Daily Democracy

Vote: Do Chelsea deserve a Champions League ban?

Should UEFA make an example of misbehaving Blues?

Didier Drogba

While the world awaits UEFA’s verdict on Didier Drogba and Michael Ballack’s punishment, the media have been making their own suggestions.

Most agree that Le Drog should receive a minimum ban of six European games, which would see him miss the group stages of the Champions League 2009/10. Ex Premier League ref Jeff Winter concurs, adding that Michael Ballack should be ruled out for four games for his ridiculous non-contact pursuit of Tom Henning Øvrebø. His former colleague Graham Poll has also waded in, suggesting a slightly harsher eight to ten matches for the Ivorian and five to six for the German.

The Guardian’s Richard Williams, however, is calling for much more drastic action:

The withdrawal of their invitation to next season’s Champions League, taking tens of millions of pounds in revenue along with it, would soon persuade them to find a way of curbing their players’ excesses, and others would follow their example. If Chelsea’s players and managerial staff are reluctant to abandon the exaggerated sense of grievance instilled and fostered by Jose Mourinho’s regime, they will have to be taught a lesson.

So, should UEFA make an example of the Blues and give them the harshest punishment of all? Or is a brief player ban and a stern ticking off much more appropriate? Let us know your thoughts below…

27 responses so far
  • anon // May 12, 2009 at 1:54 pm

    Hypothetically, if Chelsea get a ban for next year,will Villa replace them? With Europa places being lower (Everton, Spurs and Fulham in in that case)?

    Highly unlikely of course but would be good to see and to show you can’t treat refs like that

  • anon // May 12, 2009 at 2:17 pm

    Surely any ban on the club is ridiculous? Chelsea were robbed in broad daylight (even though the game was at night!).

    The obvious steps taken by UEFA to make sure there was no English repeat final was bad enough. Football has reached a level of corruption beyond sense. To then hypocritically punish Chelsea would be embarrassing to the World of Football.

    Chelsea’s punishment has already been served, being unfairly dumped out of the CL.

  • timbucktoo // May 12, 2009 at 2:24 pm

    This is becoming ridiculous, fined definatly, banned maybe, anyone remember the valencia inter game in the champs league when a brawl broke out, ppl kicking each other after the game. did anyone get a ban or did the clubs get banned? i dont think so

  • Zola // May 12, 2009 at 2:29 pm

    So fans get stabbed in Italy, Liverpool fans storm the gates at Rome to get into the final, bottles get thrown at refs in other countries..but hey this is Chelsea we’re taking about..so Yes why not just thow everything inc the kicthen sink at them.
    About time the press stood up and were accountable for their actions in stoking up the fires.
    Fine the players and club yeap.
    Do something to the ref for his part ..yeap
    Fine the papers and Sky tv for inciting this over the top reaction

  • seckkiew // May 12, 2009 at 2:42 pm

    this must surely be the sickest attempt by the media to get a football club, which has just been dealt with the cruelest injustice by a referee in a very important match, banned from the world’s biggest club competition. i have watched the match and for all i know chelsea did not do anything to the match officials, and there was no violence also. only didier drogba threw his tantrums at the referee who for unknown reasons denied chelsea 4 clear cut penalty calls. it was the rush of adrenaline that made drogba behave irrationally. i remember ex-chelsea manager scolari punched an opposition player and his club/country was not banned from the competition; fighting involving swiss and turkish players during some kind of competition (both countries not harshly dealt with); some valencia players were involved in an after-game fighting after a football match (sorry forgot which one). i do know one thing is that chelsea is always treated more harshly than other big name clubs like man utd, liverpool and arsenal

  • Evan // May 12, 2009 at 2:51 pm

    “i do know one thing is that chelsea is always treated more harshly than other big name clubs”

    Isn’t that the truth? I’m surprised to read that there are a lot of people considering the length of bans as too light. Considering most agree that they were robbed of victory and that Ballack didn’t even touch the official, I’d say the proposed 4/6 match bans respectively are harsh. Fines for players and club should definitely happen, but I believe Ballack should be banned for 1 or 2 and Drogba for 4.

  • seckkiew // May 12, 2009 at 2:55 pm

    neutral fans and non football fan readers are not so stupid as the media try their very best to crucify chelsea football club. the match was watched by millions around the world, and not everyone is dumb to differentiate right from wrong. the more the media try to portray chelsea as the enemy of football, and maybe by doing so more football fans will pledge their allegiance to chelsea.

