I've been a Chelsea supporter since 1965, when I was old enough to go to my first match at Stamford Bridge. Since 1970 I've had precious little to shout about, but I have developed and honed the peculiarly English love of the underdog in that time. Now that Chelsea are anything but underdogs, I'm experiencing new and unfamiliar feelings.

Chelsea Football Club have at last started to gain some respect in the football world. We've had some major successes in the past few years, including winning the FA Cup twice, plus the Coca-Cola, European Cup Winners and European Super Cups, albeit with a band of mercenaries on the pitch. The League title has thus far eluded us, but we've come close, and one of these days we'll win it - God knows Ken Bates, Matthew Harding and others have thrown enough money at it. When that happens I can die happy. In fact I'll probably top myself on the spot on the grounds that nothing else will ever come close to it...

As I see it, there are two types of football followers: the first group are people with no emotional commitment who only want the convenience and reflected glory of following a team like Manchester United (and even Chelsea these days). Good luck to them, but I don't class them as true fans. True fans are the lifeblood of any club: people who have stuck by them through thick and thin, regardless of success, since they were old enough to stand.

As all of you except, perhaps, some of Man Utd's "fans" will know, following a football club is not easy. Most of the time you wonder why the hell you do it, especially when your side gets hammered by teams that wouldn't trouble a mediocre kindergarten side. It's only when you actually win something that the emotional investment you have in your club pays off, and it all becomes worthwhile. I feel sorry for the likes of these bandwagon Man Utd "fans", most of whom seem to follow United because they've looked at the league tables and decided that it's a safe bet.

This site was created because I love Chelsea Football Club. I don't love the bullshit that surrounds it, though, and was constantly frustrated at the lack of opportunity to say so. After years of having no voice, I discovered the Web. It started off as a hobby that I did when I felt like it, but has metamorphosed over the past couple of years into a bloated monster that rules my life in a completely tyrannical way, but I still love it.

I don't do it for financial gain. It's an independent site, and nothing will change that - unless, of course, Uncle Ken Bates gives me a free season ticket, in which case I promise never to slag him off again..

If you have a sense of humour and love football, then I reckon you'll get something out of this site. You may encounter the odd profanity, but according to a recent study carried out in the States, 13% of all adult conversation consists of swearing. In spite of this astonishing finding, rest assured that there's a far lesser percentage than that on here, which implies that this must be a sophisticated and tasteful site.

If you HAVEN'T got a sense of humour or you're a prude, you'll definitely find something here that you won't like, especially if you're a follower of Man Utd. Tough. I probably wouldn't like you either..

Some of the things that happen in the footballing world make me as "sick as a parrot". Others make me "over the moon". To maintain my sanity, I've created the next section as a sort of padded room, where I can beat my head against the walls whenever I feel the stress levels building. It's catharsis on a grand scale. Woe betide anyone who pisses me off: for proof, look no further than the tacky and sordid Sports Dome in Camden, which closed down a few weeks after a disagreeable encounter with Priesty, whose curse is internationally acknowledged to be the Kiss of Doom.

Cup Final Shenanigans : Both Ken Bates, Chelsea's Chairman, and Jeff Powell, miserable bastard and "doyen" of football writers, have had their say after the rather boring 2000 Cup Final. Now I'm going to have mine.

Up until now I've refrained from mentioning Euro 2000, as The Sun and the News of The World have been doing such a sterling job of stitching us all up, but I can keep silent no longer. Disturbing news has reached me concerning English fans in Belgium. Not content with making arses of themselves scuffling with various Turks, Robocops, etc., they are now indulging in the new tactic of re-arranging the locals' garden furniture without permission (see pic below).

This is surely the last straw. Even the normally mild-mannered Charlie Dimmock is reported to be "incandescent with rage" at this outrageous insult to Belgian gardeners, and is demanding that the Belgian police use their water cannon feature on future transgressors. Any sympathy we might once have felt for these shameless hooligans must surely now have evaporated. I mean, if this sort of thing is allowed to continue unchecked someone could get hurt, although I'm not sure how..

Powell is a Wanker Dept:
Needless to say, the majority of the media attached none of the blame to Villa, predictably preferring instead to have a pop at Chelsea. It's the fashionable thing to do now, as that respected doyen of football writers, Jeff Powell, showed in his measured, unbiased, colostomy bag of a Cup Final report entitled "The Final insult to all those boyhood dreams".

With a title like that you don't have to be Einstein to work out what's coming next. Pathetically, Powell even complains about Dennis Wise taking his baby son up with him to collect the Cup, ludicrously and inappropriately comparing it with "the stately way" Bobby Moore collected the World Cup in 1966.. The words "pompous" and "ass" immediately spring to mind. Time to retire, Jeff, before you drown in a sea of your own bitterness. PS: As you hate football so much, Jeff, why don't you give me your free press pass to the next Cup Final ?

