12/21/24
September 03, 2009
Chelsea banned from making new signings: Until 2011. That's two transfer windows. As they're one of the older teams in the Premier League, what impact will this have on their position this season and next?
In the cutthroat world of European football, this used to be common practice. Nice to see they are cracking down on the big guys a bit, but 2 years of no new signings seems a bit steep.
I wonder if Chelsea has enough talent on their reserve team to make up for any lost players or major injuries during this time. Will be interesting to see if they can get past this and still remain a powerhouse.
posted by stalnakerz at 11:25 AM on September 03, 2009
And um, how did Man U acquire Jaap Stam, David Bellion and Dimitar Berbatov again??
There are more, but that's just off the top of my head.
What fucking bullshit.
posted by The_Special_Juan at 11:29 AM on September 03, 2009
I think Chelsea's youth system and reserves have been a bit depleted over the last few years (the signing that got them in trouble aside). So I'm also interested in how they will manage to cope with injuries, even though their squad is arguably the deepest of the "big 4".
posted by trox at 11:46 AM on September 03, 2009
What fucking bullshit.
I'm impressed. That is an eloquent, well thought out argument.
posted by tommybiden at 12:01 PM on September 03, 2009
I'm impressed. That is an eloquent, well thought out argument.
Well, I'm floored. That's top fucking shit right there.
posted by Hugh Janus at 01:01 PM on September 03, 2009
From Soccer by Ives: "While an appeal from Chelsea is almost certain, there could be substantial fallout from the deal. Other clubs who lost young talent to bigger, such as Lazio who lost Federico Macheda to Manchester United could pursue action if they feel the transfer was shifty business."
So there could be more shoes to drop if this is upheld on appeal. And this is not the first time FIFA has given this penalty for the offense: it punished Switzerland's FC Sionin April, with the club told it could not sign players until the 2010 offseason. Scion have appealed, a judgment is due by year's end.
Also, to be clear, this penalty is not two years, it's two transfer windows so Chelsea (appeals delays aside) would miss this coming January and next Summer.
posted by billsaysthis at 01:38 PM on September 03, 2009
Here's something else that just occurred to me. Will they have enough first team players to cover for Essien, Drogba, and Mikel when they leave for the African Cup of Nations in January. If they have any injuries, they could start to struggle.
posted by trox at 01:53 PM on September 03, 2009
trox, I think if Joe Cole can stay healthy they'll be ok especially if Sturridge can give the quality minutes he seems capable of. I think Man City made a mistake selling him, I'd have kept him rather than, say, buying Santa Cruz or keeping Bellamy.
posted by billsaysthis at 02:08 PM on September 03, 2009
Articles: the Guardian and ESPN.
trox, a point the ESPN article made about the African Cup of Nations/Jan. transfer window: (direct quote)
An interesting twist would surround the timing of Chelsea's appeal. It will be a number of weeks before the official papers are delivered to Stamford Bridge, from which time the club will have those 10 days to appeal. It then takes at least three months for the CAS to hear a case and that means it is highly possible Chelsea will be able to sign players for some or all of the January window.
posted by boredom_08 at 02:55 PM on September 03, 2009
That is an eloquent, well thought out argument.
... posted by tommytrump at 12:01 PM on September 03
...who only has time to read the third sentence of every post, it seems.
posted by The_Special_Juan at 03:03 PM on September 03, 2009
Interesting point in today's Fiver: will current Chelsea players demand raises given Chelsea will be hamstrung by this for a year or so? Can someone clarify this for me: does the penalty mean no new signings or just no transfers in of players that have a team?
posted by yerfatma at 03:51 PM on September 03, 2009
From what I understand, it means they cannot register new players, which would rule out signings and transfers. But I could be wrong.
posted by trox at 04:27 PM on September 03, 2009
Didn't Liverpool and Everton both lose players under similar circumstances? Surely if this were applied across the board it would be more than Chelsea taking a hit?
posted by rodgerd at 11:26 PM on September 03, 2009
Also, to be clear, this penalty is not two years, it's two transfer windows so Chelsea (appeals delays aside) would miss this coming January and next Summer." posted by billsaysthis at 01:38 PM on September 03
Sorry, fingers got ahead of the brain. Meant two windows, but considering summer window is over, it still means almost a year and a half of no new talnet. A couple of major injuries and we could see them drop like a rock next year. This may also affect their recruiting for after the penalty as players are going to be leary of going to a club that's been stagnant for that long. I'm sure they'll be able to throw money away to get some, but that doesn't guarantee talent will come in.
posted by stalnakerz at 08:26 AM on September 04, 2009
I foresee the appeals process lasting through early March, meaning the Blues will sign a LOT of players this January just in case.
posted by billsaysthis at 11:45 AM on September 04, 2009
Quite a punishment. Even with the advanced age of their first team squad, I believe Chelsea have a fairly decent youth system + reserve squad, and they can always bring back all of the players they have out on loan.