Champions League Thread

[ZOS 580]

I think will be through to the final ... expecting a goal less draw in the first leg and a win at the bridge

[Moustradamus 60]

At the end of the day, Courtois is a Chelsea player, and Atletico is the one that should be concerned. Not the other way around.

Not worried one bit about this draw:

1) Mourinho NEVER lost a game v Atletico.

2) 2nd game is at the Stamford Bridge fortress.

3) Mourinho already has a plan how to beat all 3 teams.

We're going to Lisbon. It's. Written. In. The. Stars.

[iseah100 5,612]

there's always the chance of Atletico being honorable and honoring the bloody contract they agreed to and deciding themselves in a show of fair play, not play Courtois. I doubt it, but it'd be the right thing to do.

Best draw we could have wished for.

Courtious must not play. Atletico should honor the agreement. They are not innocent, they knew what they were doing when they signed Courtious for another loan season. If they fail to honor us , we should destroy them at The Bridge.

At the end of the day, Courtois is a Chelsea player, and Atletico is the one that should be concerned. Not the other way around.

Not worried one bit about this draw:

1) Mourinho NEVER lost a game v Atletico.

2) 2nd game is at the Stamford Bridge fortress.

3) Mourinho already has a plan how to beat all 3 teams.

We're going to Lisbon. It's. Written. In. The. Stars.

Courtois deserves to play, to hell with a clause. We can beat them with or without him. I want him to play if

LETS GOOOOO CHELSEA!!!!

[Alan Partridge 1,124]

I dream of a CL final between Chelsea and Real

Torres to have a blinder against a team he dislikes, like he did for Liverpool a few years back

I'd rather play Atletico over 2 games than either of the others

[ZOS 580]

If Courtios won't play, it is NOT because Chelsea didn't want him to but because Atletico didn't think its worth the price

[bushman 2,043]

Perhaps, it´s time to hire another lawyer?

The one who drew the contract, he ain´t much, I read.

[different level 1,056]

What's important is the second leg is at The Bridge. Otherwise LOL at UEFA for trying to help Atletico. We should issue an ultimatum - if they play him, then they can forget about a loan deal next season.

[nadavTKL 1,787]

Di Marzio:

The clubs had already agreed on what to do regardless of UEFA’s ruling. Should Courtois play against them, Chelsea would no longer want to renew the player’s loan to Atletico for next season".

[hjperdeath 2,226]

At the end of the day, I'm hoping he doesn't play.

[Muzchap 8,966]

Perhaps, it´s time to hire another lawyer?

The one who drew the contract, he ain´t much, I read.

No - quite the opposite.

The clause is fine - UEFA are now trying to impose a restriction that doesn't exist and the have no specific provisions for it - just a loose interpretation of a 'cover all eventualities' clause - which is about as enforceable as David Moyes tactics..

I hope he does play - I'm just pissed off that UEFA decide to jump in again. If this wasnt an English team - do you think they would have said anything? No - of course not. Bunch of corrupt fuckers!

Didnt Celtic have a similar issue this season in qualifying? They asked UEFA for guidance and their response - 'sort it between yourselves' - another case of classic UEFA double standards.

Well fuck them - nothing would give me more joy than to see us Win now - and the 30 odd million prize will definitely help fund a couple of strikers in the summer

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

First off UEFA should butt out! If there is a legally binding contract that states Thibault can only play under certain circumstances then that's between the two clubs.

I am actually glad we drew Atletico, was hoping for it! They are a very difficult side to play against but no more than Real and Bayern. We should be favourited in this tie and over two legs we have a better chance of prevailing than in a one off.

Two legs, the second is at the Bridge. We should be able to see this through as Jose is obviously a tactical genius and will have the squad well drilled on what to expect having played them and not lost to them either.

We lose Brana and may be without Hazard; they may be without Turan and Costa. Its gonna be a very close tie no matter how you slice it so all we can hope for is our experience in the competition and the spirit of the club take us through!