It's been an up and down season for Chelsea, with superb performances in the Champions League counterpointed by disappointing league form. If you look at the statistics you'll see that Man U scored almost double the amount of goals that we did, with two of their strikers weighing in with twenty-odd goals each. Needless to say, they walked away with the title once again.

Our top scorer was Tore Andre Flo with 19 goals. If Chelsea had had a couple of forwards capable of this sort of hit rate the story would have been very different, so surely the purchase of a prolific striker is of paramount importance during the close season. The problem is, where do you get such a beast without paying the silly money that has become the norm in transfer deals this season ? Hopefully we'll do better than we did with Chris Sutton when it comes to buying a striker; I mean, look what we got for 10 million: one goal. We'll be lucky to get a tenner for Sutton, based on his performances this season. Another vitally important point is the retention of Flo at all costs. The ridiculous rumours that have been flying around during the past couple of weeks of Flo going to Man U or Rangers must stay just that: rumours.

I'll be honest and admit that I'm not certain what the problem is, but it certainly isn't terminal. I remain convinced that Chelsea's quality will shine through, and that come April we will be putting in a determined challenge for the Premiership. Laugh if you like. I'm used to it.

All this would be bad enough, but you have to add in the scumbag factor on top. If you listen to lazy journos like John Richardson, who makes up stories for Soccernet, a previously excellent site that is now owned by American conglomerate ESPN and appears to have turned to the 'lowest common denominator' form of journalism, Vialli is on the point of being sacked because Chelsea have only realised two points from five matches. In an article with the lurid headline "Troubled Vialli's side loses the plot again" (I've removed the link to the story - why should I give ESPN more free hits ?), Richardson also states that Chelsea will have to beat Feyenoord on Wednesday for Luca to avoid the chop. This is so laughable that it deserves no further comment, and can be treated with the contempt it deserves. Still, never let the truth get in the way of a good story, eh John ?

What is not so laughable, but is in fact deeply disturbing, is the report the same Soccernet put out a couple of weeks ago, whose headline implied that Chelsea had been fined by UEFA for the collective behaviour of their fans at the Galatasaray game at Stamford Bridge. In fact we were fined, for ONE moron running onto the pitch, but that fact was conveniently glossed over. Some would say that this was just plain sloppy or at worst a grammatical error. Others, myself included, would suggest that it was done deliberately to create a sensationalist aspect, thereby gaining more hits for ESPN's web site. If you want proof that this is the road they're going down, look no further than the latest twaddle from Richardson.

ESPN have their headlines carried by news servers like NewsNow, so they're obviously expecting to be taken seriously. People will be interested in clicking a link from a heavyweight like ESPN that implies that there was major crowd trouble at a match, so they also carry a responsibility to make sure that what their employees are saying in their name is truthful. Before anybody accuses me of hypocrisy I should say that I don't expect people to take my periodic journeys into the realms of fantasy too seriously; the whole point of this site is to entertain.

ESPN are the other side of the coin: they are a huge organisation whose sole reason for getting into the football website thing is to make money. It's crucial for them that they're taken seriously. As things stand, I don't see how that's possible. I have complained to ESPN about the report, but apart from an acknowledgement of my complaint I've heard nothing, and don't expect to. After all, I'm just a fan. Luckily I'm a fan with a voice, so you can rest assured that I will be highlighting any more stories from organsations like ESPN that I consider to be untruthful or dishonest.

Still, every cloud has a silver lining, as they say: Ex head chef Giuseppe Baddolini, who walked out in a huff when Chelsea signed Didier Deschamps, has been persuaded to return, on the understanding that "there will be no more garlic, tripe, oysters and long pointy bread washed down with gallons of Absinthe, like there was before. The new menu will consist of Pasta, pasta, pasta, and sometimes some nice veal. If the Frogs don't like it, they can kiss..." (Pack it in - Ed)

The French players at the club, led by Franck Leboeuf, immediately lodged a protest, claiming that there was "blatant foodism" at the club. Leboeuf went on to accuse the Italians of "standing around discussing pizza toppings when they should be training". The Italians immediately hit back, claiming that the French players were "garlicky sods". There were ugly scenes in the car park yesterday afternoon, as some of the Italian players ran a gauntlet of abuse, camembert and frog's legs as they drove home. (OK, we get the picture. No more stereotyping - PC Ed.)

All this is based on sour grapes because of the fact that Leicester should have beaten Chelsea, but didn't because they were crap, and Savage couldn't take it. (Chelsea equalised, way into time added on, from an own goal by ex-Chelsea man Frank Sinclair - nice one Frankie !)

One of the charges against Curtis is that he gave a £700 cash "advance" (a quaint legal term for 'bung') to the father of a 16 year old player at a service station on the M1, in exchange for the promise that he would act for the kid. Superbly, scumbag Andrew is threatening to rat on all the other scumbags that he's been doing "business" with over the years. Classic quote from Mr Andrew: "When I say what I have to say then I feel sorry, because a lot of people are going to run for cover."

