ROTG Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 @martin1905 Maybe you are to young, however in the evolution of Chelsea both John Neil and Bobby Campbell were huge contributors in putting Chelsea back on the map. They both took the club from division 2 to division 1 playing some of the best football seen at the bridge for a decade, each gave the club a playing style which i guess these days you call an identity . Dixon, Speedy, Nevin to name a few, were all part of the evolution being constructed by Ken Bates pre Hoddle. Therefore the Hoddle laid the foundations of where the club is today is a bit of a myth IMHO. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin1905 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 6 hours ago, ROTG said: @martin1905 Maybe you are to young, however in the evolution of Chelsea both John Neil and Bobby Campbell were huge contributors in putting Chelsea back on the map. They both took the club from division 2 to division 1 playing some of the best football seen at the bridge for a decade, each gave the club a playing style which i guess these days you call an identity . Dixon, Speedy, Nevin to name a few, were all part of the evolution being constructed by Ken Bates pre Hoddle. Therefore the Hoddle laid the foundations of where the club is today is a bit of a myth IMHO. Yep, I suppose Kevin Keegan should be thanked for the evolution of Man City. You two just get worse and worse with your digging. It's OK to be wrong, it really is. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin1905 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 12 hours ago, Dwmh said: . Hoddle may have been a great PR professional who talked his way into the England job and as that has an important role in the history of the club. But the transformation was the result of Bates money and Hoddle, during his time when Chelsea trod water from 11th to 11th, was a rubbish manager. Thank you. That is all anyone has said. You've been arguing with yourself about everything else. As I've said to @ROTG this morning, it is OK to be wrong. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post martin1905 Posted February 12 Popular Post Share Posted February 12 (edited) 13 hours ago, Dwmh said: Hoddle may have been a great PR professional who talked his way into the England job and as that has an important role in the history of the club. But the transformation was the result of Bates money and Hoddle, during his time when Chelsea trod water from 11th to 11th, was a rubbish manager. 11th, 11th under Hoddle then 6th, 4th, 3rd, 5th with managers that were at the club because of Hoddle. Following Vialli we went 6th. 6th. 4th under Ranieri before Roman bought us. Now you and ROTG can claim whatever you like, you can make up anything you like to suit your agenda, move goalposts, whatever but that is what happened. Was it all down to Hoddle? Absolutely not and no one has tried to claim that. Did we improve massively under Hoddle, again no and no one has tried to claim that. What we did was attract a different type of player with him as manager and in turn continued doing so after he left because of who he bought in but instead of everyone else, giving Hoddle some credit for his part in that, you two both want to try and be clever, go against the grain and argue for the sake of arguing. No one, not even you @Dwmh know what was the biggest factor in Ruud Gullit coming. We can take the man at face value or believe a random wind up merchant on the internets smallest active forum. We can look at actual facts, things that actually happened or listen to your usual trolling where you state things as fact and question everyone who doesn't imminently fall in line with your way of thinking. Edited February 12 by martin1905 2 1 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROTG Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, martin1905 said: Yep, I suppose Kevin Keegan should be thanked for the evolution of Man City. You two just get worse and worse with your digging. It's OK to be wrong, it really is. Obviously players like Dixon, speedy, Nevin are not worthy of any recognition because they were not part of the Hoddle revolution. Tell me where does the team of Osgood, Harris, Hutchinson, Webb, Cooke to name a few who won an FA cup & European CWC. stand in your world? Talk about digging holes Edited February 12 by ROTG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulw66 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 15 minutes ago, martin1905 said: Was it all down to Hoddle? Absolutely not and no one has tried to claim that. Did we improve massively under Hoddle, again no and no one has tried to claim that. What we did was attract a different type of player with him as manager and in turn continued doing so after he left because of who he bought in but instead of everyone else, giving Hoddle some credit for his part in that, you two both want to try and be clever, go against the grain and argue for the sake of arguing. We also reached an FA Cup Final, a European SF and an FA Cup semi final in those seasons. All of this contributed to the turning of the ship. I presonally believe Hoddle's presence was a huge factor in getting Gullit here (as do most) and it is bizarre to think Gullit himself may fabricate reasons for his arrival, some 20+ years later. