Salomon Kalou clearly thinks Chelsea paid no money for him.
Chelsea striker Salomon Kalou has become the latest Premier League star to take a swipe at the billionaires of Manchester City.
Several of the Eastlands club’s rivals at the top of the table have warned that it will not be possible for Roberto Mancini’s side to buy their way to the title this season.
“Manchester City did the same thing last summer,” Kalou said, reflecting on the £100m-plus spree at Eastlands. “I don’t know if they’ll be stronger, I’m not sure. Just because you bring in 10 new players, it doesn’t mean you’re going to be on top of the table.
“There are still teams like Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool who will always be at the top. Manchester City can do well because they have brought good players in this year but the reality is on the pitch. You can have 10 new players and it doesn’t guarantee you anything. (The Guardian)
Before Roman Abramovich arrived at Chelsea they had won approximately zero Premier League titles. A Russian oligarch invests £212.6m into the squad over two seasons and the team wins the championship. This is not a criticism of Chelsea, for all clubs envious of their position would surely love to do the same, but one would have expected Salomon Kalou to have known something about the recent history of his team.
Prior to Abramovich’s arrival, Chelsea had some great young players beginning to make a mark in Frank Lampard and John Terry and were clearly a club on the up, having just secured UEFA Champions League qualification.
Manchester City were in a similar position prior to the first of their recent takeovers. Having established themselves as a Premier League club, moved into a brand new stadium, and begun to bring through some excellent young talent themselves. Joe Hart, Micah Richards, Nedum Onuoha, Michael Johnson, Stephen Ireland and Daniel Sturridge were all great prospects which new manager Sven Goran Eriksson immediately looked to integrate in first team matters.
The only difference between Manchester City and Chelsea prior to their takeovers is that Chelsea were closer to the finished product. Manchester City have needed to invest more money to compete in the Premier League, which is more competitive than ever these days. Whether it will bear the same fruit that befell Chelsea remains to be seen though.