|
Post by Gastafari on Oct 21, 2022 10:38:04 GMT
Everything about this post is great telly. Deliciously uninformed and completely daft. 10/10, would read again. Keep up the good work. Abramovich's money is covered in blood by virtue of his association with Putin's regime and the fact that the money he looted could have funded Russian healthcare or care for the elderly. Instead it financed Chelsea football club. Members of Celtic's fanbase routinely glorify acts of terrorism and others stand by and tolerate it. I wonder what the response would be if Arab football fans glorified terrorism in the same manner? Neither statement is controversial or uninformed. Still a load of absolute nonsense.
Also when did Rodwell ever play for Chelsea?
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,278
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Oct 21, 2022 10:40:46 GMT
"But did Chelsea have a sell on clause when they sold him to Swansea. If so, we would have got an extra 15% of maybe 20% of7 million" Good point. That might have amounted to an extra £200k or so. Better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick...Those who knew him will say that Geoff Dunford was very astute on the sell on clauses. I was not close to him but it was said that he was very happy with the monies we got for SS and Zamora
|
|
|
Post by Gastafari on Oct 21, 2022 10:43:18 GMT
With regard to Abramovich, do you really think that a 16 year old boy thinks deeply about where the money to finance the club came from, when he signs a contract? Very low of you to try and sully Sinclair in this way. Chelsea fans and players have been given a free pass on this issue for too long. Everybody and his dog knew how Abramovich made his money. At 16 you are old enough to register to vote, get married and leave home...but apparently you can't be expected to make basic enquiries about how your employer got so rich? Good grief
|
|
padstow
Joined: July 2022
Posts: 41
|
Post by padstow on Oct 23, 2022 16:19:49 GMT
"But did Chelsea have a sell on clause when they sold him to Swansea. If so, we would have got an extra 15% of maybe 20% of7 million" Good point. That might have amounted to an extra £200k or so. Better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick...Those who knew him will say that Geoff Dunford was very astute on the sell on clauses. I was not close to him but it was said that he was very happy with the monies we got for SS and Zamora Very shrewd and a tough man to do business with but a good friend to those who knew him
|
|