Nathan Aké

[BoyBlue96 990]

Much criticism from Bournemouth's head director and also here from Holland. And I agree with them.

Why the hell did Conte bring him back? He tells him that he is pleased with Aké's development and then continues to not even have him in the squad at match days.

Nathan needs to leave Chelsea for the good of his career. Same goes for Van Ginkel. Both have no future here.

[LAM09 6,544]

Much criticism from Bournemouth's head director and also here from Holland. And I agree with them.

Why the hell did Conte bring him back? He tells him that he is pleased with Aké's development and then continues to not even have him in the squad at match days.

Nathan needs to leave Chelsea for the good of his career. Same goes for Van Ginkel. Both have no future here.

Ake might do, but Van Ginkel's chance went the moment he got injured.

[Tomo 21,681]

On February 3, 2017 at 11:12 AM, manpe said:

• Nathan Ake has broken through at Chelsea and is determined to keep his place

Lol what.. One cup game and he has "broken through"? Like Bertrand broke through?  He didn't even make the bench against pool. If past evidence is anything to go by then by next season he'll be loaned out again, sold or far behind in the pecking order. He is obviously a stop-gap between January and summer because we couldn't sign anybody. His positions will be strengthened by imports and he will soon be forgotten at this club, that's my prediction. All this hype around him is unnecessary at the moment, he hasn't proven anything and if this keeps up then his head will be turned by the hype like countless other former future superstars.

Bertrand did break through.

[manpe 10,855]

9 hours ago, Tomo said:

Bertrand did break through.

I think we have different understanding of breaking through. 

[Blue Colored Sky 1,807]

1 hour ago, manpe said:

I think we have different understanding of breaking through. 

So breaking through now means staying 10 years in one club, mostly as first XI player and leaving as a legend? My understanding is that player breaks through if he's clearly viable option for the manager and he hasn't got second thoughts to put him on the pitch. Like Welbeck and Cleverley at United, both eventually sold, but they were trusted to play in games and they were clear option for the manager. Same as Bertrand. Chalobah is almost there if he starts few important Premier League games. And if he will be sold in few years time? So what, any first team player can be sold in any time. 

[manpe 10,855]

19 minutes ago, Blue Colored Sky said:

So breaking through now means staying 10 years in one club, mostly as first XI player and leaving as a legend? My understanding is that player breaks through if he's clearly viable option for the manager and he hasn't got second thoughts to put him on the pitch. Like Welbeck and Cleverley at United, both eventually sold, but they were trusted to play in games and they were clear option for the manager. Same as Bertrand. Chalobah is almost there if he starts few important Premier League games. And if he will be sold in few years time? So what, any first team player can be sold in any time. 

For me there is a difference between breaking through at Chelsea and breaking through in the premier league. He broke through in the league, we gave him the platform and he grabbed it, but as soon as he was deemed surplus he was replaced. If he'd broken through here he'd still be here or been a regular player for a longer period, instead he was a temporary patch during injuries and rotation basically. Claiming Bertrand to have broken through at Chelsea is quite desperate imo, more so Ake considering he doesn't even make the bench.

[Leif 6,006]

Bertrand was one of our most important players while he was playing. Both a back up for Cole and also a back up on the wing. When he played, he was solid, and we would've been too defensively flimsy without him during that period. No, he didn't cement himself long-term here (I wish he did), but he made a big mark, and you can't make a big mark if you haven't 'broken through into the team' yet. A player who didn't break through was McEachran. Bertrand did break through for a season.

In his first 3 games for us, he got 2 MOTM awards, and then he started in & helped win the Champions League final.

But he didn't break through ? If you play in the CL Final, nevermind winning it, I think you've done as much as any player can do. In fact, he's done more than any Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool, player has done in the past decade, and had a better career than 80% of City's squad - and not just riding on the bench collecting medals, but being a part of it. He was and is a boss.

[Tomo 21,681]

9 hours ago, manpe said:

I think we have different understanding of breaking through. 

57 appearances in 3 years and 3 trophies to boot, sorry mate but that's breaking though no matter what way it's spun. 

[manpe 10,855]

Bertrand was one of our most important players while he was playing. Both a back up for Cole and also a back up on the wing. When he played, he was solid, and we would've been too defensively flimsy without him during that period. No, he didn't cement himself long-term here (I wish he did), but he made a big mark, and you can't make a big mark if you haven't 'broken through into the team' yet. A player who didn't break through was McEachran. Bertrand did break through for a season.
In his first 3 games for us, he got 2 MOTM awards, and then he started in & helped win the Champions League final.
But he didn't break through ? If you play in the CL Final, nevermind winning it, I think you've done as much as any player can do. In fact, he's done more than any Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool, player has done in the past decade, and had a better career than 80% of City's squad - and not just riding on the bench collecting medals, but being a part of it. He was and is a boss.

57 appearances in 3 years and 3 trophies to boot, sorry mate but that's breaking though no matter what way it's spun. 

