OhForAGreavsie

This was exactly my opinion when I used to watch him. Back then I would suggest people notice his involvements then ask themselves how many other players they think could do what Pastore just did. For far too much of the time my own answer to that question was, "Loads and loads."

Prefer Weigl anyway but I'm not up on the latest about what his situation might be come summer. Do I remember that there was a story about a move to Bayern? Maybe this deal, if it comes off, can only increase the likelihood that Weigl will move.

Assuming that scouts working for any big clubs are recommending a move to acquire young billy, and assuming the clubs are indeed offering £500,000, then yes they must be.

Yes I noticed that statement in the commentary on the video. Thing is, the top teams scout everybody. Anybody that comes to any kind of prominence will be assessed sooner or later by the army of scouts working for the big teams. In other words, that oft repeated phrase, "a lot of big teams are watching him", doesn't mean as much as those saying it hope we'll think it does. Edit: Notice the number of times Gilmour hangs on to the ball for 5 seconds or more, does a few twists and turns, then passes it backwards. Fair enough, if that's the best pass available, then it's the right pass but, remember, these are the involvements which the person putting the video together felt were the best of young Billy. His game does not seem to me to be ready to have a spotlight shone on it. Whoever put the video up should do the lad a favour and take it down again. Give the kid a chance to make himself the best player he can possibly be. Good luck to the lad.

Nothing special there at all. No special touch, no exceptional balance, no outstanding body control, not even any particular pace. Just a fairly ordinary lad getting away with some awkward looking moves because of the level he is playing at. If people want to see lads exhibiting genuinely exceptional talent at youth level they should check out Phil Foden or Brahim Diaz at Man City. People would also see many better players than Gilmour if they watched our youth team.

In the case of David Luiz, he has played at the same high level since his first game back. If he was playing as well on the day he returned, as he is now then that does not look to me like his current level is due to work done with Antonio. What people are choosing to believe is Victor's improvement dates back to minute one, in game one, of pre season. Again, this does not look like Vic has become a better player because of Antonio's work at Cobham. At least it doesn't look like that unless people really think Antonio has a magic wand and can transform players after just one or two training sessions. I'd be surprised if anyone thought that was actually possible. If anyone does think such magical transformations are possible, then how would they explain why Antonio has not waved his magic wand over Nate, or Michy, or Kennedy, or Charley, or Nat or Ola or Ruben? The truth is that there is no magic so neither David nor Victor is genuinely better than they were before. All that has happened is that Antonio is playing them in roles which suit their abilities and, which allow them to be effective. If this is what you mean when you say that Antonio has improved DL and VM, then I go along with you. If you were suggesting however that the two players are now better footballers than they were before Antonio came along, then I can't agree with you I'm afraid. If the Ox isn't good enough for Chelsea now, then he isn't going to become so just because he trains with Antonio. That didn't work for any of the names I listed above, and it wouldn't work for him either. On the other hand, if the Ox is good enough for Chelsea, and he is just waiting to find the right role in the right team, then maybe Antonio can put that together. Maybe. The Ox has qualities I like. If this transfer happened, I would not be unhappy about it, but I only expect good coaching from the boss, not magic.

I agree. I think the Ox is worthy of consideration in his own right but throw in the HG status and he's an option which makes a load of sense.

In terms of their personal preference, members of the RFU (Rugby Football Union) would not want to see soccer played at Twickenham. That said, it is possible that they might be persuaded by the huge amount of money which would be generated by renting out their relatively underused stadium. Like the FA, they are a not-for-profit organisation, with responsibility for the whole of the 15-a-side code. The ability to distribute additional revenues to all levels of their game would be a huge incentive for them. The real opposition would come from local residents and from "rugby people" everywhere. For reasons which, in my opinion, boil down to little more than snobbery, the idea of soccer at the home of Rugby is anathema to fans of the oval ball game. A not insignificant consideration is the fact that rugby fans, or at any rate people raised with the traditions of rugby, are massively over represented among UK powerbrokers. Many ministers of State, high-level civil servants, and wealthy property owners attended extremely expensive 'public' schools. Such schools prioritise rugby over soccer, identify with the rugby ethos and disparage what they see as soccer's poor approach on many issues. It is largely in rugby playing schools, fee paying or otherwise, where anti-soccer attitudes are passed from generation to generation. Amid much opposition from all directions, the chance of a move to Twickenham is virtually zero.

Is there anywhere we can go which doesn't involve sharing with someone and moving in with a set of fans who think of us as rivals, even if we don't see them in the same light? The only option I can think of is no option at all really. It involves delaying the redevelopment of The Bridge until we've completed a deal with AFC Wimbledon, Kingstonions & the Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames. A deal which would see us redevelop that stadium first, then move in there while the new SB takes shape. Leaving aside the difficulty of getting a deal done, that would entail playing in a ground with a tiny capacity and that is totally impractical. Even Craven Cottage has a capacity of less than 26,000 and and I don't know if it would meet uefa standards for Champions League football. If there's an alternative to the usual suspects among London's stadia, I can't think of it.

