Everton 2 Chelsea 0

[Mark Kelly]

7 minutes ago, east lower said:

They may be able to annul it, I hope they can, because unless the current people have an epiphany we’re jiggered.

Possibly not too many Chelsea supporters right now, to the query regarding the Cupcakes staying on.

Net worth of a reported £21billion. Richest person in the UK.

So had plenty of personal wealth but apart from Roman, who sinks billions of their own money into a relatively high-risk investment 

No idea if he meant it but his reported bid seemed structured - probably never will know if he was serious.

It just seemed like every time there was an investment opportunity he bid 2.5 billion. 

If he's got that amount of money he could have bought United. 

But when the Arabs were bidding 5 billion, there was Jim bidding 2.5.

[east lower]

15 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

It just seemed like every time there was an investment opportunity he bid 2.5 billion. 

If he's got that amount of money he could have bought United. 

But when the Arabs were bidding 5 billion, there was Jim bidding 2.5.

Could be that’s all it’s worth. Glazier’s have run the place into the ground. The Arabs have just signed a LIV Golf deal with Jon Rahm for £450million!! More money than sense, if ever the saying has rarely applied more!

I almost wish the wells dried up.

Edited December 8, 2023 by east lower

[Dwmh]

11 minutes ago, east lower said:

Net worth of a reported £21billion. Richest person in the UK.

Net worth.  Inded £29bn is a more recent estimate.  To get that rich from nowhere usually requires enormous leverage.  That is his investments might only have £20bn of eassily realisable assets, but the high cash flow might give them a value of £59bn.  Meanwhile he might owe the banks £30bn.  They might resent it if he tried to take cash out of the business.  He might resent it if he was forced to sell a minority stake to access cash.
Add to this his business as I understand it is largely chemicals for which oil and gas are crucial feedstocks.  Given the chaos and uncertainty in oil and gas markets in early 2022 it would be particularly bad timing to try to raise £2-£4 billion for a sporting venture.

 

[Dwmh]

5 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

It just seemed like every time there was an investment opportunity he bid 2.5 billion. 

If he's got that amount of money he could have bought United. 

But when the Arabs were bidding 5 billion, there was Jim bidding 2.5.

These are sports reporting bids.  No more likely to be true than unsuccessful bids for any player.

2 minutes ago, east lower said:

I almost wish the wells dried up.

I believe the Saudis say that they don't close coal mines because they have run out of coal.  And the oil market may dry up long before Saudi's 90 years of reserves are sold.  These are big bets on the future.
Brave I'd say.  You can sell soccer all around the world.  Only the US is interested in Golf, but Saudi and US are moving in different directions.

[east lower]

6 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

These are sports reporting bids.  No more likely to be true than unsuccessful bids for any player.

I believe the Saudis say that they don't close coal mines because they have run out of coal.  And the oil market may dry up long before Saudi's 90 years of reserves are sold.  These are big bets on the future.
Brave I'd say.  You can sell soccer all around the world.  Only the US is interested in Golf, but Saudi and US are moving in different directions.

I cannot fathom how the Saudi’s think that their sporting spending will benefit them. Anyone with a few brain-cells colliding occasionally can see through the supposed sport-washing.

I understand the development of other sources of income for the future (tourism, retail etc) but spending billions on golf, which as you say has limited appeal globally and even the American market is limited to a select market with a few countries in Eastern Asia and Japan having an interest.

[east lower]

19 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

Net worth.  Inded £29bn is a more recent estimate.  To get that rich from nowhere usually requires enormous leverage.  That is his investments might only have £20bn of eassily realisable assets, but the high cash flow might give them a value of £59bn.  Meanwhile he might owe the banks £30bn.  They might resent it if he tried to take cash out of the business.  He might resent it if he was forced to sell a minority stake to access cash.
Add to this his business as I understand it is largely chemicals for which oil and gas are crucial feedstocks.  Given the chaos and uncertainty in oil and gas markets in early 2022 it would be particularly bad timing to try to raise £2-£4 billion for a sporting venture.

 

Even in 2022 he managed to pay himself and his two right-hand men £194m in dividends.

