OhForAGreavsie

There was no evidence shown today that has not been on display all season. If you feel you learned anything today then you haven't been watching as closely as you might have.

I hoped Remy would start today but it's hard to believe it would have made much difference. It has just not been our day. My thoughts about the urgent need to upgrade our AM options would not change whether we had won or lost today. Facts are facts; we had a good summer but it was only a start. We need two more good windows before we can be genuinely competitive at the highest levels. As for the title who knows, but I thought all along, and said all along, that City are the best team so I expect them to win it. That doesn't have to mean we can't do it though.

The problem is not the back four. It is the same one that has, in my opinion, been obvious since before the end of last season. A capable attack, which moves the ball quickly and accurately, makes a huge contribution to a side's defensive solidity. We are weak in the AM positions so we do not maximise our offensive opportunities and often concede possession in ways that leave the defence exposed. Oscar and Willian are the best options we have for their positions but they are not good enough. If we can give Matic, Cesc and Hazard better help in the attacking phase it will represent a major squad upgrade.

I disagree with every word of this.

There is no magic or mystery to this in my opinion. As far as I'm concerned it happens because City are a better side than us.

Bad performances can happen, as can disappointing results. What's more, I can live with them but I would like to believe that our decision makers are aware of the great myth about our situation; we certainly do not have the best squad in the league. We can't even put an XI on the pitch made up of Champion's League quality players, never mind the notion that we possess an entire squad of them. There are a whole range of things we can take from Jose's comment that we will not be going into the market in January. Maybe we can't afford it, maybe it's misdirection and we will be shopping, perhaps it's that he has players lined up to arrive during the summer instead, or maybe he hopes to plug the gaps with members of the development squad. Some of those are more likely than others but the one thing which is not at all likely in my opinion is that Jose could genuinely believe we don't need reinforcements. Clearly we do need them, starting with 2 AMs. In my opinion this was already obvious at the end of last season, now it has become the great big elephant in the room.

Of course Torres would have trained and kept himself fit to play. The alternative would have been to risk his contract worth something like €500,000 a month, plus bonuses. How stupid would he have to be to chuck that away for the sake of a strop? Don't forget that the club treated Bogarde appallingly badly in a cheapskate and dishonest attempt to get themselves out of a situation that was UTTERLY AND COMPLETELY THE CLUB'S OWN FAULT. I am absolutely delighted that Bogarde stood firm and put up with all manner of humiliations as CFC tried to cheat him out of his contract. Good for him, but if Bogarde did that for about £2m a year, do we really imagine that Torres would not have done the same for 3 times as much, maybe more?

Indeed the source I'm recollecting did say that Milan were paying Torres's wages of €3.1m pa, implying that this represented his total salary. Obviously all of us here know better, so I just speculated that the quoted figure was in fact Milan's share of Nando's base salary. As for the wages being completely off the books, I'd be quite surprised if that was so. It's common practice for clubs to offer a pay-off when they want to move players on. Those negotiations would usually start with the player asking for the full balance due on his contract, plus an amount to cover projected bonuses. The fact that Torres seems to want to go home will have given Chelsea some good cards to play in those discussions so I'm sure we will have negotiated a discount on that figure. I can't believe we'd have got away scot free however. Any amount we did agree to pay Torres would still count against FFP.

I wonder if it's reasonable for us to speculate that the club must have negotiated some sort of compensation for this? Reading between the lines of some authoritative sounding news items, it seems Milan were paying €3.1m of Torres's annual salary, with Chelsea obviously picking up the rest. Maybe Torres has agreed to wave at least a part of what he's owed by Chelsea in order to make this deal happen. If so that would be our payback for agreeing to take an £18.2m hit in this season's FFP numbers rather than £9.1m this season and £9.1m next. It doesn't really matter much either way since we would have had to pay the full amount eventually but I'm sure there was a point in the negotiations when Marina looked across the table and asked, "What's in it for us if we sign off on this deal?" Hopefully the answer was a million or two off the total bill.

