Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

Johnny Musicworks

The Chelsea Theory

Recommended Posts

Sorry but I feel the need to start a separate thread about the ‘Chelsea theory’ which has been circulating today and has apparently led to Gregor at the post contacting his French counterparts as to its truth, and he has confirmed that it is not so.

Well when I made some idle speculation this morning regarding an hypothetical scenario it seems like it has taken on a life of its own. Let me stress this (although I have tried to clarify on several threads already) I am not ITK in any way nor ever have been or professed to be. Thankfully we have ‘Kid’ and one or two others for that .

I speculated as to an amusing theory I had with no intention that it should be considered a rumour. It provoked an interesting discussion which was picked up by others and by 1pm in the Ashton Gate coffee shop had taken on a whole different character and was told to me as fact originating from a Facebook page. Another poster had on the same thread at almost the same time speculated a similar theory. 

Getting home this evening it seems to have been picked up by various posters some of whom are saying it’s a load of rubbish. Of course it is.It was never intended to be anything more than a humorous theory. I enjoy discussion and theorising as many of us do on here but I never expected my muses to be taken as having any substance and invoke such criticism or anger. I have explained all of this on several threads but still people seem to be taking it seriously. I realise on a Meltdown night people like to rant but please don’t lose your sense of humour. 

So to be clear. It is a random theory, not a rumour and not in any way a fact and it is not based on anything I have heard from anyone. It is just a theory or scenario that could make sense of an unusual situation where BCFC have paid 8m euros for a teenager from a top European club. As a theory it is entirely made up by myself and should not be taken as anything factual.

I wonder if in future we should have a theory and conspiracy section where we can have interesting conversations which should not be taken too seriously. Life would be boring without humour and speculation and OTIB would be obsolete.  I suppose if nothing else I’ve given the Post a story for tomorrow. Apologies to anyone that has taken my muses too seriously. Can I suggest you get a humour transplant and not take me too seriously in future.

 

 

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
  • Robin 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems people have taken my theory too seriously and are suggesting the club should be careful not to get into any legal trouble for making such an arrangement with Chelsea. Even my Chelsea supporting friend in Portugal has heard it now being discussed.

I am just unused to a simple discussion becoming a fact and spreading like wildfire through the internet. I never mind theorising but I see that as very different from starting unsubstantiated rumours as if they are fact. Just wanted to make that clear before too many people get upset over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the Massengo thread this morning I suggested that Chelsea might be helping us out with funding the French lad as they cannot recruit players at present, even young ones. I further speculated that in return they may have an option to buy him off us when their ban ends. Rather than giving us cash to buy the lad I speculated that they might have let us have some players on the cheap.

This was in my opinion just an innocent theory, nothing more but many people  appear to have taken it seriously and accused the club of conducting possibly underhand and illegal transfers. I felt the need to clarify that it was just a theory and not based on any rumour or fact as people seemed to be getting very angry about an imaginary scenario. Hope that clarifies it better.

Edited by Johnny Musicworks
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well @Johnny Musicworks at least you've given everyone the origin for the story so they can vent their anger when it turns out that Chelsea aren't actually our feeder club (geddit? I deliberately switched that).

I'm sure most people took the idea with a pinch of salt and those who took it seriously are probably still hoping to get video of Elvis on the moon etc.

No harm done as far as I can see.  And the facts already speak for themselves....Tammy, Kalas, Desilva, Palmer and maybe Semenyo going the other way in a year or two. If we've got a good working relationship with Chelsea, I'm not going to complain.

As long as we never get renamed to Frank Lampard's Chelsea's Bristol City.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Xiled said:

Well @Johnny Musicworks at least you've given everyone the origin for the story so they can vent their anger when it turns out that Chelsea aren't actually our feeder club (geddit? I deliberately switched that).

I'm sure most people took the idea with a pinch of salt and those who took it seriously are probably still hoping to get video of Elvis on the moon etc.

No harm done as far as I can see.  And the facts already speak for themselves....Tammy, Kalas, Desilva, Palmer and maybe Semenyo going the other way in a year or two. If we've got a good working relationship with Chelsea, I'm not going to complain.

As long as we never get renamed to Frank Lampard's Chelsea's Bristol City.