Hopefully this one will run and run. A final thought: why do bungs always have to take place at a service station on the M1 ? Is it because motorway food is so expensive ?

Gus Poyet's agent, a Mr Paul Hodges, has been crowing in the press about how he is blackmailing Chelsea into giving Gus a huge wage rise. He has done this by "brokering" (agent's term for 'engineering') a rumoured £9m bid for Gus by Roma which would have tripled Gus' already vast salary. Hodges didn't give a shit whether Gus went to Roma or not, the whole point of the exercise being to generate some readies for himself for doing piss all.

Whether it's in the player's interests to move are of no concern whatever to these cowboys when it comes to the chance of an easy earner. This whole sorry business is a typical example of the cancer that is eating away at world football. The only person who gains is the agent. Everybody else loses, including the players in the long term.

Around 20-30 of these "agents" are bleeding the game dry, and when the whole pack of cards comes crashing down they will simply pack up and walk away, leaving a bloated corpse behind them. Greed is killing the game we all know and love, and as long as there are naive, thick and greedy footballers around, there will always be shady Arthur Daley types lurking in the background, only too ready to dip their snouts into the trough.

No insult is intended to Gus Poyet, who is a great player who never puts less than 100% into his game, and could teach some of his fellow professionals a thing or two about commitment. On the other hand, just how much do you want for training for two or three hours a day, maybe three hours of competitive football a week, free car, free schools for your kids, free housing, eight weeks holiday, hero worship, etc. ad nauseam ?

Whenever a club is having trouble with a player signing a contract or agreeing personal terms, you can bet your bottom dollar there's an agent at the bottom of it. A good example of the sort of person I mean is the scum that are representing Nicolas "spoilt bastard" Anelka. Isn't there a law against them ? If not, there ought to be. Parasites. Stringing them up is too good for 'em. In fact I'd string 'em up first, then I'd.. (that's enough - PC Ed)

Bjarne Goldbaek proves that he's not half as green as Trevor Francis is cabbage-looking, as he turns down a move to Birmingham, stating that he "couldn't work for someone with an IQ of 14". (Well, yes, I made that bit up, but it's bound to be something along those lines: Trevor Francis would struggle to win a game of draughts against a brain-damaged chimpanzee. No offence to chimps, mind - most of 'em are more far more intelligent than poor old Trev)

Where this leaves Bjarne is anyone's guess, but it's obvious that either Luca Vialli or Colin Hutchinson think he's surplus to requirements. This is a great shame, as there was endless amusement value in seeing Goldbaek standing next to Gus Poyet. Their uncanny likenesses to Fred Flintstone (Poyet) and Barney Rubble (Goldbaek) would have meant a contract for life for both of them in any sane organisation..

UPDATE:

Talk about out of the frying pan.. Having survived a near-death encounter with "Clever" Trevor Francis, Bjarne Goldbaek is now threatened by a bid from Nottingham Forest. David Platt, a man with a long pedigree in football management (OK, I made that up), is second only to Trevor in the thickie stakes, although it's a close-run contest. My advice to Bjarne is to sabotage any deal by asking for £150,000 a week, the absolute minimum salary required to put up with Forest and Platt.

I've just bought my first batch of tickets to the first six home games, plus the first qualifying round of the European Cup, coming in at a whopping £189. Prices for the Shed Upper this season have risen by 13%, more than ten times the rate of inflation, which is bad enough. What makes it all the worse is the £1 per ticket extra you have to stump up for paying by credit card. I don't know about you, but in order to buy seven tickets in advance I HAVE to buy by credit card, not having the £200 to pay up front, and I suspect an awful lot of people are in the same boat.

Wait, you might say, no one's forcing you to buy six or seven tickets up front. But everyone knows that the tickets for any given allocation are usually sold out within days of going on sale, so you either buy them up front or not at all. Which leads us back to the extra pound, which I believe is a cynical way of quietly raising the ticket price even more without publishing it. I have taken it up with Ken Bates, who did not bother to acknowledge my letter, and it was only when I started ringing his office that the Financial Director of Chelsea Village, a Mr. Russell, eventually wrote back to me, explaining that the extra charge was to cover Chelsea's losses against fraud. He also went on to say that Chelsea were having a new computer system put in, all of which cost money.

The first of his reasons is a scandalous insult to the intelligence. In this day and age there are machines that will authorise any transaction within seconds, just like in virtually every other business. Even Chelsea have them. Saying that people could ring in for tickets on somebody else's credit card number is obviously complete rubbish; they will only send the tickets to the address of the person named on the card, so where's the problem ? It's also an established fact that dealing without the need for cash is much cheaper than employing the security infrastructure needed to deal with cash, as the whole thing's done as a virtual transaction, which has the added benefit of creating no (or certainly very little) paperwork.

