Aesthetic Relic 301 Posted September 2, 2008 Author Share Posted September 2, 2008 There is nothing from the Chelsea camp because they were well and truly embarressed by Madrid. We have no idea at the moment if we matched City's bid! It is very likely though that we did and they turned it down because they did not want to sell to us. What is it with us and transfers. We either pay over the odds for players or get taken for a ride. We're a fucking charity case for everyone else in Europe, paying players wages while on loan and folding when a player wants away. Its about time we toughened up and stopped letting clubs make a mockery out of us. First on the agenda is getting shafted of Kenyon. Once again he has made us look foolish with his ego coming to the forefront. He was as cocky as you can get. Cant stand the man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerryballoono 0 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Whilst everyone seems to be blaming Real Madrid or Kenyon over the Robinho farce, I cant help but wonder whether our inability to complete the deal could be rooted more closely to international politics. The UKs tough stance on Russia over the Georgia crisis could well be making it difficult for Roman to invest in our club. He has in the past shown himself to be very astute at avoiding conflict with the powers that be in the Kremlin, so I personally wouldnt be surprised to see him step back from &/or disinvest from Chelsea if tensions continue to mount between the West & Russia over foreign policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidEU 2,023 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Come on guys, stop being ridiculous. It's no one's fault. Kenyons told the budget he has to spend, it's not his choice. If the club didnt want to pay £34m for a player that would be a HUGE risk, then who can blame them. According to SSN last night, Real Madrid would have sold him to anyone but Chelsea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Cee 50 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Whilst everyone seems to be blaming Real Madrid or Kenyon over the Robinho farce, I cant help but wonder whether our inability to complete the deal could be rooted more closely to international politics. The UKs tough stance on Russia over the Georgia crisis could well be making it difficult for Roman to invest in our club. He has in the past shown himself to be very astute at avoiding conflict with the powers that be in the Kremlin, so I personally wouldnt be surprised to see him step back from &/or disinvest from Chelsea if tensions continue to mount between the West & Russia over foreign policy. What does the tensions between the West & Russia over foreign policy have to do with Chelsea? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kez 2,727 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Real Madrid for being complete twats. Kenyon for being too overconfident Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Cee 50 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Real Madrid for being complete twats. Kenyon for being too overconfident Scolari for not having a back-up player for Robinho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kez 2,727 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 There should always be a back up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gianfranco_Z 202 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 I think scolari has always said he is someone he would like but he would be ok without him, i'm sure he, and I, and all of you, trust our players to do the business. Am happy Sinclair will be included more and Di Santo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 4,400 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 I spose Chelsea are to blame for being on Real Madrids cases constant for so long. Kitbag too for producing Robinho shirts in the online megastore too lol, that pissed real off. If we had offered 50m they wouldve still sold him to man city for 32m. We just pissed em off. Are we really pissed off? I aint because he has shown hes only interested in the money. Why the fuck would he wanna play for man city over real madrid or Chelsea? Man City will never win the prem and will never qualify for the champions league. Robinho will regret this move and in 2 years time, he'll want out. The thing that pisses me off is that we bought no-one in and our squad is pretty bare. 1 consistant winger (joey) and 1 (fairly) consistant striker (drogs) in the whole squad..... i think we're in a bit of trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riks12 3 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 what the hell robinho wants at mancity ? he should try to flee there and come to the Bridge. there are defniatly no title-options at mancity , are there ? wasted time for him, Madrid is such a crap club selling their players to another crap club, just because they don´t like the better choice i was really surprised when i read the news on pl.com....it was just like : Man City new bosses put pretty high expections to Hughes. They want City to win Champions League in 3 year plan lol. o_0 And said they want 18 new players at cost of £30 million each. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 4,400 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 lol yeah, i heard they have £800m to spend on players Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warnie_666 1,081 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 lol yeah, i heard they have £800m to spend on players Now you will hear all sorts of rubbish about Manc City. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Cee 50 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 We definately only need 1 player. But we DO need that 1 player: Cech, Cudicini, Hilario Bosingwa, Belletti, Terry, Carvalho, Alex, Ivanovic, Cole, Bridge (Ferreira???) Mikel, Essien, Lampard, Ballack, Deco Cole, Malouda, Kalou (Sinclair) Drogba, Anelka, Di Santo 23 players not including Sinclair and including the keepers. We definately need another forward option. Add Paim to that list, too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrismada9 1,948 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 And said they want 18 new players at cost of £30 million each. That is being stupidly optimistic!! Man City serving up a reality dream team in three years If that happens, I will purposly piss in a beer glass and drink it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Cee 50 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 That is being stupidly optimistic!! Man City serving up a reality dream team in three years If that happens, I will purposly piss in a beer glass and drink it Well, why not if the new owners can pay? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrismada9 1,948 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Well, why not if the new owners can pay? Yeah, signing a shitload of superstars for gawd knows how much money, expecting them to play their best for the club and as a result, win them a few titles... wait no sorry... "buy" them a few titles... Remember what they said to us when Abramovich first bought Chelsea? Many said that whoever we signed, would they gel together? Would they cope with the English game? A lot of players didn't because of those reasons, they had never even played along with the players before, not to mention that the kind of game they would be expecting was going to be different. As I have said many times, too much money in football makes it seem like mockery and an auction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliott 7 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 But we made big transfers and we did win the league. Twice. Saying City will never win the league under current circumstances is just wrong. In a few years time, they have a very real chance. And as everyone is saying, I doubt Robinho had much of a choice. He certainly wasn't going to be playing for Real Madrid, and when Manchester City came along, Real found the perfect way to piss both Chelsea and Robinho off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Cee 50 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Yeah, signing a shitload of superstars for gawd knows how much money, expecting them to play their best for the club and as a result, win them a few titles... wait no sorry... "buy" them a few titles... Remember what they said to us when Abramovich first bought Chelsea? Many said that whoever we signed, would they gel together? Would they cope with the English game? A lot of players didn't because of those reasons, they had never even played along with the players before, not to mention that the kind of game they would be expecting was going to be different. As I have said many times, too much money in football makes it seem like mockery and an auction. We signed a lot of good players and a world class manager and it worked for us. Why not for them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warnie_666 1,081 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 But we made big transfers and we did win the league. Twice. Care to name those Big transfers apart from Sheva and SWP.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliott 7 Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Care to name those Big transfers apart from Sheva and SWP.? Carvalho, Drogba, Essien, Ashley Cole, Ballack, Mutu, Duff, Robben All big players or very close to being big at the time. All were highly regarded. Okay they weren't all huge superstars (although Carvalho was voted the best defender in Europe the season we signed him IIRC, and Ballack is a very obvious exception too), but they were still huge signings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.