OhForAGreavsie

The lad above Jamal is Dom Solanke and to his left (our right) is Jake Clarke-Salter I think.

The move to Spurs was the only decision available to him. Everybody else realised that he was flashy looking but had no substance to him. Not a top level player and never was. As for heading to LA, he's just looking for his level.

I don't believe in this player's quality. Draxler has been touted as the next big thing for several years yet it seems that no top level club has made any serious attempt to get him. There's a reason for that so I say we should continue to steer clear.

Indeed. Putting loans into Chelsea Ltd is absolutely the best way for Roman to take cash back out of the club should that ever become the right thing for him to do. We have to keep in mind that while Chelsea FC PLC have no debts, the PLC is owned by Chelsea Ltd and Chelsea Ltd do owe money to one of Roman's companies. Given our historic financial losses, it's not likely that Chelsea Ltd will face corporation tax liabilities any time soon but it is entirely prudent to plan for the future. If the football club continue to make profits then Chelsea Ltd will too and, eventually, all of its tax write-offs due to the mountain of losses over the years, will have expired or been used up. In that situation Chelsea Ltd could be hit with tax demands which is where the loans would come into play. Instead of declaring a profit, and paying tax on it, Chelsea Ltd would simply repay a part of its loan. Profit gone, tax liability gone and Roman has some of his cash back without his having to pay tax on it either. Now I wouldn't want anyone to get me wrong, I'm no Maggie Thatcher. I believe in society; I recognise that it costs money to run, organise and protect. I therefore don't shirk, or begrudge, my own taxes and I don't approve when anyone else does. This mechanism I'm talking about however is no tax dodge, it's a perfectly standard business practice. It allows people to invest and build businesses which generate the wealth that ultimately pays for society. Chelsea FC, along with the rest of football, already make an enormous contribution to the national coffers and that's how it should be.

That wasn't the impression I got from reading the presentation material and press articles. Rather I expected that Roman would be lending the club the money to build the New Bridge rather than sourcing the loan on the market which would cost more and probably require more disclosure (to any lender) about its financial affairs than the club seem comfortable with these days. For Roman simply to give the club the money does not seem to make any sense to me. Of course if that's what he wants to do then who are we to argue.

Spot on. Every time the Premier League signs a new TV contract sellers, especially canny European clubs, recalibrate their asking prices. Even though the latest deal won't kick in until the season after next, the transfer price hike is clearly in full effect.

And it's not only the £8m Stoke want. Throw in the free loan they are also demanding and the deal approaches the amount Arsenal spent on Petr. Forking out the joint sixth-highest transfer fee ever paid for a goalkeeper, to purchase a backup, is an incredible, almost unbelievable, prospect. That said, I'm finding this prospect more acceptable than I did when it was first rumoured. I've often read the opinion that we can't expect to have world class players as backups but I disagree. Well sort of anyway. Everyone agrees that we should aim to have world class starters, but my argument is that our backups should be world class backups. That's to say the best backups in the world. Begovic is such a player and would represent a powerful addition to our squad. Yes the reported fee, and the reported cost of Begovic's contract, are both ridiculous but let's take advantage of our financial strength to target absolute quality. Too often in the past we've squandered our purchasing power on very poorly judged transfers. This time the decision makers have identified the right target. Let's bite the bullet, get the deal done, and move on with the rest of our summer plans.

Surely all of us, even those who have posted about their doubts, hope that. Of course there is a certain amount of pride which means that we all like to see our opinions proved right but watching Chelsea do well outranks that pride. Doesn't it? It's difficult not to have doubts given Radamel's recent output but if his form delivers results then our excitement will come and the doubts will vanish. So let's all wish him well and hope to see all doubts dispelled.

We may never know for sure but it certainly fits with Jose's comments last season when he talked about wanting to stay and not asking for a pay rise to do so.

^^Good work. Thanks.

Well reasoned point I think. It could be that there would still have been a tiny residue of PC's transfer fee on the books. He signed several renewals while here and each time he did the balance of his fee would have been amortised over the length of his new deal. There would therefore have been some amount due in the accounts for next season. However small the amount involved, it would raise PCs book costs and, using your equation, that would increase the FFP saving we make by replacing Cech with Begovic. The relatively small saving does imply though that we should tell Stoke to take a hike with their reported fee plus free loan asking price. Including a loan player for nothing, when that player would otherwise command a loan fee, changes the equation again and would make this a bad deal. PC would already have been one of the most expensive backup keepers around but only because he was on a contract which reflected his status as a starter and a superstar. We wouldn't go out and recruit a backup goalie on that sort of a contract so neither should we recruit one that would end up costing a lot more in FFP terms.

Just to be completely clear, they said the average age of a Chelsea season ticket holder is 50.

