OhForAGreavsie

Update on tickets for the women's semi-final on Sunday. The club has just announced that an extra 250 tickets have been released for sale. If anyone is interested: - https://www.chelseafc.com/en/news/2019/04/26/women-s-champions-league--limited-tickets-available-?cardIndex=0-0

Are Galaxy chocolate bars available in Budapest? If so, and if we get to the final of course, buy a big bar, bring it to the game, and make friends with the Chelsea fans. The tradition is that every time Chelsea score we pass around the choc bars. Agree with you about Charlie Brown. Was very surprised that he didn't start this game.

And what a game! 2-2 at the end of normal time, straight to pens, fell behind in the spot kicks before a miss and a Karlo Ziger save brought us back to win 5-4 after six kicks each. Definitely a game of two halves. Barcelona dominated posession in the first forty-five although we had some moments. It was from one of those that they took the lead. A header from a Chelsea corner was cleared off the line and from that situation they moved it out to their American right winger (looks a really good player) who set up a sitter. They deserved the lead and should probably have led by more than 1 goal at the break. The second half, particularly the last half hour, was a totally different story. It was played almost exclusively in their half. It wouldn't be an overstatemt to say we battered them during that period. We had numerous chances, keeper made great saves, we missed sitters, were denied a clear pen, saw one shot kicked off the line by a deffender, and another blocked by one of our own players. The Barca coach constatly pleaded with his lads to get up the pitch, in Spanish naturally but it didn't need translating. "Get out, get out, get up!", sounds the same in any language. His charges could not do it though. It was breathless, exciting stuff. Then, almost as soon as our equaliser did come, from a bad pass by their keeper, Barca went up the other end and re-took the lead. I felt our second equaliser, and eventual penalties win, were deserved.

Big weekend ahead for the club kicks off in just over an hour and a half. At 5pm UK (6pm CET) our under 19s take on Barcelona in the semi-final of the uefa Youth League. Our lads will be looking to avenge defeat by the same side in last year's final. We didn't turn up and were convincingly beaten 3-0. I felt we picked the wrong side that day; Ethan Ampadu missed the game having suffered his injury in the semi-final but George McEachran, Charlie Brown and Tariq Uwakwe, who should all have started, were on the bench. Ethan won't be involved today but George and Charlie will start for sure this time around. Barca are favourites but I'm confident we'll give a better account of ourselves than last season. The game is live on BT Sport. Then, at 2pm on Sunday, Chelsea Women, take on European Champions Lyon for a place in the Women's Champions League final. The women, very undeservedly, lost the away leg 2-1 last week in front of more than 22,000. (A record for a women's Champions League game outside of the final itself.) Lyon are widely regarded as the best female team in the world and are three time reigning European Champions. Even so, we did not look second best to them last week despite the loss. They caused us problems of course but we had the better of the game's chances including a missed penalty and a one-on-one from which Maren Mjelde looked set to score but her shot was well saved. Meanwhile, their goals were fortunate. The first came from a shot which our keeper had covered, and which would have gone wide anyway, but it was delected into the net by Magda Eriksson for her second costly own goal in a week. (Her 93rd minute own goal from a harmless cross cost us the FA Cup semi-final against Man City.) Lyon's second was from a corner which took a double ricochet at the near post to bamboozle its way past our goalie. The game at Kingsmeadow is sold out, the first time that's happened. Then of course there's the latest 'last chance' for the men to claim a Champions League spot. They owe themselves a good result don't they?

According to a report in Italy, via The 5th Stand app, Fiorentina will try to persuade Ola to choose them over Torino. As we've discussed earlier in this thread, if Ola wants to go, there's nothing CFC can do to resist the binding buy option agreed with Torino as part of his loan deal. That does not mean however that we can't ask Ola to stay here rather than accept the move. I think he'd be a good squad player because of his flexibillity, but a place in the squad probably won't be enough bait to tempt him unless... Unless this rumour has been planted by his representitives looking for leverage to negotiate better terms with the Turin outfit. If we wanted to compete on pay we probably could. Best contract, plus a part of the rotation is at least something we could make a case to him about.

I wouldn't want to lose Azpi. We need some 'glue' in the squad; some people with feeling for the club. Not enough of those currently.

It might be ludicrous, or it might be right. I think it's right, but I accept we don't agree about that. If I tone it done a bit and say that he's one of the best, who should be a member of the squad next season, then maybe we can agree about that.

Pace is a big part of his game. At youth level his football when bringing the ball out from the back was an important contribution to the development sides he played in. I don't think it'll rate as outstanding at the top level however. He won't be a liability though.

Reece is a better player than either of those two. By that I mean he's better at playing his position than they are at playing their's. Indeed Reece is better at playing Kurt's position too. I've stated this as if it's fact but it's obviously just an opinion of course. An opinion I'm really confident about though.

I hope the good season's had by Tammy, Reece and Fik means we'll hear no more of the nonsense idea that our loan players are sometimes overlooked for selection because managers would rather use players who actually to belong to their clubs. If a CFC player is not being selected by his loan club it's because the manager does not believe he deserves it. Plain and simple. Managers want to win football matches. They'd pick me if they thought I could help them do that.

Exactly. Quite a few of us were really unhappy about it in the west stand yesterday.

This encapsulates a problem with our bying strategy. To be an elite team requires elite players. Elite players can do the whole of the job, not just a part of it.

