it's fair to say that Liverpool legend John Aldridge is not a fan of Chelsea. He criticised the club and their 'moaning' manager Jose Mourinho many times this season, and he's now taken yet another sideswipe at the Blues this week, suggesting that they're not really a 'big' club.
In his column for Sunday World, Aldo criticised Mourinho for 'whining all season' about Liverpool's success, and delivered the following broadside against Chelsea:
"Unlike Chelsea, City are a proper ‘big club’, and they are also the sworn enemies of Manchester United, so they have a few things in common with Liverpool".
Take away Abramovich's cash over the last 10 years, and Chelsea would probably struggling in mid-table obscurity right now. Like Man City, they have basically bought their Premier League titles. Granted, all clubs spend money to compete, but Chelsea have taken it to another level with the seemingly limitless transfer funds.
Money doesn't always buy consistent success, though, and that is proven many times over the years. Indeed, despite Man City's riches, they have only one Premier League title to date, and Chelsea are flailing in the race this seaso despite a series of huge purchases over the last year.
As for Chelsea not being a 'proper big club' - I'd agree with that. Their 'history' as a footballing force is negligible, and a league win in 1955 is their only title victory prior to the Premier League era.
No one wants Chelsea to win the league. As Manuel Pellegrini summed it up over the weekend, when he told reporters:
"It would be very disappointing if either of the two teams who scored the most goals don’t win the league. For football, for the fans, for everyone it would be disappointing. I think that the most attractive football, the more goals you can score, should be rewarded".
It will be a massive anti-climax if Mourinho's stultifying brand of anti-football leads to the title. Hopefully, though, Liverpool will put the Blues to the sword in a couple of weeks, and finally kill-off any lingering chance of Chelsea soiling this massively exciting season.
Author: Jaimie K
In his column for Sunday World, Aldo criticised Mourinho for 'whining all season' about Liverpool's success, and delivered the following broadside against Chelsea:
"Unlike Chelsea, City are a proper ‘big club’, and they are also the sworn enemies of Manchester United, so they have a few things in common with Liverpool".
Take away Abramovich's cash over the last 10 years, and Chelsea would probably struggling in mid-table obscurity right now. Like Man City, they have basically bought their Premier League titles. Granted, all clubs spend money to compete, but Chelsea have taken it to another level with the seemingly limitless transfer funds.
Money doesn't always buy consistent success, though, and that is proven many times over the years. Indeed, despite Man City's riches, they have only one Premier League title to date, and Chelsea are flailing in the race this seaso despite a series of huge purchases over the last year.
As for Chelsea not being a 'proper big club' - I'd agree with that. Their 'history' as a footballing force is negligible, and a league win in 1955 is their only title victory prior to the Premier League era.
No one wants Chelsea to win the league. As Manuel Pellegrini summed it up over the weekend, when he told reporters:
"It would be very disappointing if either of the two teams who scored the most goals don’t win the league. For football, for the fans, for everyone it would be disappointing. I think that the most attractive football, the more goals you can score, should be rewarded".
It will be a massive anti-climax if Mourinho's stultifying brand of anti-football leads to the title. Hopefully, though, Liverpool will put the Blues to the sword in a couple of weeks, and finally kill-off any lingering chance of Chelsea soiling this massively exciting season.
Author: Jaimie K
Agent Borini has shot one down yesterday. He will kick out Chelsea also this weekend. It's for us to capitalise on that..
ReplyDeleteMourinho loves complaining
ReplyDeletebelieve it or not, liverpool attacking style is the same as chelsea, press high up, counter attack with speed using individual pace and brilliance rather than the laboured attacking build up of arsenal, everton or man city. But LFC have SASAS scoring goals almost at will, CFC have hazard and shurrle etc scoring now and then but cant compare. CFC have a world class defence & goalie though compared to the shambles that is LFC back 5. Because of the goals LFC is praised but in fact CFC play the same way majority of the time. Most people, including pellegrini are blinded by the goals tally. Wonder if you all agree or not ?
ReplyDeleteI don't agree. I think Chelsea are a big club and I'm a massive Liverpool fan.
