Following the protest we arranged prior to our home match against Brentford on January 17, we were contacted by one of the directors who sits on the board of Chelsea Football Club. We were told our manifesto had been read by the club, and we were pleased it had been brought to their attention. We were asked about the prospect of meeting face to face with that director in question.
We saw this as a key opportunity for us to put forward our thoughts and concerns to the club at what is an important and worrying time. We agreed to the meeting, although we were very clear prior to the meeting that our protest itself and any potential future action we may take would not be up for discussion.
The meeting took place in central London in early February. We have taken some time since that meeting to discuss what our next steps should be, and we have decided at this point it is in the best interests of all Chelsea fans to understand the way the club is approaching this matter, and to reveal some details of how the meeting went. This article reflects the group’s recollection and interpretation of the meeting.
As we have previously outlined, we do not have a motivation to uphold a ‘positive relationship’ with the club, as certain other stakeholders may do. Our objective is to scrutinise the club’s activities and hold them to account.
We wish to state that while we respect and thank the club for reaching out and giving us the chance to meet in person, we feel the attitude conveyed by the club director was symptomatic of the hubris, arrogance and dismissiveness with which the current ownership has run the club since taking over in 2022. On the whole, we do not feel supporters’ concerns are being addressed and based on our meeting, there is little evidence that is going to change in the short-term or long-term future.
Discussion points
Once the meeting began, it became very clear to us early on that the club’s primary motivation for the meeting was to in effect present to us a sales pitch and attempt to talk us round to their way of thinking. We were told, in no uncertain terms, that despite having the highest net spend in the Premier League on new players since BlueCo’s takeover, that the club is struggling to compete financially with Europe’s top clubs.
The club director spoke very disrespectfully about what was achieved under the previous ownership and of individuals involved in that time. In their view, the current ‘project’ consisting of vast expenditure and player churn is the only means with which we can hope to compete at the elite level at some point in the future. The club’s effort to reduce the wage bill has been seen as a means of offsetting the spend on players so far, and the director was honest about there being no appetite to compete for more established Premier League signings for this reason.
We were repeatedly given the same small number of player names they see as successes that in some way justify this approach.
After being lectured on this for about 15 minutes, we felt the need to step in and scrutinise what was being said. The meeting took a more confrontational turn when the club director expressed surprise that, in view of the club still being 13 points off the top of the table at the time (this has risen to 19 points at the time of writing), in the fourth season of a ‘transitional period’, fans are not showing more patience.
We calmly explained that we do not see a direction of travel taking us towards seriously competing in the Premier League and Champions League while the current model is in place, and that the lack of proven experience and leadership in the squad will continue to harm us until this issue is addressed.
The discussion became heated when the director responded by telling us players will mature as they get older and that, to them, it is “fucking obvious we are building one of the best teams in the world.”
One of our group then responded saying we found this a condescending comment. After paying to watch the team home and away for the last four seasons, to have it suggested to us that our route to the top is “fucking obvious” was insulting to our intelligence and we did not understand what this is based on, when we have not seriously competed in the Premier League and Champions League under BlueCo and show little signs that we will do while the current model is in place.
The director denied they were being condescending and told us we have no more right to be upset than they do (despite the fact we are paying fans). We stressed that getting buy-in from the fans is incredibly important and that the director’s opinion was very much in a minority. We expressed to the director that the club brazenly taking an attitude of “we’re right and the rest of the world is wrong” is not helpful.
Lack of experience
We asked the club why it is that since January 2023, we haven’t signed a single player of age 27 or over, and we wanted to know why there has been no exceptions or balance in the way the squad is being built.
The director appeared to suggest the club would not pursue certain players. According to the director, despite the high amount of spend on players, we can’t afford to compete for the likes of Marc Guehi and Antoine Semenyo. The director did not directly answer when asked if the club has a specific wage cap in place.
