[Football] Chelsea end of ?

[Bold Seagull]

That would be the logical conclusion, and why I agree with Chelsea's request even though it seems unfair.

As a football family we should all except the consequences of allowing corrupt owners into our game, then perhaps the FA would do something about it. Perhaps they would then say no to directors who really should be nowhere near our clubs.

If I was told that I could not attend a game (as a home or away fan) because of the actions of an owner then I might start to get properly angry.

It's really not and shouldn't be Chelsea's request to make. They should be taking their medicine given a population in Europe is having the shite bombed out of them. Let other voices like your own or the FA, or fans groups or whatever call for integrity of competitions etc, but Chelsea requesting directly that another club's fans shouldn't be able to attend their home fixture is outrageous on their part it really is, and shows what blatant disregard they have for the why they've been put in this situation.

 

[rogersix]

Thank god we’ve got an arms industry though.

(allah)

 

[Hamilton]

It's really not and shouldn't be Chelsea's request to make. They should be taking their medicine given a population in Europe is having the shite bombed out of them. Let other voices like your own or the FA, or fans groups or whatever call for integrity of competitions etc, but Chelsea requesting directly that another club's fans shouldn't be able to attend their home fixture is outrageous on their part it really is, and shows what blatant disregard they have for the why they've been put in this situation.

In the short term, I totally get where you are coming from, and I agree it should not be Chelsea's request to make. I'm just thinking in the long term and what message it sends out to all football clubs and fans. Look at Newcastle fans, wilfully turning a blind eye on their owners. Middlesborough fans would suffer, as would any other fans watching Chelsea, but it would be like the club did not exist and that we were all responsible for allowing the criminal activity to happen. In this way, life does not go on and life is not fair, but that's precisely what's happening in Ukraine where they are isolated and having to fight alone.

 

[Hamilton]

I think the time Chelsea Fans should have got Properly Angry was when their Club was bought by a Criminal?

Personally hope they implode and spiral down the leagues.

But I think we should all be getting properly angry. I think we should not be watching Newcastle. But would that happen? No, fans would still go through the turnstiles.

I remember when we boycotted the Goldstone when Archer was in charge. Just one game, we called for a boycott when we were playing Mansfield, but still a significant number went into the stadium saying "I just want to watch a game." Some people will never face the music unless they are forced to.

I just feel that we are all responsible for Chelsea happening and we all need to be responsible for stopping it in the future.

 

[Insel affe]

I just feel that we are all responsible for Chelsea happening and we all need to be responsible for stopping it in the future.

Nope, I am not responsible for the FA & the Government not doing due diligence, that is what they get paid for, not me.

 

[Bold Seagull]

In the short term, I totally get where you are coming from, and I agree it should not be Chelsea's request to make. I'm just thinking in the long term and what message it sends out to all football clubs and fans. Look at Newcastle fans, wilfully turning a blind eye on their owners. Middlesborough fans would suffer, as would any other fans watching Chelsea, but it would be like the club did not exist and that we were all responsible for allowing the criminal activity to happen. In this way, life does not go on and life is not fair, but that's precisely what's happening in Ukraine where they are isolated and having to fight alone.

You're seeing it slightly different to me H. I would have allowed them to complete their league schedule for the integrity of that, but I would have ejected them from all their cup competitions - domestic and European. They shouldn't even be operating and are only doing so under special license. They should be thanking their lucky stars for having a cup tie to play imho let alone complaining about tickets.

You're making it out like fans have some kind of power over decisions of ownership and governance. We do not. Football is not structured to give fans that kind of power as we know only too well. Chelsea have been treated too softly as it is. If you really wanted to have sent a message to clubs and fans about consequences of unscrupulous owners, this would have been the time to come down hard.

 

[Hamilton]

You're seeing it slightly different to me H. I would have allowed them to complete their league schedule for the integrity of that, but I would have ejected them from all their cup competitions - domestic and European. They shouldn't even be operating and are only doing so under special license. They should be thanking their lucky stars for having a cup tie to play imho let alone complaining about tickets.

You're making it out like fans have some kind of power over decisions of ownership and governance. We do not. Football is not structured to give fans that kind of power as we know only too well. Chelsea have been treated too softly as it is. If you really wanted to have sent a message to clubs and fans about consequences of unscrupulous owners, this would have been the time to come down hard.

I see exactly where you are coming from, and I don't disagree at all. I'm just trying to add another perspective on how we might all need to experience a bit of pain in order to get up off our backsides and demand change. For example, we should demand that a fan has a seat on the board at the Albion and not be fobbed off with a fan's advisory board or the answer always given, that we have a fan there already in Tony Bloom.

 

[Easy 10]

So if Chelsea made the FA Cup Final (and hadn't been sold by that stage), then they'd ask the Final to be played behind closed doors.

Might as well stage it at Barnet.

