OhForAGreavsie

Chelsea won of course We all knew that they would And the star of that great team was... Forever in our hearts. Long live The King.

Now I'm not sure if you're not sure or if you're messing with me. Either way it's a good one because it made me smile.

Agree with your overall view but, just to dot the is and cross the ts, I'd say it actually is a personnel issue in the sense that Jose does not have the personnel he needs to solve the problem. I think this is a circle that can't squared which is why I believe our boss deserves a lot of praise for finding solutions that win points, even if not plaudits.

Oops?! We take your point though.

I'm strongly in the pro Jose camp but I have to say that I think this criticism is unfair. Critical posts do happen after a win but they are met by various versions of the, "We won, just enjoy it can't you?", comment. People who post negatively get complaints about their timing whichever way they go. In that sense, they can't win. At this point I should admit that I'm one of them. I frequently post negative comments. It's just that, Bradford apart, my complaints are about the players, not the manager; and about what I see as the lack of sufficient quality in the squad, not about an individual's form. I make such comments just as often after a good result, as after a bad one. For example, despite his positive stats, I was unhappy with Oscar in the 5-0 at Swansea and said so. Often.

And missed 5 great chances, at least 2 of them sitters.

I can't vouch for Pogba, don't watch him, but I agree to a large degree with your general idea. Only the best will do. Outstanding must become entry level for Chelsea transfer targets. I say that I go along to a degree because I think we need to recruit at least three more outstanding players. I'm not convinced that we can pay as much as €70m for any one of them.

The right question I think. It doesn't seem to me that he'd be prepared to return or that Jose would want him for that matter. I don't think his links to the club, through his mother, would make any difference. On the other hand, if we did want him then I suppose the new TV deal might.

It is the point to me. Chelsea being better is what I care about, City getting better is their problem.

After all? Nobody liked hearing what Nasri said but surely only those with their head buried in the sand ever doubted that he was right.

We do have a habit of doing that of course.

Some people like to blame Jose for our continuing struggles going forward. I don't. My point of view is that Hazard apart, our AMs are not good enough* for the level we aim to reach. Further, fluent attacking play is best served when the central striker possess high technical ability. Unfortunately that is not Diego Costa's greatest attribute. Size and physicality are useful but are not enough without the ability to retain possession under pressure. That requires great touch, quick feet, dribbling and good passing. As I've been saying for years, we lack such a striker. If Zlatan had been playing for us last night, we'd have won even with the other shortcomings we had on show. Now, if you want to say that it's Jose's fault we don't have the squad to match our ambitions, then that is at least arguable. Personally, I think he's made progress but when he came back we were a long, long, way short. The journey to take us where we want to go has started but we aren't there yet. *Don't know about Cuadrado but early looks are not encouraging.

I don't watch Serie A so I have to say I had never heard of this lad until the Palermo president's comments were reported last week. I did though seek out a few vids after reading of our supposed interest. It's impossible, I think, to tell from those highlights whether this lad is a potential Chelsea player but he definitely has something I like very much. What's more it's something I believe we could do with, something I've been saying for a long time that we should acquire. Those videos reveal that Dybala has outstanding technical ability. We don't have that among our strikers and, in my opinion, we need to add it. Such a player would provide Jose with the ability to pose defences a different problem as well as a complimentary presence to pair with Costa if TSO should want to go with two up top. It's one thing to have the ability, but if Dybala can actually play as well then I can see why we're reportedly interested, and I'd be excited to have him here. This is a Scout Nation video so you won't see any action in the first 80 seconds or so.

Well some tools are there and some talent also, but a large slice of what it takes to make you first choice at a top club is missing. Permanently so. Inadequate tools might be honed but you either have talent or you don't. If you're Joey Barton, you are never going to be Lionel Messi; and if you're Romelu Lukaku, you are never going to be Marco Van Baston.

Exclude me from that particular us please. I was saying within the first 20 minutes of Lukaku's Chelsea debut that he would never be first choice here because his touch simply was not good enough and that it would never improve. I was called foolish for offering that opinion. Well, I certainly am a fool, but probably not on that subject.

I agree, we shouldn't get upset by this. Nasri is saying that we're not all that special. Judging by comments posted all over this site, many of us agree with him. I certainly do. Nasri is saying they were the better side in the two meetings this season. They were. Nasri is not attempting to be arithmetically accurate. Footballers talk about 90 points as the theoretical title winning figure in the same way they talk about 40 points as the theoretical target to avoid relegation. His 90 points statement was just an embellishment on his view that, "Chelsea will make mistakes", by which he means we will drop points, therefore, "If we [City] win all our games it will put pressure on Chelsea." He's right, if they win all of their games they will 'reach' 90 points, and that would put pressure on us. I say ignore him, collect 33 more points (at time of writing) and leave him to enjoy our trophy parade from the comfort of his Dubai hotel, or wherever else he chooses to sun himself in the summer.

Sadly I think that reality was established a long time ago.

That video is pathetic and demeans the channel. I wish it was made by Liverpool Fan TV so I could belittle it in the way it deserves.

No. Available and in the squad. There are two parts to the regulations regarding cup tied players: - A player is automatically cup tied if he has already played for another club in the same competition during the same season. For example, Matic played for Benfica in last season's Champions' League group stage so was not available to be selected for us in that competition after joining in January. Every club is allowed to field a maximum of one player who has already played for another team in a different UEFA club competition. Cuadrado played in the Europa League for Fiorentina but since were are allowed to use one EL player in our CL squad, he's in.

Gentlemen, You are both right of course, I can't argue with what either of you say. I do though remember Hazard being accused of something similar when he was planning to leave Lille. Unlike Romelu, Eden had given good service to his old club and has since proved that he can walk the walk in the big league. I accept that this makes his situation different to Lukaku's, but when Eden had a reason to talk about making progress in his career, it seems that is exactly what he did.

To be fair, Hazard is at a top club so does not have quite the same motivation to talk about moving on. Only Real, Barca and maybe Bayern could even be claimed as an upward move for our number 10. Eden also has no need to tell people what a good player he is because people are constantly telling him that. Lukaku doesn't have the same luxury.

I would say that Lukaku has proved something at Everton. He has proved how right we were to sell him.

I agree, forget all those. Instead just focus on... Indeed he is so... that'll do for me thank you. I'm not saying that an appeal to authority is ever the way to conclude a discussion. I strongly respect the argument that goes, just because Jose, or anyone else for that matter, thinks something don't necessarily make it so. Thing is, I'm almost ashamed to admit, because Jose says, does work for me. So, for me, that closes the case.

A neat piece of wit which often does the rounds in chess playing circles and which even made it into Darren Brown's act but of course you did say, "I can play chess against..." which is not really true now is it? Maybe saying with instead of against would work and still raise a smile. If everyone will forgive a little bit of pedantry the joke doesn't really work anyway since the best player, human or computer, will sometimes win as well as sometimes losing against the second best so at least a draw would not always follow. P.S. I'm not even county standard. Middling to weak club standard at best and I'm no better at bridge. Mind you, I play a lot more bridge than I do chess these days.

Either I've misunderstood your point ZY or you're a heck of a chess player.