CheLOLsea

[No Fixed Abode]

It was the greatest meLOLtdown since Kevin Keegan's outburst as Newcastle manager..

Massive exaggeration.

[Mr Optimist]

Jose worded his rant specifically so in his eyes he wins either way, they either punish him and he says "See I told you they have something against Chelsea" or he gets away with it.

If he wasn't such an egomaniac who loves to try and play mind games with the British press, he may consider doing a Fergie style self imposed media blackout but he would miss it as much as the tabloid press would miss his rants.

[genome]

I think people try and make out Jose is more intelligent than he really is. I doubt he specifically crafted his interview so he wins either way, he was just a mong having a meLOLtdown and that's that

[Ouroboros]

Basically an FA Misconduct charge for being a dick. Well done Jose. You dick.

You can't say anything controversial these days without getting an FA misconduct charge.

Shame that the FA are draining the personality out of the game. It's boring listening to generic media trained responses.

Yeah, it makes the FA look pretty pathetic.

The interview didn't make Jose look great though. There is no conspiracy against Chelsea. His continuing complaints make him look desperate to deflect blame and do nothing to reassure anyone that he's capable of turning this around.

[No Fixed Abode]

When you look at the evidence you can't help but think there is a conspiracy.

Take the Burnley game last season. There was no retrospective action to Ashley Barnes. This season there was retrospective action against Costa v Arsenal. It's the consistency which is poor and makes the FA look inept.

[Hoop Blah]

When you look at the evidence you can't help but think there is a conspiracy.

Take the Burnley game last season. There was no retrospective action to Ashley Barnes. This season there was retrospective action against Costa v Arsenal. It's the consistency which is poor and makes the FA look inept.

Errrmm, isn't that just because the Barnes tackle wasn't that bad and just a clash during the follow which happens as part of a legal tackle whereas Costa was whacking someone in the face which you can't do?

[Winston Smith]

Basically an FA Misconduct charge for being a dick. Well done Jose. You dick.

You can't say anything controversial these days without getting an FA misconduct charge.

Shame that the FA are draining the personality out of the game. It's boring listening to generic media trained responses.

I actually agree

What is wrong with a manager or player giving their opinion - soon all managers will just be giving the same generic post-match interviews

They have been giving the same generic post match interviews for years already, maybe decades.

Please can we ban the pre match interview? I just dont get them.

[No Fixed Abode]

When you look at the evidence you can't help but think there is a conspiracy.

Take the Burnley game last season. There was no retrospective action to Ashley Barnes. This season there was retrospective action against Costa v Arsenal. It's the consistency which is poor and makes the FA look inept.

Errrmm, isn't that just because the Barnes tackle wasn't that bad and just a clash during the follow which happens as part of a legal tackle whereas Costa was whacking someone in the face which you can't do?

You've just basically explained why the system is flawed. A potential leg breaking challenge is deemed ok but a slap around the face isn't.

[Ouroboros]

When you look at the evidence you can't help but think there is a conspiracy.

Take the Burnley game last season. There was no retrospective action to Ashley Barnes. This season there was retrospective action against Costa v Arsenal. It's the consistency which is poor and makes the FA look inept.

You can help but think that. Yes, there's always inconsistency, and this gives just about every football fan in the world the ammunition to claim his team is hard done by.

But in our adult moments we can reflect and realise that it's not true.

[No Fixed Abode]

When you look at the evidence you can't help but think there is a conspiracy.

Take the Burnley game last season. There was no retrospective action to Ashley Barnes. This season there was retrospective action against Costa v Arsenal. It's the consistency which is poor and makes the FA look inept.

You can help but think that. Yes, there's always inconsistency, and this gives just about every football fan in the world the ammunition to claim his team is hard done by.

But in our adult moments we can reflect and realise that it's not true.

But it is true. A leg breaker of a challenge is worse than a slap around the pork chops. So clearly the FA need to re-evaluate their procedures on disciplinary issues.

[LUX]

you've done a gr8 job since you've come back.

But I'm more interested on your holiday escapades. Soz if I missed it.

[Ouroboros]

But it is true. A leg breaker of a challenge is worse than a slap around the pork chops. So clearly the FA need to re-evaluate their procedures on disciplinary issues.

Ok, I guess I agree with that.

It's nothing to do with a conspiracy against Chelsea though.

[Hoop Blah]

You've just basically explained why the system is flawed. A potential leg breaking challenge is deemed ok but a slap around the face isn't.

But the clash wasn't a foul was it? And the ref saw it and dealt with it I think?

What punishment do you suggest for an accidental clash of legs?

[No Fixed Abode]

You've just basically explained why the system is flawed. A potential leg breaking challenge is deemed ok but a slap around the face isn't.

But the clash wasn't a foul was it? And the ref saw it and dealt with it I think?

What punishment do you suggest for an accidental clash of legs?

Wasn't a foul You're losing credibility here.

And again. The FA need to re-evalu8 this thing with 'the ref saw it and dealt with it". The ref only gets one angle of a challenge - some tackles look ok from certain angles - but aren't and vice versa.

[No Fixed Abode]

But it is true. A leg breaker of a challenge is worse than a slap around the pork chops. So clearly the FA need to re-evaluate their procedures on disciplinary issues.

Ok, I guess I agree with that.

It's nothing to do with a conspiracy against Chelsea though.

But it's not an isol8ed incident. Granted, you're always going to get decisions for and against you during a season - but it's the consistency which is the issue.

Gabriel's red card was rescinded for the incident with Costa for retaliation. Last season Matic was red carded for retaliation for the Ashley Barnes incident. So the FA have now set a precedent whereby it's ok to retali8. If they issue a red for retaliation again this season then they will lose even more credibility.

[genome]

Kes, what was your view on the two Southampton penalty claims on Saturday

[From Despair To Where?]

It's history repeating though isn't it. Happened in Spain and Italy, the moment Mourinho doesn't get his own way. he throws his toys out of the pram and cries "conspiracy".

[No Fixed Abode]

Kes, what was your view on the two Southampton penalty claims on Saturday

Shirt holding one was a penalty but this happens week in week out and most are never given.

Mane one was wasn't a penalty and he should have received a yellow for diving.

[LUX]

how about the 3 (THREE) Southampton goals. Any views on them? And Porto's two etc etc.

Are Chelsea still in the League Cup? You can still challenge Arsenal and, er, Stoke for that.

[Ouroboros]

But it is true. A leg breaker of a challenge is worse than a slap around the pork chops. So clearly the FA need to re-evaluate their procedures on disciplinary issues.

Ok, I guess I agree with that.

It's nothing to do with a conspiracy against Chelsea though.

But it's not an isol8ed incident. Granted, you're always going to get decisions for and against you during a season - but it's the consistency which is the issue.

Gabriel's red card was rescinded for the incident with Costa for retaliation. Last season Matic was red carded for retaliation for the Ashley Barnes incident. So the FA have now set a precedent whereby it's ok to retali8. If they issue a red for retaliation again this season then they will lose even more credibility.

Yeh. There's inconsistency, we know this.

Not evidence of an anti-Chelsea conspiracy though.