Well I’m glad someone else has a sense of humour at this time in the morning. I have been told the Elvis on the Moon video is a fake. The guy was actually an Elvis tribute act. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Johnny Musicworks said:

On the Massengo thread this morning I suggested that Chelsea might be helping us out with funding the French lad as they cannot recruit players at present, even young ones. I further speculated that in return they may have an option to buy him off us when their ban ends. Rather than giving us cash to buy the lad I speculated that they might have let us have some players on the cheap.

This was in my opinion just an innocent theory, nothing more but many people  appear to have taken it seriously and accused the club of conducting possibly underhand and illegal transfers. I felt the need to clarify that it was just a theory and not based on any rumour or fact as people seemed to be getting very angry about an imaginary scenario. Hope that clarifies it better.

But as I said on the thread, it isn't illegal for a club to buy a 'first refusal clause' on a player.

This may have happened or it may not have, however it is possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sir Geoff said:

That took a long time to explain, surely you could have just said that all in about three sentances.

I had made several attempts with shorter posts  on various threads earlier which had not seemed to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is in fact not a theory at all.  It is quite factual, though not contractual.

A gentlemans agreement exists between us and Chelsea and we will honour that agrerment.  How else do you think we got Kalas, DaSilva, Palmer and this young French kiddie from Monaco.

The deal is that if any of them leave City, Chelsea get first refusal in return, we get their services at a fair price and Chelsea avoid their transfer embago issues.

Now whether any cash has changed hands, I can't say, whether the entire deal is completely legal or even sails close to the wind,  I can't say either.

Let's just say that people like Roman Abramovich and Steve Lansdown are not UK residents and probably have middlemen to do these deals at arm's length in territories where are the laws are not respected as much as they are here.

 

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Aubergine 2
  • Rovers 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically Chelsea have 'bought' the wonderkid and 'loaned' him to us for a year or two when they will likely 'buy' him back for £30 million or so.All makes sense now.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, wendyredredrobin said:

This is in fact not a theory at all.  It is quite factual, though not contractual.

A gentlemans agreement exists between us and Chelsea and we will honour that agrerment.  How else do you think we got Kalas, DaSilva, Palmer and this young French kiddie from Monaco.

The deal is that if any of them leave City, Chelsea get first refusal in return, we get their services at a fair price and Chelsea avoid their transfer embago issues.

Now whether any cash has changed hands, I can't say, whether the entire deal is completely legal or even sails close to the wind,  I can't say either.

Let's just say that people like Roman Abramovich and Steve Lansdown are not UK residents and probably have middlemen to do these deals at arm's length in territories where are the laws are not respected as much as they are here.

 

It's well known that Chelsea insert buy back clauses when they sell youth players. 

I don't know if Chelsea have anything to do with us signing this young lad, but it would explain the cut price deals for the 3 Chelsea players. 

Chelsea have been in a lot of bother for the signing of young players, and for sending about a million of them out on loan, they also trust us to develop their young players, so I can certainly see the attractiveness of an arrangement like this. 

As long as Chelsea are not giving us the money to buy the player then a potential arrangement like this is entirely legal. Buying a first refusal clause off of us (for a reasonable price) is also entirely legal. These arrangements can be doing all officially but I'd suspect with our excellent relationship with Chelsea it would be done through gentlemans agreements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

So basically Chelsea have 'bought' the wonderkid and 'loaned' him to us for a year or two when they will likely 'buy' him back for £30 million or so.All makes sense now.

Pretty sure that would be illegal under 3rd party ownership rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I put bought in quotation marks as I assume they have guaranteed that we will get most of our £8 mill back in a couple of years time making it a very small gamble on our part. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, wendyredredrobin said:

This is in fact not a theory at all.  It is quite factual, though not contractual.

A gentlemans agreement exists between us and Chelsea and we will honour that agrerment.  How else do you think we got Kalas, DaSilva, Palmer and this young French kiddie from Monaco.

The deal is that if any of them leave City, Chelsea get first refusal in return, we get their services at a fair price and Chelsea avoid their transfer embago issues.

Now whether any cash has changed hands, I can't say, whether the entire deal is completely legal or even sails close to the wind,  I can't say either.

Let's just say that people like Roman Abramovich and Steve Lansdown are not UK residents and probably have middlemen to do these deals at arm's length in territories where are the laws are not respected as much as they are here.

 

And your evidence for this is what exactly? If you are going to imply that potentially illegal activity may have taken place or might take place in the future you need something to back it up.

