm match than a premiership encounter. Cole should have been booked for diving in the first few minutes.

Billy Dods (Billy Dods), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:42 (twenty years ago)

I'm sure you can say that of both before we're done here.


Also thank god for Graham Poll, second best ref going right now?


Cole should have been booked for diving in the first few minutes.

With Poll not cautioning Hienze in the first few minutes he knew what he was up against and wanted to hold back the cards for things like Rooney and Pires idiocy. ManU got theres back when he let Pires penalty go (probably hard to see from his angle).

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:45 (twenty years ago)

This is tremendous stuff! It's going to be like this all the way. Rooney for first red card?

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:49 (twenty years ago)

hello \ile, long time no post.

Keane was hilarious in the tunnel, shouting after Viera (this is from memory) "let's see who's the big man, I'll see you out there, see you out there you [muffled by Sky]"

Graham Poll turns up, coming up to Keane's chest and the psychotic Irishman manages to blurt out "he should learn to keep his fucking mouth shut" before the Sky censors canm get their muffling in

Hilarious

Gary Neville is producing a quintessential display, whinging like a trooper, Dot Coton in Excelsis.

And, did Rooney really get booked for implying that Pires' facial hair is a bit rub?

Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:49 (twenty years ago)

did Rooney really get booked for implying that Pires' facial hair is a bit rub?

No he didn't but between kicking the ball away and that action (with all those lovely antiracism posters around) he should have been.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:51 (twenty years ago)

I am annoyed to be missing this. Is there an audio feed being webcast anywhere?

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:52 (twenty years ago)

I would like to congratulate Vicky on a superbly named thread!

(What a freaking match!!)

Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:53 (twenty years ago)

Balls. I wanted to go to the pub and see this but I'm solo parenting. :( Punch-ups are no fun on the radio.

noodle vague (noodle vague), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:54 (twenty years ago)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport would be my guess.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:56 (twenty years ago)

I don't think you'll get an audio feed via UK websites, Ned. The internet rights now belong to whoever runs the clubs' web sites, and they're subscription only.

noodle vague (noodle vague), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:57 (twenty years ago)

Ned, it looks like FoxSportsWorld will re-show at 5 pm.

Michael White (Hereward), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:02 (twenty years ago)

http://www.stone0898.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
not sure how trustworthy it is, but I got sent it last year for free tv football

Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:02 (twenty years ago)

Thank ya much -- might see if somewhere around here is reshowing it.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:03 (twenty years ago)

So whose gettings subbed? Rooney and...

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:17 (twenty years ago)

Hienze?

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:18 (twenty years ago)

2-2!

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:20 (twenty years ago)

Rooney has set up two goals, and has just hit the woodwork!

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:23 (twenty years ago)

now 3-2 to Man U! What a game!

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:24 (twenty years ago)

What the fuck was keeper doing?!??!?!?!?!

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:24 (twenty years ago)

Fucking hell

Bumfluff, Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:24 (twenty years ago)

Arsenal are going to get seriously pwned again

Bumfluff, Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:25 (twenty years ago)

what a keeper

ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:25 (twenty years ago)

Almunia should think about resigning from the keepers union, that was terrible.

Carrol ain't much better either

Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:26 (twenty years ago)

holi SEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET!

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:34 (twenty years ago)

ha ha Silvestre twatted ljungaberga

Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:35 (twenty years ago)

I love Graham Poll

Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:36 (twenty years ago)

And he's pushing Ronaldo off the pitch too.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:37 (twenty years ago)

Reyes to get an equaliser? I wouldn't be surprised.

Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:38 (twenty years ago)

Since I switched him for Beattie on my fantasy team it wouldn't surprise me.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:39 (twenty years ago)

who the hell is this Sky commentator???

"they're trying to find a pass through the needle in a haystack"

Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:41 (twenty years ago)

i can't believe they wasted a red card like this when reyes wasn't even already on

ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:41 (twenty years ago)

what a tackle!

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:43 (twenty years ago)

that's gotta hurt

Ken, what the hell are you talking about?

Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:44 (twenty years ago)

Manu beat upon Reyes last couple of times.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:44 (twenty years ago)

i'm glad someone understood.

ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:47 (twenty years ago)

I know that, but I can't fathom why is the thing, he's one of the least offensive Arsenal players

Porkpie (porkpie), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:48 (twenty years ago)

He's 'there Ronaldo'.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:49 (twenty years ago)

West Brom and Palace's six pointer ends up giving them a point each, 2-2. From the BBC's summary of it, it also looks qutie interesting.

William Bloody Swygart (mrswygart), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:50 (twenty years ago)

4-2!!!

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:54 (twenty years ago)

oh dear

ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:54 (twenty years ago)

Thank you God.

Bumfluff, Tuesday, 1 February 2005 21:54 (twenty years ago)

If Chelsea win against Blackburn, sadly I don't see there being enough time for drama, when you look at the math of it all. Even though Chelsea play the Arse and still have to come to Old Trafford. But what a strange season it's been, with Arsenal lauded by everyone (read: southern sports media) and United written off as being in serious decline. Nobody really knows what to do with Chelski, when all's said and done. It's definitely true that, in pure footballing terms, they do deserve the title (barring catastrophic collapse). It could get very strange if United win the Champs League and Chelsea the Prem (and Arse the FA Cup?). You never know.

xpost, oh, right, sorry. Yeah, they've taken that attitude to Arsenal the last few crucial games against them -- the Cup game last season, at OT this season and last night. But it's not just against Arsenal. Usually, whenever United have a big game against a very good team, they play with that level of commitment-bordering-on-madness. Ironically, the year they won the Champions League, they completely forgot to play that way against Bayern in the Final and almost blew it (unlike against Juve that season, in Turin).

David A. (Davant), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:46 (twenty years ago)

So when does Dave C. and Dave D. start posting (it'll take a while for Dave Q at this rate)?

David A. (Davant), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:49 (twenty years ago)

Criticising Man U for drawing against Spurs when it was the single most fortunate point anyone's gained this season is a bit much, Dave.

Fucking great game. I loved it. Best moment - when Gary Neville rushes over to abuse the ref, who immediately says "shut up or you're off" to which his eyes widen, he puts his hands up, backs away and prevents team mates from having a go. Graham Poll was superb last night, missed penalty (which was certainly forgiveable) excepting.

Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:49 (twenty years ago)

Dave C = Dr. C, innit?

Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:50 (twenty years ago)

United's draw against City was probably more to the point. They utterly dominated but couldn't find the net. That one might haunt them.

Poll was surprisingly good, I agree.

(Xpost:

Dave C = Dr. C, innit?

Ha ha!)

David A. (Davant), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:53 (twenty years ago)

Chelsea are the most effective footballing machine in the history of the Premiership, I reckon. I just can't see anything stopping them other than possibly John Terry and William Gallas both breaking their legs tonight. Other than that, so well does the system work, if one player's out there's another just waiting to be slotted in there. Its like Germany in the early 90s.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:53 (twenty years ago)

xpost - Yeah, United didn't deserve to beat Spurs and could easily have lost it if Mendes' shot had managed to sneak over the line (!). But the game against Fulham they should have won comfortably, only for Diop to ruin everything.

The Horse of Babylon (the pirate king), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:54 (twenty years ago)

Damn Chelsea and their machines and systems! I remember the days when it was just meat pies and Bovril! Back then, that was all it took to dominate the land.

David A. (Davant), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:56 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, United didn't deserve to beat Spurs and could easily have lost it if Mendes' shot had managed to sneak over the line (!). But the game against Fulham they should have won comfortably, only for Diop to ruin everything.

Alright, this post is funny.

David A. (Davant), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 11:57 (twenty years ago)

Spudz game - yeah, Medes' shot and all that. But United had pummeled them earlier (according to highlights on MoTD, natch). It's more than had it not been for those, they'd be a major charge which would have cut the gap to 4 points, which would induce the old 'will moruinho wobble as United close in' but they'll never feel the hot wine-scented breath of Ferguson behind them to make that an issue.

As for effective teams, I have to say the United for 1999-2000 were amazing. When they had Cole and Yorke and Beckham, Keane in his prime, Scholes regularly brilliant, Stam very impressive etc. Christ, they used to score from clearing corners in their own half; the only way to stop them scoring was to not let them have the ball.

Dave B (daveb), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 12:31 (twenty years ago)

Utd have looked quite poor more regularly than Arsenal this season tho it seems - failing to score many times. i hope they lose more games like the Portsmouth one. i'd like Arsenal to win the Champions League (hard to explain why) but that looks highly unlikely tho they can beat Bayern.

