@yourservice 67 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 ROMAN ABRAMOVICH will no longer throw his billions at Chelsea to make them successful. The Russian owner has told the club they must operate without his money and run as a proper business. Abramovich will remain as sole owner but has told club directors he is not interested in remaining as a key decision maker. He made his decision known to directors Peter Kenyon, Eugene Tenenbaum and chairman Bruce Buck at a board meeting last Monday. The summit was called to decide strategy for next season but boss Jose Mourinho was not invited to attend. Abramovich’s move to pull the plug on his unlimited funds could now see Frank Lampard and skipper John Terry leave the club. The two England stars have failed to agree new deals with the Blues and Abramovich has laid down the law that there has to be a wage cap. Neither player is willing to accept a deal less than they think they are worth and could now sit out their current deals, which have two years left. Lampard is currently paid £118,000 per week and could stay another season at Chelsea before they would be forced to sell him for a nominal sum with just a year left on his contract. Chelsea’s only other option would be to try and cash in on him now — though so far no club has made a firm offer. From now on, Chelsea will be limited the same as every other club and will have to generate its own budget. The Russian owner has fallen out of love with the club and is intending to spend more time abroad and with his new girlfriend Daria Zhukova. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 31604 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 This could be the beginning of the end for Chelsea if they don't tighten their belts. They made a rod for their own back by offering Shevcenko and Ballack such silly money but I reckon Lampard has an inflated view of his self-worth if he's not happy with £118k pw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinofbeans 91 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 yes but despite him having an inflated ego ( i don't think for example he is worth anywhere near what he's being paid) he has been far better than shevchenko or ballack his season gone. oh and neither is terry (happy with just earning 100+k a week that is) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7329 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Lampard has been a shadow of his former self this season and i honestly dont think they would miss him. Essien is a fantastic replacement. Id be keeping hold of terry though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinofbeans 91 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 true enough but lampard was always one to go missing for half a game then come up with the winner.... and compared to our midfielders he's probably played 10 -15 more games than any of them in the last 3 seasons.... trouble for him is who in europe would want him on those wages... i know barcelona and madrid have both been having second thoughts. terry is a class player and the player long term chelsea need to keep (alongside essien and cech) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 2 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 true enough but lampard was always one to go missing for half a game then come up with the winner.... and compared to our midfielders he's probably played 10 -15 more games than any of them in the last 3 seasons.... trouble for him is who in europe would want him on those wages... i know barcelona and madrid have both been having second thoughts. terry is a class player and the player long term chelsea need to keep (alongside essien and cech) Obviously no-one in the Premiership will go for him on those wages, if Barca or Real won't have him, who will? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 I know it's ridiculous...but I can kind of understand him being pissed off if those two are on better wages. Wasn't Shearer the same here....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaser 1321 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 It was obviously just a plaything, and as easy as he picked Chelsea up, he's going to drop them. At least they should be in a better position than they were when he took over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 It was obviously just a plaything, and as easy as he picked Chelsea up, he's going to drop them. At least they should be in a better position than they were when he took over I'd settle for a few years of trophies too tbh.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaser 1321 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 It was obviously just a plaything, and as easy as he picked Chelsea up, he's going to drop them. At least they should be in a better position than they were when he took over I'd settle for a few years of trophies too tbh.... Aye but I meant financially. They had some big debts when Abramovich took over and he's obviously wiped these and theyve furthered with the "Chelsea Village" infrastructure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gejon 2 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 For a player who is a shadow of his former self 21 goals from midfield isn't too bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gram 0 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 It was obviously just a plaything, and as easy as he picked Chelsea up, he's going to drop them. At least they should be in a better position than they were when he took over I'd settle for a few years of trophies too tbh.... Aye but I meant financially. They had some big debts when Abramovich took over and he's obviously wiped these and theyve furthered with the "Chelsea Village" infrastructure. Depends how the current debt is managed. Thir financial results have been appalling lately, for obvious reasons. I assume he is going to absorb that himself? The Chelsea brand is far bigger and Kenyon seems to know what he is doing but i'm not sure how it will work tbh. With the level of spending and wages being offered its hard to see how they can break even. Manchester United manage like so it must be possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 2 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 For a player who is a shadow of his former self 21 goals from midfield isn't too bad I was going to say...although I think he's useless for England and a billy big bollocks who thinks too much of himself, you'd be mad not to want him playing for us. It's his wage demands that are the issue at the moment though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 31604 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Depends how the current debt is managed. Thir financial results have been appalling lately, for obvious reasons. I assume he is going to absorb that himself? The Chelsea brand is far bigger and Kenyon seems to know what he is doing but i'm not sure how it will work tbh. With the level of spending and wages being offered its hard to see how they can break even. Manchester United manage like so it must be possible. Man U don't offer the same sort of wages Chelsea do, with the current wage structure at Chelsea I can't see them ever being self-sufficient. If Abramovich drops them they'll be in big trouble, chances are though he's just going to refuse to pay the big transfer fees but keep paying the wages. However it'll be difficult to attract the world's best players on £90k pw when they see a lot of the squad on more money, so reducing the wages levels will be difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 2 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Depends how the current debt is managed. Thir financial results have been appalling