ReplyDeleteAgree with most of what you say but the Glentoran example is daft. The reason we don't hear aout it is because it is little more than a footballing footnote. I don't have your memory so I cannot remember the score but I suspect it was a pretty comfortable Liverpool victory and you could not blame fans saving their money. Not really very relevant as proof or otherswise of relative "bigness".
ReplyDeleteCan we get him cheap? Don't want to spend 30m on him. Levy will make us pay every penny.
ReplyDeleteLolz, great comment mate :)
ReplyDeleteYNWA bro
In The Guardian the other day Barney Ronay endearingly described Liverpool as 'the front end of a Ferrari welded on to a rickety Toyota pick-up, with no suspension and a set of tractor tyres.' If that's true, then Chelsea are the back end of a Land Rover Discovery welded on to the mid section of a Porsche 911 and the front of a Toyota Celica up on bricks. They might be boring more often than not, but they play to their strengths just as we do. They'll probably fix their problems by schilling out a huge fee for Costa who I reckon will tear up the Premier League. Anyway, regardless of how they got there, and amongst all the tedious 'mind games', I think we have to accept that Chelsea ARE a big club, and are here to stay.
ReplyDeleteI'm a born Scouser through and through, and I think both the author of this crap and Aldo are deluded; Chelsea are a BIG European club now. And that's a fact! You'd agree in the end there ain't a point embarrassing yourself arguing silly, no?
ReplyDeleteTotally the opposite Chelsea don't score many and also don't concede many because they are defensive minded ( negative ) park buses and that, liverpool concede more but also score more because they are offensive !
ReplyDeleteYou are no scouser threw and threw deluded is not a word that a scouser uses ! In fact go to any London club websites and look at there comments and that word will be found in every comment ! So stop chattn sht your a plastic Chelsea fan albeit pretending to be a liverpool fan proves it !
ReplyDeleteMax... sorry mate but Borini was sent off with a red card so will not play against Chelski!
ReplyDeleteStuart
ReplyDeleteI wasn't trying to prove relative size, as vast majority, myself included, accept LFC are the "bigger" club, it's the constant belittling of Chelsea as a small club that annoys. Btw just googled it and it was Dundalk, not Glentoran (my memory not so great!). The LFC website says it was a first round first leg European Cup tie in 1982 so no more a footballing footnote than some of our division 2 attendances around the same time, that are constantly quoted at us. On the same page it shows Liverpool's all time highest European attendance as 55,104 v Barcelona in 1975/76, interestingly 100 higher than our highest that season, 55,004, against Fulham in Division 2. I could go on but I fear I am already beyond boring
I'm afraid you're as scouse as me old son, I'm guessing somewhere in West Africa. You really don't help the argument
ReplyDeleteYou won't find me disagreeing that I'm happy with where we currently stand. I'll disagree though with the fact that any of the summer purchases bar Touré and Mignolet had anything to do with that.
ReplyDeleteEriksen was meant to be a Spurs player .He was there no one had the foresight,even though they saw him in the cl v Man city for Ajax.
ReplyDeleteHe ain't going nowhere .Lamela will be the other one people are screaming about next season.
I think he is good enough but Rodgers is unlikely to have faith in him during this time. If Sturridge is out then Aspas is a straight swap. If he uses Lucas he slightly changes the system which spells a lack of faith. He's been raving about Lucas in the press so he will probably start. That team you mentioned is good enough to beat anyone but it means there are no impact players available off the bench - Moses and Aspas, I'll pass.
ReplyDeleteI don't even care though, we just need to win. I've stopped highlighting areas of concern or things we need to improve on for a while as it's too late in the season to rectify things, all that matters is that we win, any way we possibly can.
His adjustment period could have cost you a shot at the title. While he is fantastic now, he did have to come on leaps and bounds with a poor start and return at the beginning of the season. I am rooting for your lads though, would be great for a team to win the league again without spending millions of millions.
ReplyDelete...Sorry JK, but I don't understand neither your or Aldo's logic. How the hell can Aldo say that City are bigger than Chelsea? They've only been relevant for about 4 years! He basically seems to be implying that having a big rivalry with another club, is the key to be a giant club...which is absolutely absurd. Otherwise, there isn't a single difference between City and Chelsea, apart from the fact that Chelsea have a much larger global fan base.