If Torres should play against us in Europe, I hope no one will boo him. He should never have been signed, we know that. Once he was signed he should not have been selected as often as he was. We know that too, but none of this was his fault. Promises were made to Torres in order to persuade him to join. The club the decision to bring him here and the club made those promises. This entire mess is the club's fault. I hope we will continue to show up other clubs in the way we treat our ex-players with respect.

Yes there should. Even if 17 out of 17 was not quite true

The use of English in the letter is embarrassing for an official communication from Chelsea Football club but the behaviour described as unacceptable is indeed unacceptable.

Roof is probably the best word to use. The attitude of the local council and residents makes it highly doubtful that we'd get a licence for concerts or other non-football events at Stamford Bridge. Even if we did manage to stage some, the revenue would probably count as being generated from non-football activity and so would not count for FFP in any case. That does not mean that extra income would not be welcome, of course it would, but there would be no impact on FFP.

Roll back 12 months and many people were arguing that Mikel was the ideal man to occupy the main DM role. Enter Matic and virtually no one is arguing that any more. The arrival of someone who really is good at the job has pretty much ended the made up case for Mikel. Now there is a case being made for Mikel to fulfil another function. Well that case too will continue to be argued until we find an alternative who is genuinely good at the second DM role. We are not Leicester City, we should not be making do. If we need someone better, and we do, then let's go and get him. Perhaps Mikel's real contribution at the moment is as a place holder for Loftus-Cheek. I've been an RLC doubter; not of his talent, that's undeniable, but of how he applies it. If he gets his act together then he will perhaps earn promotion to the top squad. If Jose believes in RLC then he could well think it's better to have a stop-gap player occupying the place earmarked for Ruben, rather than buy an off the shelf player who will block Ruben's path. Ruben is not a proper DM of course but there are good options available if someone with his attributes replaces Mikel in the squad. Just a speculation.

Someone posted recently to argue that we need quality backups in the AM positions. My own view is that, Hazard apart, we already have plenty of backup quality players in that area. What we need is more AMs of the appropriate quality to be starting for Chelsea.

Quietly effective game by the looks of that. Especially enjoyed some of his first time passes. Not flashy but the correct pass, at the correct time, played with the correct weight. Very efficient.

And that's another part of our problem that, sooner or later, is going to have to be addressed.

You ask a reasonable question about what might have happened had Mikel played for ManU, and how different expectations could have impacted his development. We can't know how that would have gone but, based on our experience of the player, we can each make a guess. Personally, I doubt he'd have succeed. Jose did not give up on Mikel as an attacking option because the player was good at it, Jose gave up because Mikel was not good at a forward thinking role. My belief is that SAF would have done the same, just as he gave up on Anderson. I have seen no evidence of Mikel flourishing for Nigeria. He was indeed excellent against Spain, a game in which Nigeia were nevertheless soundly beaten, but prior to that his place in the team had come under scrutiny. The first time I saw Lukaku play for Chelsea I said he had no business being at a team with Chelsea's ambitions. Many thought that opinion was wrong at the time, and plenty still do, but I stick by it. Roman would have saved every penny spent on Torres if our owner had shared my opinion on the player. I was confused by his success at Liverpool because he had no qualities which explained how it happened. No touch, no control, no hold up play, no passing and no dribbling. I never rated Torres and would never have spent a single penny on him. It's probably safe for us to guess that Roman wishes he hadn't either.