Though the bit about giving first refusal is common and not against any rules anyway. It may even be written into transfer terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot see SL and MA putting us in a situation which breach any rules.  As long a no money changes hands and there is no input with regard to when he plays is it nothing more than a tip and a gamble on our part ?

Chelsea may indeed come back next summer and we may "choose" to listen to their interest first but if he flops no clubs will show interest.

Nothing more to see here, move along please but Shhhhh don't tell Colin.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is any truth in this rumour, then any 'understanding' cannot be enforceable in a court of law and hence can only be a working arrangement.  We could tell Chelsea to do one if we didn't want to sell him - he is a person not a commodity.  

The cheap price of last season's loanees is entirely due to the combination of high wages and Chelsea not being able to loan them out for a fee.   A bit like having a large number of rental properties and seeing a dip in the number of people looking to rent - You get rid at a lower price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Johnny Musicworks said:

On the Massengo thread this morning I suggested that Chelsea might be helping us out with funding the French lad as they cannot recruit players at present, even young ones. I further speculated that in return they may have an option to buy him off us when their ban ends. Rather than giving us cash to buy the lad I speculated that they might have let us have some players on the cheap.

This was in my opinion just an innocent theory, nothing more but many people  appear to have taken it seriously and accused the club of conducting possibly underhand and illegal transfers. I felt the need to clarify that it was just a theory and not based on any rumour or fact as people seemed to be getting very angry about an imaginary scenario. Hope that clarifies it better.

Seems a coincidence that the lad's fee is the same as the cost of Kalas.

We cant be paying €8M for ANY player without them walking straight into our first X1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a lesson in how rumours spread. People read things on here then talk to others as though they heard it first hand so they can appear in the know. Others take that as a second source confirming the thing they read on here.  Then some shitty newspaper or website runs the rumour and before you know it the ironclad fact is we're signing Eric Cantona and Michael Owen.

Edited by Nibor
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a footballing note, if you stick a French wonderkid into a team which is being overrun in every department, would it make that much difference?

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Johnny Musicworks said:

Sorry but I feel the need to start a separate thread about the ‘Chelsea theory’ which has been circulating today and has apparently led to Gregor at the post contacting his French counterparts as to its truth, and he has confirmed that it is not so.

Well when I made some idle speculation this morning regarding an hypothetical scenario it seems like it has taken on a life of its own. Let me stress this (although I have tried to clarify on several threads already) I am not ITK in any way nor ever have been or professed to be. Thankfully we have ‘Kid’ and one or two others for that .

I speculated as to an amusing theory I had with no intention that it should be considered a rumour. It provoked an interesting discussion which was picked up by others and by 1pm in the Ashton Gate coffee shop had taken on a whole different character and was told to me as fact originating from a Facebook page. Another poster had on the same thread at almost the same time speculated a similar theory. 

Getting home this evening it seems to have been picked up by various posters some of whom are saying it’s a load of rubbish. Of course it is.It was never intended to be anything more than a humorous theory. I enjoy discussion and theorising as many of us do on here but I never expected my muses to be taken as having any substance and invoke such criticism or anger. I have explained all of this on several threads but still people seem to be taking it seriously. I realise on a Meltdown night people like to rant but please don’t lose your sense of humour. 

So to be clear. It is a random theory, not a rumour and not in any way a fact and it is not based on anything I have heard from anyone. It is just a theory or scenario that could make sense of an unusual situation where BCFC have paid 8m euros for a teenager from a top European club. As a theory it is entirely made up by myself and should not be taken as anything factual.

I wonder if in future we should have a theory and conspiracy section where we can have interesting conversations which should not be taken too seriously. Life would be boring without humour and speculation and OTIB would be obsolete.  I suppose if nothing else I’ve given the Post a story for tomorrow. Apologies to anyone that has taken my muses too seriously. Can I suggest you get a humour transplant and not take me too seriously in future.

 

 

Chinese whispers are a funny thing. I heard this from 2 different people in and out of the ground yesterday selling it to me as gospel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Nibor said:

This is a lesson in how rumours spread. People read things on here then talk to others as though they heard it first hand so they can appear in the know. Others take that as a second source confirming the thing they read on here.  Then some shitty newspaper or website runs the rumour and before you know it the ironclad fact is we're signing Eric Cantona and Michael Owen.