[bushman 2,043]

First off UEFA should butt out! If there is a legally binding contract that states Thibault can only play under certain circumstances then that's between the two clubs.

I am actually glad we drew Atletico, was hoping for it! They are a very difficult side to play against but no more than Real and Bayern. We should be favourited in this tie and over two legs we have a better chance of prevailing than in a one off.

Two legs, the second is at the Bridge. We should be able to see this through as Jose is obviously a tactical genius and will have the squad well drilled on what to expect having played them and not lost to them either.

We lose Brana and may be without Hazard; they may be without Turan and Costa. Its gonna be a very close tie no matter how you slice it so all we can hope for is our experience in the competition and the spirit of the club take us through!

There is not one cunt sitting at UEFA who wants Chelsea to win the CL again. That´s the bottom line.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

There is not one cunt sitting at UEFA who wants Chelsea to win the CL again. That´s the bottom line.

couldn't be more right. Atletico to the finals gives them a healthy paycheck to help keep their best players and thus keep La Liga(UEFA's league) from plummeting even further.

[bababoom 4,478]

IF our game plan is spot on and the players play well we shouldn't have to rely on whether a GK plays or not. I know it's in the contract, but maybe we can use this as leverage for Costa?

[sutro 1,026]

Cant stop thinking about winning the cl-el- cl in a row.

That would be such a big achievement for the club.

It will be tough games with 2 teams that will give everything they got with loads of heart and desire.

Sooooo looking forward to this

[bushman 2,043]

couldn't be more right. Atletico to the finals gives them a healthy paycheck to help keep their best players and thus keep La Liga(UEFA's league) from plummeting even further.

Some say, Jose has got news for UEFA, soon.

His experience in the CL should prevail, I feel.

Can you imagine if that frog passes the trophy to Jose again?

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

IF our game plan is spot on and the players play well we shouldn't have to rely on whether a GK plays or not. I know it's in the contract, but maybe we can use this as leverage for Costa?

Here's the thing about that. Atletico are in the final 4 of the champions league and in pole position for a La Liga title, why on earth would they sell Costa? They won't need the money anymore and are highly competitive.

[bushman 2,043]

Here's the thing about that. Atletico are in the final 4 of the champions league and in pole position for a La Liga title, why on earth would they sell Costa? They won't need the money anymore and are highly competitive.

Money? Atletico is in a deep financial hole.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

Money? Atletico is in a deep financial hole.

They're in that hole because they haven't been competitive. If they get to the finals of the CL and win La Liga its a different story. Hell even now, a semi finals berth helps them immensely

[Barbara 15,149]

People want to be so 'politically correct' here that they fail to notice they're supporting something unethical.

If we created a clause it should be reinforced - if not by us because UEFA decided to be nosy about it, then Atletico should honor their own signature.

To the hell if he deserves, to the hell if UEFA forces us, to the hell all things involved. If they agreed to that the right thing to do is that.

Even if there wasn't such a clause, it's still an opening for conflict of interest for everyone involved (being an auditor for processes for many years, I'd never approve the lack of a rule prohibiting that). That's why I support the rule in the football associations. This opens space for shady business/interests and even if it's pristine clean, it could still raise suspicions. What are Chelsea interests? And Atletico's? And Thibaut's?

Not having that rule in UEFA regulation is already bad as it is. Anyway, I don't think loaned players should ever play against their parent club to avoid all that sort of issues, but the case we have a contract that clearly (or supposedly) has a clause about it, it should be respected, if not by legal reinforcement, it's the honorable thing to do.

Now it becomes a bargain chip to renew his loan contract or to easy things up to Costa signing or to leave a slit for UEFA investigate the match and decide to make whatever shady decision to harm us they want (it's in their hands to allege whatever stupidity they want to put at stake the integrity of all involved).

He shouldn't play because it's the ETHICAL thing to do. The one that doesn't leave doubt for any questions and that should be UEFA's rule, not Chelsea or Atletico's decision. Too many interests in conflict. It's stupid not to have that rule in the first place.