What's new

What the pundits & media are saying about us

Classof17

Classof17

Active Member
Apr 19, 2017
113
214
Most pundits are saying that the main difference between us and 'quality' Chelsea as highlighted in the semi final is the fact that Chelsea can bring on 3 game changers from the bench. Some idiots are saying this as if it's a virtue on their part. All it is because of, is the position they have with the unrivaled oil money and the fact they can pay unrivaled wages to players who aren't quite good enough for the real big clubs in Spain.

These players wouldn't want to sit on another teams bench being paid lower sums. Anyway it annoys me how some pundits or commentators praise Chelsea because of this. This is a money thing not a football thing, created through intelligence, or hard work. Not achieved through merit, but as a luxury of an ordinary club being hacked with unethical finances.
 
yiddopaul

yiddopaul

Well-Known Member
Dec 28, 2005
3,450
6,736
Classof17 said:
Most pundits are saying that the main difference between us and 'quality' Chelsea as highlighted in the semi final is the fact that Chelsea can bring on 3 game changers from the bench. Some idiots are saying this as if it's a virtue on their part. All it is because of, is the position they have with the unrivaled oil money and the fact they can pay unrivaled wages to players who aren't quite good enough for the real big clubs in Spain.

These players wouldn't want to sit on another teams bench being paid lower sums. Anyway it annoys me how some pundits or commentators praise Chelsea because of this. This is a money thing not a football thing, created through intelligence, or hard work. Not achieved through merit, but as a luxury of an ordinary club being hacked with unethical finances.
Click to expand...
It is annoying. The pundits only respect or take seriously a team that has stupid amounts of money. To them, that's what makes a proper football team. And if a team comes along and does things the right way, through intelligence, hard work, good coaching etc (the way all teams once used to do it pre-Chelsea days), then they still don't take them seriously because we can't be truly great as we haven't spent ££££££££ on players. It really is quite bizzare. Team's fans like City, hate us because they sold out, and took a short cut to success, and still we're a better team than them.
 
Riandor

Riandor

COB Founder
May 26, 2004
9,418
11,627
yiddopaul said:
It is annoying. The pundits only respect or take seriously a team that has stupid amounts of money. To them, that's what makes a proper football team. And if a team comes along and does things the right way, through intelligence, hard work, good coaching etc (the way all teams once used to do it pre-Chelsea days), then they still don't take them seriously because we can't be truly great as we haven't spent ££££££££ on players. It really is quite bizzare. Team's fans like City, hate us because they sold out, and took a short cut to success, and still we're a better team than them.
Click to expand...
Sky aren't Interested in football, they're interested in revenue.

Chelsea, City, United... these are teams who win trophies and therefore have lots of followers and that equates to more revenue.

It's akin to Real Madrid and Barcelona hogging the tv rights in Spain.

If we won the league, it might be different, but until then, we are just an interesting side note. Add pundit bias and it's really not surprising.
 
K

kmk

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2014
4,209
28,277
Riandor said:
Sky aren't Interested in football, they're interested in revenue.

Chelsea, City, United... these are teams who win trophies and therefore have lots of followers and that equates to more revenue.

It's akin to Real Madrid and Barcelona hogging the tv rights in Spain.

If we won the league, it might be different, but until then, we are just an interesting side note. Add pundit bias and it's really not surprising.
Click to expand...

Surely we must have a bigger following amongst U.K. Sky viewers than Citeh?
 
K

kmk

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2014
4,209
28,277
Jamie Carragher and Alan Pardew discussing our season on Sky's Monday Night Football.

Carragher mentioned that we could have been Champions if Chelsea had been playing in Europe.

http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/10859836/in-praise-of-tottenham

IMG_3734.PNG
 
Mr Pink

Mr Pink

SC Supporter
Aug 25, 2010
55,143
100,278
To be fair to Carragher he's becoming more and more complimentary about us, even said he loved watching this current Spurs side.
 
Gbspurs

Gbspurs

Gatekeeper for debates, King of the plonkers
Jan 27, 2011
26,971
61,861
nicdic

nicdic

Official SC Padre
Admin
May 8, 2005
41,857
25,920
Gbspurs said:
These sort of stats actually bother me. How can we be so dominant and have nothing to show for it?!
Click to expand...
Because last seasons winners were a complete anomaly and Chelsea this season have had no European football.