Which brings us on to his second reason, the one about having a new system put in. It reveals an interesting point about the way football clubs treat their loyal customers: this guy thought that the onus was on his customers to pay for a computer system that should have been installed twenty years ago, but wasn't because lack of foresight, vision and investment has been endemic in the industry for years. Now they're reaping the harvest of those years, and have come up with a great wheeze to upgrade without the inconvenience of having to pay for it. And they STILL can't organise it properly. So you can stick your excuses, Mr. Russell. Why don't you just come clean and admit that you want to have your cake, eat it, then get someone else to pay for it ?

Let me know what you think.

Don't you just love the ripe smell of bullshit ? As the whole world knows by now, Man U have been forced by powerful organisations with vested interests to pull out of what has arguably been, until now, the greatest club competition in the world: the FA Cup. For once I have every sympathy with Man U, who were stitched up with breathtaking panache by the government and the FA, who were in turn stitched up by FIFA, the world football governing body.

The root of it all is the insatiable desire to host the World Cup. The reasons for this desire differ wildly, depending on which camp you fall into: the fans' camp or the greedy, corrupt, capitalist bastards camp. With me so far ? As with virtually every other facet of footballing life, the fans end up getting their heads kicked in by the fat bastards at the top of the dung heap. The boys at FIFA must be laughing their bollocks off as they watch the undignified scramble to even be considered for the World Cup. While they tour the world staying in five star hotels, sipping champagne and eating baby pandas at the expense of the local tax payers, us fans happily put up with the minor inconvenience of having our footballing heritage swept aside.

The one organisation that we could reasonably expect to stick up for us, the government (you should never expect any favours from the FA, who are the lapdogs of FIFA), are instead falling over themselves to accede to FIFA's slightest whim. Surely anyone with the merest hint of common sense will have realised by now that England have virtually NO chance of hosting the 2006 World Cup, and that we're being strung along by FIFA and the multinationals, who will keep us dangling until they've squeezed every last drop out of us, then give the World Cup to the Germans. Meanwhile it's the same old story: fans bottom of the shitpile, everyone else reeking of roses.

In the continuing bid to sign the whole French World Cup-winning team, Chelsea sign Didier Deschamps from Juventus for £3 million. We have now arrived at a potentially dangerous situation, where the French players outnumber our famous Italians. This has already caused the resignation of club chef Giuseppe Baddolini, who complained: "Life used to be so easy: pasta, pasta, pasta, and sometimes some nice veal. Now it's garlic, tripe, oysters and long pointy bread washed down with gallons of Absinthe. Last night Franck Leboeuf asked me for SNAILS ! Well that's it. No more. Basta. If they want snails they'll have to catch them themselves. I'm off."

Ex-Juve and current France captain Deschamps is in a class of his own, even though Eric Cantona once intriguingly described him as a "water carrier". Embarrassingly for Monsieur Cuntona, Deschamps has since gone on to carry water in both the European and World Cups, while psychiatrists, players, fans and that bloke in the crowd at Palace are still referring to Cantona as a "nut job".

Laudrup's doctor confirms that a prolonged stay in a foreign country is, in fact, the best cure for homesickness. In a universally acclaimed paper in top doctors' club magazine The Lancet, Dr. Bertie Ollocks reveals that homesickness has been misunderstood in medical circles for years. "Kill or cure is the only answer" said Dr. Ollocks. "I knew straight away that Brian needed a strong dose of aversion therapy, so I gave him some of my new, patent elixir, made from oil of snake, and advised him to leave Copenhagen immediately and sign for Ajax. His homesickness left him straight away. Amazing. Now I'm going to travel the world on a horse-drawn wagon selling my medicine for a dollar a bottle."

Those of you who read my stuff regularly will know exactly how I feel about cheating, whining little shits like Sutton, so it will come as no surprise when I say that, if the rumours are true and we do sign him, there will be trouble sooner or later.

Sutton is the sort of weak character who's fine when everything's going his way, but as soon as the slightest little problem crops up in his path he starts sulking and playing up like the spoilt brat that he is. It's a matter of record that he has in the past exhibited a supreme lack of moral fibre:

• His childish refusal to play for England because Glenn Hoddle had the TEMERITY to pick him for the England B team (surely a great honour ?)
• Slagging virtually every defender (including Frank Leboeuf) that's ever got the better of him
• His two footed tackles when they do get one over on him
• Repeated, blatant diving in the penalty area
• Mouthing off in the papers about how he already wants out of Blackburn because they've been relegated

Some might say that you can't really blame him for wanting out of Blackburn. Others, including me, would say that Sutton did very little to help Blackburn stay up, and that he should try to repay Jack Walker's faith in him by knuckling down next season to help them go back up again. I for one am praying that we don't sign him. I won't say anything more on the subject if he does become a Chelsea player, because criticising our players is usually done very well by others, but don't be surprised if my prophecy comes true in the future - I certainly won't. In any case, NOBODY is worth £10 million.

