Abro apparently wants to sell the club debt free with the net proceeds going to a fund to support victims of the war.

There’ll probably be a discussion about what ‘net’ means but on the face of it, it’s hard not to be impressed.

Fair play, Roman.

He can go *%^@ himself. Worried about sanctions.

Whole club should be liquidated, players sold and proceeds sent to Ukrainian victims

It served its purpose. Tested the legitimacy of Russian owners of British Social infrastructure and it worked

Matt syed nailed it years ago

https://youtu.be/yldrEFO2B78

David Deins quote was prophetic.

Russian tanks are on our lawns firing pound notes at us.

It literally ended with that. Can’t help but feel it’s another shameful day for football.

Sportwashing. Football is just lost

Wholeheartedly agree with all that Syed said and Abro’s purchase may well have been a reason he’s still alive today. I’m sure he believes the billions he’s poured into the club is money we’ll spent - I’m sure he’s had some fun along the way as well.

However, he’s now cashing in his chips and - apparently - giving away the proceeds.

Edit: I don’t think he - or any of the other oligarchs - give the arse of a rat about sanctions.

As to RA, here's the Forbes piece regarding his sanction insurance. Apparently, Chelsea would owe him $2B. If RA chooses to call in the loan, Chelsea would go out of business, etc. Club is valued at $3.2B.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/daviddawki ... fc7d121be7

What are the net proceeds ? Do they include all the dodgy loans he took in the cost before the profit.

Kiwi:

You literally said
"Okay let's quickly sort out this mish mash .
[1] Expansionism my arse .... he is protecting Russians ... why has he sent troops only into the Donbass / Luhansk . Why aren't tanks streaming across the border towards Kiev ."

I replied (when tanks were streaming toward Kiev)

"Golly. Beginning with point 1, will you actually admit you are completely wrong?

Otherwise there really is no point discussing your other steaming hogwash."

Is there anything else you would like me to point out?

Precisely. He has been laundering money through Chelsea and is now seemingly trying to buy himself out of the disgraceful position he is in (exposed by buddy Putin's bond villain turn).

Of course Chelsea are now in a strong financial position, and are probably more or less weaned of the doping. But take out all the money he's chucked at the club historically and they would be bankrupt. He's never getting that money back and that was never his intention.

That is financial doping.

What the Kroenke's are doing is different. They sinking money into the club with the clear purpose of getting a good return. They are not trying to hide stolen money or buy haven in case things get tricky back in the states.

The types of people buying PL clubs these days are the types that will 'buy' a title. I'd be suprised if that didn't happen and we'll end up with an owner go on a spending spree similar to when RA took over.

Lets make it clear that I do not condone Russia and would happily see Putin put down likely the mongrel dog he is. But I am not sure we can point fingers at other clubs.

Thank God we only take clean money at Arsenal : Rwanda?, Kroenke - Trump donator and no favours in return. The moral high ground is a great place.

Usmanovs yacht seized.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/giacomotog ... 6ecdec52dd

Well done EU

Hold on Dutch Boy ...... Care to give me the number of the post where I advocated NUKING Ukraine .

Read that statement he made about selling.

You will never see a statement like that by an owner again I reckon. Weakens the negotiating position immediately for potential buyers then he could have given even more “ net proceeds” to good causes.

It’s about sanctions and seizure and he’s trying to delay whilst the UK government are twiddling their thumbs. He’ll probably achieve a firesale and get his money out but look at the contrast with the EU sanctions and Germans seizing usmanovs yacht.

So the flattening of Iraq was a foreign policy mistake / a difficult military decision . Okay got ya

Try engaging a few brain cells and think for a minute ....... given the size and efficiency of the Russian military couldn't they have pounded Ukraine into submission already .
Forget the occassional bright flash on the horizon where is the constant bombardment , shells , Katyuska rockets , bombs . Russia controls the air space how come there aren't sh**tloads of bombs falling .

Yes I did see Putin this morning had decided to cut communications

I saw earlier you were for kicking every Russian from Britain ... what about some poor smuck ; say a Russian bootmaker who escaped the Soviet Union been plying his trade in Britain since 1981 . He gets hoovered up transported to God knows where .