Stevem On X (blueski), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 12:34 (twenty years ago)

I'd say it's more that Arsenal were consistantly brilliant until November, but have lost it since then, whereas United were mostly rubbish until mid-November but have been excellent since then, while Chelsea have just been consistantly great.

The Horse of Babylon (the pirate king), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 13:06 (twenty years ago)

**Dave C = Dr. C, innit? **

Quite. IF we stay clear of injuries the title's ours, but we have a lot of games to play in various cups. The 'big squad' thing is a myth really. What if Terry, Frank L, and a couple of strikers were injured and out for key games? We have little cover at centre-back with Carvalho injured - in fact it's only Huth. If say Drogba and Eidar were out we're down to Kezman as the focal point of the attack - and he's pretty useless. I suppose one of the wingers could go up front, but it would change a winning pattern and I wouldn't fancy it. In midfield we should be OK - he seems to be going for Frank, Makka and one of Tiago/Smertin/Cole. We have the new geezer from Czechoslovakia or somewhere + the wretched Geremi as cover and I suppose Scott Parker will be fit soon.

I can't see us losing it, but a blip is still possible. I have seen to much disappointment in 34 years of supporting CFC to get the champagne ready!

Dr. C (Dr. C), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 13:12 (twenty years ago)

even when Chelsea were playing a bit rubbish - september and over Christmas - we won because we just don't concede goals.

now we're getting that thing were teams turn up and expect to lose - they don't even pretend to hide it. it's something arsenal and man u have experienced for years, but it's strange. on sunday, birmingham just didn't want to be there.


Pete W (peterw), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 13:17 (twenty years ago)

hi dr c,

huth is out for 6-8 weeks but carvalho is back soon. that giant russian (Dolph Lundgren?) can play centre-back i think.

Pete W (peterw), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 13:21 (twenty years ago)

I have just seen that on the website.

Dr. C (Dr. C), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 13:22 (twenty years ago)

I'm not a Chelsea fan but I'll be quite happy if they buy their way to the title. They are doing exactly what ManYoo/Arsenal have been doing for years, massively outspending the competition. What makes it refreshing is that the money came to them serendipitously. If you support a smaller club you know they will never be a ManYoo or Real Madrid, but you can dream of them becoming a Chelsea.

frankiemachine, Wednesday, 2 February 2005 13:57 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, but at least Arsenal and man yoo didn't spend money they stole from the Russian people. I can't stand what he's done, but I have more hate for how he did it.

Dave B (daveb), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 14:01 (twenty years ago)

I have no great love for Arsenal as everyone here knows full well but even I wouldn't accuse them of massively outspending the competition, especially when the competition includes the likes of Liverpool, Newcastle, Spurs, Boro etc etc etc. Who aside from Reyes have they paid silly money out for? £10.5m for Thierry Henry is pretty cheap when you consider it was the height of transfer fee mentalism and they'd just sold Anelka for £23m. Fast forward a couple of years and Leeds are forking out more than that for Robbie Fowler.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 14:15 (twenty years ago)

united got some cheap ones too.. although most are back in the days like cantona was only £1.2 mil? and schmeichel was like half a mil?? and all those ones from the youth squad obv.

ken c (ken c), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:00 (twenty years ago)

i dunno how much was soleskjaer but he definitely costed less than £15m, which was dearer.

ken c (ken c), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:06 (twenty years ago)

£1.2m was a lot back in 1992, Ken. I remember two years later when Chris Sutton went for £5m and there were people saying "that's just too much".

Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:08 (twenty years ago)

Trevor Francis to thread.

Dave B (daveb), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:13 (twenty years ago)

Keane was a record transfer fee back in the day wasn't he? 3.5 million or something like that.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:23 (twenty years ago)

I admire the fact that Man Utd always have a lot of home grown players in the team. I can't really identify with Smertin, Drogba et.al - ideal scenario would be a Chelsea team with 6 former youth-team players in it winning the championship. But I don't think anyone can do that now. At least we have John Terry. If he ever goes I shall cry for a week.

As said here before, I am uncomfortable with the Abramovic scenario and particularly like my club being used as a way of laundering money. The post-Abramovic years could be uncomfortable, but it's almost worth the risk to see us stuffing Man U and The Arse this year.

