OhForAGreavsie

Good.

I can't argue it since I've only watched Dybala in one full game (last night) and that's not enough for a truly valid opinion. Meanwhile, it's clear that Palermo are trying to massage the fee. That said, I am not a fan of Icardi (another youtube based opinion I'm afraid) and am in no hurry to see him here. He does not strike me as outstanding in any department and anyway, he looks too similar to Costa. I'd like us to add something different, not more of the same.

For what it's worth, and I can't complain if you say it isn't worth much, I watched youtube videos of Pastore when he was linked with us ahead of joining PSG. From those I formed the opinion that he was not worth signing and that he would not be a success in Paris. On the other hand, having watched Dybala's youtube clips, he looks better than Pastore in my opinion.

A sensible attitude by club and player I think.

The three strikers you've listed sound a better combination to me than any two of them plus Drogba. If Didier continues to play next season, I hope it's elsewhere.

Watched Dybala today. He set up both goals in a 2-1 win, hit the woodwork and was MoTM. I like this bloke and we need a player like him. If we land him I'll be pleased.

Speaking personally, I don't consider myself a super fan but I do care about the football that's played. I have two issues however: Although some will disagree, I am convinced that this squad is not good enough to win the league playing on the front foot. I've seen it happen time and time and time again that clubs arrive expecting a battering but become emboldened by the fact that our players keep passing to them. We survive this habit when our shape caters for it but we are horribly exposed when it does not. Our squad is better than it has been in the recent past but it is still not good enough. I am seldom frustrated by how we play but I often am by how poorly we play. @Blue Coloured Sky won't have it, but the the only difference between our league performances at Man City this season and last, is that in 2013/14 we played well there, while this term we did not. The shape of the side was exactly the same. Atletico are much admired, including by me. They don't play front foot, they play what Jose is now calling strategically but with the difference that their passing is more sound than ours. This allows them to move forward with greater purpose and effect and also allows them time to recover their shape before possession is lost. When Jose returned I felt we were 8 players short. We've made progress in that regard but there are still too many weak links. If we are still having to play like this three years from now, I will be as angry as some others are. For now however, I am calm and happy. Because we have Jose.

Unless Boro no longer want him, which is hard to believe given his selection record, why is the loan not extended to the end of the season including possible play-offs? Is it perhaps to do with additional fees Boro might be due to pay if he stays?

Revisionist and untrue, although fashionably revisionist I grant you. We were equally unloved in that period for the way we played as we are now. We were as frequently clunky then as we are now and, we are told, Jose was eventually sacked for it. I've read several times in the last 12 hours that, with this squad, we should be doing better but I simply do not agree. In terms of playing proactive football, both Arsenal and Manchester City have better squads than we do. Fortunately we have a manager who is prepared to cut his cloth and knows how to do it. As a result, few neutrals will now bet on either of those clubs catching us. We are not going to succeed consistently playing on the front foot when our squad is littered with players for whom basic continuity passing is a problem. It only takes one piece of miss-control, one wayward pass, one-second's worth of indecisiveness to turn potent, exciting football, into slow, ineffective aimlessness. We have some building blocks around which a squad can be assembled to provide the kind of football we all want but there is work to do before we get there. Meanwhile Stamford Bridge rocked yesterday watching its team trying to win the league. I loved it, all of us who were there loved it. Sorry about that.

A reasonable approach.

Not that it would have mattered if they were booked.

He was.

I'm one of Oscar's biggest critics but I made him MoTM today.

You know I couldn't wait to get back and log on to read the latest efforts from the whiners. Thank you for not letting me down. Every bit as enjoyable as the constant bleating on Arsenal Fan TV.

All I've seen of either player is Youtube videos so anyone who has watched full game coverage of these two, as you have, is fully entitled to tell me that I simply don't know what I'm talking but, based on those Youtube videos, Dybala interests me and Icardi does not. Jose likes to talk about having different solutions within the squad. My impression is that Icardi is similar to Costa whereas Dybala is very different, not least because he is more technically gifted than either Costa or Icardi. In that sense Dybala would offer Jose an alternative rather than more of the same. The Argentinian looks the more useful option for us so I'm not surprised to read reports that we've made a bid. On the other hand, I'd be surprised if we went for Icardi.