ReplyDeleteJamie, having a great history does indeed help you become a big club, but it's not the only avenue either. In the last decade, Chelsea have won 3 Premier Leagues, at least 3 FA cups, and a Champions League. Not only that, they've built a large global fan base, and they receive great amounts of revenue. How does that not make you a genuinely big club? Yes, they are f**king passionless and plastic, but nevertheless, still properly big.
Aah the old "plastic" tag. Can you define plastic? The club distribute "plastic" flags but then again, in recent years so have Barcelona, Spurs & Arsenal off the top of my head.So I'm guessing its not that? Is it supporters that don't actually go to games? Then by definition Liverpool have far more than Chelsea with their greater UK & global fanbase. Or is it just a tired, old, repeating of abuse that shows a complete lack of imagination or independent thought. Passionless, some tourists undoubtedly, but Liverpool suffer the same, as do most big, successful clubs. If you are old enough to have been to Anfield when Chelsea visited in the 70s & 80s you wouldn't call them passionless, but, hold on, I'm talking about "history" now...............
ReplyDeleteSorry cerasstar but don't know we're you watched the game but I was there borini got booked for the glasses gesture and was subbed later on in the game, he defintley didn't get sent off !
ReplyDeleteThey may not have contributed much in playing, but they may have assisted in Rogers decision making i.e. playing Stirling and Coutinho alot more because there wasn't enough quality replacement. Now if Eriksen was there he would have (possibly) taken game time away from them which may of hampered their development and in the course of it altered some of our results which could have changed our current position on the ladder and because of this I am glad we did not sign him (for this season just gone) and were left with our current squad
ReplyDeleteWhy is it not possible that Eriksen's presence may have improved some of LFC's results? Why do you automatically go to the negative and suggest it could've hindered LFC? Coutinho has had many quiet games this season, and it's only recently that his form has improved.
ReplyDeleteMourinho should be teached a lesson once in for all that money can't buy trophies...
ReplyDeleteI have stated in my previous comments it could eithrr way. Since there is a 50/50 chance it could have negative affect I chose No because I wouldn't risk the possible impact being negative and us losing top spot. However if we were 6/7 in the league like United (I couldn't help but smile while typing that) I would say the 59/50 risk would be worth it in changing our patg.
ReplyDeleteAs far as rhetoric goes that makes perfect sense but te me it's like saying Atletico Madrid selling us Diego Costa could have improved their season when he so clearly is part of the reason it's been as good so far.
ReplyDeleteI can loan you a song that would fit your logic:
ReplyDeleteF*** Off Notts County FC,
You ain't got no history,
152 Years, Founding Team,
Not what we call history
Only 9 clubs have spent longer in the top flight than Chelsea. Spurs in 9th place have 2 league titles (last one in 1961) so I presume you dismiss those as well. Man City have 3 league titles, but had also only amassed 1 by the 1955 cutoff so they are also out the running.
Maybe Villa have 'too much' history to count as a team with history as they have 7 titles, but only 1 since 1911? Similar deal with Sunderland.
We are the pure and chosen few
And all the rest are damned
There’s room enough in hell for you
We don’t want heaven crammed.
The most ironic part of this ideology that seems to come from Liverpool fans is this idea of Liverpool FC as an institution. Retention of this institution, stability/continuity, preservation, traditionalism, opposition to modernism/change, protection of "the way things were". The irony being they are the principles of Conservatism. Tory ideals. Blue at heart.
Is that you Stuart Craig?
ReplyDeleteWhat about the 95k fans last year at the MCG in Australia and most were Liverpool fans thats massive.
ReplyDeleteI agree with everything except the flailing part. The table says otherwise. Chelski is a big club but not a proper big club. They remind me of Steinbrenner's Yankees...bought not grown...overpowering smaller teams through money...buying players that other clubs painstakingly trained,,..liking the idea of competition as long as they win every year and then believing it was all their own work and 'special genius.' It is why no serious fan of football could ever support Chelski.
