Season 2001-2002

Jon Harley goes to Fulham

8th August 2001

Given that Chelsea have recently signed another left-sided player for defence/midfield (Boudewijn Zenden), I suppose I shouldn't have been too surprised to hear about Jon Harley's departure. Still, I'm bloody angry about it. Let me explain ...

When Ranieri first came to Chelsea, he claimed he wanted to bring in younger players (to boost fitness levels) and to increase the count of British players making regular appearances in the first team (since they had a better understanding of the English game). So what the hell is he doing off-loading one of the best young English prospects in the country? Jon Harley will almost certainly be picked up by England in the near future to fill the vacant left back slot. He's that good.

Looking at it from Jon's point of view, if he honestly felt that Ranieri wasn't going to give him the chance he deserved, then going elsewhere is a good move. Moving to Fulham, just a stone's throw from Stamford Bridge, minimises the impact on his personal life, so I can understand that, too. Leave aside that Fulham are shite, then for Jon, this is a good move all around.

But Ranieri should be ashamed of himself. Frankly, I rate Harley better than Babayaro any day. If we had a surplus of left-sided defensive talent, then Baba was that surplus, and he should have been the one to make way. Jon Harley is a star in the making; Babayaro can do a mean celebratory back-flip, but he has never been anything other than ordinary when it comes to playing.

Anyway, I wish Jon Harley all the best for his future career, and I hope he makes it into the senior England team in the near future. I also hope he does the decent thing and feigns injury for the Fulham games against Chelsea. I'd hate to see him scoring against us.


Chelsea (Dis)United?

18th October 2001

When Chelsea were drawn against a side from Tel Aviv in the UEFA Cup 2nd Round, we all knew that the likelihood of the tie going ahead as a bog-standard two-legged affair was somewhat low. In the current political climate, having Chelsea play in Israel presents an opportunity for a Palestinian extremist to target a high-profile English team in a high-profile international sporting event, in order to gain revenge on the British nation for our perceived support for Israel's policy towards the Palestinians.

So we all expected that the tie would be re-designated a one-off match on neutral territory, much like the tie that Rangers played in the first round.

Unfortunately, a combination of UEFA's recalcitrance and Chelsea plc's poor financial results has forced the team to fulfill the tie as a two-legged fixture after all. UEFA's recalcitrance is par for the course, so their stance had to be expected. Chelsea could have argued a very good case for "doing a Rangers" if it hadn't been for the fact that they cannot afford to be thrown out of the UEFA Cup and be banned from European competition for a few years as a consequence. Chelsea is still a loss-making enterprise at the moment, and I suspect the possibility of a money-spinning re-appearance in next year's Champions' League is just too big a carrot to ignore.

Enough of the background. The bottom line is that Chelsea have had to go to Tel Aviv to play a football match, despite the dangers. They did the decent thing by the players, though, by allowing those who did not want to go to Tel Aviv to pull out. Family men, under pressure from their families, could put family commitments ahead of club commitments without fear of disciplinary action from the club. UEFA did the decent thing by allowing Chelsea to make this offer to their players, without fear of a hefty fine for fielding an under-strength team.

So why, when six players did not go to Tel Aviv, are the press - and Ken Bates, it seems - villifying those six players? Apparently, Ken is furious that any one of them could have had the gall to take up the club's sensible offer. In that case, Ken, why was the offer made at all?

From the playing perspective, if Chelsea is to be seen as a big club with big ambitions, the loss of six players should have little or no effect. The depth of the squad should be such as to be able to replace those six players with equally able substitutes. Look at Manchester United; they are renowned as a big club, and they could field two almost completely different teams on a week-to-week basis if they wanted to.

Let's hear no more then of a divided Chelsea. No more talk of the apparent resentment by the players in Tel Aviv towards those who stayed behind. It's bollocks. We'll win the tie because we have a big squad and because we are a big club.


Leeds fans attack my website

22nd October 2001

Certain Leeds United fans have attacked my website over the last couple of days, leaving vitriolic messages in my guestbook. I publish them here to let everyone see just how pathetic they are. Typically, the messages include a reference to Matthew Harding's untimely death, which the writer claims to have been his "favourite Chelsea moment". Predictably, they have also targetted the "Chelsea Six", accusing them of cowardice.

And just as predictably, none of the would-be protagonists have deigned to leave any contact details. So of course I can't reply to them, except through this page. To be honest, I couldn't be arsed to reply, as I believe them to be genetic throwbacks who probably harp back to the "good old days" when the only reason certain people went to a football match was to get involved in a "rumble". Sorry boys, those days are gone. Your type of supporter died out with the dinosaurs.

