Thursday, 22nd May 2008
LOSERS
Speaking to the press after his third successive defeat Chelsea Leader Abramovich pinned the blame squarely on Manchester United's power on incumbency, helped by inconsistent decisions on the part of the officials and by a controlled and spiteful media, owned by friends of the friends of friends.
It was also clear, he said, that so many people of a different colour had been given special privileges to travel and show their support for the other lot that it was impossible to know whether the cause of true democracy had been served.
"This was why" he said "we always objected to joining UEFA."
At a loss to understand how, yet again, he had been unable to take his club to the pinnacle of power, Abramovich pointed out that when clubs like Man U are able to waive income tax demands, grant planning permits, shower jobs like confetti and generally bestow largesse on all and sundry, the purity of the game is sullied beyond redemption and the future of civilisation is threatened.
The failure of the powers that be to recognise that it was Chelsea's turn this time also ensured that yet again, the people's choice was perverted and the wrong team won. In fact, continued Abramovich, such was the manifest injustice of the whole thing that he was going to thkweam and thkweam and thkweam until he was given a lollipop too. After all, he continued, Man U won by only the slimmest of slim margins, which means that they were obliged, under the rules of footballing democracy as re-defined for his own convenience, to recognise Abramovich as a co-winner.
In fact, he emphasised, Man U did not win at all, Chelsea did, so there. Asked to pinpoint the basic reason for Chelsea's failure to convince the public on the day, Abramovich said that it was too early to be able to say who was to blame but a report would be published in a few days, just as soon as he had had time to write it. He knew that the report would be a good one, because he was going to write it, and in it there would be nothing but words of praise for him.
Pressed for a fuller answer, he did say that the decision to play for an extra half hour certainly did not help the cause of true democracy, as it was clear that the other side would do everything in their power, legitimate or not, to ensure that the result was swung their way, for all that this would mean a travesty of justice and a perversion of the will of the people. Abramovich said that his abject failure to live up to the traditions of the beautiful game and concede gracefully, accepting responsibility and congratulating the winners, was absolutely not connected to his inability to stand up and be counted when the chips were down but was to be taken as yet another good reason why he would be given a standing ovation at the next General Meeting of the Club, during which he or his chosen one would be nominated to chair the Board of Directors again.
When it was pointed out that this was yet another example of the way his stewardship had led half the footballing nation up the garden path to disappointment, Abramovich said that this was quite simply not true.
Under him, they had won any number of inconsequential and irrelevant trophies and, anyway, the questioner was obviously forgetting that on at least one occasion, Man U's triumph was false, because more people, including Abramovich's own late great-aunty, had made it clear that they did not want them to win, so there. In concluding his speech from the throne, Abramovich hinted that his deputy leader was going to be singled out internally for the fullest portion of blame. It was irrelevant, he said, that this gentleman had conducted himself with dignity and given everything he had to the contest: he was the one who had actually led the team at the venue and therefore he had to take the full blame.
Asked whether he was referring to his campaign manager or to the leader of the technical group at the venue where the contest took place, Abramovich said that it would be unfair to individualise but the whole world had seen who had walked across to the other side and conceded defeat while he, Abramovich, was skulking away refusing to show his face.
As for the team's technical leader, Abramovich had nothing but ill-disguised annoyance because of the way he had snatched defeat from the very jaws of victory. When asked whether his key man's performance and attitude was a factor in their defeat, Abramovich said that it was unfair to blame this gentleman, whose bright smile was evidence of the fact that he was a perfect fit for the job, which entailed doing everything asked of him by him (Reporter's note: Abramovich clearly meant himself when referring to the second him but English is not his first language) When it was gently pointed out that it was the one who had got a red-card who was being asked about, Abramovich was heard to mumble
"Oh, I thought it was the one who got a black eye and who is Drogba anyway?". Concluding, Abramovich said that his supporters' deep disappointment was nothing to do with him, he wasn't there at the time, he wasn't to blame, not him, he would come up smelling of roses yet again, and nor was it anything to do with anyone who supported him.
"It was everyone else's fault" he said "especially those who don't realise exactly how utterly, utterly brilliant I am and how I know everything about everything that there is to know anything about. It was the power of incumbency, supported by those of forces of evil, the bribed columnists and the rest of the lick-spittle media, which made sure that the will of the people was perverted."
Abramovich promised to be at the beck and call of the people, even if he would now pretend to take a back-seat.