lately, for obvious reasons. I assume he is going to absorb that himself? The Chelsea brand is far bigger and Kenyon seems to know what he is doing but i'm not sure how it will work tbh. With the level of spending and wages being offered its hard to see how they can break even. Manchester United manage like so it must be possible. Man U don't offer the same sort of wages Chelsea do, with the current wage structure at Chelsea I can't see them ever being self-sufficient. If Abramovich drops them they'll be in big trouble, chances are though he's just going to refuse to pay the big transfer fees but keep paying the wages. However it'll be difficult to attract the world's best players on £90k pw when they see a lot of the squad on more money, so reducing the wages levels will be difficult. Depends what wages they on at the moment though I suppose, but I don't think we're ever going to see Ronaldinho, for example, in the premiership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 31604 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Depends how the current debt is managed. Thir financial results have been appalling lately, for obvious reasons. I assume he is going to absorb that himself? The Chelsea brand is far bigger and Kenyon seems to know what he is doing but i'm not sure how it will work tbh. With the level of spending and wages being offered its hard to see how they can break even. Manchester United manage like so it must be possible. Man U don't offer the same sort of wages Chelsea do, with the current wage structure at Chelsea I can't see them ever being self-sufficient. If Abramovich drops them they'll be in big trouble, chances are though he's just going to refuse to pay the big transfer fees but keep paying the wages. However it'll be difficult to attract the world's best players on £90k pw when they see a lot of the squad on more money, so reducing the wages levels will be difficult. Depends what wages they on at the moment though I suppose, but I don't think we're ever going to see Ronaldinho, for example, in the premiership. Aye but the world's best players will generally be on a good wage or will soon be demanding one after joining. Take Lampard for example, he's on £118k per week, that's mind boggling money that he wouldn't get elsewhere but it seems that he wants more because Ballack and Shencenko are getting it. It's that sort of jealousy that will mean the top players joining will want at least the same as the top earners already there even though it would be well above the market rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 2 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Depends how the current debt is managed. Thir financial results have been appalling lately, for obvious reasons. I assume he is going to absorb that himself? The Chelsea brand is far bigger and Kenyon seems to know what he is doing but i'm not sure how it will work tbh. With the level of spending and wages being offered its hard to see how they can break even. Manchester United manage like so it must be possible. Man U don't offer the same sort of wages Chelsea do, with the current wage structure at Chelsea I can't see them ever being self-sufficient. If Abramovich drops them they'll be in big trouble, chances are though he's just going to refuse to pay the big transfer fees but keep paying the wages. However it'll be difficult to attract the world's best players on £90k pw when they see a lot of the squad on more money, so reducing the wages levels will be difficult. Depends what wages they on at the moment though I suppose, but I don't think we're ever going to see Ronaldinho, for example, in the premiership. Aye but the world's best players will generally be on a good wage or will soon be demanding one after joining. Take Lampard for example, he's on £118k per week, that's mind boggling money that he wouldn't get elsewhere but it seems that he wants more because Ballack and Shencenko are getting it. It's that sort of jealousy that will mean the top players joining will want at least the same as the top earners already there even though it would be well above the market rate. Well that goes back to my Ronaldinho point - I don't think the Premiership is that attractive as a playing proposition to 'the world's best'. The only reason Ballack and Shevchenko came to Chelsea was silly money. And with an Italian team winning the CL despite there being 3 English teams in the semis, you can forget seeing the likes of Kaka and Cannavaro coming here, unless Chelsea continue to pay more and more astronomical wages. Which they won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 ROMAN ABRAMOVICH will no longer throw his billions at Chelsea to make them successful. The Russian owner has told the club they must operate without his money and run as a proper business. Abramovich will remain as sole owner but has told club directors he is not interested in remaining as a key decision maker. He made his decision known to directors Peter Kenyon, Eugene Tenenbaum and chairman Bruce Buck at a board meeting last Monday. The summit was called to decide strategy for next season but boss Jose Mourinho was not invited to attend. Abramovich’s move to pull the plug on his unlimited funds could now see Frank Lampard and skipper John Terry leave the club. The two England stars have failed to agree new deals with the Blues and Abramovich has laid down the law that there has to be a wage cap. Neither player is willing to accept a deal less than they think they are worth and could now sit out their current deals, which have two years left. Lampard is currently paid £118,000 per week and could stay another season at Chelsea before they would be forced to sell him for a nominal sum with just a year left on his contract. Chelsea’s only other option would be to try and cash in on him now — though so far no club has made a firm offer. From now on, Chelsea will be limited the same as every other club and will have to generate its own budget. The Russian owner has fallen out of love with the club and is intending to spend more time abroad and with his new girlfriend Daria Zhukova. source?????? and he's so far fallen out of love with the club he sent his double along to the Cup Final eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14021 Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 Couldnt give a fuck. Whats his new lass like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themags 0 Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 his new lass is canny fit like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 31604 Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 (edited) Abramovich hints at more spending Abramovich has spent nearly £250m at Stamford Bridge Chelsea's billionaire owner Roman Abramovich has dismissed reports that he will no longer spend heavily to bring players to Stamford Bridge. Recent newspaper reports have suggested that Abramovich, who took over at Chelsea in 2003, would be spending less in the transfer market in future years. But he told radio station Ekho Moskvy that such claims were "nonsense". He added: "Everything will remain the same. My relationship with Chelsea has not changed. I don't want to change." Rumours have persisted that Abramovich - who is Russia's richest man with an estimated £9.5bn fortune, according to Forbes Magazine - is to reduce his spending. That has led to speculation that key players like Frank Lampard and skipper John Terry could leave. Abramovich has spent about £250m on player transfers since buying Chelsea, including shelling out a British record £30m for AC Milan striker Andriy Shevchenko in 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...sea/6704101.stm Edited May 30, 2007 by ewerk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now