Perhaps we should try to get the other rich bloke in Britain  to come forward and buy us  -  Get hoovered-up by Mr Dyson.

[Dwmh]

13 minutes ago, east lower said:

I cannot fathom how the Saudi’s think that their sporting spending will benefit them. Anyone with a few brain-cells colliding occasionally can see through the supposed sport-washing.

I understand the development of other sources of income for the future (tourism, retail etc) but spending billions on golf, which as you say has limited appeal globally and even the American market is limited to a select market with a few countries in Eastern Asia and Japan having an interest.

MBS is clearly very ambitious.  I wouldn't call it just sports washing.  After all for the world outside WaPo and the Khashoggi family Saudi have already made the important changes.  The Iran deal (brokered by China) lead directly to calling off the attacks on Yemen and bombing the port.  The last two years have made Saudi much easier to accept for 85% of the world.  Gaza is accelerating the process.  Saudi joins BRICS next month.
Whether all the investments (or any of them) are wise is a different question

 

9 minutes ago, east lower said:

Even in 2022 he managed to pay himself and his two right-hand men £194m in dividends.

Perhaps we should try to get the other rich bloke in Britain  to come forward and buy us  -  Get hoovered-up by Mr Dyson.

Well exactly - the £29bn net worth isn't actually producing a lot of cash flow for him personally <1% pa.  Much will get used to pay down loans so INEOS can continue to borrow again for the next purchase.
£194m after tax doesn't buy many Chelsea players.

[east lower]

36 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

MBS is clearly very ambitious.  I wouldn't call it just sports washing.  After all for the world outside WaPo and the Khashoggi family Saudi have already made the important changes.  The Iran deal (brokered by China) lead directly to calling off the attacks on Yemen and bombing the port.  The last two years have made Saudi much easier to accept for 85% of the world.  Gaza is accelerating the process.  Saudi joins BRICS next month.
Whether all the investments (or any of them) are wise is a different question

 

Well exactly - the £29bn net worth isn't actually producing a lot of cash flow for him personally <1% pa.  Much will get used to pay down loans so INEOS can continue to borrow again for the next purchase.
£194m after tax doesn't buy many Chelsea players.

He’d sit below the PIF and Sheikh Mansoor but would be the third richest owner, if he had been successful with his bid for us. 
 

If I recall correctly he had approached RA in 2019 ish with a bid for Chelsea. Track record in other sports for running successful team's. He’d have found funding for the costs of running the club and purchases, just as he will have to at Man United. He just seemed a better experienced option to me in 2022.

[Dwmh]

40 minutes ago, east lower said:

He’d sit below the PIF and Sheikh Mansoor but would be the third richest owner, if he had been successful with his bid for us. 
 

If I recall correctly he had approached RA in 2019 ish with a bid for Chelsea. Track record in other sports for running successful team's. He’d have found funding for the costs of running the club and purchases, just as he will have to at Man United. He just seemed a better experienced option to me in 2022.

Not sure.  First his experience is buying up and running businesses and bleeding them dry with low cost approaches.  I suspect CL football is too much about the talent for that to work.  His sport experienced to date has been in much much smaller teams. 

LA Dodgers on the other hand has almost the same annual turnover as CFC.

Besides as I have said elsewhere.  US foreign policy is about creating cheap asset opportunities for US banks and corporates to take advantage of.  And UK anti-Russia policy is tied to the hip with the Americans.  It wasn't meant to be booty for a Brit.

[Ham]

I wonder how all of the Clearlake haters are now feeling about the Ricketts and their right wing grandfather.

 

[kev61]

18 hours ago, Mark Kelly said:

It does seem that if you buck the trend and don't play tippy tappy bollocks in your own eighteen yard area you are seen as a lesser coach , it's the football version of "The Emperor's new clothes"  

Where has this tactic come from?.It's being used by more and more teams - it is suicidal without ANY merit imo.

Is there a coaches journal that comes out every month that coaches/ managers subscribe to, that has all the latest new tactics?.

Playing out from the back is a joke unless you are Brazil in their prime.