  • timbucktoo // May 12, 2009 at 2:59 pm

    read, Foul; the secret world of FIFA by Andrew Jennings

    it will explain alot

  • Sally Slaughter // May 12, 2009 at 4:34 pm

    Just ban the referee!!! We should get the Barcelona goalkeeper and three Chelsea players and take the three PK’s Chelsea should of received and have them playoff before the final in Rome. If any one of the PK’s are made CHELSEA IS IN barcelona OUT!!!

  • sukhbataar // May 12, 2009 at 5:16 pm

    I’m fed up with all the injustice chelsea receive, how could anyone even think about banning us. All we did was disappoint every neutral by refusing to play in the first leg and then get robbed in the second leg by a team that scored a perfectly good goal after being harshly reduced to ten men. How can any team reach a final without being giving 3 or 4 penalties at home. It’s a farce.

  • Jay // May 12, 2009 at 5:46 pm

    Chelsea supporters everywhere nowadays? Dont think so if you refuse to play football for 180 minutes. Every neutral fan is happy because football won the moment chelsea lost. Of course its harsh with the not given penalties( 2 by the way not 4), but thats compensated with an red card that should not have been given. Chelsea brought this to themself putting in defenders for attackers with a 1-0 deficit and up against ten man.
    Again, nobody, absolutely nobody cares except the chelseafans. Footbaal has won once again
    Justice has prevailed

  • Man of the 'tic // May 12, 2009 at 6:03 pm


  • Drogba's flip flops // May 12, 2009 at 6:08 pm

    Coming to a store near you:



  • Jamie // May 12, 2009 at 7:31 pm

    referrees are normally biased toward chelsea, but this time for once they got owned by a team who got let off with more fouls than they did!

  • Jamie // May 12, 2009 at 7:36 pm

    Chelsea are gay!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • John // May 12, 2009 at 10:37 pm

    Jay…Chelsea played football and they played the way that beats Barca. Fans like yourself refuse to realize that.

  • Joe // May 12, 2009 at 11:55 pm

    The only fans defending Barcelona are Barcelona fans.

    Perhaps it shows their guilty conscience?

  • Fergus // May 13, 2009 at 2:08 am

    ban them into the stone age. neanderthals.

  • seckkiew // May 13, 2009 at 5:24 am

    chelsea-haters have no moral, can’t differentiate between right and wrong.
    go hang your heads in shame

  • Fergus // May 13, 2009 at 5:32 am

    ooo it’s now a moral issue! i love this!

    drogba’s head is the one that should hang in shame. i don’t know how you can justify how chelsea behaved by coming here and telling people that they have no concept of right and wrong.

    seckkiew, you are truly quite special.

  • seckkiew // May 13, 2009 at 6:04 am

    you’re more stupid than i thought. go read the subject. it’s whether chelsea should be banned not about drogba

  • Fergus // May 13, 2009 at 6:14 am

    seckkiew, i initially wanted to start a fight, but i’m bored of it now.

    seriously, it is about both chelsea and drogba. your club’s failure to control his behaviour (where was terry’s leadership? where was hiddink’s discipline? where were the stamford bridge stewards?) makes drogba’s outburst a COLLECTIVE fault from the whole club.

    bosingwa came out the next day and told the press that the referee was “a thief”. hiddink came out the next day and JUSTIFIED how his players behaved.

    behaviour like that makes the disrepute collective. your whole club should be banned from European football for one season for the collectively disgraceful behaviour.

    as for who should hang his head in shame? turns out you’re right. more than drogba.

  • Bob // May 13, 2009 at 8:38 am


    “i initially wanted to start a fight”

    Shows a lot about yourself. Bored, so comes on the internet (what a place!) to ‘start a fight’ and now your still bored, sad.

    So much for morals huh?

    They obviously don’t pay you enough do they.

  • Fergus // May 13, 2009 at 8:42 am

    they definitely don’t pay me enough, mate!

    as fun as an online bicker can sometimes be though, i eventually decided to discuss it rationally.

    and it’s still my rational argument that chelsea have collectively dropped the proverbial disciplinary ball and deserve to be collectively sanctioned by uefa.

  • Fergus // May 13, 2009 at 8:43 am

    and i also don’t think it’s a moral issue, it’s a disciplinary issue, for the club, uefa and all the fans. we all know what are the right and wrong things to do, and the apologies that ensued the day after the fiasco simply goes to confirm that there is a universal standard of what is the right way to behave when you lose.

    as for the morals that govern commenting here, i’m not trying to start a fight anymore. :P

  • nutter // May 13, 2009 at 1:12 pm

    punch, punch, kick, swear, “come on then”, punch, run away

  • manplus anele // May 14, 2009 at 10:25 am

    that is my mail.

Leave a comment
  1. View comments in RSS feed