23 Feb 2025 14:33:58
My guess is most football fans feel the need to apportion blame when things ain't going well.
We all know how it goes, the players are crap, the manager is out of his depth, the recruitment is amateurish and the owners don't understand football or something similar.
There is supposed to be a protest at the bridge on Tuesday pre our match against Southampton. Good luck to them.
When I was very young ish I used to go on protest matches. They always seemed to be focused on a single issue, like "Ban the Bomb. " I would struggle with hoisting a protest banner that says I blame the players 10%, the manager 20%, the SD's 30% and the owners 40%.
I have obviously just picked those percentages as an example.
23 Feb 2025 16:50:47
Tom
I would go players 10%, coach 10%, SD's 40% and owners 40%.
The reason for these percentages is that the owners chose the SD's and the SD's chose an inexperienced coach and players.
23 Feb 2025 17:37:34
Bill, you want the manager sacked he would surely have to be higher than 10% to blame.
I wouldn’t have a clue why our form has dropped so drastically but I do think the injury to Fofana (still not sure about him) didn’t help.
23 Feb 2025 18:45:29
Tom
The SD's should not have chosen Matesca, it's not his fault he is too inexperienced hence the 10%.
That being said, he still has to go at the end of the season.
23 Feb 2025 19:01:55
Bill, good point and who chose the SD’s and who told the owners CFC was a good investment?
I’m not a massive fan of the blame game but we all do it.
23 Feb 2025 19:34:11
Tom
I would imagine aa they would have done due diligence, it's totally their fault for buying the club.
Not saying they are bad for us but they did noy employ well.
The other issue with the owners is just that, there is more than one and the same can be said of the SD's.
23 Feb 2025 19:55:41
Bill, I should have made it clear that I was joking about who advised our current owners!
There was a reported disagreement between the current shareholders but that’s nothing unusual in the corporate world. I wouldn’t have a clue if one would be better than two and if there was only one owner I have no idea if it would have made any difference to what’s gone on at our club.
From the outside TB has gone down a bit in my estimation for being a major shareholder in a ticket resale site that I am told is legal in the USA.
23 Feb 2025 20:21:09
It will be interesting Tom if the protests build up which might happen once the media coverage hypes it up as a crisis at the club.
Investors like returns on their money and if there is adverse publicity abd / or the club continue their slide, it could affect future sponsorship revenue.
23 Feb 2025 20:43:02
Bill, while I will support the right to protest, as I’ve said I think this particular protest lacks focus.
The protests at Utd and I think the spuds if I remember had a singular goal and were aimed at the clubs owners.
I have no skin in the game regarding those protests but let’s be honest both clubs owners ignored the noise and just carried on as usual.
I’m only guessing but my guess is we have a very good profile for sponsors. We are based in one of the best parts of London, have a track record of success in the men’s and women’s team on top of that our community and academy work has been very successful.
I personally think that the club could well be proved right in negotiating a long term FOS but only time will tell on that score.
24 Feb 2025 09:49:46
Tom
The only difference with the ownership models you have mentioned is that we are the only ones owned by private equity.
The owners a beholding to their investors and therefore any bad publicity will put pressure on TB and Clearlake.
With regards yo the protesters, the bit I have read was about selling our academy players and assets such as the ladies team and hotels purely because we splashed over a billion and for what, are we any better than before RA's sanctions?
The model of buying all young foreign players has not worked and what is more infuriating is that some decent players have not had a look in for example Veiga, JF, Hall, Santos, Petrovic and probly more but there are too many to remember.
We were second in the league yet we trimmed down the squad to threadbare, just look at our bench now
Maresca clearly does not want to play the young academy players hence the lack of substitutions consequently he is running the first 11 into the medical table.
24 Feb 2025 11:34:45
Bill, I think EM has tried to involve the academy players. Maybe because we had the conference league as an added competition.
Our current owners are successful business people that for me “care” about there investment and the club. If people/ fans think they have made a pigs ear of there investment that is a different debate.
I have no idea if there PB will work. I think publicly bringing up the so called 2030 thing was to put it mildly a mistake.
Selling ish the hotels I was fine with as I’ve always seen them as not needed. I cannot work out if the sale of the women’s team is real. My assumption is that it’s still part of the Blue Co group.
24 Feb 2025 13:22:41
The problem is Tom
The womens team are no longer protected under the Chelsea umbrella, if Blue Co want to sell, it will now be easier for them to do so.
24 Feb 2025 17:36:51
Bill, I don’t really understand the sale of the ladies team. I’m also not sure what happens about a singular sponsor for the club including the ladies team.
Maybe I will treat the Blue Co company structure as a project when I’m feeling a little better.
Stay safe Bill.