It certainly is a lesson in how things go viral. A Chelsea supporting friend in Portugal said that Chelsea fans were also discussing how this deal was being done with us. Am I about to become a Sky Sports Source I wonder. Maybe it’s beat that us pensioners are kept off the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah OK, whatever.

 

What’s next? Let me guess, you’re going to tell us the illuminati doesn’t exist and that the spray coming out the back of aeroplanes isn’t actually the government trying to poison areas of the population.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last season, Wolves bought Afobe back for £10m & pretty much instantly sold him to Stoke for £12m

Nothing different about this if it were to happen is there? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

That took a long time to explain, surely you could have just said that all in about three sentances.

As Mark Twain said:

“I didn't have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead.”

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, BoneyardTIM said:

And still some people are,1 believing the fictitious story and 2, adding to it. Unbelievable Jeff😂😂😂

Fictitious story? I think not. The "minder" with him yesterday had a Chelsea badge on his pocket and was drinking from an "I love Chelsea cup". Just saying 😲

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Up The City! said:

It's well known that Chelsea insert buy back clauses when they sell youth players. 

I don't know if Chelsea have anything to do with us signing this young lad, but it would explain the cut price deals for the 3 Chelsea players. 

Chelsea have been in a lot of bother for the signing of young players, and for sending about a million of them out on loan, they also trust us to develop their young players, so I can certainly see the attractiveness of an arrangement like this. 

As long as Chelsea are not giving us the money to buy the player then a potential arrangement like this is entirely legal. Buying a first refusal clause off of us (for a reasonable price) is also entirely legal. These arrangements can be doing all officially but I'd suspect with our excellent relationship with Chelsea it would be done through gentlemans agreements.

Both Kalas and Palmer were signed for their value and not at 'cut price' deals, neither would have gone for more than we bought them for and on reflection both were fair prices.

DaSilva had a pre arranged fee so Chelsea couldn't avoid that, clearly undervalued when they loaned him to us initially. No way were they loaning him to us with a low buy-out clause in 2018 when they didn't have a transfer ban, with the intention of signing Massengo in summer 2019 when they did have a transfer ban! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Carey 6 said:

Last season, Wolves bought Afobe back for £10m & pretty much instantly sold him to Stoke for £12m

Nothing different about this if it were to happen is there? 

Wolves might have kept him and could have sold him to, say, us as he was their player and they were free to do what they wanted with him.

The conspiracy theorist's suggestion is that we've colluded with Chelsea to buy him as our player and then "sell" him to Chelsea, but only Chelsea,  at a point in the future ( let's say, when their transfer ban is ended) . The theory being that Chelsea cannot buy while their ban is in operation so , because of the "relationship" we've developed with them, they've asked us to be their "surrogate" club in order to prevent another big club buying the lad first, 

The conspiracy goes on to suggest that all of this is being arranged by a gentleman's agreement, as anything put in writing , on a legal and contractually binding basis, would undoubtadly bring the wrath of the PL, EUFA, FIFA and Khan down on both clubs, resulting in relegation to league 3 for us, a fine for Chelsea and Bailey Wright being banished to the Memorial Stadium for all eternity.

IF there is any truth regarding an arrangement with Chelsea, it is completely different from what Wolves did, as it suggests that while he might be registered as our player, another club is effectively controlling what can and cannot happen to him in the future as far as him being transferred and registered to another club. It smacks of third party ownership, which the regulators do not like and I would be extremely concerned if we have got involved in anything like this.

It's one thing to develop a strong relationship with a club because they know we look after loanees well and are in a position to buy them if they become surplus to Chelsea's requirements, but this would be on a whole different level. Given all that was said on the ffp thread, in particular about club's selling their grounds to themselves. I would like to think this is not something to which SL would agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, man in the middle said:

Personally I love this conspiracy theory and I’m running with it 🤪 Did anyone Else know we’ve never been to the moon 🤔, always question everything!

We can't get to the premier league, so there's no chance of us getting to the moon!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Carey 6 said:

Last season, Wolves bought Afobe back for £10m & pretty much instantly sold him to Stoke for £12m

Nothing different about this if it were to happen is there? 

That was different IMO.