Parallels the Gestapo treatment of the Jews in Kristelnacht ......round em all up ....ship em out

""Your leaving this "" ...good call ........... I'm over , debating with the mentally impaired .

I don’t debate with apologists for child killers either.

Have a good one

Unfortunately Old Man it appears your Carl Lewis moment has fallen a couple of inches short ......"" the world "" you refer to consists of the US and its poodles UK , EU , Australia , Canada , NZ .

Now on the Russian side ...hmm let's see .... we have Pakistan , Brazil , Argentina , Venezuela , Iran , Iraq , Saudi Arabia , Emirates , Qatar , Israel , Vietnam , Burma , Thailand , Kazakhstan , Azerbijan , Afghanistan , Georgia , a fair percentage of Africa , Chile , Mexico , Nicaragua , Honduras.

...... and the two very big boys in the room India and China .

Okey Dokey ... the ultimate cop out ... I'll take that as a win Top Gun 0 Kiwi 3

You too ... have a lovely day .

Got to go ; the apologist for a child killer has to help his son move house .

You need to admit you pissed ya pants in front of the forum on this but you won’t.

Now you are sat in the chair. Stinking of piss, positively humming but arguing that you aren’t.

Kiwi, go check the UN vote today - just the magnificent 4 against the condemnation resolution - the cradle of democracy otherwise known as North Korea, Syria, Eritrea and Belarus. You're playing like Wilhelm Bungert in this match!

Wonder if this property RA bought back in 2008 is still in his repertoire at all. If it is, it may be one of many to go o. The chopping block.

Russian oil magnate Roman Abramovich has bought a Colorado ranch. The latest purchase is of a 14,300-square-foot, split-level house in Snowmass, near Aspen, set on 200 acres. It has 11 bedrooms, 12 baths, a media room, a climate-controlled wine room with a tasting area, a hot tub and a spa.

Sounds a civilised sort of chap.

https://twitter.com/matt5cott/status/14 ... 73059?s=21

Interesting Twitter thread on Chelsea and their post Roman finances.

By all accounts chelsea are a sustainable club right now, a combination of high player sales (a lot through the academy), lots of prize money and big sponsorship deals has allowed them to do so. They’ve taken a £1.5billion leg up to get there so does it come slowly crashing down?

Logical thinking is it brings them back in line with teams like us and Liverpool financially. Where finances are linked directly to success. Man U operate on a higher plane due to huge commercial activities and City (and potentially Newcastle) are a different level again.

This is my thinking as well. Chelsea have spent a lot in recent years, and they've spent poorly: Havertz £72m, Lukaku £97m, Werner £47m, Chilwell £45m, Zieyech £36m - none of them have lived up to expectations. You can get away with that sort of spending if you're backed by a billionaire who likes to splash the cash (like Man City in their quest for a top class central defender), but if the next owner of Chelsea is more conservative they could be in a bit of trouble. The contracts for Rudiger, Azpilicueta and Christensen are up in the summer, so they might be in a position where they will need to invest.

It all depends on who buys the club of course, but there's a chance we might see Chelsea fall down into Arsenal/Liverpool territory, rather than challenge Man City.

This is a decent piece on Abramovich

I wasn’t sure about your comment that they spent badly in recent years, although I can see why one would say that of Lukaku and maybe Werner. But as you say in the above passage, the absolutely critical factor now is who buys them.

Yes, well put together, but as he asks the question of others, perhaps he should also ask why the UK media has been, and remains, complicit in accepting the role of billionaire owners within our game. Millions of fans of the less well-endowed clubs understand how this has completely distorted the sport, yet the Fourth Estate has failed to ever seriously take on the status quo. Yesterday, after virtually two decades of supine reporting, Tuchel was put on the spot over Abramovich's future! Why weren't the importnat, tough questions being asked from 2003 onwards?

Absolutely. We just accepted this as the next step in the financial shenanigans of football. Just proves that sports washing absolutely works. Arseblog writes a really good blog this morning about it all. Worth taking a few minutes to read.

You're absolutely right about this. Experts, pundits and columnists have spent 20 years hiding behind the 'football shouldn't be mixed with politics' schtick, which was always nonsense. Football doesn't exist in a vacuum, it's part of society and it's evidently a part of politics as well.