Frankly, I don't appreciate the messages you have left on my guestbook. I have clearly asked for family-friendly entries, suitable enough for children to read. You have chosen to ignore that request. It just goes to show that you are ignorant twats of the highest order.

    10/22/01 06:28:27 PM  
Name   JON
Chelsea Fan Since?   CHELSEA HATER FOR LIFE
Favourite Chelsea Moment?   ALAN HUDSON TRYING TO CROSS THE ROAD
Comments   YOU CHELSEA SCUM ARE AS YELLOW AS THE CARD THAT GAY BASTARD LE SAUX WAS SHOWN.THIS WAR WILL RUN UNTIL ALL YOUR SHITE WEBSITES ARE DESTROYED IN A BLAZE OF WHITE GLORY.
WHERE ARE YOU CHELSEA...WHERE'S YOUR RESPONSE ?
ARE YOU ALL SHIT SCARED CHICKENS LIKE YOUR COWARDLY PLAYERS.LET'S SEE....
    10/21/01 02:17:55 PM  
Name   WHITE JEHAD
Chelsea Fan Since?   NEVER I HAVE WHITE BLOOD IN MY VEINS
Favourite Chelsea Moment?   WHEN THAT DICKHEADS CHOPPER CRASHED
Comments   DIRTY CHELSEA APES LEEDS ARE GONNA GIVE YOU TOTAL JIHAD TODAY
    10/21/01 11:36:41 AM  
Name   JON
Chelsea Fan Since?   CHELSEA HATER SINCE BIRTH
Favourite Chelsea Moment?   ALAN HUDSON GETTING DONE FOR SHOPLIFTING
Comments   ALL YOU COCKNEY FAGGOTS-BETTER KNOWN AS THE CHELSEA-VILLAGE PEOPLE--YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN WHY RON HARRIS WAS CALLED "CHOPPER" BUT YOU'LL NEVER CONVINCE ME ABOUT "BUTCH" WILKINS.LUFC FOREVER...WE HATE CHELSEA WE HATE CHELSEA WE HATE CHELSEA WE HATE CHELSEA.....
    10/20/01 08:59:32 PM  
Name   WHITE JEHAD
Chelsea Fan Since?   NEVER COS THERE SHITE
Favourite Chelsea Moment?   EVERY TIME LEEDS KICK THERE DIRTY MERCINARY ARSES
Comments   ITS TIME TO GET THE BEATING OF YOUR LIVES YOU DIRTY BLUE SCUM . EVEN MANU ARE A TREAT COMPARED WITH YOU
    10/20/01 08:58:04 PM  
Name   Leeds Faithful
Chelsea Fan Since?   HAR HAR HAR....YEAH RIGHT!
Favourite Chelsea Moment?   WHEN WE STUFF YOU TIME AND TIME AGAIN!
Comments   LEEDS UNITED ARE GOING TO STUFF YOUR IMPORTED ASSES, CHELSEASCUM! BE PREPARED FOR THE WHITE JIHAD!
OH, I CAN GUARENTEE THAT ELLAND ROAD WILL BE JUST AS HOSTILE AS ISRAEL, AT LEAST FOR YOU TWATS ANYWAY.
PIGGYBANK MOVED TO CHELSEA, AND HE WON FUCK ALL!
    10/20/01 03:55:32 PM  
Name   JON
Chelsea Fan Since?   YOU MUST BE JOKING
Favourite Chelsea Moment?   WHENEVER THEY LOSE
Comments   THE WHITE INVASION IS ON ITS WAY,CHELSEA SCUM.
JUDAS FLOYD PIGGYBAINK CAN EXPECT HIS USUAL RECEPTION.ZOLA IS AN UGLY DWARF AND THE REST OF YOUR TEAM ARE KINGS ROAD PISSHEAD POSERS.NICE TO SEE JODY MORRIS KEEPING UP YOUR LONG TRADITION OF BOOZERS WHO PREFER A PINT TO PLAYING FOR YOUR SAD TEAM.SEE YOU ALL AT ELLAND ROAD...IF YOU THINK ITS SAFER THAN ISRAEL.


The so-called WHITE JEHAD is back

24th October 2001

Just for the record, here is the latest vitriol posted on to my guestbook from someone calling himself the WHITE JEHAD. I think you'll agree with me when I say this person is just a sad excuse for a human being, and should be pitied rather than despised.