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulw66 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 12 hours ago, Dwmh said: 25 years on he believes his own bullshit and still is unable to say it was the money. There was much more money in Serie A than the PL back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Kelly Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 Just now, paulw66 said: There was much more money in Serie A than the PL back then. Serie A was the glamour destination for the tasty footballer , this is probably part of why the whole of Europe moan about the Premier League whilst showing all the games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
My Blood Is Blue Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 52 minutes ago, martin1905 said: …the internets smallest active forum. But the best forum! 😉 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post martin1905 Posted February 12 Popular Post Share Posted February 12 35 minutes ago, ROTG said: Obviously players like Dixon, speedy, Nevin are not worthy of any recognition because they were not part of the Hoddle revolution. Tell me where does the team of Osgood, Harris, Hutchinson, Webb, Cooke to name a few who won an FA cup & European CWC. stand in your world? Talk about digging holes Not in the same conversation, obviously. The conversation was pretty simple really. If you need to move the goalposts to pointlessly argue your point, that's fine. I'll break it down for you. Glenn Hoddle was a massive reason for Rudd Gullit signing. That signing, along with Mark Hughes changed everything. We had never bought that level of player before. The following year we signed Vialli, Zola, Di Matteo and Frank Leboeuf. I, personally do not belive we would have signed those players without Ruud Gullit being here. When Hoddle left us, Gullit took over as manager. We finished 6th then 4th. When Gullit left, Vialli took over and we finished 3rd, 5th before Ranieri. We then finish 6th, 6th, 4th. Then Roman buys us and the rest is history. Again, I'll try to keep this simple. Regardless of the 70/71 team or the 55 league winning team, which I'm sure you'll try to use next, Glenn Hoddle put the pieces in place for the club to start on its most successful period in our history. 27 years of sustained success at the very top. Not a couple of cup wins 50 years ago, no matter how important they were. Without Hoddle, Gullit probably doesn't come. Without Gullit, no Vialli, no Zola, no Di Matteo, no Leboeuf. Without those quite possibly no Roman. 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROTG Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 41 minutes ago, martin1905 said: Not in the same conversation, obviously. The conversation was pretty simple really. If you need to move the goalposts to pointlessly argue your point, that's fine. I'll break it down for you. Glenn Hoddle was a massive reason for Rudd Gullit signing. That signing, along with Mark Hughes changed everything. We had never bought that level of player before. The following year we signed Vialli, Zola, Di Matteo and Frank Leboeuf. I, personally do not belive we would have signed those players without Ruud Gullit being here. When Hoddle left us, Gullit took over as manager. We finished 6th then 4th. When Gullit left, Vialli took over and we finished 3rd, 5th before Ranieri. We then finish 6th, 6th, 4th. Then Roman buys us and the rest is history. Again, I'll try to keep this simple. Regardless of the 70/71 team or the 55 league winning team, which I'm sure you'll try to use next, Glenn Hoddle put the pieces in place for the club to start on its most successful period in our history. 27 years of sustained success at the very top. Not a couple of cup wins 50 years ago, no matter how important they were. Without Hoddle, Gullit probably doesn't come. Without Gullit, no Vialli, no Zola, no Di Matteo, no Leboeuf. Without those quite possibly no Roman. Ok So I understand you, Hoddle In season 3 when Gullit joined only matters. It was nothing to do with the club being more attractive because of the higher salaries offered because many were available on a Bosman or nearing the end of their contracts or being released due to there age, one Hoddle departed It was purely the pulling power of Gullit? Ken Bates funding it, Colin Hutchinson being the negotiator with the players and clubs was second fiddle to Gullit and his pulling power. As for the team of 50's, 60's, 70's & 80's absolute toilet, the occasional cup success and no history. Sounds very much like what opposing fans sing. I conceded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwmh Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 2 hours ago, martin1905 said: Thank you. That is all anyone has said. You've been arguing with yourself about everything else. As I've said to @ROTG this morning, it is OK to be wrong. Really and i thought it was people having a go for the same thing. 