“The statement has no legal meaning at all.”
On Saturday afternoon, Chelsea FC released a statement that explaining that the owner of the club, Roman Abramovich, would be “giving trustees of Chelsea’s charitable Foundation the stewardship and care of Chelsea FC.”
In light of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and Abramovich’s close ties to the Kremlin, it appeared hugely significant, with many interpreting the statement as the Russian relinquishing control of the club. The statement, however, notably made no reference to the conflict.
Chelsea then released a separate statement on Sunday, condemning the conflict, with no reference to Abramovich.
“Chelsea FC’s thoughts are with everyone in Ukraine. Everyone at the club is praying for peace,” it said.
The careful wording and careful timing of each statement have raised eyebrows, and cast doubt on the significance of Abramovich’s apparent move to distance himself from the running of the club.
As explained by David Allen Green, lawyer and commentator, the statement actually has no legal significance, but is merely delicately crafted PR.
In a blog post entitled ‘The Chelsea FC statement that is not what it seems’, Green writes: “One phrase which stands out is ‘stewardship and care’ – which Abramovich is ‘giving’ to the ‘trustees of Chelsea’s charitable Foundation.’
“Two sentences before that phrase – deftly – this is framed as a ‘decision’.”
This, he explains,” looks solemn and legally meaningful,” but “has no legal meaning at all.”
Elaborating on the careful selection of word choice, Green explains that while ‘stewardship’ has a ring of legalese to it, it is essentially “flapdoodle.”
“What one transfers to trustees is not “stewardship and care” but ownership of property,” he adds.
“There is no property been passed to trustees.
“The word ‘trustees’ is, in effect, a misdirection.
“They may as well be assistant referees or physiotherapists, for their title is – strictly speaking – irrelevant to what is being described.”
The timing of its release was crucially important in its efficacy as well.
As Green writes in his blog, 6:45pm on Saturday evening is “early enough to be just about picked by the Sunday newspapers, but late enough to avoid lengthy scrutiny.”
“And it was at that time on a Saturday that those on Twitter are expecting ‘breaking’ stories.
“Accordingly, the statement was quickly taken (and shared) by many in news and sports media as being significant.”
Abramovich’s ownership of Chelsea has become a hot topic in the footballing world since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Last week, Labour MP Chris Bryant used his parliamentary privilege to say that “surely, Mr Abramovich should not be allowed to own a football club in this country”, citing a leaked Home Office document from 2019 that stated Abramovich was “of interest” to HMG due to his links to the Russian state.
And on Monday morning, The Jerusalem Post reported that Abramovich was in Belarus to help broker talks between Russia and Ukraine with a hope of bringing the conflict to an end.
The Post reports that Alexander Rodnyansky, a two-time Oscar-nominated producer who was born in Kyiv, told them that Ukrainian government officials reached out to Abramovich and and other members of the Jewish community in Russia asking for help.
A spokesperson for the Chelsea owner said: “I can confirm that Roman Abramovich was contacted by the Ukrainian side for support in achieving a peaceful resolution, and that he has been trying to help ever since. Considering what is at stake, we would ask for understanding as to why we have not commented on neither the situation as such nor his involvement.”