Wolves had an option to buy as part of the deal- 'flipping' Afobe served 2 purposes. Firstly they may have been unconvinced he was up to it in the PL, 2nd it gave them an instant saving + profit to reinvest- to trade upwards, to look for better.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Johnny Musicworks said:

Sorry but I feel the need to start a separate thread about the ‘Chelsea theory’ which has been circulating today and has apparently led to Gregor at the post contacting his French counterparts as to its truth, and he has confirmed that it is not so.

Well when I made some idle speculation this morning regarding an hypothetical scenario it seems like it has taken on a life of its own. Let me stress this (although I have tried to clarify on several threads already) I am not ITK in any way nor ever have been or professed to be. Thankfully we have ‘Kid’ and one or two others for that .

I speculated as to an amusing theory I had with no intention that it should be considered a rumour. It provoked an interesting discussion which was picked up by others and by 1pm in the Ashton Gate coffee shop had taken on a whole different character and was told to me as fact originating from a Facebook page. Another poster had on the same thread at almost the same time speculated a similar theory. 

Getting home this evening it seems to have been picked up by various posters some of whom are saying it’s a load of rubbish. Of course it is.It was never intended to be anything more than a humorous theory. I enjoy discussion and theorising as many of us do on here but I never expected my muses to be taken as having any substance and invoke such criticism or anger. I have explained all of this on several threads but still people seem to be taking it seriously. I realise on a Meltdown night people like to rant but please don’t lose your sense of humour. 

So to be clear. It is a random theory, not a rumour and not in any way a fact and it is not based on anything I have heard from anyone. It is just a theory or scenario that could make sense of an unusual situation where BCFC have paid 8m euros for a teenager from a top European club. As a theory it is entirely made up by myself and should not be taken as anything factual.

I wonder if in future we should have a theory and conspiracy section where we can have interesting conversations which should not be taken too seriously. Life would be boring without humour and speculation and OTIB would be obsolete.  I suppose if nothing else I’ve given the Post a story for tomorrow. Apologies to anyone that has taken my muses too seriously. Can I suggest you get a humour transplant and not take me too seriously in future.

 

 

Stop trying to cover your tracks Roman!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chinapig said:

And your evidence for this is what exactly? If you are going to imply that potentially illegal activity may have taken place or might take place in the future you need something to back it up.

Though the bit about giving first refusal is common and not against any rules anyway. It may even be written into transfer terms.

Not saying there is any illegality, but I can assure you that the world of football transfers is a murky business and you sometimes don't get your man without getting your hands dirty (or someone elses hands).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Johnny Musicworks said:

It certainly is a lesson in how things go viral. A Chelsea supporting friend in Portugal said that Chelsea fans were also discussing how this deal was being done with us. Am I about to become a Sky Sports Source I wonder. Maybe it’s beat that us pensioners are kept off the internet.

Thanks for starting this thread as you might have noticed in the transfer forum it was driving me a bit mad that everyone was referring to it as a 'rumour'.

What amazes me though is that even on this thread, following your unequivocal denial of any link between this theory and reality, still people believe it! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, TheCulturalBomb said:

Chelsea feeder club. I mean the better the connection with a club of that stature the better it is for us. 

But we're not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mozo said:

Thanks for starting this thread as you might have noticed in the transfer forum it was driving me a bit mad that everyone was referring to it as a 'rumour'.

What amazes me though is that even on this thread, following your unequivocal denial of any link between this theory and reality, still people believe it! 

People believe it because it is entirely believable even tho this guy clearly stated had had no sources. 

When we signed NE I'm pretty sure we had a gentleman's agreement in place with Stoke City for them to buy him in the future if they remained in the Prem. So with that in mind, this Chelsea theory is entirely plausible.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Spooky !!!! Brentford have just paid £7-8 m for a 19 yr old French youth player from Troyes.

What?! So they've got a secret arrangement with Chelsea too?! I thought it was just us!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Desso said:

Fictitious story? I think not. The "minder" with him yesterday had a Chelsea badge on his pocket and was drinking from an "I love Chelsea cup". Just saying 😲

Was it Wally Al Qaeda?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, wendyredredrobin said:

Not saying there is any illegality, but I can assure you that the world of football transfers is a murky business and you sometimes don't get your man without getting your hands dirty (or someone elses hands).

But you stated it as fact without presenting any evidence then responded with generalisations.

You are free to believe any conspiracy theory you choose but if you are going to claim it is factually accurate the burden of proof is on you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...