Do people just randomly forget that some clubs used to be owned by banks and that’s how they are where they are today?
I’m not going to be an hypocrite and say Chelsea doesn’t have a role to play in the current state of football but if it wasn’t Chelsea it was going to be another club.
Current state of football was inevitable. It was going to happen regardless.
I think people are nitpicking this article a bit. Saying Chelsea are poster boys for whats wrong with football today is a reasonable take. Sure, they could have said Newcastle or PSG or Man City, but the person is expressing an opinion and it’s not a bad one, certainly not as bad as people in this comment section are making it out to be.
Did he? He lost money all throughout his ownership and last I heard still didn’t have access to the sale proceeds. Plus rumor is he wasn’t even allowed within the country for the last few years.
I don’t think Roman “sportswashed” because I don’t think he was trying to clean up his public persona, but instead wanted to have assets outside of Putin’s control in case things went bad. And at least to date that plan backfired.
People don’t read articles here, or anywhere on reddit tbh. One of my professors has his tests just be like from the first 3 pages of each textbook chapter, and people still don’t read it. It’s like 5 minutes of work lol.
Bayer Leverkusen were founded by Bayer, the pharmaceutical company that produced chemical weapons for the Nazis during WWII. Bayern Munich used the swastika as their badge. PSG and Manchester City are oil clubs that actively cheat their books to be able to spend more. I don’t get what we’re doing here trying to paint Chelsea’s spending as some new wave ruining football.
These people who say “football is gone” frankly do not know what they’re talking about. Inflation (both within and outside the sport) has changed the landscape but there has always been stupid money and bad people within the sport.
The complainers are just nostalgic for the times before they knew and understood how bad it is. Picking any one club to vilify is foolish. It’s an arms race.
So you think the UK should have had rules that prevented anyone from owning a club if they had any connections to someone who “wasn’t a good person”?
It’s not even rational to discriminate against someone that was in the KGB, because that just means they were public servants working to protect their country.
I mean yeah I get it, but that’s leaving out a relevant historical context as to why those things happened.
I agree that Chelsea should not be seen as “where things gone wrong”, but pointing out to Nazi Germany to say things have always been wrong just seems whataboutism with a really low bar
Do people just randomly forget that some clubs used to be owned by banks and that’s how they are where they are today?
I’m not going to be an hypocrite and say Chelsea doesn’t have a role to play in the current state of football but if it wasn’t Chelsea it was going to be another club.
Current state of football was inevitable. It was going to happen regardless.
Brits invent football and have been whining about it ever since.
This is the definitive slogan of /r/soccer
I think people are nitpicking this article a bit. Saying Chelsea are poster boys for whats wrong with football today is a reasonable take. Sure, they could have said Newcastle or PSG or Man City, but the person is expressing an opinion and it’s not a bad one, certainly not as bad as people in this comment section are making it out to be.
Did he? He lost money all throughout his ownership and last I heard still didn’t have access to the sale proceeds. Plus rumor is he wasn’t even allowed within the country for the last few years.
I don’t think Roman “sportswashed” because I don’t think he was trying to clean up his public persona, but instead wanted to have assets outside of Putin’s control in case things went bad. And at least to date that plan backfired.
People don’t read articles here, or anywhere on reddit tbh. One of my professors has his tests just be like from the first 3 pages of each textbook chapter, and people still don’t read it. It’s like 5 minutes of work lol.
Bayer Leverkusen were founded by Bayer, the pharmaceutical company that produced chemical weapons for the Nazis during WWII. Bayern Munich used the swastika as their badge. PSG and Manchester City are oil clubs that actively cheat their books to be able to spend more. I don’t get what we’re doing here trying to paint Chelsea’s spending as some new wave ruining football.
These people who say “football is gone” frankly do not know what they’re talking about. Inflation (both within and outside the sport) has changed the landscape but there has always been stupid money and bad people within the sport.
The complainers are just nostalgic for the times before they knew and understood how bad it is. Picking any one club to vilify is foolish. It’s an arms race.
Exactly!
This isn’t even the first time Chelsea’s spending ruined football!
Are you really using Nazi Germany for an example as to why Chelsea aren’t “the only ones ruining football”?
So you think the UK should have had rules that prevented anyone from owning a club if they had any connections to someone who “wasn’t a good person”?
It’s not even rational to discriminate against someone that was in the KGB, because that just means they were public servants working to protect their country.
No, he’s using Nazi Germany as an example of how football has been corrupted by less than benevolent interests for a very long time.
I mean yeah I get it, but that’s leaving out a relevant historical context as to why those things happened.
I agree that Chelsea should not be seen as “where things gone wrong”, but pointing out to Nazi Germany to say things have always been wrong just seems whataboutism with a really low bar
Just feel like he’s going to a more extreme level
and the funny thing is that a major portion of redditors are actually american