    10/24/01 09:04:52 AM  
Name   WHITE JEHAD
Chelsea Fan Since?   NEVER YOU SHITE BASTARDS
Favourite Chelsea Moment?   THE SOUND OF THE ROTORS SPINNING BEFOR THEY HIT THE GROUND
Comments   CHELSEA SUCK AND THERE FANS ARE ALL GAY


Let's all bash Chelsea

26th October 2001

On Wednesday night, whilst playing against West Ham, Emmanuel Petit admitted to his boss that he was tired and that he should be substituted. Ranieri obliged. That's okay, after all, the man might have been in the process of falling ill. In any case, if a player thinks he isn't performing adequately and that somebody else should come on and try to improve things, that's to be applauded, isn't it?

Well no, apparently not. According to certain hacks out there, Petit is a lazy good-for-nothing who clearly isn't pulling his weight. As a highly-paid French international, he shouldn't be tired, and he's now being accused of cheating the Chelsea club and the Chelsea fans. Jack Carroll on Soccernet says sarcasticly (October 26th):

Poor Emmanuel Petit. When he is not too worried by his girlfriend's pregnancy to travel [to Tel Aviv], it appears he is too tired to play.

And Carroll is not the only one to be villifying the Frenchman. Even Sky Sports finds it amazing - and amusing - that Petit had the nerve to admit he was tired.

Well guys, let me put you straight on something. I'd far rather have a player on my side admitting that he's not performing well than have one who whinges ceaselessly when he's not playing all of every match. I can think of quite a few in recent years who have whinged on and on about not being picked.

As for the seemingly endless taunting by the press that the "Chelsea Six" are spineless cowards for not travelling to Tel Aviv along with their team-mates, let's see how they treat certain members of the England cricket team when they decide not to go to India in November. Will they be spineless cowards too? For that matter, are the Austrian national team cowards for not going to Israel to fulfill their World Cup qualifying fixture? Of course not.

Come to think of it, are the US Federation Cup team, who have recently decided not to travel to Madrid because of fears for their safety, all cowards too? No, of course not. Even if they were cowards, no-one is allowed to say so, for fear of hurting their feelings. Poor dears, we all know that Madrid is a hot-bed of Islamic fundamentalist terrorist activity, so you can't blame them, can you?


Even FIFA hates us now

7th November 2001

The following article appeared this morning on the Reuters website. It makes interesting reading.

FIFA president Sepp Blatter has come out against the Chelsea players who missed a UEFA Cup match in Israel because of worries about their safety, saying the "god of football" was watching as they lost to Hapoel Tel Aviv.

"I can understand if players are afraid, but they are in a working contract and they have to deliver their duty," Blatter was quoted as saying in The Times newspaper.

"I have to travel and I would have been to watch Austria play in Israel (in a World Cup qualifier) if I had not had a problem with my leg.

"And now I understand Chelsea have been eliminated (from the UEFA Cup), so the god of football was definitely looking down."

Five Chelsea first-team regulars chose not to travel for the October 18 second round tie -- which the English premier league side lost 2-0 -- because of their concerns about safety in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the United States.

Skipper Marcel Desailly also missed the game through injury and Chelsea were eventually knocked out of the competition after drawing 1-1 in last week's home leg.

FIFA has sought to keep the footballing calendar on track since September 11 and the refusal of nine Austrian players to travel to Tel Aviv for a re-arranged World Cup qualifier on October 27 has been the only other significant disruption.

"Football cannot ensure peace, but we have a duty to offer a message and a better understanding of the world," said Blatter.

Looking back, he added: "I was at the Munich Olympics in 1972 and they stopped the Games for just one day. It was not cancelled because life must continue. The youth of the world have a right to play their sport.

"We played football three days after September 11 in Iran and other Arab countries and people stood for 60 seconds for those who died (in the United States).

"I'm concerned about security but I pray to Allah, the god of football or whoever, that the world's most popular game is not disturbed."

Sepp Blatter is clearly an opinionated idiot. Let's take his points one by one, shall we?

I can understand if players are afraid, but they are in a working contract and they have to deliver their duty. But they were offered the choice by their employers, so the matter of being in a working contract doesn't come into it. They made a choice based on the concerns of their families. And what "duty" is it that they should have delivered? The duty to keep playing football for football's sake? Or the duty to their families to make sure they don't get killed in a foreign country that's actually in a state of civil war? Please tell me, Mr Blatter.

