OhForAGreavsie

I'm really sorry but my careless typing, and lack of proof reading, means that my 'correction' needs more help than the sentence it attempted to comment on. 🙁 I typed, 'This an old story.' I should have typed, 'This is an old story.' I'm going to delete the original post. It's served its purpose. Albeit very badly. 🙁🙁

OK. Thank you. If we can get him to happily play LB we'll all be delighted.

OK. I asked because a social media post, reproduced above, claimed that Alaba does not want to play LB anymore.

I always said that it was his injuries which kept Darren Anderton at the top level. Without them, his inconsistency would have seen him slide downwards. The next time Ruben gets a run in the side may well be decisive for his Chelsea future.

There is no debate; I agree with you. As I said, Ruben has excellent attributes. My argument is that he does do enough with them. We would be crazy to do that again. Any player worth £100m would have to be an automatic starter for us. If he wasn't good enough to be that in this squad, then we would have massively overpaid. Again?? Relatively speaking, we've previously signed players for amounts equivalent to £100m in today's market and used them in rotation. Our squad is not good for us to burn money like that now. If we dump that amount into a player, he has to be on the pitch. Is Havertz worth that kind of money? I haven't seen enough of him in 90-minute action to be certain. If, however, Frank is convinced that he wants to spend such a chunk of his budget on the player then, in the absence of information to form my own judgement, I'd have to defer to my belief in Frank and Jody. If too, Marina can make the deal fit within FFP, then I will have to defer to her also.

This is the frustrating bit, he so very obviously has it in him. I can almost imagine that his mum used to tell him to be fair to the other boys and not hog all the limelight himself. We'll, they're big boys now Rubes. You don't have to be fair to them anymore.

Ruben has excellent attributes, but he has never shown any hint of becoming a world class player. Throughout his Chelsea progression he has consistently failed to impact football matches. No one doubts that he has the qualities to be a big factor in any game but he virtually never delivers. Those fantastic attributes got him in the World Cup squad; injuries got him in the side, and what did he deliver? Nothing. I've championed Ruben since his U18 days, but I've always offered the opinion that he would not make it if he did not find a way to bring his talent to bear on matches more often. It hasn't happened yet.

What position would you be signing him to fill?

Position of strength and we bought Kezman. I know he produced great stats, but how any football person could watch Kezman for more than 15 minutes, and yet conclude that he was a man to spend money on is beyond me.

Finnish striker Adelina Engmam has left Chelsea FCW today for French outfit Montpellier HSC. https://www.chelseafc.com/en/news/2020/06/16/engman-exits-chelsea-fc-women

After getting over the shock of watching my team being outclassed, I thoroughly enjoyed Bayern's performance at The Bridge this year. It was near perfect football of the type I like most. Breath taking display from an unbelievable football team. Total number of flicks and tricks: zero. Benrahama seems to be all about flicks and tricks. I'm hardly ever impressed by his type of player. Yes tricks look great when they work but, much more often than not, they come to nothing. Indeed, that is the case with most of the clips featured in the video above. The impressive bits are those when he uses his skills to create room for a pass and then executes it well. It worries me that there aren't enough moments of quality play to avoid the need to pad the video with party tricks. I believe in Frank and Jody. If they want this lad, and believe that they can focus him on delivering effective outcomes, then I'm on board. If it were up to me however, Benrahama would have a lot to prove before he earned a move Chelsea.

Oh well. What started with the promise of that first preseason has been heading toward a sad end for a long time now. Maybe, just maybe, he'll get a loan, perform well for six months, earn himself a contract with his loan club, and provide Chelsea with a way out of the dilemma.

There aren't many better ways to persuade a man than by telling him things he already wants to believe. By the way, that's just ridiculous by Eden. Some coach, somewhere, must have built that pass to self, with feint by the fake recipient, into a routine for their squad.