I feel that if people allow themselves to get agitated they can make the environment ugly, unpleasant and draw the danger of violence closer to the surface. They can do that regardless of the best efforts of clubs, stadium managers and police. Think London stadium. When people watch football on their feet they do get more excited and excitable. I hope you are right that people will control themselves, and that control measures will take care of anyone that can't manage a bit of self-discipline. In the end I don't believe that you are right however. People react; our songs and actions get slightly closer to the mark, the oppo's lunatics then respond pushing it a bit further and up goes the heat. Like I said, think West Ham. I don't want to see that. To my mind it ain't broke so I say let's not fix it. We remember the 70s & 80s. We remember that crowds were way down on the 60s, and way down on where they are now despite the prices being many multiple times higher than they were then. Fans were driven away in their tens of thousands by the violence and by the fact that football grounds were pretty horrible places to be. We only need see the behaviour of a noticeable proportion of England fans at tournaments to see that the trouble makers are still among us. In my opinion, clubs would be foolish to give in to this pressure for standing. I accept however that more football fans agree with you than agree with me.

Be neutral. Support England.

It was announced more than a year ago that there will be a return to the shed. Away fans will stay more or less where they are now but the intention is that they are moved higher. The club were asked to investigate a single 'wall' like Dortmund's for The Shed, but said it was a non starter given the space restrictions. They were also asked to investigate safe standing but say they have no plans to incorporate it at present. Personally I'm strongly against a return to standing. I think it'll raise the temperature and increase confrontational attitudes among those who are that way inclined. he game is so much better without that ugliness and I believe no chances must be taken which might turn the clock back to the bad old days.

Interesting. I don't think it's the actual pass which is the most important component of being a good passer. Most people, you & me included I think, could complete a very high percentage of the passes available to us if we were first set up with the right angle, on our chosen foot, with the time and space required, and with the runner in position. Even if you and I couldn't, most professionals could. Nemanja, for example, certainly can. Yes, there are differences between different professionals but, given the perfect set up I've described, the better passer isn't going to complete a significantly higher percentage of the passes than the less good distributor. There is something which makes a much bigger impact on the outcome of any given possession than mere precision of delivery. That thing is the special player's ability to do the things which create the good conditions for a pass in the first place. These include; the collect and turn which leaves the immediate marker in his wake and opens up the pitch in front of him, the precise touch which puts the ball right were it needs to be so he has that split second to get his pass away, the poise and body control to retain possession long enough for the target of his pass to make a run. I won't go on with the list; we all know the sort of things which are on it. I think Bakayoko has many of the attributes required to generate good passing opportunities for himself. Threading the intricate pass around the edge of the opponents' box is a part of the function of a player in Bakayoko's role, but effectively turning defence into attack is a more important part. Bakayoko may not score lots of goals or register many assists, but his team does and he is a big part of the reason for that.

I really believe that when the glorious day comes that we find a youngster who the manager really believes in, that kid will be trusted and selected. In terms of technical ability, I believe that RLC is indeed better equipped than Dele Ali. In terms of what the two lads do with their tools however, there is no comparison. Sadly. I think that is a trait which is prevalent in Italian managers; they value experience. Our Italians, Capello with England, and various Italian national team managers have exhibited it.

I nearly clicked the like button but can only agree with half of the last sentence. I think the utility of loans has come to an end for Nat. For me, his options are to convince Antonio that he is ready for a bigger role, accept his current role, or find a new permanent home. I wholeheartedly support everything else you say in the post above.

For what it's worth, I posted, elsewhere, to say that I didn't rate Nemanja after watching clips of him before we signed him first time around. My appraisal then was that he needed far too long on the ball and that he was over fond of flighted passes. Passes which took too long to reach their targets, and which were more difficult for the receiver to control, than if they had been played along the floor. I'd like to claim that at least this makes me consistent about his contribution but, in fact, I was very enthusiastic about his performances in the first six months after his return. In my opinion, he represented a step forward from the players who were the alternatives at the time. Now however, I feel it is time to take another step. Two things to be fair to Nemanja: - 1. He is more selective with the flighted passes now, and does a better job with choosing that route only when it is the best option. In his youth he seemed to do it for style. (Or at least he did in the clips I saw.) 2. In my opinion he is much better suited to the position he switched to at Benfica, than he was to the AM role he was slated for when we first signed him.

Exactly.