It seems that even Matthew Harding's widow is included in Ken Bates's seemingly bizarre vendetta against a dead Chelsea fan. Ruth Harding has been informed that she and her family will no longer be welcome in the directors box at Chelsea, and that she is to be relieved of her honorary post as Chelsea's patron. Needless to say, Ruth Harding has said that she is "..very sad and bewildered by this decision which came as a total surprise." There may well be more to it than meets the eye, but it looks pretty bad from where I'm standing. In the interests of fairness I invite Ken to put his side of it by contacting me here, but I'm not holding my breath. Congratulations, Ken, it looks like you have once again elevated yourself to the shortlist for the spiteful, churlish cunt of the year award.

It's been a pretty bad couple of weeks for the Blues, starting with the loss of a two-goal lead against Leicester, and culminating in the exit from the European Cup Winners Cup in Majorca. What makes it all the harder to bear, however, is the attitude of some of the so-called "fans". The ones who booed Chelsea off the pitch and threw their scarves in the bin after the Leicester game (it was a draw, I remind you !). The ones who are demanding that Luca Vialli should be sacked. The ones who cheer like true fans when we win, but turn on the team when we don't.

In thirty-odd years of following the Blues I've never felt as ashamed as I did on that day. It's a good job the scarf-burning boo boys weren't around in the seventies and eighties, because they'd have REALLY had something to moan about. They should try getting behind the team when the shit is hitting the fan, instead of behaving like spoilt, petulant little boys who can't get their own way. Hopefully they'll get bored with football now that things aren't going their way, and we won't have to put up with this shit next season.

I'm proud of what Chelsea have achieved over the last couple of years. Everyone at the club is spilling blood in order to achieve success, and we've won four major trophies in two seasons, but for some it's not good enough. Well I say again that I'm proud to be a Chelsea fan, and if this is failure, give me more.

The ghastly rumours that Chelsea are trying to sign the mentally deficient Chris Sutton for a fee not unadjacent to £10m gather pace. If these rumours turn out to be true I shall have no other alternative than to switch my allegiance to Fulham, who have the crucial advantage of being 100 yards closer to my house than Chelsea. Even big mouth/no trousers Keegan is infinitely preferable to having to cheer on a neanderthal like Sutton. I've been thinking of trying supporting a different club every season for quite a while now, just to see how it is for Man Utd's current "fans"...

Most people know that Graeme Le Saux was caught on camera giving Robbie Fowler a clip round the ear in the bad tempered Premiership game between Chelsea and Liverpool. What some people don't know are the underlying reasons behind why it happened. On the face of it, it was a simple act of retaliation, but there's a little more to it than that. In the game, Fowler had flattened Le Saux, after which Chelsea were awarded a free kick. Fowler then turned his backside towards Le Saux in "an offensive and provocative manner". Le Saux complained to the referee, who responded by booking him, presumably for time wasting. A few minutes later, Le Saux clattered Fowler in an off the ball incident.

There is an issue here, which is what's behind all these shenanigans. Graeme Le Saux has always been slightly different to the run of the mill footballer. He reads a broadsheet newspaper, lists photography and reading amongst his hobbies, and is known to be articulate and of above average intelligence. In other words, he breaks the mould of the stereotypical footballer. Needless to say, this difference is pounced on by opposing supporters, who by their nature as a mob will automatically focus on anything that doesn't fit in to their preconceived ideas about manhood, and assume that he must be gay. So they barrack him endlessly from the terraces. For the most part he puts up with it very well - how would you like constant taunts about your sexuality at your place of work ?

The point is that although that sort of moronic behaviour can be expected from us fans, a footballer is entitled to some respect from his fellow professionals, and he clearly has the right not to expect that sort of shit from Fowler. Add to that the reaction of the ref when he complained, and you can understand the anger he must have felt, even though you can't condone his actions.

Le Saux will likely be punished for the incident, but if that's the case Fowler must also accept his share of the blame. He should also apologise publicly to Le Saux and condemn his own behaviour, if only to correct the impression that it's OK to go in for a bit of "queer bashing" in public. PS: Graeme Le Saux is married with a daughter.

Predictably Arse Wenger and all the other apologists were quick to pour scorn on Chelsea's famous 5-0 victory at Highbury in the 4th round of the Worthington Cup by claiming that they hadn't played their strongest squad etc., yawn, yawn, ad nauseam. Try telling that to the 35,000 Bumnal fans who paid good money to watch their team sacrificed because of Wenger's lack of pride. The fact is that Chelsea didn't use their strongest side either, fielding juniors Percassi, Nicholls and Clement, and reserve keeper Kharine. The difference was that Chelsea remembered that they were playing a London derby, always a matter of pride and the strongest commitment. Arse Wenger evidently decided to take the traditional French line by throwing down his gunners and legging it. No change there, then. (No more frog-bashing, please, you're on a sticky wicket there. Frank Leboeuf.)