Yes. she's a senior executive at a billion pound company. You'd say that she must be a person able, wiling, authorised and ready to take decisions on her own initiative. Nevertheless board responsibility will be in place for any multi million pound transaction. Before the responsible individual heads off to negotiate deals she will have board agreed strategy and parameters in her briefcase. Metaphorically speaking. Now, if we were to re-read the accusations and substitute 'board/Roman' for 'Marina', then perhaps there's a discussion to be had. Those accusations are not being shared around however. The are aimed squarely at Marina and, if true, they add up to gross incompetence. Yet Marina has not been sacked. Instead, since coming to our attention, she has been promoted at least twice. What is it you know about her job performance that Roman, Eugene and Bruce don't? Would you concede that that the reverse is at least possibly true, and that they may know something you and I don't? Like the real history of the transactions on Marina's wrap sheet perhaps?

Thanks Vesper, I've read many, though not all, of your posts on the topic I've not seen anything which I consider to be conclusive. Even if I'm being dense, and failing to see the obvious, that still deals with only one of my points which failed to survive the editor. Others include: - Did Marina have freedom to act, or, for example, had the full board/Roman set parameters which constrained her? Did the manger successfully lobby Roman to keep the player because he did not like any of the alternatives available to Chelsea? Before I would decide to blame any individual I would want to establish that there is actually some blame there in the first place. I remain unconvinced that there is, but if there is, we still need more information before we can decide where it lies.

I just don't have the same confidence you do in the reporting you use to inform these opinions. The only vaguely convincing confirmation I have seen for the claim that Barca bid for Willian came in a quote attributed to Willian himself. No fee was mentioned in that quote. Before condemning Marina for refusing £65m for Willian, for example. I would need a few things: - Oops, I forgot that bullet points don't work so my list has not been published. No time to redo now, I have a tuition to give.. update later.

Curses. Such a good player. Real shame we seem not to have sold him on the idea of coming here.

I think Vesper has this one right. Clear-eyed squad planning called for.

It's not clubs but insurance companies who require medicals. I'm pretty certain that a medical carried out by a German doctor is equally acceptable to them as one performed by a UK medic. Something doesn't quite chime.

?? You could say let's not get ahead of ourselves, or you could say we might as well enjoy the speculation while we can.

Not necessarily a change in the agreement, just a change in what we think we know about it. Again, not saying I think this is true. Just proposing a way the new information might fit with the old. I've been writing too much about Kai Havertz today.

The extension of my attempt to make the 15th July story plausible would be that Timo has conditionally agreed to join subject either to Chelsea qualifying for the CL, or Leverkausen not doing so. Of course I have no idea what's actually going on. I'm just allowing the new date to be true and trying to create a scenario to make it fit with what we think we know already.

Remember when we signed Sam Kerr? Remember that we signed another player in that transfer window? Her name is Jamie-Lee Napier. Here's an interview she did with The Beeb: - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52951617

This does not tell the whole story. Just because you can, is never a reason for delay. If you want to delay for fiscal reasons, and the clause gives you the time to do that, then fine but the delay would be for fiscal reasons, not because there's a clause. The clause may allow you to do what you want to do, but it doesn't cause you to want to do it. If the July date is correct (and perhaps that's a revised date as a result of negotiations) then it seems to me that the most plausible reason for waiting is that Werner would like a bit more information about our Champions League prospects for next season. He'll have a better idea about our chances on 15th July, and about how Leipzig's have gone too.

I never take much account of stats in assessing a player. I'm not suggesting that stats mean nothing, that is absolutely not true. Nor would I expect to convince anyone that ignoring stats leads to better decisions. I'm just honestly reporting how I do it. What I attempt to do instead is make an independent assessment of the player's quality; does he do the basics to an exceptionally high standard, is his decision making good, in any given piece of action do I believe he has handled the situation as well as I would expect any professional to do, or has he produced a superior outcome. Only if players pass these tests do I then start to take an interest in their stats. As to the early comments in this thread, you'll notice there isn't much from me. That's because I believed this player is not obtainable by Chelsea. If we do sign Havertz then I'll feel that I must have overrated him, but I'll be happy all the same.