There are one or two self-interested reasons why Roman might consider it necessary to build a new stadium, and a different reason why he might need to at least pretend he wants to build one. 1. Pure bloody-minded pride. Roman has resources and can use them to fight back. He won’t want ‘them’, whoever he feels they are, to win by reducing his club. Without the new stadium CFC will be reduced; its revenues and perceived status will decline relative to other clubs. 2. To protect his investment. If it's true, as Bruce Back insists, that Roman retains a long-term commitment to CFC, then any decline will hurt him both financially and emotionally. If we can’t compete for top honours, or even attract the players required to try, then the value of Roman’s asset will slide, along with the pleasure he gets from owning it. He’ll be forced to watch as the real worth of what he bought so expensively, dribbles away. It's unlikely that Roman disagrees about a new stadium being an important factor in preventing that happening, On the other hand, we must concede that it is at least possible for the rumours of a sale to be true. If so, the battle to win planning permission for the stadium will have been an important bargaining chip when it comes to negotiating the right price. Therefore... 3. With permission to upgrade Stamford Bridge, the club is worth a lot more than without it. Of course, it would be worth much more still with permission, from authorities and fans alike, to build on a new site. A new site remains my preferred option. It would give the club a huge boost, whether under new ownership, or Roman’s. Isn't converstion amazing? Imagine Christian is flitting around the web one day and that he comes across his discussion page in talkchelsea.net. He'll read this and think, "what?" On the value and quality of young sportsmen hangs multi-billion pound decisions these days.

Been a great weekend for us so far. We've had these before and not taken advantage of them. Will we get it right this time?

Hope so.

When Aguero leaves I reckon City will go to the market for his replacement. When Jesus joined City, and was sometimes preferred to Aguero in the XI, there was a lot of talk about the posibility of his becoming their first choice immediately. My reaction to that was, 'yes please', because having watched Jesus on YouTube, I had formed, and posted, the opinion that he was not as good as his reputation suggested, and nowhere near as good as the Argentine. Maybe because that assessment is right, or, if it's not, maybe for some other reason, but Guardiola does not seem to like Jesus as much as most other members of his squad. I haven't seen much evidence to sugget that Jesus is getting promoted when Aguero leaves. If it's true that Jesus wants to quit the club, perhaps it's because he's getting that vibe too.

Such a brilliant post.

As long ago as October 2011 I predicted that Romelu Lukaku's attributes would make him able to contribute to a team, but that the manager of any top club who employed him would soon be on the look out for an upgrade because of Rom's technical limitations. The first time I saw Tammy play for the 18s he was used wide right to accomadate Dom Solanke, who was preferred at CF. Tammy did well with his long strides, pace & power but I placed him in a similar category to Rom. A good lad with desireable attributes but lacking the finesse to match the requirements of top clubs. Tammy could be a squad member for us, a replacement Giroud, but I suspect that role wouldn't satisfy him at this stage of his career. I'd also take Rom as a backup by the way, but he'd cost too much, and need to be paid way, way too much to give value for money in that role. For our starter I want a player with elite talents. Easily said, but not so easily achieved I agree.

Our dominent youth sides in recent years have featured some really good prospects at full back and centreback. Lads who were outstanding at that level, and who are now doing well themselves out on loan or on permanent transfer. Whenever the development managers decided to play Reece at fullback others had to make way because, as good as they are, Reece is better. That was unless the bosses chose to use Reece at centrback, because then it was the turn of the very good CB prospects to make way for a better player. Another comment from Latics Speyk:- "Thought Cook got the Olsen sub spot on, most managers would have taken a forward off right away but by biding his time and putting Superman [He's referring to Reece] back to centre back it allowed us to keep Gavin on and bingo!! He then brought Olsen on when we were under the cosh and moved Reece back [To CM] to shore up midfield. The lad will go in goal if Walton gets hurt. The fans should really chant "WHERE ON THE MARCH WITH REECE'S ARMY is there nothing this lad cant do, I cant tell you how much I will miss him" - ZAKKY

I share your optinion about Reece, don't fully agree about Tammy & Charly and think that it's more about system with Dave. From Latic Speyk after yesterday's game: - "Outstanding today. By far the best player I’ve ever seen in a latics shirt, including all those years in the Prem." - TH10 "A super star. This lad is nothing short of sublime." - dwdan "What I love about him most is his passion for the club. Not for one second has he acted too big for this level and his head has always been in the right place." - NYC_LATICS

Where abouts were you? There was a really excited young lad near me (West Upper -south) who kept saying, "We're going to be in the semi-final!". Wasn't your little man was it? Either way, glad he enjoyed it.

Not based on last night, no. All four goals followed nice pieces of play but, overall, we are a poor team at the moment. Even at this level. Left the ground pretty depressed. Our passing is horrible. We often fail to spot the right option, and far too often fail to execute it even when we do. Our flicks and tricks kill play way more frequently than they set it up. Virtually no one has the combination of competence and confidence to receive the ball in a negative situation then do what's required to get play moving in a positive direction for the team. We beat Slavia with four good goals but, across the whole game, I was more impressed by their movement and combinations, than I was by ours. Although it's no fluke that they got this far in the competition, there are many better teams than Slavia Prague. Mountains of work to do.

Oh sod off J. I was so happy, why do you have to put this in my head? It was a great game of football, the best result for Chelsea, another potential injury for Spurs; Southern Comfort and ice time. Then you chirp up and all of a sudden it's time to put the cap back on the bottle, the ice back in the frezer, and stick The Smiths in the DVD player.

I know that italian managers value experience more than most but, even so, that looks like a strangely backward looking list of targets. If you're overhauling surely you go younger than that.

Hope that has a positive influence for us but I can't really see it. If he's a true Blue like you and me, then maybe, but if he's less committed than us he'll be guided by the same considerations any player would be. If that's the case, it's going to be bad news for us. He looks a real good player and that means lots of interest, including from clubs higher up the food chain than we are. Even if we're ban free, one of those will take him. Will we be ban free though? Pepe looks to me like the player Chelsea hoped Bertrand Traore might be. Wouldn't it be ironic if we're unable to sign the real deal, in part, because of the way we signed the pretender?