Dr. C (Dr. C), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:43 (twenty years ago)

particularly like my club being used as a way of laundering money

Well hey, if you're not complaining! ;-)

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:48 (twenty years ago)

Ha! **DON'T** particularly like...

Thanks, Ned. (Proof that Ned proof reads every thread on ILX!)

Dr. C (Dr. C), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 15:57 (twenty years ago)

I like Roy Keane a lot, now.

the bellefox, Wednesday, 2 February 2005 16:28 (twenty years ago)

the Utd child mascot's face after his potty-mouthed outburst tho...

i guess they hear them in the tunnels every week, and already know the words from the playground

Stevem On X (blueski), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 16:36 (twenty years ago)

Late back to the party here, I know, but I'd just like to point out that it was my fellow pub-goers who were on about ManU being worthier winners than Chelsea, and that I didn't necessarily agree with their view. I think the bit I may have agreed with, that was made upthread also, is that Man U mix their stupid spending with homegrown talent, whereas the current Chelsea squad is pretty much a new team bought in for the purposes of winning. Which is nice if you can afford to do it, but it's nice to think that if you can't afford a stack of Robbens and Drogbas, you might uncover a Giggs or a Scholes or a Neville or two, and if you are really lucky, you'll get them all at the one time.

ailsa (ailsa), Thursday, 3 February 2005 00:11 (twenty years ago)

As the commentator said at the weekend, Middlesbrough, after years of stupidly excessive speculative spending, FINALLY appear to have got their act together and are now rolling promising looking kids off the production line.

There aren't a huge number of other teams doing that at the moment - Liverpool are doing okay in that department, there are a fair few coming through the lower teams in the league (although tough shit if you're at a club like Bolton). Has the romantic ideal of a John Terry coming through the ranks and then captaining his team in Europe all but gone? Or have Premiership clubs more or less given up on it and are all doing a Tottenham, ie accepting that a season or two at West Ham or Derby is better than sitting in the reserves at White Hart Lane?

Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 3 February 2005 00:28 (twenty years ago)

chelsea win again - they are tremendous and gritty.

ailsa otm. i am a man u fan, but i must say: even when we were producing the likes of scholes, becks, butt nevilles etc - we spent big money to fill the rest of the gaps. at every stage of united's career, there were some big money signings (3.75 for keane may not seem much now, for instance, but it was a brit record at the time). we have had the luxury of splashing out on flops like veron and still having enough to cover other areas. cole, yorke, stam, ferdinand, ronaldo, rooney - these all cost big money.

what i mean is - united's financial situation during the ferguson era always gave them a headstart above the majority of premiership teams. ferguson did a terrific job - regardless of how much financial help he got - he is an incredibly great manager. but it's ridiculous that ppl complain about *one* team having a financial superiority to man u, when we've had it over the majority of the league, for the entirety of our most successful period.

so, i grudgingly give props to abramovich, his gigantic wallet, his excellent choice of manager, and his refusal to involve himself in footballing affairs. a smart man.

weasel diesel (K1l14n), Thursday, 3 February 2005 00:48 (twenty years ago)

i just read through my post, and the last paragraph seems like sarcasm - it isn't - i like and respect abramovich.

weasel diesel (K1l14n), Thursday, 3 February 2005 00:50 (twenty years ago)

i love his grin

ken c (ken c), Thursday, 3 February 2005 01:08 (twenty years ago)

I really can't see how you can respect someone who has done what he's done to the Russian economy, less like them.

Dave B (daveb), Thursday, 3 February 2005 09:32 (twenty years ago)

i should have phrased it as "i respect abramovich's work at chelsea" - i know little about him outside of that.

weasel diesel (K1l14n), Thursday, 3 February 2005 09:56 (twenty years ago)

What we need is for a shadowy stranger unaffiliated with any government-funded organisations to fill us on the Russian's background.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 3 February 2005 09:57 (twenty years ago)

I don't think Abramovic is any more of a crook than Al-Fayed, or even Jack Walker. These guys are all utter bastards - it's just that to make big money and control stuff in Russia requires the use of more extreme means.

Dr. C (Dr. C), Thursday, 3 February 2005 10:04 (twenty years ago)

There was a programme abt him on BBC2 a cpl of weeks ago that showed how he acquired his money. In the end the reporter asked some chelsea fans whether they cared where he got his money from and no one did.

what did his work at chelsea involve beside throwing lots of money at the club? and finding (through people he hired), in mourinho,someone who knew what to do with it.

Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 3 February 2005 10:12 (twenty years ago)

julio - what sort of things was he embroiled in?

weasel diesel (K1l14n), Thursday, 3 February 2005 10:36 (twenty years ago)

I gather its as follows: Abramovich, along with the other oligarchs, bought the hastily-privatised old Soviet oil industry at a tiny fraction of its real market value. Rivals allegedly ended up 'disappearing'.

Fast forward a few years, the oligarchs are not popular in Russia, seeing as having robbed the country etc etc. Putin is under pressure to deal with them, but seems to have struck a deal with Abramovich that as long as he stays out of politics he will be left alone. Still, Abramovich is funnelling vast amounts of money out the country and into Chelsea.

Also, by becoming Mr Stamford Bridge, he is also the world's most famous Russian and therefore well-placed for any future political career.

(Disclaimer - may not all be true. If I suddenly stop posting, avenge my death)

Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 3 February 2005 10:48 (twenty years ago)

yeah, basically that was it.

There were also details of this court case:

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2005/01/17/003.html

Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 3 February 2005 10:53 (twenty years ago)

Also, by becoming Mr Stamford Bridge, he is also the world's most famous Russian and therefore UNLIKELY TO BE ARRESTED OR MURDERED.

That's why I've always thought he bought Chelsea. I didn't think that show uncovered anything that wasn't in the public domain (so RA's money is owned by shell companies based in Cyprus? So what?)

Back to football: the best thing about Chelsea is undoubtedly Mourinho - if Ranieri had this squad we'd probably be a couple of points behind Man U, with the challenge already fading. Mourinho has made all the difference and, like Ferguson and Wenger, proves a good manager is what really makes the difference. His gesture last night of making the players throw their shirts to the crowd has cemented his legend.

Pete W (peterw), Thursday, 3 February 2005 10:57 (twenty years ago)

Is it time to avenge Matt DC's death yet?

Markelby (Mark C), Thursday, 3 February 2005 12:07 (twenty years ago)

Pete - agree totally with what you said about Mourinho. I liked Ranieri, but he didn't have the kind of belief that you need to topple the likes of Arsenal and Man Utd.

Dr. C (Dr. C), Thursday, 3 February 2005 12:10 (twenty years ago)

I read the boy Roman was in the interviews of all prospective members of Putin's first cabinet.

Dave B (daveb), Thursday, 3 February 2005 12:33 (twenty years ago)

Yes Abramovich has a pretty suspect background but sport has always been awash with ill-gotten money. It doesn't usually act as much of a determinant of which clubs/sportsman the average fan wants to do well. Many fans have a hearty contempt for the character of their club owner or chairman.

For reasons noted above thread I doubt his investment in Chelsea can be regarded as "laundering" - the money was got in a dubious way but with the collusion of the Russian government and I doubt he's under any legal threat. I can see the argument that owning Chelsea makes him a bit more high profile and adds a bit of protection but if he threatened to become a genuine political embarrassment to the Russian government (eg by deciding confession was good for the soul) I doubt it'd help him much.

It seems to me there's much hypocrisy about Abramovich. Many Englishmen who could have watched documentaries about corrupt Russians enriching themselves at the expense of the people with complete equanimity have discovered a marvellous sense of outrage now that a tiny fraction of the cash has been pumped into a rival football club. So convenient to pretend that their real objection isn't to how he's using the cash, but the immoral way he got it. When in fact as long as he'd restricted his spending to yachts and private jets they'd never have given a damn.

frankiemachine, Thursday, 3 February 2005 12:54 (twenty years ago)

Well said. I still wish he wasn't involved in Chelsea though.

Dr. C (Dr. C), Thursday, 3 February 2005 13:58 (twenty years ago)

it's nice to think that if you can't afford a stack of Robbens and Drogbas, you might uncover a Giggs or a Scholes or a Neville or two, and if you are really lucky, you'll get them all at the one time.

Well, to some extent, in the near future, you might have to.

Onimo (GerryNemo), Thursday, 3 February 2005 15:05 (twenty years ago)

Matt, please put a reason for your edits in the box. Alan or Andrew made that little box for a reason, please don't let their hard work go to waste.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Thursday, 3 February 2005 15:14 (twenty years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.