Vialli played only two recognised central defenders in an attack-dominated formation, while Wenger virtually admitted that he sacrificed the Worthington Cup on purpose.

Incidentally, The score would have been 8-0 if the appalling "referee's assistant" hadn't left his glasses at home. He called Chelsea strikers offside no less than four times as they were away one on one with the keeper, TV replays showing conclusively that the linesman was a relative of Colonel Blink the short-sighted gink. See the match report from Billy The Bridge.

A lot's been said about Brian Laudrup's decision to pack it all in and go home to Denmark. The vast majority of it, as usual, has been utter rubbish, and I'm talking mainly about the laughable fiction that's printed daily in certain tabloids.

My own feeling is that on the one hand I respect Brian's motives for wanting to go home, but on the other I'm angry and frustrated at the way binding contracts are pushed aside at the slightest whim in football these days. Supporting a football club should NOT involve worrying about whether your top players will still be there next time you turn up to watch them. The 18,000 season ticket holders at Chelsea must be well chuffed, not to mention the 20,000 or so members who've been forced to buy tickets for every match until the end of the season because of the huge demand to see players like Brian Laudrup.

Brian said (and I paraphrase here) that he had been away for ten years and just wanted to go home, and that money was irrelevant if your quality of life was shit. I agree one hundred percent with that, and applaud him for his integrity. On the other hand, what about the 2 year contract he'd signed before deciding after 10 games that he didn't like having to work for a place in the side ? Where's the integrity in that ? So don't let anyone tell you that what Brian has done is OK, because it isn't.

The definition of the word "contract" is: A formal agreement between people or groups. This means that Brian signed a formal agreement with Chelsea to play football for them for three years. As far as I'm aware, (and I admit that I'm at a disadvantage here, not having any idea of what was actually in the contract) there was no get-out clause in that contract that would enable Brian to push off home at his convenience. He is therefore in breach of that contract. Obviously you can't force a bloke to play football, but just letting him clear off to Copenhagen for a pittance does not exactly encourage loyalty from other players. If Briany is such a paragon of integrity, I would suggest that he should pay back the estimated £600,000 he's received in wages since he came to Chelsea. Yeah, right. I can just see it.

Another point to make here is that a lot of fans had taken out an emotional investment in Laudrup and were ready to worship at his footballing shrine (to descend into tabloid-speak for a second). You may think that it doesn't matter if a few fans are disappointed, but don't forget that these poor mug punters are the ones who're paying Briany's bloated salary, not to mention the rest of them. Without the fans you've got NOTHING, apart from a hotel, a couple of restaurants and a debt with yearly interest payments in the millions of pounds.

Speaking for myself, I feel cheated that Brian couldn't give a bit more commitment to the club. It makes you wonder how long it will be before other players get the same idea as poor little Briany when the going gets a bit rough, and where will Chelsea be then ? They've created one hell of a precedent.

Due to the bovine, stubborn thoughtlessness of my soon-to-be-ex-girlfriend Jennie's best mate, who decided it would be a good idea to get married in Greece that weekend, I won't be at the Newcastle match.

The sheer selfishness and insensitivity of these women not to take the fixture list into account is breathtaking, especially in view of the fact that I've already been to the not inconsiderable trouble of getting hold of a ticket, and have not missed the first home game of the season for years.

When I dipped my toe in the fetid waters of compromise, i.e. "You'll have to go on your own", I received, to the accompaniment of vicious and unprovoked threats, shrift that was entirely and inappropriately short. At the risk of being branded a dinosaur, it brings to mind the old saying: "Can't live with 'em, can't shoot 'em"...

Here's a quote from my match report of 28th February 1998 when Chelsea played Moan U at home (see the full report):

"It's a bit worrying that people like Butt and Beckham (who also lost it big time and got booked) are seen as the backbone of the national team, and can't behave like professionals when subjected to a bit of stick that would be classed as amateur night in most other places in the world. And they'll get sent off in the World Cup for retaliation, not just booked. The trouble with that lot is that they're so used to having everything their own way that they haven't had to develop the character they need for when things are going against them. Defenders in the teams we're playing in the World Cup must be gleefully rubbing their hands together as they practise accidentally raking shins, treading on insteps, pulling hair, spitting, etc."