ReplyDeleteThey would have got 150K if they wanted to
ReplyDeleteSome of us are tired of this story.. ya ya so what?? Get more interesting things to write about not about what/who wants to play for the KOP.. can bet there are 1000s out there.. !!
ReplyDeleteKOke would be a great addition
ReplyDeleteFair point. I think the biggest problem spurs had this season was buying too many players who want to play in similar positions. Neither manager but particularly AVB, had no idea what their best team was
ReplyDeleteYes Chelsea's definitely not a big club. They're like QPR only with loads more money. And yes Gerrard is better than Lampard!
ReplyDeleteI despise Alejandro Moreno. Effin annoying bloke who has no clue about tactics, form and home advantage. He just decides that the team with the most famous individuals wins the league.
ReplyDeleteHislop's alright though, he did predict an upset against Man City sometime in the run-in when he looked at the schedule.
ReplyDeleteArsenal are the biggest club in london, without abramovich you's would be nothing. Can't wait till we get you's at anfield and give you's a good hiding. Hope they freeze abramovich's money when they hit russia with more sanctions. Lol
ReplyDeleteI have checked the label in my jumper and that's not what it says -sorry
ReplyDeleteIt depends on how you look at it. For me a 'BIG' Club is one which has sustained in the top flight throughout their history, Everton, Aston Villa, Liverpool, Arsenal and Manchester United have done that. No matter how bad the situation is, these clubs have fought back and claimed honors without heavy financial backing. That's what makes you a big club, for if it isn't the money that is propelling you, it's the fans and a shrewd Manager who does the Job for you and for me that's what the game is all about.
ReplyDeleteIn some ways you're right, but there are differences. Chelsea played against Arsenal in their 6-0 defeat that way (the way we play), but the difference is we go out there looking to do that every week. Chelsea does it sometimes, but too often, like in their away games to Arsenal this year, they're happy to play for a point and be very negative and defensive minded.
ReplyDeleteArsenal are indeed the biggest club in London. How is that relevant? I"d rather be smaller and win trophies as it happens. Pathetic statement to say we"d be nothing, smaller, yes, less successful yes, but most of us wouldn't give a fcuk coz we"ve been unsuccessful and smaller before and enjoyed that too
ReplyDelete'Since Liverpool can't play defensively, they will be forced into a shootout with City, and City just have more talent to win that battle'. I mean, f***king wowed when he said that. He totally ignored home advantage, emotion, atmosphere and hostility. And of course, he was wrong. City only got back into it because we fell asleep.
ReplyDeleteYeah but he was still tipping for City to win the prize regardless. We were underdogs in that match according to the bookies?
ReplyDeleteI hate Chelsea to the depths of my soul. I have a mate who supports Chelsea and I'm always telling him they're not a big club. Pretenders I call them. If you look at other giants of the game - ourselves, United, real, barca, Milan etc. they're all clubs who have built themselves into the giants of the game over decades and are steeped in history. They may spend big but they have earned the right to have money to spend by having decades of success before the game was dominated by sugar daddy owners. It saddens me that true historically big European clubs like Ajax and benfica are now selling clubs to perceived "bigger clubs" such as Chelsea who haven't earned the right to be a dominant force either domestically or in Europe. They've simply bought it with the help of their rather unscrupulous owner.
ReplyDeleteRant over... God I hate them
If roman and his money get papped Chelsea will be crippled financially and could end up like rangers
ReplyDeletetrev - none of your comments have been deleted. Click on your user name and you'll find all your comments.
ReplyDeleteSure. Class player. But where would he play?
ReplyDelete£36milion very expensive and too big risk for player like him.Until now only with a little contribution but his price more than £30milion.Much better if LFC can chasing players like Koke,Isco,Thomas Mueller and Ross Barkley.Much2 better and worth it.
ReplyDeleteKoke over Hendo. He is hard working as Hendo this season he has scored important goals for Athletico plus he is technically better than Hendo IMO.
ReplyDeleteTrue but Henderson is an integral part of a very successful and well gelled team so why risk upsetting that?
ReplyDelete