test

Welcome to Talk Chelsea

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Jim

Nathan Aké

Started by Jim,

1,251 posts in this topic
43 minutes ago, Iggy Doonican said:

Lukaku done really well for W.B.A and Everton. A lot of people myself included believe McEachran would have been given a longer run in the team if Ancelotti hadn't been sacked.

 

53 minutes ago, ja1 said:

Lukaku's loans were very good, much better than Boga's, Solanke's and McEachran's..

I explained it here;

1 hour ago, BlueLyon said:

IMceachran, Boga, Solanke, Lukaku...they were loaned, but never made any serious waves. We cant just give them playtime. And when they sit on bench, they start complaining like they are the biggest stars in football.

Lukaku was not even close being good enough to leading our line. He came of good season, but he was extremely raw player. He should wait and take his chances when given, but instead decided to leave. I agree there is favorism of proven, experienced players in our team, but at one point, he would get the game time if he stayed.

Should we decide to play him every game since that first everton season on loan? Not buy Costa, because we had Lukaku? Everyone knows he wasnt good enough to be starter. He would still need to prove it here, at Chelsea. United bought Ibra last summer and Rashford is still playing and playing well. Lukaku decided to leave on loan when we had Etoo and Torres, he then decided to leave permamently when we bought Costa. He could easily play games if he proven he is good on the pitch. Costa was injured and banned in quite a few games in first season. But Lukaku thought straight he has to play every game. So be it. But he wasnt good enough to start for Chelsea every week. Even now when it seems we are buying him back, Im not convinced. He will need to play well here before I make any judgement that he is good enough to lead our attack.

As for Mceachran, he was promising under Ancelotti, but completely lost it on loans. If Carlo stayed, maybe it would be different, but its a big if. We cant say Chelsea made any mistake with Josh, he just didnt perform on loans.

Tomo likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, BlueLyon said:

And when they sit on bench, they start complaining like they are the biggest stars in football.

Don't think that's true at all who exactly ?. Lukaku might well have felt aggrieved being kept out of the side by Eto and especially Torres. No footballers enjoy sitting on the bench apart from Winston Bogarde.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Iggy Doonican said:

Don't think that's true at all who exactly ?. Lukaku might well have felt aggrieved being kept out of the side by Eto and especially Torres. No footballers enjoy sitting on the bench apart from Winston Bogarde.

Lukaku wasnt better than Etoo at that moment. He wasnt. And he decided to leave the year we bought Costa.

Generaly there are many who didnt want to stay little longer here. Sturridge then, now Solanke. Mata too but he isnt exactly youngster.

Im only saying they must earn starting place. You dont just play them week in week out so they can get their feet running and hit form. Its one or two games, if coach is happy they will play. Unless we want to be like Borussia and sacrifice the results.

Rashford is staying put at United. He knew his chances will be limited and he didnt push for move. Neither did Martial. And Martial had much better season last year than Lukaku at Chelsea.

Martial could get realy pissed and move out when they signed Ibra. And Im sure Luaku would be throwing tantrums if he was in Martial's position. But he stayed.

Either our youngsters dont have the character or the talent.

Back then Lukaku had almost no link up ability, which is crucial for top team. I understand he was kept out by Etoo and then by Costa. But he wanted to play week in week out, how is that Chelsea fault for not giving him play time? He wasnt good enough, simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, BlueLyon said:

Lukaku wasnt better than Etoo at that moment. He wasnt. And he decided to leave the year we bought Costa.

Generaly there are many who didnt want to stay little longer here. Sturridge then, now Solanke. Mata too but he isnt exactly youngster.

Im only saying they must earn starting place. You dont just play them week in week out so they can get their feet running and hit form. Its one or two games, if coach is happy they will play. Unless we want to be like Borussia and sacrifice the results.

Rashford is staying put at United. He knew his chances will be limited and he didnt push for move. Neither did Martial. And Martial had much better season last year than Lukaku at Chelsea.

Martial could get realy pissed and move out when they signed Ibra. And Im sure Luaku would be throwing tantrums if he was in Martial's position. But he stayed.

Either our youngsters dont have the character or the talent.

Back then Lukaku had almost no link up ability, which is crucial for top team. I understand he was kept out by Etoo and then by Costa. But he wanted to play week in week out, how is that Chelsea fault for not giving him play time? He wasnt good enough, simple as that.

Whether you think Eto was better than Lukaku is one thing but a raw kid instead of Torres leave it out. Mourinho just doesn't trust youngsters any other manager and Lukaku would have started more. Mata? he never asked for a move think you're rewriting history a bit mate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Iggy Doonican said:

Whether you think Eto was better than Lukaku is one thing but a raw kid instead of Torres leave it out. Mourinho just doesn't trust youngsters any other manager and Lukaku would have started more. Mata? he never asked for a move think you're rewriting history a bit mate.