In view of what happened in the England-Argentina game in the World Cup, It gives me no pleasure at all to say "I told you so", but I can tell you this: Glenn Hoddle deserves an apology from the likes of The Sun and other scum papers, all of whom were slating him for not starting Beckham against Tunisia and Romania. He knew that Beckham was a spoilt brat and would get England in the shit, but, as usual, the "experts" at the Sun knew better, didn't they ? So you can put the blame for England going out firmly on the Sun's shoulders, can't you ;-)

Excuse me, but if your team have got themselves in a situation where they need another team, with other priorities, to bail them out of the shit, it's a pretty piss-poor state of affairs. Chelsea are trying, with minimal help from the English FA, to bring back some European silverware to this country, something that Man U, Arsenal, Villa etc. failed dismally to do. Get real, Howard. If you'd been in our position you wouldn't have thought twice about trying to avoid injuries to your players, in fact I seem to remember that when you were in the same position as us in 1985 you did EXACTLY that. So don't give us your sanctimonious platitudes, you hypocrite. I hope we do beat Bolton, but only because I want us to finish with our highest league position for years. If it wasn't for that I'd be laughing my bollocks off hoping you'd get relegated. No disrespect to Everton fans, it's your boss who's got up my nose.

Thanks also to the English FA. It's not our bleeding fault that we have to play a game that means a lot to others and bugger all to us three days before the most important game for any English club in years. Now they're threatening us with large fines if we don't field a full strength team against Bolton. Perhaps they'd like to tell us what they consider our "full strength" team to be, then ? If they could be arsed to look at the teamsheets over the season they'd see that we haven't had more than six of the same players in the side for more than two games on the trot since week one. Chelsea have at least thirty full-time pros on the books, and most of them have played in our squad system this season. So you can stick your large fine where the sun don't shine. Unless you can prove that we're not putting out a full strength team just because we're playing Rixy, Mark Stein, Stamford and David Rocastle in the side.

Ho ho bloody ho. After "a display that ranks as one of the most impressive seen from a British club in the last five years" (Paul McCarthy of the Express talking about Chelsea's famous 2-1 victory at Real Betis), you wankers must be kicking yourselves for refusing to cover Chelsea in Europe this season, on the spurious grounds that the Cup Winners Cup is "not a competition that will attract viewers." After having slumbered through Villa and Man U's games in Europe this week, I wonder what the viewing public would have to say about it ?

Full marks to Channel 5 and Jonathan Pearce for having the balls to show Chelsea in Europe in spite of the derision they received from the big boys. It's just a pity you can't receive Channel 5 if you live outside central London, isn't it ?

UPDATE: With a hugely hypocritical about-turn, the BBC have now decided to cover the final of the ECWC, using license-payers' money to outbid the luckless Channel 5 for the rights. For once I'm at a loss for words.

There have been a few thoughtful and intelligent articles written about Ruud Gullit in the past couple of weeks, notably the one by Jeff Powell in the Daily Mail a couple of Fridays ago. Unfortunately these have proved to be the exception in a spectacular display of scumbag journalism from the tabloids. At least it's consistent, though; consistent with the way sports journos have been making up seedy stories for years. The reporting of the Terry Venables/Alan Sugar fight, the Heysel Stadium disaster, Hillsborough, etc. are only a few examples that spring to mind (hang your head in shame, The Sun.)

Given that most of the stuff on offer from the tabloids has been fanciful to say the least, you really have to make up your mind about Ruud based on his record at the Club. When Ruud came, Glenn Hoddle was trying to resurrect the principles of The Beautiful Game, but we didn't really have the players or the inclination at board level for him to succeed. Glimmers of hope were there, though, and Chelsea were playing better football than at any time since the early seventies.

Glenn's masterstroke was in attracting Ruud Gullit to come to Chelsea as a player. The excitement and attention that resulted was amazing. Suddenly it seemed that people were prepared to take Chelsea seriously again. Within months, Chelsea had signed the likes of Vialli, Leboeuf, Di Matteo, Zola, etc., and were catapulted into being a valid footballing force in this country. The main reason these players were attracted to Chelsea above other Premiership clubs was the style of football they were playing, personified by Ruud Gullit. For that reason alone, we owe a great debt of gratitude to Ruud.

Secondly, look at what Chelsea have achieved since he was made manager. We've won the FA Cup for the first time in 26 years, we've been in the top 5 of the Premiership for most of this season, we're in the final of the Coca-Cola Cup, we're in the quarter-finals of the European Cup Winners Cup, old uncle Tom Cobbleigh and all. Not bad in one and a half seasons.

It may be that Ruud is a greedy, arrogant, cold bastard. It may even be that he only turned on the charm when the TV cameras were around and didn't work that hard on the relationships with youth players and reserves, but, at the end of the day, it's undeniable that he has been the catalyst for Chelsea's vastly improving fortunes. I'd like to thank Ruud for what he did for our Club, and wish him well in the future.

Here we go again. Another classic example of the way football fans are treated by the triumvirate of clubs/police/FA. An 11:15 kickoff against Moan U, and why ? Because they can get away with it. Their reasons are that the police are worried about "drunkenness and the associated problems that go with it". Apply those criteria to all the matches round the country, then. Go on, and see what happens. You'll have half the publicans in the country on your back, for starters, never mind the barrage of criticism from club chairmen, supporters clubs, etc.