I'm seriously under qualified to comment having seen so little of this bloke but I do like what I have seen. In my opinion we urgently need a technically gifted striker because I believe that's something we miss badly. Jose likes to talk about a squad that offers different solutions; Dybala would certainly be different to anything we have now.

Pure speculation on my part, I have no knowledge of the facts but... Are there not strict rules which govern emergency loans? Are those rules not likely to specify under what circumstances such a loan can be extended? If there are no such rules, and an emergency loan can be treated just like any other, then what's the point of a transfer window, and a separate loan window, for Championship clubs? Logically there must be rules and perhaps they have played a part in Nathan's return to Cobham.

Of course I can convince you. All I need from you is to tell me how. It's a serious question. How in the world is a person who takes your outlook to be convinced about an unknowable future event, simply through the power of argument? Of course we both know the answer to that question and you certainly knew it before you even asked me. As for you hoping to be proved wrong, I have my doubts but I hope to be proved wrong about that.

And I don't trust them either. Indeed we have more than a few I don't trust even in small games. On the main conversation I can only say that you and I disagree and probably always will.

Thank you.

Like many, if not most, people I'm not a big believer in stats but I think possession stats tend to be what people have in mind when they talk about being dominant. I do prefer Jose's way of talking about control but it's hard to argue that those stats say anything other than that we set up to counter attack City in 13/14, just as we did in 14/15. All that this season's game proved is that if you can't pass, not a lot else matters. When it comes to passing we have too many weak links. In fact I don't believe Jose can pick any side without having to include a number of players for whom passing is not a strength. I'm watching for squad changes before I'll start expecting better football.

I won't promise to review the games, I watch far too much football as it is. 2013/14: - City enjoyed nearly twice as much possession as we did.City had more shots than we did.City delivered 3.5 times as many crosses into our goal area as we put into theirs.City won twice as many corners as we did.We were forced into twice as many clearances as they were.These stats, taken from the Premier League site*, suggest that we did not dominate. Speaking from memory, I would rather say that we controlled the game, as Jose likes to put it. That is we sit, maintaining shape at all times and our throw ins go forward never sideways to prevent quick breaks with men in front of the ball and out of position. Because we executed that plan so well in 13/14 we regularly broke with space to play into and threatened to score more than the one goal that was registered. Fast forward to 14/15 and Andre Schurrle scored a beauty which will almost certainly get my vote for goal of the season but, sadly, that was pretty much the only passing movement we were able to put together on the day. You don't pass and your breaks never get started or worse, you get broken against. I remain firmly of the opinion that execution was the only difference between the two games. In 13/14 we played well, we passed to each other, Hazard & Matic were great; none of that was true this season. *Possession stats are from BBC, 65-35 in City's favour.

I watched the game on Tuesday, made up my mind that I'd like Chelsea to sign Varane but also made up my mind that Madrid could not possibly be willing to sell him. Now here you come, telling me what I want to hear and raising my hopes. You better be right. :) P.S. I missed Jose's comments that you referred to. Where were they published?

The great example is Manchester City. Somewhere in this site I read at least one post contrasting the way we played at City this season with our league performance there in 13/14. That post was from a Jose critic and talked about how TSO had set up brilliantly last season but how he had gone away from that this term. Not so. Well not in my opinion anyway. The set up was exactly the same but, whereas last season the players executed well, this time around, with the exception of the absolutely magnificent goal we scored, they played like park footballers. As a result barely a pass completed. Even so the genius of the tactical lay out still garnered a point and very nearly three.

Funny how people used to say that Pep was a tactical genius when he was in charge of Barca. As has ever been the case, the tactics you can successfully apply depend on the players you have.