Lukaku simply wasnt good enough. Or had poor mentality, didnt convince Mou on training. Conte isnt playing Bats either for example. Dont you think its weird that Conte insisted on playing Costa despite being out of form? And only gave chance to Bats once our title was more or less secured? I certainly trust Conte, despite all talent Bats had, he was not mentaly on the level to lead our line. The boy has alot to learn, but he must take every chance he gets. I hope we keep him as our second choice this year tbh. Lukaku was pretty much the same, but he decided to leave.

Rashford is playing well and enough at United under Mourinho. Meanwhile Shaw and Martial are not, basicaly because of their attitude, despite they have talent. Mourinho clearly gave chance to players that are actualy level headed, like Varane at Real, Rashford at United. He might not be the best man for youth, he is pragmatic first, but those who truly show it, they play. 

Under Mou, I see Lukaku as immature boy, trying too hard, instead of keeping head down and learn. At one point he had enough and decided to leave, which was best for his career. But who knows, if he is as good as some say here, if he stayed, he might as well be a starter at Chelsea past season.

I absolutely agree about Torres tho, he should left or got benched long time before it actualy happened. 

About Mata; 

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/715399/Jose-Mourinho-Juan-Mata-Manchester-United-Chelsea-transfer-news-gossip

"He was the one wanting to leave", Im not making it up.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BlueLyon said:

Lukaku simply wasnt good enough. Or had poor mentality, didnt convince Mou on training. Conte isnt playing Bats either for example. Dont you think its weird that Conte insisted on playing Costa despite being out of form? And only gave chance to Bats once our title was more or less secured? I certainly trust Conte, despite all talent Bats had, he was not mentaly on the level to lead our line. The boy has alot to learn, but he must take every chance he gets. I hope we keep him as our second choice this year tbh. Lukaku was pretty much the same, but he decided to leave.

Rashford is playing well and enough at United under Mourinho. Meanwhile Shaw and Martial are not, basicaly because of their attitude, despite they have talent. Mourinho clearly gave chance to players that are actualy level headed, like Varane at Real, Rashford at United. He might not be the best man for youth, he is pragmatic first, but those who truly show it, they play. 

Under Mou, I see Lukaku as immature boy, trying too hard, instead of keeping head down and learn. At one point he had enough and decided to leave, which was best for his career. But who knows, if he is as good as some say here, if he stayed, he might as well be a starter at Chelsea past season.

I absolutely agree about Torres tho, he should left or got benched long time before it actualy happened. 

About Mata; 

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/715399/Jose-Mourinho-Juan-Mata-Manchester-United-Chelsea-transfer-news-gossip

"He was the one wanting to leave", Im not making it up.

 

The words Daily Express and gossip are from gospel truth son:D. Don't follow the comings and goings of Man United so I can't comment on that. The Bats one is an odd one granted, personally I think given time he could come good. But it's all getting a bit predictable Bats will go on loan have a great season elsewhere and sit on the bench for us the following season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Iggy Doonican said:

The words Daily Express and gossip are from gospel truth son:D. Don't follow the comings and goings of Man United so I can't comment on that. The Bats one is an odd one granted, personally I think given time he could come good. But it's all getting a bit predictable Bats will go on loan have a great season elsewhere and sit on the bench for us the following season.

I know Mou can talk bs, but I would believe him on that one.

It makes sense why we sold him so quickly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, BlueLyon said:

I tried ti quote you in another thread but then couldnt find the post, anyway its basicaly same topic so I will just quote you here...

I dont think we are as bad with youth as some imply. Yes we messed up with KdB big time and maybe Bertrand, but thats about it. 

I dont get this; player should get chance. They do get chance. But its not like they will play 10, 20 games in season. 

We apparently had so many great youngsters we didnt give them chance. I dont buy it. They are simply not good enough. Doing it in youth levels is entirely different than senior level. They are average on senior level, thats why they dont and didnt play more for us. Its the sad truth.

We loaned several players out, to foreign leagues, to championship, to PL. Several didnt even get to play regular football. And we are to blame for loanining them out instead of giving them a chance? If they were good, they would play, they would play well and return here. And continue playing. But most didnt play on loan or played very average, thats why they got sold and we hear almost nothing about them. 

Lahm was loaned to stuttgart and played well. He returned to bayerna, got a game and played well. He didnt get 30 games to catch form. RLC is getting playtime and he is absolutely average most of time. How can someone keep giving him playtime? Mceachran, Boga, Solanke, Lukaku...they were loaned, but never made any serious waves. We cant just give them playtime. And when they sit on bench, they start complaining like they are the biggest stars in football. We are not ideal club for youngsters indeed, but if there was world class talent here, they would play. Again, only one of such calibre was KdB, in this case the board made big mistake. 

With Ake, its different, he was good but we are simply stuffed in this department. Christensen will get that role. Then there is Zouma. We all know Ake might be realy good one day and if that clause is real, we can easily get him back. 

The best example is Courtois clearly. He was loaned, he took his chance and he is now playing here because he is top player. Christensen has potential to be similar. 

