In terms of history, the circumstances of the foundation of both Chelsea and Charlton Athletic in 1905 could hardly have been more contrasting.
We had a bunch of 15 year old ragamuffins getting a team, a club, together principally for the love of the sport. Chelsea was a planned creation by a rich businessman and landowner of that time, Gus Mears, with the avowed intention of capitalising on the growth of football as a (paying) spectator sport.
I know which one is more authentic, and has the enduring 'cool' despite fleeting success. We have always been a living organism, Chelsea are more akin to an architect's structure, indeed they always make me think of a 60's tower block.
Yep. Lampard fell without being touched. Outside the box too. Makelele on his last game took it and missed. Think it was Anderson in goal from us but could be wrong.
Yep. Lampard fell without being touched. Outside the box too. Makelele on his last game took it and missed. Think it was Anderson in goal from us but could be wrong.
You're right, it was Andersen in goal. I'm still annoyed about that one. The worst thing is Andersen got down to save the rebound but Makelele hit his shot so badly it went into the ground and over him. Ridiculous
It's like when you see Man City fans getting stick for buying success when you know a large majority of them travelled up and down the country to shit holes like Gillingham not that long ago. Id rather clubs that have had real ups and downs taste success that clubs like Liverpool that think they are entitled to it.
Chelsea fans turn a blind eye to a number of disturbing truths. The general defence is "oh that again, haven't heard that one before!" as if repetition is somehow worse than the accusations themselves. The captain is an absolute scumbag, the owner a crook and possible killer. That's the history people should be talking about.
As for the fans, most of the thugs I've known in my area are Chelsea, so combined with my resentment of what Roman did to the transfer market at a time when we were beginning to compete, along with a bit of Scott Parker sour grapes, I can safely say I thoroughly dislike the entire football club. I'd enjoy any thread that opens with an anti-Chelsea rant.
I find it odd that the Chelsea armchair fans celebrate like mental when they win the league, it just does not dawn on them that with the money they spend and the fact that they only have to beat 3-4 other teams, that they should be winning the most uncompetitive football league south of Scotland. Oh well it will be nice seeing fat blokes wearing Chelski shirts at Bluewater and at BBQ's in the summer.
I find it odd that the Chelsea armchair fans celebrate like mental when they win the league, it just does not dawn on them that with the money they spend and the fact that they only have to beat 3-4 other teams, that they should be winning the most uncompetitive football league south of Scotland. Oh well it will be nice seeing fat blokes wearing Chelski shirts at Bluewater and at BBQ's in the summer.
Up there (nearly) with Millwall for me as a club I cant stand.
Their fan base is made up from a mix of Neanderthal thug types and the "I havent got a clue about Football but i best choose a team that wins a lot so I fit it and can be cool" types.
You very rarely used to see a Chelsea top around, less than say a West Ham top.
Not bothered about Abromivich really. Not bothered that they have won the league.
Chelsea would not be nowhere if Abramovich hadn't bought them, and even if they weren't winning the league due to that investment not being there they would still be a team who won a decent haul of trophies and had some of the greatest players of the early Premier League era.
Not nowhere but not clear where they would be had RA not bought the club. From memory the club had large and potentially unsustainable debts at the time of purchase by RA. Had the club not been bought, player sales seemed likely and a Leeds scenario possible.
Chelsea's position and support would have always made them attractive to buyers. Whether those buyers would have been ideal, to fans of that club, is another matter.
Can't stand the majority of their supporter base. Something about them just comes across as very smug and ignorant to what is going on outside of their little 'Race for the top four' bubble. Try and get them talking about the relegation battle, or who might come up from the Championship and they're clueless.
Will never forget this smug plastic Chelsea who I used to work with a few years ago. I was telling my other colleagues (mostly Arsenal, mostly just as plastic) about us winning League One and how great it felt, and he just steamed in and said "Yeah, so what? We've won the Champions League". Cnut.
Not bothered about Abromivich really. Not bothered that they have won the league.
Not bothered that he's been accused of murder? That he ripped off the Russian people for billions? That he bought a club largely to avoid being assassinated? What would a club owner need to do to concern you!?
Not bothered about Abromivich really. Not bothered that they have won the league.
Not bothered that he's been accused of murder? That he ripped off the Russian people for billions? That he bought a club largely to avoid being assassinated? What would a club owner need to do to concern you!?
Attempt to pass off Thuram-Ulien has a Championship keeper?
I find it odd that the Chelsea armchair fans celebrate like mental when they win the league, it just does not dawn on them that with the money they spend and the fact that they only have to beat 3-4 other teams, that they should be winning the most uncompetitive football league south of Scotland. Oh well it will be nice seeing fat blokes wearing Chelski shirts at Bluewater and at BBQ's in the summer.
