OhForAGreavsie

How can people treat this light-heartedly? If Leicester need the win to pip Spurs to the title I'm buying their shirt, learning their songs and eating Walker's crisps.

Jed's goal vs Lyon: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3xksx1_2-2-jeremie-boga-goal-hd-rennes-v-lyon-13-03-2016_sport

Because he is talented but not effective enough. He is no better a player today than he was three years ago and that's an issue. I'm a long standing defender of the academy and the work they do but if I had the opportunity I'd have questions for them about Jed's development.

Pace, great technique on the dribble, great passing and amazing body control. Just 18 and way better than Boga. That said Jed has just netted to bring the scores level after Rennes had trailed 2-0. Lyon should have wrapped this up a long time ago but may rue the chances they've wasted.

Tune in to BT Sport 2 right now or find a stream and watch. You will quickly be convinced. Bonus, Jed came on at half time so you'll catch a glimpse of him too.

I remain unconvinced by Pogba but Dybala is a great player. If we got him it would be a fantastic statement, not only of our intent but also of our ability to deal with our problems. As good as he is however he is only number three on my summer wish list. 2. Leonardo Bonucci 1. Ousmane Dembele It's fantasy stuff of the highest order but if we got all three then we'd only need three more players to get ourselves back into top four contention. That's how good those three are.

You are not the only one.

Firstly apologies for having added extra content to my post after you quoted it. I was typing the addition as you were typing your reply. This is perhaps progress though. You seem to have accepted that it hasn't happened in the past and are now aiming to criticise them for something you say they are doing currently and going forward. Let's see but what profits are you claiming they are keeping? Why would Roman let them keep his money when he'd rather it was spent on the team or at least on the stadium?

Again, how do you know in what manner Chelsea is run? You are making an accusation against the board and imputing their motives without any knowledge of the situation. There are many things about which the board might face criticism, we don't need to make any up. In any case we've made two profits in the last goodness knows how many years stretching back to pre-Roman days. If there is a bonus structure for the board, and if it is based on profits, then they ain't doing so well out of it. In any case there is little logic in the accusation. Look at the amount of money Roman has pumped into the club. If it was profits he was after he'd have done better to just put the money in the bank, even in an ordinary account attracting a tiny interest rate. Roman is patently not in it for the money. That being so, why would he incentivise the board to chase profits when doing so could very well be to the detriment of the success he craves? Makes little sense. Is it not more likely that if there is a bonus structure it would better reflect his goals for the club? A guess of my own about what one of these might look like: A board member is likely to have been deputed to pilot the construction of the new stadium from gaining planning permission through to completion. That person may well earn a bonus if the stadium is allowed, and then built on time and within budget. As I say that's just a guess but it seems likely to be far closer to the sort of thing Roman would pay bonuses for. Other guess are available of course.

I thought Oliver was brilliant throughout. One of the best refereeing performances for some time. He was calm and replays suggested that almost all of his decisions were correct. Nothing there for us, or Everton, to complain about.

Neither of us has the first clue about the remuneration packages of board members. I don't know whether or not they are paid bonuses and, if so, what triggers those payments. You don't either.

We have only one shareholder and we don't pay dividends.

Thank you for bolstering my faith. So many on here scream and shout at Guus, and shouted at Jose, because those two seasoned professionals, who have proved their credentials over and over again, had the temerity to disagree with the genius opinions posted here.

All 100% correct of course but I'd still like to see Pato. Out of curiosity if nothing else. I haven't seen him since he was in Europe when I formed the opinion that he was another in the long, long line of players who, while clearly talented, were not at all effective; a player who was more hype than substance. When I said so in the transfer thread before Pato joined, someone came along and railed about being fed up with people like me posting when they didn't know what they are talking about. He went on to explain that Pato was now fully fit and playing really well. Tough to see how it could have been possible for me not to know what I was talking about when I was talking about was my own opinion formed when I had watched the player. Still, it'd be good to see Pato in blue once or twice. We have nothing to loose.

Had to quote because 1 like just isn't enough for this post. He's going to play against Ajax on Tuesday but he's too old for the Youth Cup game on Friday so he'll be available if Guus wants him.

Let's see what the mega reviews reveal but I fear this may be worse than Suarez in one way. My view, not widely accepted I know, is that Suarez just looses it and can't help himself. It looks to me like something that's been with him since childhood. I'm not sure Diego has that excuse. Anyway... Given the opportunity I'd have signed Suarez even after the bite at Anfield but I don't believe Diego offers enough to offset the hassle, bad publicity and extra motivation he provides to opponents. If he stays, he stays but if he leaves I'm fine with it. Only, please Chelsea, if we are to replace Costa, buy a striker whose first asset is his technical ability. Thirteen years Roman has been here, not one such striker signed.

I'm ambivalent about retaining him. Away from home, he motivates opposing fans too much and, home or away, his technique often fails him when he has the ball at his feet. If we get a sensible offer from Atleti I'd take it.

In 1955/56 the reigning champions finished 16th out of 22 so it has happened before.

Thank you. We do it too but not as shamelessly as Manchester City who do it absolutely routinely. Their wide men are not wide at all, barring Nevas who wasn't starting when KDB was fit, so they push their full backs high for width. This frequently leaves them with the foul as their only choice when an opponent threatens to break against them. In our semi-final at Wembley in 2013 Ya-ya should already have been sent off for two cynical challenges before he was eventually booked for a third one. Referees have to up their game on this issue.