1 hour ago, martin1905 said: 11th, 11th under Hoddle then 6th, 4th, 3rd, 5th with managers that were at the club because of Hoddle. Following Vialli we went 6th. 6th. 4th under Ranieri before Roman bought us. So add in the improvements in earlier years we can say Chelsea plateaued under Hoddle. anyone got something nice to say for him? 2 hours ago, martin1905 said: No one, not even you @Dwmh know what was the biggest factor in Ruud Gullit coming. We can take the man at face value or believe a random wind up merchant on the internets smallest active forum. We can look at actual facts, things that actually happened or listen to your usual trolling where you state things as fact and question everyone who doesn't imminently fall in line with your way of thinking. Sure but money is certainly a more likely motive than some platitudes he said to the press. If people really want to rebel against commonsense it really is their look out. As mrs Merton said to Debbie McGhee https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=795268861448028 1 hour ago, paulw66 said: There was much more money in Serie A than the PL back then. 1 hour ago, Mark Kelly said: Serie A was the glamour destination for the tasty footballer , this is probably part of why the whole of Europe moan about the Premier League whilst showing all the games. Had been. Gullit arrived in 1995 3 years in to PL with Sky. The money was changing very rapidly and I'd have guessed by 1998 PL was a lot richer than Serie A. Perhaps earlier. It was not only Chelsea that started bringing in foreign players in 1995 or accelerated in 96 onwards. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5518185/The-English-players-came-Serie-1990s-pomp.html In 1992 Paul Gascoigne went to italy. By 1997 the article is talking about Dorigo (32) and the pride of England Danny Dichio. 1 hour ago, martin1905 said: I'll break it down for you. Glenn Hoddle was a massive reason excuse for Rudd Gullit signing taking the money. That signing money, along with which also bought Mark Hughes changed everything. We had never bought that level of player before. then spent much more including much younger players with fees too. I'm not getting at Martin but this encapsulates where this conversation has gone. Basically there is a tired adherence to a Gullit came for Hoddle white lie fed to the media and a blatant disregard to 1990s PL history or anything else, established finance changes and CFC history 1980s onwards. Imagine, all those people who prefer to credit Hoddle and not Bates - I wonder where that comes from? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Kelly Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 Just now, Dwmh said: Really and i thought it was people having a go for the same thing. So add in the improvements in earlier years we can say Chelsea plateaued under Hoddle. anyone got something nice to say for him? Sure but money is certainly a more likely motive than some platitudes he said to the press. If people really want to rebel against commonsense it really is their look out. As mrs Merton said to Debbie McGhee https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=795268861448028 Had been. Gullit arrived in 1995 3 years in to PL with Sky. The money was changing very rapidly and I'd have guessed by 1998 PL was a lot richer than Serie A. Perhaps earlier. It was not only Chelsea that started bringing in foreign players in 1995 or accelerated in 96 onwards. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5518185/The-English-players-came-Serie-1990s-pomp.html In 1992 Paul Gascoigne went to italy. By 1997 the article is talking about Dorigo (32) and the pride of England Danny Dichio. I'm not getting at Martin but this encapsulates where this conversation has gone. Basically there is a tired adherence to a Gullit came for Hoddle white lie fed to the media and a blatant disregard to 1990s PL history or anything else, established finance changes and CFC history 1980s onwards. Imagine, all those people who prefer to credit Hoddle and not Bates - I wonder where that comes from? Any idea what I want for dinner tonight? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonb Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 9 hours ago, ROTG said: @martin1905 Maybe you are to young, however in the evolution of Chelsea both John Neil and Bobby Campbell were huge contributors in putting Chelsea back on the map. They both took the club from division 2 to division 1 playing some of the best football seen at the bridge for a decade, each gave the club a playing style which i guess these days you call an identity . Dixon, Speedy, Nevin to name a few, were all part of the evolution being constructed by Ken Bates pre Hoddle. Therefore the Hoddle laid the foundations of where the club is today is a bit of a myth IMHO. Yep the John Neal revolution from 2nd Division mediocrity to 6th in Division 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwmh Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 4 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said: Any idea what I want for dinner tonight? More meringue i expect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
