Journalist questions Obramovich ownership of Chelsea

[Stephen Paul]

"One has to look at how he's amassed his wealth. That 'stolen' money is bankrolling Chelsea. It has been a deeply corrosive influence on British football."
"He bought Chelsea for protection. He knew there was a risk Putin would come after him and he knew one of the best ways of protecting himself was to associate himself with a highly visible British asset - and he chose Chelsea Football Club."
"There's no real emotional background to that, that was a decision from a very ruthless and manipulative businessman"
"So to talk about it in terms of 'Oh he's great because he's invested in British football' look at the reason he did and look at the money he's using"

Journalist Matthew Syed's comments have resurfaced and they're causing serious debate.

[93:2012]

These journalists have an agenda and on top of that they have to create controversy to earn.

Just ignore their crap and spin.

[gavin]

I think that he was genuinely interested and excited by Chelsea. But that doesn't mean that he isn't a wanker.

[KunDB]

Roman Abramovivh was brilliant for Chelsea and that's all fans want. Would you sooner have the Glaziers ripping your club off?

The usual cohort of journalists are trying to twist this tragic war to attack City & Newcastle. Same old, same old.