I think you are doing what many cricket commentators do. A batsman steps forward to a goodish length ball outside the off stump and smacks it through cover to the boundary. Played, they say. What a stroke, they purr. Next ball he makes the same shot but plays a few millimetres inside the line, and the ball moves a few millimetres off the seam. Result, a splice to point and a brilliant catch. Now we get endless analysis about how the bat was away from his body, how we wasn't quite over the ball, how his front foot wasn't quite to the pitch, and how he has to cut out these mistakes. We drew at City last season thanks to Super Frank. In truth we were lucky to get a point because we were comprehensively outplayed. That was in contrast to our league win there the previous season which was widely hailed as a tactical master class and the performance of the season. I had a debate on here with someone who was blasting away at Jose for his defensive set up in the draw and laying into him for not being more aggressive as he had been the first time. My point, and the point of these two examples, is that the tactics were exactly the same in both games. Indeed City had more possession, and a greater territorial dominance in the game we won than in the one which was drawn. The only difference is that the players played well in the win and, barring the absolutely brilliant Andre Schurrle goal, they were utterly hopeless in the draw. In the win, when we did spring forward we passed crisply and accurately to retain possession and allow time for numbers to join the attack. That made it look like we were more offensively set up but, as I say, we were deployed the same way in the draw. We just passed like park players in that game and seldom retained good possession. Had we played gung-ho football on Wednesday, Paris would have murdered us but had we implemented Guus's tactics with just a little more quality, and a little more help from the officials, we might have run them closer. The tactics were fine, the talent level in our squad is the problem and it has been so, in your words, for some time now. Managers have to cut their cloth. Hiddink is a very good cloth cutter.

Imagine how that photo will look at the end of next season when the side finishing 20th in the Premier League will earn more than the €138m we earned as champions last season?

I did not see it this way. In an FA Cup game where you can gamble one goal you might score against one you might concede, maybe, but the away goal rule, a rule I love by the way, changes the odds dramatically. A second goal for Paris last night was effectively worth two-and-a-half goals. Those odds are always going to alter your outlook. Guus's set up was, as I saw it, more flexible than the way you describe it. When an attack in numbers broke down, i.e. when we had enough bodies forward to make it worthwhile, we pressed high and did it well. We recovered the ball numerous times and created danger from it, including the goal. However when we had fewer than two or three people high we dropped off when our attacks broke down. There is no point pressing with too few players because they will just be passed around and all the energy they expend chasing the ball is simply wasted. When good sides have the ball against you, of course you drop back. Nothing else makes sense. Watch Barca, they do it. The aim all night, well most of the night, was to break quickly with a three man front, DG, EH & PR with CA, RFK and one of CF or MJO bursting to join. Unfortunately we were let down by the referee. Like all clubs do when facing that tatic, PSG's method was to make a stopping foul, to make it quickly and to make it high. This is because the resulting free kick is not so dangerous and because a cynical foul near the opponents box and before the potential threat to your own goal is made clear, is seldom punished as severely by the officials as a cynical foul near your own box. Three Paris players should have been booked early for doing this and one, Rabiot, should have been sent off before half time for two such offences. Rabiot of course would not have been sent off, had he already been booked he would not have committed the second foul. The restriction an early booking would have placed on him, and and on Matuidi, would have made a difference to us. It would have allowed three or four more, potentially dangerous, attacks to develop rather than being illegally stopped. No professional manager, not one, is going to behave as you seem to be suggesting Guus should have done when facing a great opponent in the situation that conceding a single goal would eliminate his team.

Guus chose the set up that he thought would give us the best chance to win. If he'd thought your approach was the best option he'd have gone with it but clearly he did not. If he was not gung-ho enough for you it's because he didn't think that was the way to go. I felt he was right. I thought his tactics were excellent and for quite a while enabled us to live with a side that is clearly better than we are. Guus isn't affraid. He used his judgement and did what he judged best but we lost because Paris are better than we are. That's the long and the short of if.

The ball playing CB I want is Bonucci but I don't agree with you about Diego. He's on my upgrade if possible list. It won't be easy to do but if there's a player available who can do what Diego does plus is better with the ball at his feet then I'd make the change. Meanwhile, back on topic... I think the board may have made the same mistake the players seem to have done. Our squad was far from the best in the country last season but, for two reasons, board and players seem to have gotten it into their heads that they were. Those reasons were Jose and Mourhino. No Jose, no title last season yet the players, and some fans, seem to believe they had outgrown the man and his methods. We've seen the results and those results must have opened the eyes of the board. I think the people in charge will be an open book now and will listen hard to the advice Guus and the new manager will be pumping in. If Guus and the new boss are on the same page then together they will be the focal point for the changes that are needed.

I don't like to read the board being described in those disrespectful terms. I know however that it reflects not just your opinion, but those of a sizeable percentage of Chelsea fans so I'll have to get used to it I suppose. I'm not defending what has been done, I'm as critical as anyone else of the player recruitment. It's just that I prefer to express myself using a different tone. Guus will be sticking around in just such a role, That much can be divined from his statements spread over numerous press conferences. I get the feeling that he will be Roman's new Bobby Campbell.