Thanks DH. Certainly not looking for an argument but maybe we can have an interesting conversation about this. My views in a nutshell: - I concede that Mikel was rated as a big prospect and was coveted by two of the great managers in the game. I do not concede however that he ever lived up to expectation as an AM/CM, or that he was not given ample opportunities to do so. My recollection is that he was given many. I believe therefore that we do know he is not good enough to play higher than he does now because we've seen him try and we've seen him fail. I think Nigeria Mikel is a myth. The odd good game is all that amounts to as well. There's the oft quoted game in the Confederations Cup last year but not much else. I like Mikel as a closer. When we're two up and Mikel is introduced I smile and feel happy. I'm never so happy however when Mikel starts, although I can live with it when it's a JM decision. I'd be quite surprised if Mikel's current contract is extended, and just as surprised if he ever earns another at the same level.

Can't agree DH. If he was good enough as an AM/CM there would have been no need, and therefore no attempt, to mould him. He was not, and is not, good enough however.

Thank you. To be fair, in my mind, Wallace's Chelsea chances are already a write off but I suppose being young does give him time to show us more than we've seen so far. What I saw from Traore early this season was a bit hit and miss. His passing in particular was struggling and the impact that had on his overall game meant I wasn't all that surprised when he played himself out of the starting line up for a while. There's no doubt he has the great body control and explosive movements that can take opponents out of the game. On top of that, he has a good sense of the pass, of when and where a pass is on. He wasn't executing well however and that caused him to try more dibbles. Inevitably that led to possession breaking down on Brtrand a lot. Plenty of good looking movement went nowhere and fizzled out. The mere fact that Bertrand is back in the line up, showing off his finishing* and becoming a key player for Vitesse again, suggests that he's either worked through his problems or is experiencing an upswing in form. Let's hope it's the former. By the end of the season we'll know one way or the other and he'll have qualified for a work permit. Indeed, I reckon he might even get a permit on appeal in January. If Salah leaves next month, as is rumoured, I wonder if Jose might be tempted to bring him here. Could help our chances in the UEFA Youth League if nothing else. *Just seen today's goals on YouTube. Two high class finishes.

I saw a couple of Vitesse games earlier in the season but haven't watched them for a while. Can you tell us a bit more about how Bertrand is playing? Also why has Walace not featured recently, is he injured or out of favour?

You don't have to be English to qualify as 'homegrown' but Kevin does not meet the other criteria and so will never be regarded as homegrown under either Premier League or UEFA rules.

Again, I disagree. That performance against Bacelona was one of our better displays against them and we certainly deserved a second goal before they equalised. Even so the high quality nature of our play that night was based on a solid, shape holding, defensive set up. Trying to mix it with that Barca side was not the way to go for anybody. They were extremely fortunate to put us out, but what happened when AF deployed a less pragmatic approach against them in the final? The scoreline was decisive but nevertheless extremely flattering to a United side who were comprehensively outplayed. The notion that when a side lines up in the 'low-block' it means that they are not trying to win is one of the great myths of the game. Sometimes doing that is exactly the right way to try to win. JM knows this and he is not alone. I want to see us able to beat more sides on the front foot, dominating possession and confidently able to challenge them to outscore us if they can. Not with this collection of players we can't however. We are closer now to being able to adopt that approach but we aren't there yet. Not quite sure what you meant in reference to the United game, after all we did have a hard time when they scored against us.

Not, in my opinion, as many as it has gained. Perhaps this differing view might be traced to my thoughts about the prowess of our team. It is widely believed that we have an outstanding team capable of beating almost anybody by pressing high and playing through teams. Not me however. I think that our generally great results this season have caused people to overlook some of the flaws in our squad and to overrate the quality we can put on the pitch. Clearly we do have some outstanding footballers but, as controversial as my opinion might be, I also think we have rather too many who are short of the quality required if our play is to justify the rave reviews we've been getting. For example, I don't think any of Oscar, Schurrle or Willian are as good as needed. Even Costa, who is a big improvement on what we have had previously, has clear weaknesses that restrict our flow. Believing all of this allows me to support a pragmatic approach more often than some others seem to. I am delighted that we have a manager who will go the pragmatic route whenever he does not feel that we can win by going on to/staying on the front foot. I am convinced that we have gained much, much more from Jose doing that, than we have lost.