As a club they've got an interesting history, but sadly it's not one that the vast majority of their fans have any interest or are in any way a part of. I think the biggest problem at the moment though, is Mourinho. He's a classless, unsporting wind up merchant. I don't recall the same animostiy when Ancelotti won the league.
Chelsea fans turn a blind eye to a number of disturbing truths. The general defence is "oh that again, haven't heard that one before!" as if repetition is somehow worse than the accusations themselves. The captain is an absolute scumbag, the owner a crook and possible killer. That's the history people should be talking about.
As for the fans, most of the thugs I've known in my area are Chelsea, so combined with my resentment of what Roman did to the transfer market at a time when we were beginning to compete, along with a bit of Scott Parker sour grapes, I can safely say I thoroughly dislike the entire football club. I'd enjoy any thread that opens with an anti-Chelsea rant.
Not bothered about Abromivich really. Not bothered that they have won the league.
Not bothered that he's been accused of murder? That he ripped off the Russian people for billions? That he bought a club largely to avoid being assassinated? What would a club owner need to do to concern you!?
Is this wise after all the shit with Oyston taking Blackpool fans to court. Personally couldn't care less what you have said on here. But doesn't shit like this get people sued
So are we saying that the football tradition of boys (or girls) starting to follow a particular club because their grandparents, parents, aunts and uncles, next door neighbours etc supported that club, irrespective if they live in the vicinity of the club any longer, which describes a very significant core of the Charlton fan base, is something unique to Charlton or small clubs in general?
The term 'plastic' can be applied to a sizeable number of the followers all successful clubs but that does not mean that those clubs don't have a large core of support for whom the concept of supporting another club would be as much an option as it would be for many core Charlton supporters.
Chelsea fans turn a blind eye to a number of disturbing truths. The general defence is "oh that again, haven't heard that one before!" as if repetition is somehow worse than the accusations themselves. The captain is an absolute scumbag, the owner a crook and possible killer. That's the history people should be talking about.
As for the fans, most of the thugs I've known in my area are Chelsea, so combined with my resentment of what Roman did to the transfer market at a time when we were beginning to compete, along with a bit of Scott Parker sour grapes, I can safely say I thoroughly dislike the entire football club. I'd enjoy any thread that opens with an anti-Chelsea rant.
Not bothered about Abromivich really. Not bothered that they have won the league.
Not bothered that he's been accused of murder? That he ripped off the Russian people for billions? That he bought a club largely to avoid being assassinated? What would a club owner need to do to concern you!?
Is this wise after all the shit with Oyston taking Blackpool fans to court. Personally couldn't care less what you have said on here. But doesn't shit like this get people sued
These points are undisputed. Some have been raised in court and still remain undisputed. The murder accusations (I refer to accusations, rather than making the claim myself) go back to the aluminium wars when over 100 executives were murdered, and the death of Boris Berezovsky. This video covers much of it.
Comments
We had a bunch of 15 year old ragamuffins getting a team, a club, together principally for the love of the sport. Chelsea was a planned creation by a rich businessman and landowner of that time, Gus Mears, with the avowed intention of capitalising on the growth of football as a (paying) spectator sport.
I know which one is more authentic, and has the enduring 'cool' despite fleeting success. We have always been a living organism, Chelsea are more akin to an architect's structure, indeed they always make me think of a 60's tower block.
As for the fans, most of the thugs I've known in my area are Chelsea, so combined with my resentment of what Roman did to the transfer market at a time when we were beginning to compete, along with a bit of Scott Parker sour grapes, I can safely say I thoroughly dislike the entire football club. I'd enjoy any thread that opens with an anti-Chelsea rant.
Oh well it will be nice seeing fat blokes wearing Chelski shirts at Bluewater and at BBQ's in the summer.
Their fan base is made up from a mix of Neanderthal thug types and the "I havent got a clue about Football but i best choose a team that wins a lot so I fit it and can be cool" types.
You very rarely used to see a Chelsea top around, less than say a West Ham top.
Not bothered about Abromivich really. Not bothered that they have won the league.
Just dislike their fans.
Chelsea's position and support would have always made them attractive to buyers. Whether those buyers would have been ideal, to fans of that club, is another matter.
Sure, it takes a lot more money to buy success these days - but it's far from a recent phenomenon.
Will never forget this smug plastic Chelsea who I used to work with a few years ago. I was telling my other colleagues (mostly Arsenal, mostly just as plastic) about us winning League One and how great it felt, and he just steamed in and said "Yeah, so what? We've won the Champions League". Cnut.
The term 'plastic' can be applied to a sizeable number of the followers all successful clubs but that does not mean that those clubs don't have a large core of support for whom the concept of supporting another club would be as much an option as it would be for many core Charlton supporters.
At the time it was a fantasy world but it all ended in tears when that boatload of rubber didn't arrive at Tilbury.