[kev61]

18 hours ago, east lower said:

I think that even the most optimistic person could see that we would go backwards before getting even in the vicinity of where we were challenging for league titles again. However did anyone truly believe we'd have been speaking about potential relegation (very hushed tones admittedly) last season and doing no better points wise thus far this 

Well Santos have been relegated for the first time in 111 years - the same Santos that pele came from.

Leicester won the league -  it is not too  far fetched to think we might get relegated.

[Floyd25]

52 minutes ago, kev61 said:

Is there a coaches journal that comes out every month that coaches/ managers subscribe to, that has all the latest new tactics?.

Playing out from the back is a joke unless you are Brazil in their prime.

It’s happening because Pep Guardiola popularised its usage in the premier league. It’s definitely not a joke if done well, the top teams have no trouble with this.
 

It is a joke though when you see teams trying to do it, when they simply don’t have good enough players and you see errors stemming from it every weekend, it does my head in to be honest. 

[kev61]

4 minutes ago, Floyd25 said:

It’s happening because Pep Guardiola popularised its usage in the premier league. It’s definitely not a joke if done well, the top teams have no trouble with this.
 

It is a joke though when you see teams trying to do it, when they simply don’t have good enough players and you see errors stemming from it every weekend, it does my head in to be honest. 

So are coaches trying to copy Pep?.Can someone please explain to me what benefit is playing out from back except for keeping possession?

[thevelourfog]

6 hours ago, Ham said:

I wonder how all of the Clearlake haters are now feeling about the Ricketts and their right wing grandfather.

 

Such a bizarre thing to say. Bizarre to frame really self-evidently legitimate criticism of Clearlake's ownership as "hate", as if it's some irrational or unfair emotional position, even before you get into the Ricketts stuff. I can't even remember what he was accused of or did but it certainly wasn't being "right wing". Boehly didn't earn billions by being a keen student of Engels ffs. 

On my part, I didn't have high hopes for any of the billionaires bidding for us being especially lovely people. I did hope for competence. 

[asvaberg]

5 hours ago, kev61 said:

So are coaches trying to copy Pep?.Can someone please explain to me what benefit is playing out from back except for keeping possession?

I don't think it's about possession. My belief is it's to stretch the opponant team, to "lure" their players way into our half and then get spaces within their MF/defence.

Or am I totally wrong? Please correct me, if so.

[ROTG]

7 hours ago, Ham said:

I wonder how all of the Clearlake haters are now feeling about the Ricketts and their right wing grandfather.

 

Wow

Just because things are not a rosy as you would like and people question the leadership and their policies, your comment is really scarping the bottom of the barrel. 

[ROTG]

5 hours ago, kev61 said:

So are coaches trying to copy Pep?.Can someone please explain to me what benefit is playing out from back except for keeping possession?

In Pete’s case champions of the PL 3 season on the trot, CL and god knows how many other pieces of silverware. 
 

however you are right, each team should have it own identity and style of play.

In our case it would be difficult to do an hoof to the front man to hold the ball up, because we don not have a striker with that tallent. 

[Max Fowler]

1 hour ago, asvaberg said:

I don't think it's about possession. My belief is it's to stretch the opponant team, to "lure" their players way into our half and then get spaces within their MF/defence.

Or am I totally wrong? Please correct me, if so.

I think you're both right. If you hoof the ball up the pitch against a team like City, it's very likely their massive defenders are just going to head it down and then they'll have the ball for the next twenty minutes. Some teams like Brentford are very effective at doing this - I am not sure for a top team it's a viable strategy any more.

To escape the high press they put on you, you need to keep the ball and find escape routes. As we saw against United, if you fail to keep the ball you invite constant pressure and lose control of the game. Hence why Sanchez' kicking is such a problem for us. We keep losing the ball high up the pitch and inviting the opposition on to us.

[Mark Kelly]

Good news , Pochettino has said that Enzo and Caicedo need to improve .

If only there was a way he could help them .

Maybe the club can employ someone to work with them inbetween games?

[east lower]

1 hour ago, Mark Kelly said:

Good news , Pochettino has said that Enzo and Caicedo need to improve .

If only there was a way he could help them .