I agree with RLC and Zouma getting chances and Courtois and Eden's quality was evident when they were 20 itself. 

But consider KdB, Bertrand, Lukaku, Sturridge, Not all world class but certainly top talents the club didn't handle well. The club should have a plan or a policy to integrate youngsters, like this season, I hope Christensen is given a chance to establish himself and Virgil or whoever is not bought for 60 million. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CHERRIES CONFIDENT ON AKE

Bournemouth are increasingly confident that they are close to agreeing a deal to sign Chelsea defender Nathan Ake, according to Sky sources.

Sky Sports News HQ understands Southampton and Leicester are also interested in signing the 22-year-old centre-back.

Ake, valued in the region of £20m, spent the first of last season on loan at Bournemouth before being recalled in January. 

Grrr And double Grrr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's simply not going to get game time here. We are supposedly close to signing VvD, even if not him, it will be someone else. We have Cahill, Luiz, possibly AC coming back from Germany and even the left side is covered with the possible arrival of Sandro and Alonso as back up.

20M is good money for a player that probably wouldn't kick a ball but for League Cup games.

Chelsea? likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But he is so versatile. He can play LB, LWB, DM and CB. 20m would represent a very good return on investment given we paid like 6m for him. Probably too much to turn down if all he would do here is to make up the numbers. 

King11Didier and mccg like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Magic Lamps said:

But he is so versatile. He can play LB, LWB, DM and CB. 20m would represent a very good return on investment given we paid like 6m for him. Probably too much to turn down if all he would do here is to make up the numbers. 

Sometimes selling them can do good to them. They will feel settled. 

This is what Real Madrid does, but the best thing is that they put in a buy back clause. 

They did it for Carvajal, and Morata recently. It's about time we do the same and if the players improve in two season we just buy them back. 

King11Didier likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

V.Sad to see him go if he does , another massive backward step for our academy, loan army process imho , good enough for 1st team, with champions league footie and law of averages injuries/suspensions player fatigue, plenty of opportunities for Ake this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Will demand a buy-back option" Most important words, with those it is essentially a loan deal in my eyes if the player lives up to his potential. Ake wants to be there and play, we want Ake to play and develop, Bournemouth wants a young good CB. All parties win. Go and play young man and be so good we are killing to buy you back!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/06/2017 at 7:59 PM, Iggy Doonican said:

Don't think that's true at all who exactly ?. Lukaku might well have felt aggrieved being kept out of the side by Eto and especially Torres. No footballers enjoy sitting on the bench apart from Winston Bogarde.

Hello Iggy,

You made a brilliant point. Players have been unhappy to be left out, naturally, but who has whinged? No one to my recollection. Don't agree with you about Winston Bogarde however. Bates & Hutchinson treated him badly. They shamefully vilified and scapegoated him for something that was entirely their own fault.

Bogarde was lured to the club by the offer of a contract that clearly overpriced his value to the team. That contract employed him be a professional footballer, with all that entails; train right, eat right and play to the best of his ability whenever selected. Winston did all of that. He kept his side of the bargain. He was entitled to expect Chelsea to keep theirs.

The problem, of course, is that Winston's abilities were not good enough. That, quite openly, was the opinion of Luca Vialli, yet our Chairman & CEO proceeded with the deal. I think the plan was to bring him in on a free, then sell him on at a profit. They could see choppy financial waters ahead so, tempted by the lure of a quick and easy profit, they gambled. Unfortunately they shot themselves in the foot by offering too big a pay packet to a player who simply wasn't worth it. Luca knew it, all the clubs to whom our leaders would later try to palm off Bogarde knew it, even you and I knew it.

Ken did some things for which Chelsea fans should respect him, but his treatment of Winston Bogarde was dishonourable and he should apologise. It's by no means the only mea culpa he owes but he has form, so we know he won't be paying up any time soon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Iggy Doonican said:

Whether you think Eto was better than Lukaku is one thing but a raw kid instead of Torres leave it out. Mourinho just doesn't trust youngsters any other manager and Lukaku would have started more. Mata? he never asked for a move think you're rewriting history a bit mate.

I don't think many manager's aiming to win the league would have a 20 year old leading the line, especially when the attacking midfielders were also early 20's. We probably wouldn't have got top four with that combination and certainly wouldn't have gone near the title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Strike said:

I agree with RLC and Zouma getting chances and Courtois and Eden's quality was evident when they were 20 itself. 

But consider KdB, Bertrand, Lukaku, Sturridge, Not all world class but certainly top talents the club didn't handle well. The club should have a plan or a policy to integrate youngsters, like this season, I hope Christensen is given a chance to establish himself and Virgil or whoever is not bought for 60 million. 

KDB and Sturridge ill give, but what could the club have done differently with Bertrand and Lukaku? Bertrand's level is a squad player at a top club or a starter at a mid level one, he wanted the latter. Lukaku wouldn't accept number two behind Costa so he left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.