[Football] Should Abramovich be thrown out of football

[MJsGhost]

Matthew Syed was a brilliant table tennis player and is a brilliant journalist. Always a fascinating listen and read.

His book "Bounce" is well worth a read

 

[MJsGhost]

The question In the poll was not to do with politics or Putin , but rather the Chelsea owner Abramovich . I read that Mr A is , of Russian born but is now a citizen of Portugal . This gives him full EU citizen rights

I see no cause to “throw him out of football “ although I dislike Chelsea F C as much as the next man.

Perhaps not for long - there are suspicions that his citizenship application doesn't stack up...

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-portugal-abramovich-idUKKBN2JS221

 

[Blue3]

Wasn't there some 'issue' whereby he had avoided the UK for quite a long time as there was a risk of arrest or denied entry?

* apparently 3 years due to 'visa issues'

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/roman-abramovich-chelsea-london-family-b1932742.html

He wanted uk citizenship but was refused so he obtained Israeli citizenship instead and as the uk has no planned sanctions with Israel I guess he’s in the clear

The problem with Russian sanctions is most of Russias wealth is tied up in oil and gas which they will switch more to the Chinese market, the west is buying almost all its products or parts of products from China, we will be indirectly funding Putins war

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

How would we react if Scotland decided it wanted to be in an arms relationship with Russia? It’s exactly the same thing as Ukraine joining NATO no?

No. If you replaced the Republic of Ireland with Scotland in your sentence, then you'd have a point, and then we'd be back to discussing the issue of Cuba in the 60s which we discussed on here before. There is a valid argument to consider there but circumstances are different. Personally I don't see the point in encouraging Ukraine to join NATO as it is only antagonising Russia, but a preemptive invasion of Ukraine is hardly the right response by Russia which suggests it is borne of something wise, ie Putin's belief that Ukraine should be part of Russia.

 

[Swansman]

If were going to ban football owners based on atrocities their home nations has made, there would be very very few owners left. In the PL there are people from England, USA, Russia, Saudi Arabia, China, Italy, Egypt, UAE and Serbia... they would all need to be thrown out of football.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

If were going to ban football owners based on atrocities their home nations has made, there would be very very few owners left. In the PL there are people from England, USA, Russia, Saudi Arabia, China, Italy, Egypt, UAE and Serbia... they would all need to be thrown out of football.

The premise is that he would be thrown out for laundering stolen Russian money not for atrocities committed by Russia. It would be karma catching up with him and only triggered by current world events as a part of sanctions against Putin’s cronies. Just a reflection of deep distaste of Abramovich and his ilk. Also shining a light on the money obsessed PL and I have zero belief it would ever happen.

 

[MJsGhost]

If were going to ban football owners based on atrocities their home nations has made, there would be very very few owners left. In the PL there are people from England, USA, Russia, Saudi Arabia, China, Italy, Egypt, UAE and Serbia... they would all need to be thrown out of football.

Abramovich is more involved than just being Russian though isn't he?

His wealth has come from being part of and cosying up to the regime (helped by huge bribes that his QC admitted to in court) and is close enough to Putin to be described as having a father/son relationship. There is logic to damaging the interests of Putin's associates because it puts pressure on him.

We are also not in a situation where international sanctions are being levied against England, USA, Saudi Arabia, China, Italy, Egypt, UAE and Serbia are we? Sanctions against individuals for past atrocities would help how?

Your argument might hold water if it weren't for the massive false equivalence.

 

[osgood]

Do€$ anyon€ hav€ a clu€? £€t m€ know...

Apropos of nothing, U€FA apparently receives roughly €40m p.a. from Gazprom through various sponsorship deals.

Hmmmmm

id like to see some of the menus

Anyone on here done their catering ?

 

[osgood]

Abramovich is more involved than just being Russian though isn't he?

His wealth has come from being part of and cosying up to the regime (helped by huge bribes that his QC admitted to in court) and is close enough to Putin to be described as having a father/son relationship. There is logic to damaging the interests of Putin's associates because it puts pressure on him.

We are also not in a situation where international sanctions are being levied against England, USA, Saudi Arabia, China, Italy, Egypt, UAE and Serbia are we? Sanctions against individuals for past atrocities would help how?

Your argument might hold water if it weren't for the massive false equivalence.

I did read somewhere that Abramovitch gifted Putin a rather large yacht , forget what the amount it is worth

 

[osgood]

If were going to ban football owners based on atrocities their home nations has made, there would be very very few owners left. In the PL there are people from England, USA, Russia, Saudi Arabia, China, Italy, Egypt, UAE and Serbia... they would all need to be thrown out of football.

Good X 10 , we could be Champions of Europe !

 

[Audax]

Wouldn’t it all just be much easier to guarantee that Ukraine won’t be part of NATO?

Nope. Why not? Because this isn't actually about whether or not Ukraine joins NATO for Putin. That's merely a smokescreen. You just have to look at what he's said in the last couple of days: he's not talking about NATO anymore, he's talking about Ukraine's history, and what he calls the "mistakes" of previous Russian / Soviet governments in "gifting" Ukraine land / independence.

For Putin, this isn't about NATO at all. It's about rebuilding the Soviet empire, one small piece at a time. A few years ago the west was too soft and let him annex Crimea. They've not done enough to call him out and make him pay dearly for fomenting the separatist rebellion in Donetsk and Luhansk (neither of which would have got anywhere without Russia weapons and specialist troops being shipped in). Putin has been planning this for *years*. He's engineering things to give him the excuses to invade Ukraine. If we're not firm with him now, he won't stop with what he's got so far. He'll go further. The logic he's using now to "claim" Ukraine ... that doesn't stop with just the Ukraine. He could extrapolate the same line of logic to invalidate Finland's status as an independent country, as an example.

 

[Swansman]

Sofia Abramovich (his daughter) posting anti-invasion things on Instagram. Makes me believe Roman might not be too keen either.

 

[Boys 9d]

If Saudis with their bombing of civilians in Yemen can own a Football Club, why should a Russian be any different?

 

[Live by the sea]

I would strongly suspect that Roman has used Putin to further his businesses yes but is no supporter of Putin . Roman actually does a lot for charity & to try to help the peace process in the Middle East . He doesn’t have to do this . He’s never been suspected of doing anything anti British or on behalf of the Russians . Because of this I don’t see any real reason to not let him continue as is . This obviously doesn’t apply to all oligarchs as some are far more supportive of Putin .

 

[clapham_gull]

Some lunatic has just rang in Radio 5 trying to explain the breaking news.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Some lunatic has just rang in Radio 5 trying to explain the breaking news.

Which is?

Abramovich gives up Chelsea ownership?

 

[clapham_gull]

Which is?

Abramovich gives up Chelsea ownership?

The person dialling in was so incoherent it was difficult to understand.

 

[Hugo Rune]

The person dialling in was so incoherent it was difficult to understand.

It’s difficult to understand.

"I have always taken decisions with the club's best interest at heart," said Abramovich in a statement.

"I remain committed to these values. That is why I am today giving trustees of Chelsea's charitable Foundation the stewardship and care of Chelsea FC.”

Does this now mean that Chelsea’s charitable foundation own the club and not Abramovich?

 

[Eric the meek]

It’s difficult to understand.

"I have always taken decisions with the club's best interest at heart," said Abramovich in a statement.

"I remain committed to these values. That is why I am today giving trustees of Chelsea's charitable Foundation the stewardship and care of Chelsea FC.”

Does this now mean that Chelsea’s charitable foundation own the club and not Abramovich?

No. According to the BBC, he will remain owner of the club.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60540278

 

[clapham_gull]

It’s difficult to understand.