Newcastle being bought by what is essentialy the Saudi Arabian state is the latest, and most obvious example of this, and experts were very reluctant to comment on the political aspect of it all. The problem now is that the Premier League and all the experts can't take a stand against Abramovich without being seen as the worst kind of hypocrites.

A very good piece which fairly puts the blame where it most belongs - with the football authorities and governments. The fans only ever want the best for their team, so can never be relied upon to provide a moral compass or see the big picture. Similarly the players and management have willingly jumped on the gravy train, so they are far from disinterested parties.

I find it depressing that Abramovich's assets have not been frozen by the UK government. There is equanimity about him being able to sell his club, while people die in Ukraine. Appallingly the debate is mainly about Chelsea's future. Abramovich must have some very powerful friends in the West.

I am not in London obviously but I would assume a decent percentage of the young supporters "inherited" their club from their fathers, older brothers, etc.

However, I also have to assume that a lot of kids chose Chelsea back around 2004, 2005 and the few years after that they dominated because they were the big thing going. Probably despite ther fathers being supporters of other clubs.

In the states, football took off right around that time (being shown on TV for the first time, scores part of the sports news) and Americans generally are notorious glory hunters, no shame in it at all, so I know Chelsea picked up a few fans because I've seen it.

Essentially, Chelsea bought titles and cups and with that bought a big enough fan base to sustain them. Globally as well.

The league should have long adopted standards similar to what the NFL does. There are a few requirements just to get a vote and if I'm not mistaken, 3/4 of all owners must approve the ownership.

But just to get there, you can be minority holder but not less than 30%. Your group can't have more than 24 persons in it and you can't use debt more than 1 billion (prior it was 500 million). The 3/4 vote is to keep out the Romans, Usmanovs of the world.

Less than 5 years ago the debt was 350 million. The NFL has been weakening the financial requirements. Anyway, it kept the 'wrong sort' out by having to be approved by the other owners.

I've just read an article in the Times that says Liz Truss has wanted to impose far greater sanctions on the Oligarchs but has been warned how difficult it would be from a legal standpoint which may well take months and months to counter. Ironically, the EU have had no such issues imposing sanctions. I can't understand how there remains a disparity in being able to bring such sanctions in Europe but not in the UK from a legal point of view.

I think the depth of Russian money and influence which has been allowed within the political sphere has created such a conflict of interest for the Government they're genuinely hamstrung by their own decision to allow such 'investments' and as such can't move against these people.

Yes most likely that is the case. If Parliament wants to do so, it can introduce the necessary legislation very quickly. I think an Act of Parliament trumps all other legalities.

At the time, most people condemned that. The US had very little support. Remember the ridiculous 'coalition of the willing', and the absurd attempt to rename 'french fries' 'freedom fries' (because the French did not support them). People have been calling for Blair and Bush to be prosecuted and I would absolutely support that.

Were we differ is I just do not see how this justifies Putin's actions. I am unable to see your line of argument here. It seems to be nothing but whataboutism. We should focus on the facts at hand. The whole whole world, with some exceptions (including, shamefully, South Africa, which abstained after initially strongly denouncing the invasion) are seeing this as naked aggression and extremely dangerous.

I'd also be careful of arguing that Putin is not deliberately targetting civilians or is not particularly aggressive or isn't going to use his nukes. It is the sort of position that might not age well.

Wrong again.

Perhaps you should try doing some football predictions!

Can't win them all.

Fulham v West Ham cup final? Wow...London must have been rocking.



So, West Ham in another cup final in '81 after beating us in the FA Cup in '80? Didn't know that.

You do enjoy your wine Bernard.

A few Chelsea fan forums indicate they are not particularly fond of having a Stan Kroenke sort owning their club. Mike Ashley was also mentioned, but that may have been in jest.
Neither is there any stampede of enthusiasm of having a Swiss billionaire living in Wyoming at the helm either. Wyss, being 86 and needing a consortium, is worrisome to Chelsea fans.

Sanctions imposed on Usmanov. Worth considering that had he bought the club, today was the day we could have found ourselves in a very big pile of *%^@.