Why Are Chelsea So Hated?
January 10th, 2007 by Cathy ThompsonFlicking through the Sun this morning I suddenly realised that Chelsea are the new Manchester United. Remember in the 1990’s when if you didn’t support Man Utd then you hated them. Basically you didn’t mind who beat them as long as someone did. Now most football fans think the same of Chelsea and I’m left wondering what exactly has brought this sea change in opinion.
I personally believe that it all started when the Russian tycoon took over thereby changing the face of the club. Suddenly Chelsea had money and were willing to spend it. Ranieri began to piece a squad together and the team started to progress in quality and support. The media jumped on the band wagon and started to promise that big things lay in Chelsea’s future and as a club they were really going somewhere. All that excitement and optimism and the Stamford Bridge faithful couldn’t believe their luck, all those years of support had finally paid off and they even dared to dream of a premiership title.
Where did it all go wrong? Fast forward a number of years and Chelsea are on everyone’s most hated list. The manager is unlikable, arrogant and cocky, the never ending money tree that is Roman Abramovich has got tiring and even top class players in the team can’t change the fact that Man Utd are simply in better form this season. When I pondered this situation I began to wonder what exactly caused this to happen? Is it simply jealousy as Chelsea fans would have you believe, is it the media who continually focus on Chelsea and any shortcomings there maybe or is it that people are disappointed in the modern game which Chelsea encompass.
I have said before that if a rich sugar daddy approached my team I would be gutted as I believe they draw the very lifeblood out of the game and for me personally thats why I don’t like Chelsea at the moment. The media may cling to something Mourinho says and blow it all out of proportion as they have done in the past but is this the only reason why people don’t like the man. Or is his aloof attitude? The problem is Mourinho is a character and a character will always draw attention from the media and if he didn’t want it that way then he shouldn’t play up to them so often with his outbursts. Last week I wrote an article in which I believe Jose would walk after this season if he didn’t lift the title and I stick to that. I also affirm my belief that he has been one of the main components in making Chelsea everyones love to hate club in the premiership.
Although I may be being too tough on the special one and it could just be that sucess in a team brings criticism from the masses. I remember back to the late 1990’s when I worked in a Sports Shop and you couldn’t have found a Chelsea top if you tried and now when I walk in its wall to wall Chelsea from training tops to tracksuits. Therefore Chelsea could be hated for the fact that their success has meant that many have jumped on the blues bandwagon and most Chelsea fans are now viewed as glory hunters. This must sting the loyal support who were pre-Abramovich but its something that they must accept as along with money and success there are always those who want a piece of the glory.
It seems that the answer has to come to me as a write this article as Abramovich seems to be in the centre of any reason I can think of for why Chelsea have become so disliked with football fans all over the country. Fans feel that Chelsea have bought the title and bought their recent run of success and therefore everyone wants to see them fail to prove that teams can beat them without the financial backing of a tycoon. There are many reasons which culminate in Chelsea being the most hated club in the premiership but it seems that Mr Abramovich is the catalyst for them all.
Explore posts in the same categories: Chelsea
January 10th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Has it really taken you this long to work out why Chelsea are so hated? That’s laughable - really groundbreaking piece that. However, I don’t think we are as hated as everyone makes out. And secretly you love our ” unlikable, arrogant and cocky” manager.
I don’t really think that football clubs need to be loved by supporters of other clubs. It would be nice to just get a little recognition, but as long as articles like this litter the net disguised as journalism, then I don’t think we will. Remember when Real Madrid spent all their money, and the press were marvelling over the cash value of their squad? And not a hint of critisism from anyone. 10 out of 10 for regurgitating other writers thoughts, 0 out of 10 for actually thinking about what you are writing.
January 10th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
“0 out of 10 for actually thinking about what you are writing. ”
Right back at you Paul.
January 10th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
I read somewhere that in England there is the mentality that we all hate winners. That whilst someone is successful, instead of lauding the hard work and quality we deride their shortcomings. Should they fail after that sucess then they can become loved once it is realised they are, after all, human.
If this is true then the ‘mighty blues’ don’t have long to wait before the hatred subsides. Only till 27th January 2007 infact when Nottingham Forest march on to Wembley.
January 10th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Truely embarrassing piece!
The reasons why we are actually hated:
1. We have a culture that hates success (sporting hereos such as Eddie the Eagle and Frank Bruno)
2. We have a culture that hates “new money”
3. Chelsea have a manager who is seen as arrogant. On a few occasions he has overstepped the mark but as Chelsea fans we obviously like him. Ranieri was loved outside of the club because he was humble but at the end of the day he won nothing.
4. We have an unlimited transfer budget and are seen to be damaging the game. Funnily enough the likes of AC Milan, Inter Milan, Real Madrid & Manchester United have been spending vast sums for years??? also we have ploughed over-inflated transfer sums back into the English game for the likes of Glen Johnson, Shaun-Wright Phillips, Damien Duff, Obi-Jon Mikel, Wayne Bridge and Joe Cole.