 

[Stato]

Sporting Integrity you say? Chelsea? Can we please have a smilie for a spit take?

https://www.chelseafc.com/en/news/2021/04/18/club-statement

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/footbal... were given a transfer,in May after an appeal.

I've already had to cheer on Middlesbro' once this season and now I'll have to sully myself again.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

One thing I will say about war (and it's the only thing) is that it forces people and organisations to show who they really are.

From the incredible bravery of the woman protesting on Russian TV, to the Snake Island boys and worthy of ongoing admiration. Incredibly hypocritical, ignorant and self interested football club fans and owners equally, deserve nothing but contempt.

 

[Giraffe]

I remember when we boycotted the Goldstone when Archer was in charge. Just one game, we called for a boycott when we were playing Mansfield, but still a significant number went into the stadium saying "I just want to watch a game."

I would question "significant". My recollection as someone that stayed outside but went inside for the second half when the East terrace gates were opened was it was no more than about 1,000-1,500 that went from the start.

 

[rippleman]

With Chelsea fans flying Russian flags and singing their support of Putin's pal I say **** 'em.

 

[Bry Nylon]

Chelsea fan on 5Live now saying Abramovich has been harshly judged, owing to all the great charitable work the Chelsea Foundation has done to transform the tough urban ghettos of down-town Chobham.

 

[kevo]

I would question "significant". My recollection as someone that stayed outside but went inside for the second half when the East terrace gates were opened was it was no more than about 1,000-1,500 that went from the start.

The official attendance that day was 1,933. The lowest (at least post-war) attendance for a first team home game at the Goldstone.

There were maybe 2-300 from Mansfield, some of whom didn't go in the ground.

The real issue was all the protestors were outside the North Stand. Only 88 people paid to get in the north. Elsewhere other people just walked into the ground unaware a boycott was taking place.

I'm sure quite a lot of people did just want to 'watch the game' but they were far outnumbered by those who stayed away or refused to go in (until the storming of the East, of course!).

 

[Easy 10]

The official attendance that day was 1,933. The lowest (at least post-war) attendance for a first team home game at the Goldstone.

There were maybe 2-300 from Mansfield, some of whom didn't go in the ground.

The real issue was all the protestors were outside the North Stand. Only 88 people paid to get in the north. Elsewhere other people just walked into the ground unaware a boycott was taking place.

I'm sure quite a lot of people did just want to 'watch the game' but they were far outnumbered by those who stayed away or refused to go in (until the storming of the East, of course!).

I remember it well.

My (then) managers in-laws lived in one of the houses along Goldstone Lane, so I managed to wangle an invite to watch the game from their front garden. You could see almost the entire pitch, apart from maybe 50-10 yards of the near touchline. Tea, crisps and cake was served throughout the first half, all very civilised. Then some time at or shortly after half time, some of the commoners managed to force open an east stand exit gate, and in we all rushed for the second half.

I think we salvaged a 1-1 draw, having been losing at half time. I may be wrong though. The mind plays tricks.

 

[Hamilton]

I would question "significant". My recollection as someone that stayed outside but went inside for the second half when the East terrace gates were opened was it was no more than about 1,000-1,500 that went from the start.

It was significant enough for me. I remember being perplexed at why same said fans walked through the turnstiles knowing that their club was at risk. Anyhow, we digress.

 

[dolphins]

Their behind-closed-doors request has now been withdrawn.

 

[hart's shirt]

"After constructive talks between the FA and Chelsea, the club has agreed to remove their request," the FA said.


2 words should have been enough.

 

[grubbyhands]

Chelsea fan on 5Live now saying Abramovich has been harshly judged, owing to all the great charitable work the Chelsea Foundation has done to transform the tough urban ghettos of down-town Chobham.

Cobham.

 

[kevo]

I remember it well.

My (then) managers in-laws lived in one of the houses along Goldstone Lane, so I managed to wangle an invite to watch the game from their front garden. You could see almost the entire pitch, apart from maybe 50-10 yards of the near touchline. Tea, crisps and cake was served throughout the first half, all very civilised. Then some time at or shortly after half time, some of the commoners managed to force open an east stand exit gate, and in we all rushed for the second half.

I think we salvaged a 1-1 draw, having been losing at half time. I may be wrong though. The mind plays tricks.

Correct. 1-0 down at half-time, equalised in the second half with a Denny Mundee penalty.

I remember when the fans broke into the East Terrace the players actually stopped playing for a moment, wondering what the f**k was gping on. Walking across the pitch at half time, with some fans sitting in the (otherwise empty) directors" box was pure anarchy in action. Where were the police? If there were any, they didn't try to stop any of it (thank goodness).

I take a special interest in that day because I was the one who first suggested we boycott the match via a post on the old Albion Campaign Pages (the precursor to NSC). Bisa then got behind it and organised the protest.