Tuesday, September 05, 2006

Could Gallas have helped us?

I thought it amazing that Chelsea decided to put out the statement today regarding the alledged threat former player William Gallas.

It is certainly a very strongly worded attack on the player - is something Gallas has since denied and it seems to be a situation in which neither side are able to prove the truth. The crux of the matter is summed up in the paragraph concerning the game against ourselves on the opening day of the season, in which to be fair we could have done with all the help we could get:

"Before the first game of the season against Manchester City, when only four defenders were available and John Terry was doubtful with an injury, he refused to play.
He went on to threaten that if he was forced to play, or if he was disciplined and financially punished for his breach of the rules, that he could score an own goal or get himself sent off, or make deliberate mistakes".

If Gallas had really threatened to do any of the above, and did play in the game - would he really have got away with it? Surely it would have been too obvious to the watching public to have done so?

Then again, remember this?

vote it up!


Anonymous said...

Chelsea are just being a typical bunch of sore losers again. Who wants to play with an over rated defender John Terry who openly brags about cheating on his wife and loving every second he inflicted pain on her?
money issue for Gallas? pretty good since he moved for much less than what a certain team who uses money and high bids to secure 1000 players

Anonymous said...

What planet are you people on???

When you really consider his actions, basically what he did was to discredit his own integrity to the point where he rendered himself useless to the club in order to get the “leverage” he needed to force his move through. (He made himself untrustworthy).

This is a despicable tactic!

So why should Chelsea (and it was totally the right thing to do) make this fact public?

1. Because the club cannot allow a tactic like that to go unpunished as it would then essentially give other players the permission to follow a similar tactic in the future.

2. Because he continued to attack the Club and its management in the press, so why on earth should we “protect” him by concealing his tactics?

Chelsea FC did the only right thing to do and should be applauded for standing up against this “selfish, uncultured, unprofessional lying twat” (to use the term Kenn Emetulu eloquently used).

Anonymous said...

What planet are you on?

Just because a club like Chelsea comes on and accuses an player who has contributed so much for them over the past years, you believe every word they say?

They have been found to be less credible on many occasions and i seriously doubt if Gallas would actually do such a thing. Maybe not just Gallas but any professional footballer would not.

Let's not jump to conclusions that Gallas actually did those alleged threats. Hear both sides of the story first. Although it would likely to be Gallas' against Chelsea's words.

Anonymous said...

Why believe anything that Chelsea say ?
They lied about tapping up Ashley Cole, they lied about the Anders Frisk incident and they continually refuse to accept defeat even when it is there for all to see in black and white (they refuse to accept that they lost to Liverpool in the CL Semi-Final and losing to Charlton on penalties in the League Cup).
Liars basically.

Anonymous said...

In response to the 3rd posting here;

Yes you are right it is the word of Chelsea vs Gallas. The same man who defended Zidanes head butt in the WC final. The same man who already went on strike in a similar situation when he played for Marseilles. The same man who has been a constant petulant little child every time he has negotiated a salary increase. The same man who before coming to Chelsea had nothing more than a French 2nd division title to his name. Chelsea made Gallas!

You say “Let's not jump to conclusions that Gallas actually did those alleged threats”, yet you have jumped to the conclusion that Chelsea has lied about this. It is nothing more than the usual Chelsea hatred “din”, had it been any other club you would have applauded them – you have zero credibility.

OK next posting;

CFC did not lie about the AC affair – it’s a know fact that the meeting was arranged by AC and not CFC.

In the Anders Frisk affair you are once again wrong; it has been subsequently proven and confirmed by Anders Frisk that he WAS approached by Riikard in an area where the Barca coach wasn’t supposed to be. This was of course completely buried in the incredible bias UK media. But Frisk (who is Swedish) was interviewed by Danish Newspaper Ekstra Bladet www.eb.dk under the heading “Mourinho is right” so your view is based upon incorrect information. (I am Danish and I have personally read the interview).

You should read this; http://www.chelsea.vitalfootball.co.uk/article.asp?a=29868
That’s an accurate description of the state of affairs and why it has gotten to this point.