posted Nov 28, 2006

I need a catchy nickname

I actually have quite a few for you after this last response. Obviously, you're not much for reading within the lines, let alone behind them, so I'll make this as succinct and direct as possible, insofar as legalities permit.

Yes, if you really must be rather too simplistic and plebeian about it, Arsenal did indeed move for the money. But there's rather more to it than that. To begin with, unlike Stamford Bridge, Highbury had not had any extensive rebuilding or renovation carried out in more than thirty years (apart from the necessary safety measures). The stadium was old and in need of extensive and expensive repair; factor in the price they had already been assured through the current property development and you have a financially sound reason to invest in a new stadium, particularly one with increased capacity, luxury boxes, and all the other modern day necessities. But football matters form only a part of this: if you really want to find out a little more, look to the tax relief and add that to the dispensation from the FA. And yes, there was one. At Chelsea we have spent years putting up with being shifted around the ground as one stand after another falls to the ground. Ostensibly, it is quite as new a stadium as any in England. People like Matthew Harding, and yes, even Batesy, worked tirelessly in order to achieve this. Together they saved the club; Abramovich merely soiled it with stolen money. (And yes, you might wish to do a little research on this subject as well.) The issue here is Kenyon and his pitiful need to outshine his hometown team and put some hair on his head. Yes, extra seats would indeed be nice, but it is by no means necessary, and it certainly does not warrant a move. As a concluding side point, your analogy to other grounds is similarly unsound, as, apart from Man City's, the others you mention have a comparable capacity to the current maximum attendance at Stamford Bridge. So no argument there I'm afraid.

The other points seem more querulous than purposeful, but a few words here should suffice. As far as the Board is concerned, who do you think supports Kenyon, his absurd suggestions, and those utterly ridiculous 'legal statements' issued by CFC? Do we all remember those released after ditty Drogba admitted to diving last year? These things should be quite enough, but unfortunately, they only begin to scratch the surface. Again, do your homework and take a good long look at the way in which our club is perceived by football as a whole. And no, this is not similar to what Man Utd or Arsenal have faced in the past: this is of another level entirely. As for those 'pertinent facts' that seem to be escaping you, well, they've already been covered quite comprehensively; perhaps reading through the debate on which you're commenting might help a touch. And finally, the 'weak minds' comment refers to those Chelsea fans who are only looking at the immediate present and basing their opinions solely upon the supposed success that we're seeing on the pitch. Such people, who never see a larger picture in anything, possess the type of limpid hearts that enable impotent little Mancunians to all but destroy what was once a proud and honourable club. In other words, some fans, a great many in Chelsea's case I'm afraid, are only here for the moment, and, unfortunately, the rest of us have to stand idly by and watch while they shatter both the past and the future.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 29, 2006

Yes, if you really must be rather too simplistic and plebeian about it, Arsenal did indeed move for the money.
************
There’s no simplicity about it, Arsenal moved for the money and everything you list about tax break etc only enforces this and only a very deluded person would try to suggest differently.
Not sure what the FA dispensation is all about, I’ve searched everywhere and can find nothing about it so maybe you can enlighten us more. What did they need a dispensation from the FA for exactly.


As a concluding side point, your analogy to other grounds is similarly unsound, as, apart from Man City's, the others you mention have a comparable capacity to the current maximum attendance at Stamford Bridge. So no argument there I'm afraid.
*************
Seems you are the one having difficulty reading the previous posts as my reference was to the fact that they all moved but are they any less of the same club? I made no reference to the size of these stadiums but that Bolton are still Bolton etc.


The other points seem more querulous than purposeful, but a few words here should suffice. As far as the Board is concerned, who do you think supports Kenyon, his absurd suggestions, and those utterly ridiculous 'legal statements' issued by CFC? Do we all remember those released after ditty Drogba admitted to diving last year? These things should be quite enough, but unfortunately, they only begin to scratch the surface. Again, do your homework and take a good long look at the way in which our club is perceived by football as a whole.
*****************
You mean why Chelsea’s support is rising faster than any other teams?
You mean the fact that they have sold more shirts already this season than any other team in a single season in the history of Adidas?
Clearly not everyone then perceives everything to be bad.



These things should be quite enough, but unfortunately, they only begin to scratch the surface.
**************
See, anyone can make bland statements but someone with an intellect which you most certainly consider yourself to have would use cold hard facts and examples, without them it’s just a string of words.



As for those 'pertinent facts' that seem to be escaping you, well, they've already been covered quite comprehensively; perhaps reading through the debate on which you're commenting might help a touch.
**************
Would you mind showing me where in this article these 'pertinent facts' appear as since you mentioned them you have continually referenced them but never actually say what they are.Once again another example of nothingness in your response.