I have to travel and I would have been to watch Austria play in Israel (in a World Cup qualifier) if I had not had a problem with my leg. Hah! The old gammy leg excuse, eh? What's a sore leg got to do with it? Hardly a life threatening injury, is it? And remind me again, wasn't it FIFA that sanctioned the postponement of this game (Israel v Austria) due to Austria's fears following the shooting down of an aeroplane over the Black Sea? Did I hear you complain about that decision?

And now I understand Chelsea have been eliminated (from the UEFA Cup), so the god of football was definitely looking down. Oh, I see. You appear to have taken great pleasure in seeing Chelsea get eliminated, presumably because the footballing world can't abide cowards. Five players chose not to travel to Israel, ergo Chelsea is a team of cowards, ergo Chelsea deserved to lose. Ha, ha, ha. What would you have done had we won? Insist that EUFA disqualify us?

I was at the Munich Olympics in 1972 and they stopped the Games for just one day. It was not cancelled because life must continue. That was altogether different. The terrorists involved were visible, limited in number and trapped. The games were already under way, so there was no more danger in allowing them to continue than if the terrorists hadn't been there in the first place. And Germany wasn't in the middle of a civil war. The difference here is that the Chelsea team is a high-profile group of Westerners, operating from a country that, along with the United States of America, is an acknowledged and sworn enemy of certain Islamic extremists, and that Chelsea were about to visit a country that is in turn the target of Islamic extremists. The dangers were, and still are, very real.

I always knew that Blatter was an idiot, and two-faced at that. But this takes the biscuit. Fuck off, Blatter.


Time to batter Blatter

8th November 2001

The following article appeared this morning on the Blue and White Army website, as a direct response to yesterday's report in the Times concerning Sepp Blatter's odious comments about the "Chelsea Six". The piece is authored by somebody calling himself (or herself) Euro Blue. It is altogether more eloquent than my piece above, and I reproduce it here as part of the record for this season.

Following on from the seemingly never-ending "stay away six" saga, World football's bureaucrat-in-chief, Sepp Blatter, yesterday launched an astonishing and inappropriate attack on Chelsea.

Seemingly bleeding the story bone-dry, Blatter's [opinion] was subsequently reported gleefully in most media. The FIFA president suggested that it was somehow fair that Chelsea were knocked out of the UEFA Cup after several players did not travel to Israel for their tie against Hapoel Tel Aviv.

In the interests of objectivity, we will quote Blatter's ramblings in full. He said, "I can understand if players are afraid, but they are in a working contract and they have to deliver their duty."

"I have to travel and I would have been to watch Austria play in Israel if I had not had a problem with my leg and now I understand Chelsea have been eliminated so the God of football was definitely looking down."

"Football cannot ensure peace, but we have a duty to offer a message and a better understanding of the world."

Looking back [perhaps while chewing a Werther's Original], he added, "I was at the Munich Olympics in 1972 and they stopped the Games for just one day. It was not cancelled because life must continue. The youth of the world have a right to play their sport."

"We [no you didn't, Sepp, you were busy pushing paper in Zurich so that's a pretty unjustified use of the first person plural] played football three days after September 11 in Iran and other Arab countries and people stood for 60 seconds for those who died (in the terrorist attacks)."

"I'm concerned about security but I pray to Allah, the God of football or whoever, that the world's most popular game is not disturbed."

That Blatter chose to single out Chelsea for such invective is quite astounding, not to mention biting the hand that feeds. Also, there is much in what he says that smacks of rank hypocrisy.

Although "the god of Football" (had a bit too much cheese with your long business lunch before inventing a new deity, Sepp?) may have been looking down, and although it is part of the magic of football that the smaller teams sometimes eliminate the larger ones, Blatter must surely also be praying to the "God of Football" that the likes of Hapoel get eliminated quickly from the tournament. Looking at the teams left in the UEFA cup, the last thing that Blatter would like is for more giant-killers to progress further.

A UEFA cup final involving, say, FC Slovan Liberec and PFC Litex Lovech would be a disaster for UEFA - and by extension FIFA, which depends on selling the television rights to its matches for its finances. The bigger, more prestigious teams such as Chelsea, from countries with a culture of soccer on the TV would mean that the governing bodies could sell those television rights for a handsome sum. Smaller teams with less support (and therefore less interest from wealthier countries) would mean less cash for the governing bodies. And therefore less expense-account lunches for the likes of Sepp Blatter.