5. We have glory hunter supporters. Yes we do but we also have a loyal hardcore of fans that have been around for years. Every football fan has to start somewhere and I am happy to welcome them to Chelsea if they get behind the team, invest in the club and sing at matches. Ask yourself why there are so many Southern accents on the Liverpool and Man Utd fans that you know?
6. Too many people believe what they read in the papers. The Sun and Mirror are absolute trash hell bent on sensationalism. Ream after ream of stories with very little fact or misquotes tend to make an imprint on the psyche of those people who are paying the 30p for this garbage.
Finally for all of these reasons we don’t particularly want to be loved we just want to be hated for the right reasons.
I used to dislike Arsenal because they had the absolute Indian sign over us and I had watched countless defeats including an FA Cup final. However now I appreciate the football that they play and we have a much improved record against them. I used to dislike Man Utd because I was jealous of what they had - success. Both reasons all to do with the football and being a fan.
Regards the statement “I have said before that if a rich sugar daddy approached my team I would be gutted as I believe they draw the very lifeblood out of the game and for me personally thats why I don’t like Chelsea at the moment.” Never say never as it has been nothing but good news for the Chelsea.
January 10th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
Stuart - with regards to your last statement about the good news for Chelsea…
I’m pleased to see Abramovich is ploughing money into Chelsea’s youth team also. They have a good set up and deservable beat a talented Forest side 2-0 in the FA Youth Cup. For the future this bodes well if Chelsea teams are built from their academy rather than bought.
However, are you worried about the impact that might be caused should Abramovich pull out his billions. You cannot deny that he could do this as easily as he bought Chelsea and this would leave you in deep shite?
January 10th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
I agree with quite a few of the comments made here (especially the one about the Sun and the Mirror being trash, but that’s not the issue). We do seem to have a culture in this country that hates winners/success, but that’s not just it. Nor is it entirely about jealousy, though it’s fair to say that is a part of it.
Stuart, you talk of the likes of Man Utd, AC Milan, Inter and Real Madrid spending vast sums and this is true, but do they, like Chelsea, spend £16 on a back-up midfielder (Mikel) £7m on a 2nd choice centre back (Boulahrouz) £24m on a reserve winger (SWP) or £12m (that price may not be exact, sorry) for a back-up winger/forward (Kalou)? I think not. Real, although they have always spent big, have worked on the policy of ‘Zidanes and Pavons’, that is big money spent on the first 11 with the gaps filled by youth team players. Although, admittedly, that policy is beginning to change.
AC Milan haven’t spend huge money on big-name players for a couple of years now, with perhaps the exceptions of Gilardino and Kaka (though I don’t know how much he cost). Indeed their replacement for £30m Sheva was Betis’ Ricardo Olivera, who they hardly broke the bank to sign.
Man Utd, of course, have spent big, but again any big-money signings are regular first teamers and don’t spend most of their time in the reserves or on the bench a la Mikel and SWP.
That is one of the reasons why they are hated. It’s not just that they have a bigger budget than everyone else, it’s that they can spend huge sums for players they don’t really need, and are happy to do so.
January 10th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
Because of their ridicilous money-spending and absence of bringing up own talent (except from Terry)
January 10th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal and others big clubs throughout Europe have all achieved huge success in the past, yet have never spent as much as Chelsea have in the last 2 years. When people (Chelsea fans) accuse these clubs of spending just as much as Chelsea they are factually wrong - no one has ever spent as much as Chelsea have in the last 2 years. Even this is not really a valid reason for hating chelsea though, its their money, they can do what the like with it - what business is it of ours? But then we remember, Chelsea did not earn this money.
Succesful football teams earn money from success, they can then reinvest this money in future success. This is why Manchester United have been able to buy the likes of Rio Ferdinand for huge sums of money, they earnt their money by winning and all the exta sponsorship, gate receipts and TV money that comes with it. Chelsea, by contrast, are actually heavilly in debt - and will not break even until 2010 if recent forecasts are accurate. The only reason they have just won 2 premiership titles is Roman Abramovich, they, like him, have not earnt their success. They did not gradually build a team with shrewd transfers on a limited budget, slowly building strength until generating enough money to buy better players, finally being sufficiently stong, consistent and lucky to win the premiership. Chelsea bought their titles, backed by money of dubious, if not criminal origin.
If there is one reason Chelsea are hated it is not the amount of money they have spent, but the fact that they have not earned it. Our hate for Chelsea is then compounded by their arrogance, particularly that of the self-appointed ’special one’: claiming skill, passion, struggle, teamwork, vision, commitment and more. If that were true, we could admire Chelsea, albeit with some jealousy as they beat our clubs in a fair contest. But as I have argued, this is not the case.