Sir, once again you’ve typed an awful lot of bland meaningless, nothingness. You try to be clever but having looked back at your history of posts very few of them actually say anything meaningful or useful it's just rubbish that you write quite frankly.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 29, 2006

Fair enough. I've tried to be as polite as patience allows and respond as time affords. Perhaps we might just agree that neither of us particularly respects the intellectual capacity of the other and leave it at that? Besides, even though we two are the only ones still here, the comment 'they have sold more shirts already this season than any other team in a single season in the history of Adidas' is almost too pitiful for comment. But it does tend to support what a good many of us have been trying to say all along. Enjoy your shirt.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 30, 2006

What you couldn't find just a little time to show me the 'pertinent fact' ? Or explain the 'FA Dispensation'?


'But it does tend to support what a good many of us have been trying to say all along.'
********
Good to see you had time for another meaningless string of words though.Maybe you should try actually saying what it is ' a good many of us have been trying to say'.

'Perhaps we might just agree that neither of us particularly respects the intellectual capacity of the other'
************
I just don't like people who make stupid comments like 'Arsenal didn't move because of money' but can't then back up their statements with cold hard facts and even worse when they finally do get round to admitting that they are wrong,'Yes,Arsenal did indeed move for the money.' they don't have the good grace to apologise.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 30, 2006

You really just can't let this rest, can you? Please understand that I'm not in the habit of providing a signpost for every half-wit who simply cannot read. You're picking at threads that others have the capacity both to understand and to follow. Not every comment necessitates the type of explanation you seem to require. There was no call for an apology. My point was that if you must look upon the issue from such a bland and obvious perspective, then by all means do so; but others are entitled to look at mitigating circumstances that suggest money alone was not the sole reason for the new stadium; perhaps it was the most important, but it was by no means the only reason, which was your governing issue. And that little analogy relating to the other stadia was simply misplaced. Expending still more time trying to explain that which already has been would seem to go against the grain of the patience you have already been extended: we're not all sitting around in offices waiting for others to show us the way to common sense. And as for Dein's dispensation, well, think a little will you?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 30, 2006

And as for Dein's dispensation, well, think a little will you?
*********
I did one better I called the FA Information Office and they had no clue what I was talking about.They tell me that they had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Arsenal relocating to a new stadium at all as those things don't come under there jurisdiction.

You can't take the time to show me the pertinent facts because they aren;t there mate.You open your mouth and words rush out but you have no cold hard facts to back up anything you say,it's all tripe.Since you mentioned the words 'pertinent facts' I think it only right you should name them and then show me where in this thread they are.If you can't it just proves my point,an awful lot of typing but nothing actually said.

That's twice now you've been wrong and not the guts to admit it.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 30, 2006

I'll tell you what,if you can point me to an article that explains this FA dispensation and can show me in this thread the pertinent facts I'll not only apologize to you I'll also never post again on this site.Surely that's an offer you can't refuse.

To help you along here is the first post where you mentioned the illusive 'pertinent facts'.

'The Arsenal situation is not at all equatable and seems quite an awkward comparison; I'm sorry, but I really don't see how this can be explained when all the pertinent facts are clear.'

And here is where you mention the 'FA dispensation'.

'But football matters form only a part of this: if you really want to find out a little more, look to the tax relief and add that to the dispensation from the FA.'

So,the ball is in your court,either put up or shut up.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 1, 2006

A final posting on this matter

Again, you fail to read. Think of Dein's position; think of why the writing between the lines is the only wording I can have on this subject. Political games seldom reach the general public until it's too late for anything to be done, particularly with almost every other club in the Premiership banging on the local Council door for a new stadium. Let's just wait a little while, shall we? Let's just see how conveniently and how quietly a significant portion of the stadium debt just up and disappears prior to January 2008. How's that for subtle specifics?

I'm afraid your baited incentive isn't quite worth my position. I wouldn't want you 'never to post again on this site': your postings are amusing if nothing else. But I have to say, were you to temper these little bursts with a touch of common sense, your obvious care and concern for the game, however misdirected it may well be, would come through rather more clearly. And though this will prevent a good many from discovering what exactly it is that's being implied when things just cannot be said openly, I in turn will attempt either to provide the bare and basic facts or keep quiet altogether.

Now let's allow this to rest, and you can send on your apology after next Christmas.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 1, 2006

All the bluster all the big tallk and you can't do it because it's not true,you lied and worst thing you know you lied.

No one can ever take a word you write on here seriously now as everyone will see you are all talk and no actual substance.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 5, 2006

Well, nothing stops Chelsea from being defiant in defeat when it does more than everyone does, revolutionarising the boring game we were watching till Abramovich and Mourinho came along. English football owes a lot to Abramovich and all the Men at Chelsea

add comment | complain about this comment