Never mind the quality, feel the width eh? There are assists, and then there are assists. They are certainly not created equal. When judging the contribution of any player, it's not a simple matter of measuring his output. Questions have to be asked, and answered. How often does the player do as well as he can have done in a given situation? Can we reasonably expect our starter in that position to do better? Your answers to those questions in Nemanja's case may find in his favour, mine find decisively against him. As for the assists; I've frequently posted the opinion that, when things are in his favour, Nemanja can pick a pass as well as the next professional. It it when things are not in his favour that he frustrates me. When we need someone with the surety of touch, quickness of feet and quality body control to turn a less than perfect situation into an attacking opportunity for our team, Nemanja is not our man. On the majority of occasions that Nemanja comes into possession, a standard, simple, action is exactly what is required and he serves us well in those situations. There are numerous times in each game however where we would benefit from a player with superior attributes and it is those times which make the difference. We hope to qualify for, and be competitive in, the Champions League next season. We will find it harder to succeed in that ambition if we are not able to select a player to partner Ngolo who is able to help us make the most of those difference making opportunities. Last, but not least, Nemanja is utterly unable to do anything the least bit challenging with his right leg. He avoids that limb in the same way novice tennis players avoid their backhand. For me, an upgrade in his position remains priority number one this summer.

I think the plan remains the same. Academy graduates will be selected when, and only when, the current manager decides to do so. When circumstances permit the manager might, as Antonio and others have done, select players for development purposes. Other than that selection has to be earned and the manager is the person to decide when it has been. If this implies that the whole academy structure needs re-examination, then so be it. Ultimately, if you or I were running the team we'd make our own choices over selection. Antonio must be allowed to do the same. As for your assessment of Nat, or mine come to that, it's just opinion. Maybe Antonio agrees, maybe he does not, but if he says 'best in decades' does not equal good enough then that's his call to make. Again, if this implies that the whole academy structure needs re-examination, then, again, so be it.

Exactly so. Like many, I'd be glad to see more minutes for both Nat & Michy but Antonio already sees more of the pair than we do. Who knows, if we saw what he does everyday, we might very well be making the same decisions. Be that as it may, there is no doubt that if the boss felt the pair could help the team, he would pick them. Since he does not pick them, he clearly he does not think that Nat & Michy offer what he wants. Even if anyone has a different view about this, it is still only a matter of opinion and, in the end, someone has to choose. That person has be the manager.

Nemanja is not a Chelsea youth product.

Leaving David aside, which of our other Brazilians did we, or do we, think is good enough for the Selacoa? It doesn't take an anti-Chelsea conspiracy to leave those names out of the National team. Returning to DL, perhaps he's just not fancied. There are an awful lot of people in the football world who could not select him either. Chelsea's gain.

Get used to that frustration; if you haven't already. I've been having this discussion with people for decades but there's always someone new coming along who needs convincing all over again. Players are often said to have improved, and indeed they do but only in a specific, narrow way. Players improve in their understanding of how to make the best use of their attributes. They get better at using the tools they have and, crucially, they get to know what they can't do so they do not waste possession by trying things they can't manage. Romelu has done that well but, players like him and Diego never turn into Lionel Messi. Basic talent level is innate and can't be fixed by training. Proof? 1. There is only one Messi, as there was just one Pele and one Maradonna. If reaching their levels of ability was a simple matter of extra hours on the training ground, there would have been countless thousands of them over the years. 2. There is a transfer market. If clubs could simply train up their own Messis, Bouffons or Bonuccis, why on Earth would they bother spending hundreds of millions in the market? Improvements are possible but only in a limited way. Kurt will never have quality skills in possession of the football and, in this system, that is a serious issue. N'golo's FA Cup goal against ManU is one of my favourites of the season. Why? Watch it again and notice where our LCB & RCB are as the goal is created and scored. That's a part of our system when circumstances are right, and it's a thing of beauty, but there ain't no point putting Kurt there.

Being "just" a finisher was never good enough. I heard Clive Allen tell a story about the opening game of the 1987/88 season. He and Mickey Quinn had scored 77 goals between them the previous season but both were on the bench as their sides faced each other in that fixture. With the score still 0-0 there was a moment, Allen says, when the pair glanced at each other and raised their eyes to the sky as if to say how the heck can't we get into these teams. The answer of course was that neither of them were good enough, as all round players, to keep their manager's confidence. It's why they both had so many clubs. Teams would be attracted by their goal scoring, but would eventually be disappointed by their overall contribution and decide to move them on. The same was true of Michael Owen, an absolutely brilliant finisher in my opinion. He earned moves for that reason but his clubs lost interest in him because his all round game was not at the same standard. For all their rhetoric, Liverpool didn't fight to keep him, and no one else did either. It takes more than a good scoring record to make a top player. That is why no top club was prepared to pay the money for Lukaku last summer. Let's see what happens this time around.

The only difference of opinion between us here is that I would swap CB and LWB in your list.