Ah, I see now. Our owner gets a lot of stick and is branded a gangster, or worse, by those with a certain outlook but actually I think he's a decent bloke. It's clear that promises were made to Nando during the recruitment process and my guess is that Roman felt honour bound to see that they were kept. I like that Mr A has that quality about him so I wouldn't want to see a change but it's a safe bet that he's counselled himself to be more careful about what is promised in future.

Like many, I initially thought that Roman was behind the move for Torres but not any more. I believe Wilkins when he said, two or three years ago, that Carlo was the one who initiated and pushed for that deal.

I just didn't like the look of Battersea with the chimney stacks incorporated but, generally speaking, I was in favour of a new site. I felt that was the best way to ensure we could build exactly what we needed and not just a compromised bodge. For example, I love the view from the East Stand but the west stand is a better place to watch from. Now, if I understand the plans correctly, the west is going to be rebuilt with the same rake as the current east stand. That's to say it'll be just as steep*. I know a lot of people don't feel comfortable in the east stand because of that steepness. There are bound to be other compromises too like seat spacing perhaps. Assuming we get planning permission for these plans, the debate about moving or staying is over so no sense rehashing all of that. If we are to stay, then these proposals look far better than I feared they might. If we can realise them the stadium will be great. *Somewhere in the back of my mind I have the thought that the rake of the east stand would no longer pass building regs. Can't recall where I might have got that from but, because of that, I was surprised to read that the new west stand would be built along the same lines. Does anyone know more/better?

Makes sense and obviously all clubs, including our own, would like to do their business early. Indeed Jose said as much when he talked about hoping to get it done before heading off on holiday. We all know the realities however. Among other things moves often involve chains. We can imagine this sort of conversation, "We'll sell him to you once we can buy our replacement from them, but they won't sell till they've got their replacement in." Even more often the sellers simply have no incentive to close deals early. In fact they frequently have every incentive to hold out and wait for the looming deadline to put pressure on buyers to add the final few millions to their offers. Transfer windows like the last one are fun but windows like this one are much more common. We can be sure that the club is working on deals as fast as it can so our only choices are to wait patiently, or to wait nervously. Either way, we do have to wait.

Good shout. That said, it looks like New Stamford Bridge would fit comfortably inside the big dome at the heart of Germania.

^^Many people liked the Battersea plans but I must say that I hated them. This on the other hand I would get excited about.

Best wishes to Pter. He did brilliantly for our club and I'll never forget it. I'm sure he'll understand if we here hope that he'll be picking the ball out of his net a bit more often than he's been used to over the last decade. One note, I wish he hadn't said that bit about Roman. What he said is true but you just know how the media are going to spin it and milk it for all it's worth.

I dismissed Gael's Chelsea chances within 20 minutes of kick-off in the first game I saw him play live. (A youth team game as Stamford Bridge.) Speaking personally then, Gael was certainly not rated more highly than Charly. The two players are similarly talented but, in my opinion, Charly has a much better understanding of the game and is clearly a better prospect at 18 than Gael was. In fact it's not even close. Again, that's only my opinion of course.

What seems ridiculous in my opinion is to imagine it is possible to quantify a player's ability simply by counting goals. Thinking like that can lead to flushing £100m down the toilet if you're not careful. I frequently said, while Torres was scoring those goals, that he was nevertheless a very ordinary player. We have since learned from Danny Murphy that Torres's Liverpool teammates thought so too. Recently Iker Casillas has also broken cover, which I expect more professionals will as the years pass and the autobiographies are published. Forget the goals, the truth about Torres was inescapable if you just watched him play. A bloke might be able to beat the odds for a while but Nando's luck was always going to run out.

I felt that while his body language was imperious at times when playing CB, he simply had too many mistakes in him. He is capable of some great passing but this made him overambitious in what he tried to accomplish from the back. His passing, which invariably travelled right to left, was all too often poor and sometimes worse. I think Nate would struggle to get a Premier League contract at this stage but if he has hopes of one with a Championship club then, for me, DM is his best shot. I did say if though.

Sadly can't argue, and you are right, he was beyond shocking at Wembley. With Jose in attendance to boot. As for the switch to midfield, I think the first decision was that he wasn't going to be a top quality CB. I felt the move up field was therefore the right call.

Oh dear, it's not even a multi page thread and I still don't see it. Thanks Jason.

I'm not sure I believe this. Replay his early comments about Petr's potential destination. In those he talks about a legend's right to choose, about how normally it would be different but how Petr was special in the history of this club and that meant special treatment. Jose talked about pride in his club for allowing players to choose and about how the players we sell are very, very good so, wherever Petr went, it would have to be a big fee. Only more recently has he changed his tune. My reading of this change is that it's a negotiating stance and that Marina put him up to it. Will any club after Wenger leaves Arsenal?