Maybe the club can employ someone to work with them inbetween games?

Well,  as you say the good news is he's recognised that.

The bad news is that he's not been able, as yet to actually do his job and undertake that task.

The other news is that when coaches start to come out and publicly criticise the high-value players in the squad, that's invariably 'last throw of the dice' territory for the coach. He runs the risk of the wrath of the players (unjustifiably in my view on this occasion), the faceless creatures behind the scenes who identified them as primary targets and the owner's who've sanctioned and spent £215m on them.

Edited December 9, 2023 by east lower

[east lower]

9 hours ago, kev61 said:

Well Santos have been relegated for the first time in 111 years - the same Santos that pele came from.

Leicester won the league -  it is not too  far fetched to think we might get relegated.

At one time last season it looked possible and if the wheels really come off, it could be possible again this season. The bottom 3 look doomed though to me, the 3 that came up. Although that's not happened for a long time, if at all?

Leicester bad buys and then lack of funding as they were building a new training complex. Santos - Don't know what happened to them, but there's gotta be a set of reasons, might look later. I did read that they'd been relegated. 

[Ham]

4 hours ago, thevelourfog said:

Such a bizarre thing to say. Bizarre to frame really self-evidently legitimate criticism of Clearlake's ownership as "hate", as if it's some irrational or unfair emotional position, even before you get into the Ricketts stuff. I can't even remember what he was accused of or did but it certainly wasn't being "right wing". Boehly didn't earn billions by being a keen student of Engels ffs. 

On my part, I didn't have high hopes for any of the billionaires bidding for us being especially lovely people. I did hope for competence. 

The point was that twitter activists wrote off one of the potential bidders, a group with good sporting experience, on tenuous links to outdated views by an octagenarian relative when the group might well have played this ownership very differently. 

3 hours ago, ROTG said:

Wow

Just because things are not a rosy as you would like and people question the leadership and their policies, your comment is really scarping the bottom of the barrel. 

Getting advice on posting from you of all people 😂

[Dwmh]

3 hours ago, asvaberg said:

I don't think it's about possession. My belief is it's to stretch the opponant team, to "lure" their players way into our half and then get spaces within their MF/defence.

Or am I totally wrong? Please correct me, if so.

I'm sure you are right.
Back under JM, when the team did things for deliberate thought out reasons, we would play the ball about at the back until at least 1 midfielder had detached himself from the 8 man defence and gone ball hunting. If 2 or 3 joined the lone striker we could go long.

Of course the real difference between us then and now is that we could go long in those days.  In fact we could do pretty much anything we wanted to.  And if teams like WHU had the cheek to go one up and get Maniche sent off early, we would pull out all the stops and smash them 4-1.

Pressing high is a gamble.  Playing the ball around in spite of a high press is calling the bluff.
The real question with this team is what happens if we don't call the bluff?  Do we have a long ball alternative?
And are we farting about at the back because we want to create good attacking ball when we go forward or because we don't know how.

1 minute ago, east lower said:

At one time last season it looked possible and if the wheels really come off, it could be possible again this season. The bottom 3 look doomed though to me, the 3 that came up. Although that's not happened for a long time, if at all?

The only time we really looked relegation fodder were the last 9 games after Potter had gone  W1 D2 L6 (I'll forgive them the 2 losses against RM).  That is 21 points per season form.

And to be fair to Poch, he has turned that around and made us the 48-50 point a season team that we were under Potter.
Perhaps picking strong teams for pre-season was a smarter move than I had acknowledged.
 

9 minutes ago, Ham said:

The point was that twitter activists wrote off one of the potential bidders, a group with good sporting experience, on tenuous links to outdated views by an octagenarian relative when the group might well have played this ownership very differently. 

Catching up on this story.  Islamophobic remarks I read.  How very modern.  They'd be owners if the auction were today.
Oe even RA might even be allowed to stay.

[Max Fowler]

34 minutes ago, Ham said:

The point was that twitter activists wrote off one of the potential bidders, a group with good sporting experience, on tenuous links to outdated views by an octagenarian relative when the group might well have played this ownership very differently. 

Not completely relevant but...