The positive to take is that we're the team who has been most competitive and most consistent even with European football. It bodes well for the future.

Frustrating? Sure. But massively encouraging and positive too.

If Chelsea got Leicester's points total last season, they would have an extra 31 points and we'd be second by quite a way.
 
K

kitchen

Well-Known Member
Nov 24, 2006
2,296
3,633
Classof17 said:
Most pundits are saying that the main difference between us and 'quality' Chelsea as highlighted in the semi final is the fact that Chelsea can bring on 3 game changers from the bench. Some idiots are saying this as if it's a virtue on their part. All it is because of, is the position they have with the unrivaled oil money and the fact they can pay unrivaled wages to players who aren't quite good enough for the real big clubs in Spain.

These players wouldn't want to sit on another teams bench being paid lower sums. Anyway it annoys me how some pundits or commentators praise Chelsea because of this. This is a money thing not a football thing, created through intelligence, or hard work. Not achieved through merit, but as a luxury of an ordinary club being hacked with unethical finances.
Click to expand...

It's also bullshit and a convenient thing to say.

They have depth in the attacking midfield areas but where they lack depth is at wingback, and defensive midfield.

They can bring on attacking substitutions but their squad hasn't been tested this season because they've had virtually no injuries and none in the areas where they can't bring in top quality replacements.

One injury to Kante and they'd be up shit creek.
 
eddiev14

eddiev14

SC Supporter
Jan 18, 2005
7,174
19,688
nicdic said:
Because last seasons winners were a complete anomaly and Chelsea this season have had no European football.

The positive to take is that we're the team who has been most competitive and most consistent even with European football. It bodes well for the future.

Frustrating? Sure. But massively encouraging and positive too.

If Chelsea got Leicester's points total last season, they would have an extra 31 points and we'd be second by quite a way.
Click to expand...

Then you remember we're playing at Wembley next season...

Honestly, why can't we have nice things?!? :(
 
Led's Zeppelin

Led's Zeppelin

Can't Re Member
May 28, 2013
7,354
20,227
Gbspurs said:
These sort of stats actually bother me. How can we be so dominant and have nothing to show for it?!
Click to expand...

Because football is a game, and arbitrary rules shape it. Groups of games called seasons determine where trophies go. If people were genuinely interested in who is the best team they would devise a better way of finding out. But because it is at heart still just a game, not a medical procedure or a space programme at stake, no one really thinks about it, and just accepts the convention.

One single year is a bit more understandable than two years, but ultimately it means no more. Less, in many ways, but that's how it is. It's a bugger.
 
yiddopaul

yiddopaul

Well-Known Member
Dec 28, 2005
3,450
6,736
nicdic said:
Because last seasons winners were a complete anomaly and Chelsea this season have had no European football.

The positive to take is that we're the team who has been most competitive and most consistent even with European football. It bodes well for the future.

Frustrating? Sure. But massively encouraging and positive too.

If Chelsea got Leicester's points total last season, they would have an extra 31 points and we'd be second by quite a way.
Click to expand...
...or injuries.
 
W

walton

Well-Known Member
Feb 28, 2006
3,189
5,018
Blimey, this has turned in to one hell of a bleat fest; why can't people just enjoy what we have at the moment rather than crying over Chelsea's ill-gotten wealth (it's amazing how many experts there are about the relative merits of top PL clubs revenue streams...), their lack of injuries, or Sky's hard-on for Utd, Citeh etc. Dry your eyes.

Let's not pretend we're some kind of throwback to a purer time, where football wasn't all about the dolla. We spent £30m on Sissoko just to troll Everton ffs, let's keep things in perspective.

If Chelsea win the league, it will be because they have been the best team/squad being managed by the best coach over the 38 games. Simple.
 
fletch82

fletch82

Well-Known Member
Aug 23, 2015
2,652
8,489
Who ever that miserable git on Ssn was this morning has us winning all but Utd and chavs not dropping a point and then all the spurs players leaving ,WHL blowing up and levy committing hari kari
Happy sort of fella for a complete **** :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

EmperorKabir
  • Locked
What our opponents' fans are saying about us 18/19
276 277 278
Replies
6K
Views
960K
Shadydan
Shadydan
W
Eric Dier Interview ....The Times..
2
Replies
20
Views
5K
Coyboy
Coyboy
chrissivad
  • Locked
Phantom of the Lane
Replies
0
Views
4K
chrissivad
chrissivad
Top