It constantly amazes me that clubs like Chelsea and Man U can charge punters up to £50 to see 90 minutes of football, which is as much as, say, top tickets to a West End play or the finest seats at the Opera, etc., and still treat us like they did when it was tuppence to stand on the terraces. For good or ill, the demographical profile of football supporters has changed. When will the police and clubs realise that the vast majority of us have absolutely NO interest in causing any sort of trouble when we go to watch a game ? With threats of life bans flying around like confetti, we couldn't afford to even if we wanted to.

The fact is that the police, clubs, FA, FIFA, the lot of them, just want an easy life, which means dumping on the people who pay their wages from a great height. If they reckon Man U is a riot waiting to happen, why did they let the Arsenal match go ahead last Wednesday night ? The pubs had been open nine hours beforehand, but, mysteriously, at the end of the match Arsenal and Chelsea fans were freely mixing in Fulham Road, and there was NO trouble whatsoever. In spite of the fact that Chelsea traditionally hates Arsenal easily as much as Man U. The conclusion, then, can only be that the fuzz hate Man U even more than we do..

All this stupid ruling will achieve is to further alienate genuine fans. What with the rumours of huge ticket price rises for next season, the clubs can ill afford to keep on this way, and it's no good hiding behind the coppers' shirt tails, either. Stand up for yourselves.

Finally, I can only apologize to the Chelsea fans who live in the home counties who will have to get up at 5 in the morning to stand any chance of getting to the match. Man U fans will be OK - they all live in London.

There have been some astonishing developments at Chelsea recently. If you've followed Chelsea for long, you'll have seen it all before, and you'll be used to staggering from one managerial crisis to the next. I find myself in the position of being unable to make up my mind whether Ruud Gullit's sacking was justified, at the time it came, or not.

I'm in the same position as a lot of Chelsea fans; I'm increasingly uncomfortable with Ken Bates' more outlandish comments and seemingly bizarre behaviour, but his actions in the past have not been the actions of a man who doesn't give a shit about the club. He is outspoken and forthright, which makes him easy to dislike, but my feeling is that, underneath it all, he does have Chelsea Football Club's best interests at heart. I might change my mind when I see the ticket price increases for next season, though !

Last night (19th Feb 1997) the present storm clouds lifted long enough for the superb 3-1 stuffing of London rivals Arsenal in the second leg of the Coca-Cola Cup semi final. Chelsea win 4-3 on aggregate, sending us to Wembley again, against Middlesbrough again. Let the good times roll !

It's been a year since the death of Matthew Harding. His memory is still honoured here, even if it isn't in the Chairman's office at Stamford Bridge. Ken Bates, with exquisite timing, called Matthew "evil" in a documentary about Matthew's life on Channel 5. Bates has made some outlandish statements in the past which you could consider amusing, but this time he's blown it. Like thousands of other people, Matthew Harding was an ordinary bloke who loved Chelsea. The only difference between him and the rest of us was that he had a lot of money, and he did with it what the rest of us would have done if they'd been in Matthew's position: he helped Chelsea financially when they really needed it.

I've always supported Ken Bates because it was obvious that he'd saved the Club from oblivion at the hands of property speculators when he could have made a killing and walked away. But by attacking Matthew Harding in this way, he's also attacking every other Chelsea fan who wishes they could do what Matthew did for the Club. I hope Ken Bates is ashamed of himself. Judging by his attitude in the documentary, though, I doubt it. I also hope he can still look Ruth Harding in the eye at the next home game, but he'll probably have no trouble doing that either.

A big thank you to the Sports Dome in Camden, a so-called sports theme bar, for not letting in sports fans on Cup Final day, for what I can only assume is the heinous crime of wearing a Chelsea shirt. I would have understood if we'd been drunk and disorderly, but it was 11:30 in the morning, you twats. Two hours later, maybe. Here's a suggestion: when it comes down to it, you don't actually want paying customers cluttering up the place, so why not turn it into a "Bouncer's Paradise" theme bar, where nobody gets in at all ? Much more your cup of tea.

And to that arse in The Vine on Kentish Town Road: You've ruined what used to be a good pub with that pretentious deco refit. You can't buy atmosphere out of a shop-fitter's catalogue, you moron. Treating people like shit because they happen to like football shows what an ignorant little prat you are, bearing in mind that the only other people in your place were a few poor bloody locals who you haven't been able to get rid of yet. That pub used to be packed out on a Saturday night. Why don't you piss off back to catering college and do some studying this time ? For instance, if you want to sell alcohol you could try learning how to handle people who have had some drinks and may be a little over-excited. You lost at least £200 that night by being such a wanker that we walked out; a quiet word would have sufficed, but you had to exhibit the diplomatic finesse of Saddam Hussein, didn't you ? You pompous, jumped-up little git.