The club is taking the view that due to our revenue being lower than a number of other Premier League and European clubs, signing players with resale value is one of the few levers we have to mitigate against this. We asked that if that is the case, why can’t we look towards growing revenue either by winning competitions which leads to greater prize money, or at least by bringing on board a long-term front-of-shirt sponsor?
We pointed out to the director that if the club is not prepared to pay fair market rates, in terms of wages, for the types of players that will help push the club forward, which our competitors are prepared to pay, then we cannot expect to compete at the top. We argued there must be a reason why no other elite club has tried anything like our current project in approximately 150 years of organised football, and there is not a shred of evidence that this type of approach leads to winning elite league titles.
The director retorted that we also do not have evidence of this approach not working. We responded that the best example we could think of was Arsenal’s earlier years of playing at the Emirates Stadium post-2006, where a focus on developing youth rather than mixing youth with experience never developed into a team that was capable of winning leagues. The director remained confident this will not happen with us.
Management problems
Another issue which was raised was that of the club’s inability to align with managers beyond 12-18 months. The meeting took place about one month after Enzo Maresca’s departure, who at 18 months, is currently the longest-serving manager of the BlueCo era.
Once again, there was a lack of self-reflection from the director, who even said there is no statistical relationship between managers and results, and that their overall impact is overestimated. We found this very concerning, although the director did at least acknowledge they had hoped to make more progress this season.
The director also conceded there had been a failing in Maresca’s tenure, with regards to his relationship with the medical staff.
We were also alarmed when the director said the likes of Luis Enrique, who won the Champions League as manager of PSG last season (and whose team beat us 5-2 the night before this article was published), would not have been the right appointment for us when the manager position came up previously.
It was put forward by our representatives that there is a lack of scrutiny being placed on the sporting directors. According to the board director, problems with Maresca stemmed from him not being offered some of the same contract details that the sporting directors have in place..
We do not feel that a small number of more successful signings, given almost the entire squad BlueCo inherited has been replaced, outweighs the lack of sufficient quality in several positions we still see on the pitch. Some of the more recent signings, particularly given we had qualified for the Champions League, were singled out by us as particularly disappointing.
When asked if the current sporting directors are the right people to take the club forward, the director said they could not directly answer the question, but it seems to them that they are.
John Terry
Since our meeting, John Terry has spoken publicly about his disappointment at not being chosen to lead the team as manager on an interim basis following Maresca’s exit from the club. This seemed very timely, as once again, we were alarmed when the director told us they do not think Terry is the right person to be involved with professionally in first-team affairs. This is despite the fact the club employs him as a part-time mentor in the club’s academy.
What next?
The director explained it is likely to take at least a couple more seasons for us to compete at the very top of the table again. The director was unable to put an exact timeline on this.
The director asked us what the club could do to alleviate our concerns. Our answer was the club could compromise and build a more balanced squad. The director did not seem keen on this idea. The club continues to believe players simply getting older will turn them into winners; we believe football is never this simple, and at some point, leaders need to show them how to win at the elite level.
To be clear, this meeting did nothing to deter us in our efforts to try and bring about change and we were certainly not talked round to the club’s way of thinking. If anything, it has made us more determined to take action against them.
We feel there is a severe lack of self-reflection at the club, and refusing to take others’ points on board would be detrimental to any business, let alone a football club. The director did tell us our comments would be passed on to others at the club though.
Since that meeting took place, we have noticed UEFA’s report signifying the club reported an English record loss of £355m for the 2024-25 season. While the club has of course tried to play this down, we do not take this as an indication that the decimation of what made the club so successful prior to the 2022 takeover is being justified by a ‘financially sustainable approach’.
While we accept the director’s point that the quantity of communication with fan groups has improved since BlueCo’s takeover, we pointed out these are short-term wins, and it is ultimately actions that matter more.
The director conceded that our protest was well organised and our arguments were expressed in the right way. We will continue to scrutinise the club’s actions and will do what it takes to help get this club back to where we feel we should be competing. We will not rest until the club is willing to show a form of compromise.
Up the Chels!