RSS
Comments
"Abramovich promised to be at the beck and call of the people, even if he would now pretend to take a back-seat."
Would the 'beck' be you, by any chance, Bocc?
You talk the talk, can you walk the walk?
I think you should seriously consider sticking a big glowng graphic saying something on the lines of 'here be jokes', for the benefit of the thickies.
Doesn't this remind you of Sant's press conference? Or was it done on purpose Dr. Borg Cardona!!
Originally, the nick came from the way a bloke who shall remain nameless (for now) bawled out my surname across the canteen at University: it sort of ran together and became "bocca" (BOrgCArdona, geddit?)
There seems to have been instant adoption of the sound, presumably on the basis of the valid-enough theory "if the cap fits, wear it".
So it's not just my shape, but that sure helped.
1939 (Esplanade House School) and I listened on the steam radio
to an exciting match for who thought Pompey would beat Wolves?
Our Maltese teacher, Mr Armes, at tthe Dockyard School of Cospicua two years earlier had observed that the three Royal Navy divisions, Portsmouth Plymouth and Chatham
were all at the bottom of their respective football divisions!
My father was Pompey Div.
At least Portsmouth set a record for the longest holder of the Cup!
Andrew being told that things are ironic by someone like you who clearly has no sence of irony is in fact rather ironic.
The first one with the quote from W.Churchill.
@ABC. Some comic relief - What's John Terry's favourite piece of lingerie ? A SLIP !!!!!!!!!!
Don't you think you're abusing this politics metaphor? if I remember correctly, a while back, when things where looking up for Chelsea, you used the same metaphor to say something on the lines of 'the blue coming from behind to clutch victory from the jaws of...bla bla'. Isn't what you're doing now pretty much the opposite of that, with the blues taking on the role of the sulky losers? You're turning your metaphors upside down! Ammetti! Ammetti!
You bad, bad man.
... as a neutral supporter (I lie... my dad's a genuine supporter of the Pensioners since the 1960's) I would have preferred a Chelski win. The only consolation for me was that Wayne Bridge was not even on the bench... more incentive for him to move on to greater things with his mentor Claudio Ranieri. I'd have loved to wish good luck for next year but this time we're back and Del Piero, Amauri and Trezeguet will be swinging them in all over Europe... it's tough but hey - if it's in the game... then it's in the game.
I would have added a small disclaimer, that any likeness with real life situations and people other than those mentioned here is purely accidental.
While my analysis focuses on the game (see Jes on Sport); this one depicts what might be going on in the headquarters in the aftermath of the loss.
However, it turned out that the Blues' behaviour on the pitch was of much better losers then the 'incidents' you're referring to here.
Good day to all.
Jes
Its like firing on the Red Cross.
Still can't make head or tail of charles buttigieg's contribution however. Will somebody enlighten me please.
I had to smile despite living in Barnsley-England's Zabbar
This hatred is being pushed too far, at its extreme,political polarisation resembles religious wars. It has the same fanatism,the same destructiveness,the same demonising of opponents.
anyway a round of applause also goes for Chelsea... there cannot be a GREAT WIN without a GREAT OPPONENT
Glory glory Man Utd
sahha
In Defeat: Defiance
In Victory: Magnanimity
In Peace: Goodwill.
How the English-Speaking Peoples through their unwisdom,carelessness and good nature allowed the wicked to rearm.
Sir Winston Churchill
How you managed to come up with such a brilliant and totally pertinent exercise (should I call it satire !) at an unearthly hour and especially after the rollercoaster of emotions you (like all of us ordinary mortals) went through beats me completely.
Political parallels apart, although the similarities with the local situation are uncanny, I never thought that I would ever find myself , as a Man. U. fan, feeling for Chelsea.
Drogba's stupidity apart, all the Blues players deserve nothing but the highest praise for the way they turned the game round after suffering such a mauling in the first half (by the way, even a primary school football team coach would have realised that the Essien role as Ronaldo's marker was a non starter).
How can one not feel sorry for JT, who blew it at the last minute after the massive game he played in the heart of the Chelsea defence.
All in all, a massive advert for the English Premier league, and for the perennial detractors of the English national team, may I point out that ten of the starting players yesterday were English.
Well done to both teams.
But pardon me for my skepticism, you either have a way above average memory or you taped the whole thing and spent the night hitting play and stop.
Come on be honest ... did he really say all that?