Blatter is also very happy to ask others to be brave where he is not. He courageously mentions the fact that the Olympic games in 1972 were suspended for one day only after sport's darkest hour, and he refers to the fact that football was played "three days after September 11th in Arab countries as well as Iran". Surely, Blatter is invoking valour by association - he himself stayed away from these potentially awkward countries - and we can be sure that, had he travelled, he would have regaled us to boredom with tales of his heroism.

Quite apart from the fact that there is a different personal involvement between slogging out 90 minutes on the pitch to sitting in the executive box on a comfy cushion, which is the closest the likes of Blatter get to the game. I would be somewhat more impressed if Blatter went to Kabul to see Afghanistan's World Cup qualifier. Do a few of those trips before lecturing others on courageous travelling, Sepp.

Blatter knew very well that in the aftermath of the September 11th atrocities, it was the governing bodies themselves which asked for matches to be suspended as a mark of respect. It was, after all, UEFA which [postponed] Champion's League matches and UEFA Cup matches on the Wednesday and Thursday following the atrocities. His comments about football taking place in the days afterwards are therefore meaningless, quite apart from the fact that there is a completely different security risk for members of teams from within those countries (say two Iranian teams) compared to the visit of a foreign and high-prestige opponent.

Mr Blatter states that he himself has to travel - and that he would have been to watch Austria play in Israel if he had not had a problem with his leg. Far from being courageous, his statement smacks of cowardice and double standards. I don't remember Blatter coming down hard on the Austrian national team which had to postpone that very match against Israel because 9 players refused to travel - an event that seems considerably more significant and damaging to the image of football as a vector for promoting the World Peace that is so dear to Sepp Blatter (give this man a Nobel Peace prize!). After all, Chelsea made it to Tel Aviv on the day that their match was due to take place after having said that they would field a team at all costs.

In addition, Mr Blatter, why do you magnanimously allow yourself mitigating circumstances that prevent you from travelling (a vague "leg problem" which apparently prevents you from sitting in the first class section of a plane for the 4 hour flight from Zurich to Tel Aviv) that you deny the Chelsea players? Why is your excuse more justifiable than that Marcel Desailly (who would have travelled had he not had a complicated tooth infection that affected his Achille's heel), that of William Gallas (who was also injured), those of Eidur Gudjohnssen or Emmanuel Petit (who would have travelled but their partners were about to give birth) or Graeme Le Saux (who would have travelled but his wife had only just given birth to his second child)? Such largesse that you deny to others has a name - hypocrisy.

Chelsea's decision to play at all costs won them praise from UEFA before the match. Any subsequent criticism is purely circumstantial in that the club's handling of a delicate situation backfired and Chelsea lost in Tel Aviv. Make no mistakes about it: had the Blues won on the night - or even held on to a 0-0 draw (but for the final 5 minutes that would have been the case), they would have also been praised. Sepp Blatter's comments are therefore particularly ill-judged - not to mention ill-advised, as he is clearly not in full possession of the facts.

Thank you Colin Hutchinson for a graceful defence of Chelsea which is as professional as Sepp Blatter's comments were out of place. Given his job, Hutch has to be diplomatic. At this website, we can allow ourselves to be less so. In his article on Hutchinson's reply to Blatter published on this site earlier today, The Hitman suggests that Blatter's disdain for English football may have coloured his judgement. Can I add that Blatter might well have been shooting his mouth off because he is an ignorant, self-serving, hypocritical Gnome of Zurich?

Well said.


Roberto di Matteo calls it a day

20th February 2002

Roberto di Matteo, a living legend, has reluctantly decided to hang up his boots, and to retire from playing professional football. He suffered an horrific injury 17 months ago, whilst playing against St Gallen in a UEFA Cup tie, and never fully recovered.

Robbie will forever be remembered by Chelsea fans as the man who scored the vital first goal in the 1997 FA Cup Final. That goal goes down in history as the quickest goal in a Wembley final, and as the goal that marked Chelsea's return as a force in English and European football. Just three years later, it was Robbie who scored the only goal to give Chelsea victory in the 2000 FA Cup Final, the last to be played at the old Wembley.

But Robbie meant more to us than being the scorer of those two goals, vital though they may have been. He was always happy to play for Chelsea, always giving his best, and rightly became a crowd favourite because of this. His enthusiasm for the game was unquenchable, his love for the club unending. He will be missed, and I for one would like to wish him the best for the future, wherever and whatever that will be.

Thanks for the memories!