My Blood Is Blue Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 16 minutes ago, Dwmh said: Imagine, all those people who prefer to credit Hoddle and not Bates - I wonder where that comes from? Which nobody is doing, that’s just you trying to bring that into it to try and force people to back down. The original point was, from what I can care to remember, that Hoddle played a part in helping turn us into the successful club we became. Nobody ever said it was Hoddle and Hoddle alone. Nobody said it wasn’t because of Bates or anyone else. People have just been saying that Hoddle was also a part of that, but for some reason you want to fully disagree with that and then constantly not just move goalposts to suit your argument, but add new ones in to try and make people hit when they were never aiming for them in the first place. Lets just stop the boring discussion now. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post boratsbrother Posted February 12 Popular Post Share Posted February 12 (edited) All of us will naturally agree and disagree with other forum members on the various threads. Some will disagree with another forum member a lot or all of the time. What is very odd though is to see two forum members who always disagree with everyone in every discussion. 🤔 Edited February 12 by boratsbrother 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisb Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 ^ I suspect it’s due to one who enjoys winding other people up and the other trying to get their post count up to the 50,000 that they had on the previous forum! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROTG Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 1 hour ago, jasonb said: Yep the John Neal revolution from 2nd Division mediocrity to 6th in Division 1. Heaven for bids lets never mention on this forum the likes of John Neil being a good manager or speedy, Nevin or Dixon being great players for the club because they only managed 6th in division 1. But it is ok to praise a £1b squad which has not even got anywhere near 6th in one and a half seasons. It’s a funny old game 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROTG Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 1 hour ago, boratsbrother said: All of us will naturally agree and disagree with other forum members on the various threads. Some will disagree with another forum member a lot or all of the time. What is very odd though is to see two forum members who always disagree with everyone in every discussion. 🤔 Ignore button is available Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Kelly Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 Just now, ROTG said: Heaven for bids lets never mention on this forum the likes of John Neil being a good manager or speedy, Nevin or Dixon being great players for the club because they only managed 6th in division 1. But it is ok to praise a £1b squad which has not even got anywhere near 6th in one and a half seasons. It’s a funny old game Making things up that people don't think or haven't said isn't debate you know. Many of us here saw with our own eyes how fantastic John Neal ( at least I got his name right ) was and how excellent Speedie ( I got his name right too ) Nevin and Dixon were. Just give the constant shitposting a rest for everyone's sanity 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisb Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 5 minutes ago, ROTG said: Ignore button is available If we all went down that route I suspect you might be very lonely on here! I don’t think anyone wants to do that though but the constant moving the goalposts and going off at a random tangent don’t really help the debate. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROTG Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 4 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said: Making things up that people don't think or haven't said isn't debate you know. Many of us here saw with our own eyes how fantastic John Neal ( at least I got his name right ) was and how excellent Speedie ( I got his name right too ) Nevin and Dixon were. Just give the constant shitposting a rest for everyone's sanity Ok. But it’s ok for people to shi1post me. Got a funny feeling the usual rose tinted mafia will like your post. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ham Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 4 minutes ago, ROTG said: Ok. But it’s ok for people to shi1post me. Got a funny feeling the usual rose tinted mafia will like your post. Come on. Don't pretend that your main role on here hasn't been WUM for a number of years. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROTG Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 10 minutes ago, chrisb said: If we all went down that route I suspect you might be very lonely on here! I don’t think anyone wants to do that though but the constant moving the goalposts and going off at a random tangent don’t really help the debate. Ok I will stay away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now