Fair enough, some good points made there. Understand both POVs. I'm not saying Berty was shit not at all, i wish he'd stayed, but his tenure here was over the moment Mourinho walked in. I'm willing to concede that the term "breaking through" can be subjective, and actually it would be reasonable for me to state that he broke through at Chelsea but established himself in Soton. That would be more accurate perhaps and that is what i meant.

[Tomo 21,681]

6 minutes ago, manpe said:

 

Fair enough, some good points made there. Understand both POVs. I'm not saying Berty was shit not at all, i wish he'd stayed, but his tenure here was over the moment Mourinho walked in. I'm willing to concede that the term "breaking through" can be subjective, and actually it would be reasonable for me to state that he broke through at Chelsea but established himself in Soton. That would be more accurate perhaps and that is what i meant.

 

He could have been a squad player long term our John O Shea/Wes Brown type so to speak, but truthfully i don't miss him he had many games to put himself in the window to replace Cole and never really showed enough. Also we have to bare in mind Cole was in deep decline post 2010, if we had a younger version of him at the club, he would have been fucked.

Mourinho may not be the great with youth from scratch but he has showed with Rashford he will give games to one's that have already had first team exposure and proved themselves, Ryan was more experienced than Rashford so there must have been a reason Jose didn't trust him.

[Fernando 6,375]

What a waste. 

Should have stayed at his last team. 

No point in bringing him back. 

[DYC. 7,542]

2 minutes ago, Fernando said:

What a waste. 

Should have stayed at his last team. 

No point in bringing him back. 

He's insurance in case Alonso and some defenders got injured. And he's another number for Chelsea's HG roster. That's why he was brought back. Horrible for him but that's football.

[BoyBlue96 990]

Not selected for the Dutch squad.

I love Conte but I'm furious he brought back Nathan under false promises. This guy has no future at Chelsea. He will never be a starter and he isn't even on our bench in PL games. He told Ruud Gullit that Conte told him on the phone he's impressed with him and wants to bring him back as a reward. What reward? Playing against L1 or Championship sides in a cup game. Shambles, Conte. Shambles.

 

Chelsea need to stop with this ridiculous loaning business. Sell Aké back to Bournemouth where he can actually play and while you're at it, sell Kalas and Piazon to Fulham, Van Ginkel to PSV, Pasilic to Milan and so on. These guy's need to get on with their football and their careers. 

[LAM09 6,544]

Not selected for the Dutch squad.
I love Conte but I'm furious he brought back Nathan under false promises. This guy has no future at Chelsea. He will never be a starter and he isn't even on our bench in PL games. He told Ruud Gullit that Conte told him on the phone he's impressed with him and wants to bring him back as a reward. What reward? Playing against L1 or Championship sides in a cup game. Shambles, Conte. Shambles.
 
Chelsea need to stop with this ridiculous loaning business. Sell Aké back to Bournemouth where he can actually play and while you're at it, sell Kalas and Piazon to Fulham, Van Ginkel to PSV, Pasilic to Milan and so on. These guy's need to get on with their football and their careers. 

I doubt Conte ever promised him a first team place. He clearly was a stopgap until the summer unfortunately.

[the wes 7,212]

3 hours ago, BoyBlue96 said:

3 hours ago, BoyBlue96 said:

sell Aké back to Bournemouth 

 

Doing that might come back and haunt us like it did with Lukaku and KDB 

We should do what Real Madrid did with morata do the same with are loanees only if they turn out to cracking players 

[the wes 7,212]

Don't forget we have made money from buying players cheap and loaning them out to clubs the like of T.Hazard Bamford papy 

[BoyBlue96 990]

This shit needs to end. And no, not because he's a Dutchie like I am but it's ridiculous business and career-destroying.

 

[Valdo 583]

I dont think Its strange Conte didnt play him yet, but instead brought him back to be a backup for Cahill and perhaps Alonso. Since Alonso was coping with some injury. And why buy someone in January for Cb/Wb backup when we had the option to recall Ake? Now he can train with our first team and get accustomed to Conte and his tactics and perhaps the way he wants to use him next season. We almost played the entire same starting 11 since we changed the system to 3-4-3. And since we are so close to clinching the title, why change our "winning" team? I see it as a big "pre-season" for Ake, untill the summer pre-season games begin and he will probably get chances enough then as Cahill his replacement or perhaps Alonso even. Sure you can call it a waste that he aint playing now, but he is training with the best Squad in the EPL atm, and we all know what the boy is capable of. And I really believe Conte wants to use him, and knows his potential. Unlike the Batman which probably wasnt Conte buy in the first place. So before everyone claims he wont make it here, or that It is a waste he aint playing untill the end of the season, or atleast untill we wrap up the title considering the "risks" that your putting a boy in a team that has been a well oiled machine since the change of system. Again, Im sure he will get his chance pre-season or if we have spare games left if we win the title early to show he can shine. And knowing our board I doubt we will be splashing cash like the Manchester clubs, and with Christensen returning as well. Most money will go towards a striker(s) / replacement for William / and probably a capable midfielder. So I for one have no doubts or indications that it was a waste to bring him back. I mean, how long did it take Ivanovic to play his first game. Have some faith guys! Again he's training with the best!