Chelsea beat us because Abramovich buys their success, we hate them for it: not because they beat us, although that does hurt, but because they don’t deserve to.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
If Roman left Chelsea would become the next Leeds Utd. In fact possibly worse. They wouldn’t be able to pyaing half the players wages and therefore just to stave off going out of business would have to sell most first team players or get them to take huge pay cuts. There would be some very happy managers in european footbal picking up some bargain basement priced superstars!
They run at such a high loss that it surprises most of us in English football as we are used to teams making and spending their own money or surviving on someone/business ploughing just a couple of million pounds in to cover some running costs. In europe though, the likes of Juve, AC, Barce and Madrid have been run with huge losses (maybe not quite Chelski losses but big none the less) year in, year out with only investment from millionaires or government letting them spend spend spend like they do…almsot unheard of in England pre-Roman. Manchester Utd have been a special case over the years and have spent as they have earnt running succeslfully with huge profits. If EU law and Uefa regulation change the games rules and states clubs can only spend ‘x’ amount of what they earn there could be some big changes afoot in european and english football.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
Well said Jimmy. Compound that with the fact that their millionnaire team play ‘boring’ defensive football…
January 10th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
I second what Kieran has said, good points there Jimmy. What you say is a valied point too Kieran, and something I’ve argued in the comments for another article on the site. With the money at his disposal Mourinho could have made Chelsea in the best team the modern game has ever seen. He can buy practically anyone, and they could play truly thrilling, exciting football…yet they don’t. Mourinho is far too much of a pragmatist for that, and for all their cash and international stars they frequently play football that makes Bolton look like Brazil circa 1970 (Ok, I’m exagerrating a little, but you see my point…)
January 10th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
It’s all because the never ending pocket of Abramovich, and the unsportmanlike behavior of their coach. A team that only have won two leagues and have no history now think their the best team of Europe… Keep dreaming the fall will be hard.
January 11th, 2007 at 3:03 am
Mourinho could not have bought anyone. Money does not mean absolutely everything in football. It means a damn lot, but not everything. Ronaldinho for example - a prime target you would have thought, would never dream of palying for a club like CHelsea would he - there is very little glamour there. Barcelona, Real Madrid, AC Milan, that’s where you want to be, not Fulham.
Chelsea are, with huge financial backing, trying to forge a sustainable future. It requires a huge investment to begin with - they needed to buy the players to create the best squad in England/Europe. Once they have this squad they can win things. Once they ahve won things they will ahve gained a big enough reputation. They will have also enticed more new young talent. Roman himself said that he wanted to have top quality internationals palying alongside homegrown palyers. In fact, it becomes EUFA law soon that you must have a few homegrown palyers in your squad does it not?
The pragmatic approach on the pitch [what is seen as boring tactics] has this far worked well enough to return 2 premiership titles. They don’t need to worry about style yet. They are on the way to becoming a huge club. Once they are there, they will create enough revenue to become profitable. They will sell more shirts, and get much bigger gates once they have a new stadium/redeveloped stadium. Their sponsorship income must be huge now.
Also just think how many more Chelsea fans you see about these days all of a sudden. They are becoming a huge force in English football. They have not reached anywhere near their potential yet, but it is a long term plan. To break even in 2010, considering the investment of Roman, will be a pretty special acheivement if it happens. At that point, they will probably be at Man Utds level. -A club that, it must be pointed out, are now themselves actually in more debt than Chelsea. Give it a few more years and Chelsea will get creative - just you wait, well maybe more attacking than creative…. The thing is you don’t win any trophies for being creative, so for the time being, they will not be.
Chelsea are hated for 2 reasons - 1) They are very hard to beet. 2) People put this down to money. This leads to the asumption that the money at stake is unfair. Life is unfortunately. But to then bitterly suggest that Abramovic was not srewd in accruing his huge personal wealth as Jimmy does is ridiculous, and this merely shows how succesful Roman etc. has been. -The fact they wind Man Utd fans up so much is a true testament to their success. Chelsea will go on to be as big as Man Utd, with a different means to the end, and they will become selfsustainable its just a long term business plan, and jelous fans of other teams fail to understand it.
I must just point out at this point that I do not support either MU or Chelski!
April 13th, 2007 at 7:47 pm
well said jimmy…..united, l’pool and arsenal have legitimate grounds to buy expensive players via self-generated wealth from success….chelsea got a sugar daddy and bought success….they offer no creativity or entertainment…….united and arsenal are the saviours of the beautiful game in england….
May 2nd, 2007 at 1:01 pm
Blah blah blah!!!! With all the millions of abramovich, what have Chelsea won this season? Yay, the carling cup, but what else? Just knocked out of the champions league, premiership in tatters and a possible FA cup victory, if they can beat Man Utd…. A real team is a team that has worked their way to the top, NOT bought the way to the top. I remember hating Man Utd in the 90’s becuase of their success, but lets no forget that 1986 they were almost relegated. All praise to Sir Alex for building his team up and having huge success. Anyone can be a Mourinho or a “special one” if they had the financial backing of Mr Abramovich. Swallow all your words Mr Mourinho…. Swallow them all……