I must preface this post with the statement that I find all that is happening in Ukraine to be repulsive and I wholeheartedly agree with anyone who says that situation is more grave than any new stadium, player investment, etc, etc. That should not, however, cease conversation on other subjects so I hope readers will bear with me in my belief that my post to follow is more to do with the 'flexibility' of the media and powers that be whenever it suits their agenda.

Thankfully, we have done the right thing in disassociating ourselves from our three Russian sponsors. I am not overly concerned about the Usmanov situation as I believe Moshiri to be solid at his £1.9 billion independent net worth! He is the 13th richest owner in the Premier League even if not the outright richest (thank God!) Moshiri's worth is one place and £0.24 billion behind The Sith Lord Darth John Henry in 12th.

My question relates to the proposed sale of Chelsea by Abramovic. If he writes off the club's £1.5Bn loans as he has stated is his intent, how does that affect them for the insultingly ironically-named Financial Fair Play?

On the face of things, it's a noble farewell gesture from him - especially also donating all net profits of the club sale to Ukraine war victims. Of course a condemnation of Putin would have been much more welcome. However, I suspect doing so could get Novichok sprinkled on Abramovic's Corn Flakes!

I'd like to know how a loan debt almost equal to the entire net worth of our owner can be simply eradicated. Yet somehow there is no mention of it being a monumental advantage of unparalleled degree for Chelsea. As if even having such colossal loan debt wasn't already a huge advantage before it's erasure.

How is that question not even mooted in any of the news reels?