OhForAGreavsie

Got to say this sounds pretty ill-informed to me. "No specific system in place?" We have a fantastic system in place, one which has drawn plaudits from all quarters. People like Gareth Southgate, Stuart Robson and even 'Der Neue Kaiser', Michael Ballack, speak gushingly about Cobham. Hardly a month goes by without someone or other citing our development structure as THE model to follow. Ten years ago JM condemned the youth squad, now it's stuffed with high quality players in every position. Of course our academy, which is in its tenth year, has not yet produced a first team regular but ten years is no time at all in youth development. Lads recruited at 8 years of age in 2004/05 are still A FEW YEARS short of being first-team ready. Will any of the current U21s or U18s make it? Who knows. Chelsea need a high class squad and the only way any academy is going to turn out high class professionals is if the lads were high class prospects in the first place. All that can be asked of a youth system is that it identifies the best talent available to it and then teaches them to become the best footballers they possibly can. Whether the academy is doing that, and whether the young men turn out to be good enough for Chelsea, are massive questions. Over the next three or four years we'll BEGIN to be able to answer them as regards the first wave of true Cobham graduates. If the players fail the test then the focus shifts to the next age group and we move on. If however the judgement is that the system has failed, and that the players have not been coached to fulfil their potential, then the spotlight will be turned on Cobham itself. Good luck to all the young men who are studying there and trying to establish themselves in professional football. I hope as many of them as possible make it, and that some of them manage to do so with Chelsea.

It's interesting to read the varying opinions but I'm definitely with those who see Reus as 'must buy if available'. I'll be very surprised if every coach/manager/director of football, at all candidate clubs, does not see it that way too.

I'm not really up on how the rules on temporary transfers work. With Omeruo and Kalas having gone out for the whole season are we allowed to recall them or are they 'lost' to us for the season come what may? Is there even a rule about this or is it subject only to agreement between the clubs? If we can recall one of those two for emergency cover, I don't think we'll feel the need to buy a CB in January.

Ake is not a Chelsea class LB in my opinion. DM is his best shot at our first team, again imo. I also think we need to address CM/RW as soon as we can. We are undoubtedly a better side now than we were this time last year but we still blew the chance for a season defining victory at the Etihad. That happened because our passing broke down. Badly, and not for the first time this season. In fact we've suffered spells of poor passing in the majority of our games so far and that, imo, is not surprising. Remember it only takes one bad pass to destroy an attack and put your own team under pressure. Had we passed better at City we'd have controlled the ball against 10 men and seen the game out. As it was City could have won because we repeatedly gave up possession. Oscar, Ramires, Schurrle and Willian all struggle with their passing too often. They are very good players but we need great ones and we need them asap.

This lot? Cudicini Percassi Panucci Casiaraghi Dorigo* Zola Di Matteo DaLa Bonna Ambrosetti Vialli Borini

No the two I have in mind are not brothers. One is another left back and the other a striker. They are: - Left Back: Striker:

It was us and it was 2005 but it was Jose's second season i.e. 2005-2006.

Le Saux was not one of the two I thought of so I'd say that's (at least) 2 defenders and 1 striker.

When I started this post I only had the one who played for England but the other one came to me as I was typing. A defender and a striker. Correct?

Yep.

I thought we always denied that Alex was ours and even went so far as to put out a press release contradicting the manager of the other club when he said publicly that Alex was our player. Or am I confusing Alex with someone else? Either way, we all know what really happened but I just wondered if that is the 'official' story.

Salah is a 'free' pick in that Jose does not really seem to want to use him and would hardly miss the Egyptian if he left. Can't remember if Moh was on the U21 list this season but he won't be next year. If we need to free a second slot then replace Drogba with Bamford. (I rate Solanke more highly than Bamford but he's too young.)

Alex John Obi Mikel Paulo Ferreira Geremi Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink Jesper Gronkjaer Salomon Kalou Jody Morris and Albert Ferrer Didn't get Alex, Gerimi or Gronkjaer. Is that answer for Alex the 'official' one?

Got to say that's not how I read it. The reply said it would be short sighted to think that our squad is perfect and not capable of improvement. 'Perfect' is obviously a tough standard but it does seem to me that we are short. Among the current AMs it looks like only Hazard can be considered an automatic pick. All of the others leave Jose dissatisfied from time to time and find themselves being rotated. I know a lot people see Oscar as a guaranteed selection but fewer picture Willian or Schurrle as the complete answer. I therefore do think we have a need at AM. Traore will qualify for a work permit in plenty of time to join the squad next season and it may be that Jose wants to hold a slot open for him but, even so, it's hard to imagine that if an elite level AM like Marco Reus becomes available, we wouldn't be interested. As for an alternative to Oscar, it may sound off the wall but how about Arturo Vidal? Jose demands that his '10' plays a full part when we're out of possession and Vidal does that in spades. The Chilean also loves to play high and is, in my opinion, comfortably better on the ball than Oscar.

Alex did name 6 of my answers. A clue to the one he didn't mention; think Liverpool 28th October, 2008.

Gutted the home fixture has already been played but it's a great job for Robbie. Good luck legend.

If Reus moves next summer then, at the very worst, clubs will have to fight off a clause allowing him to switch to Barca when their transfer ban expires.

Talking to an Arsenal fan after the world cup, I was purring about the fact that the Germans had won it without their best two players, Gundagan & Reus. His response was ... "Er, Ozil?" I smiled.

That's the beauty with people's prejudices; there's just no logic to 'em. Anyway, we already know that there's nothing (association) football clubs won't do for money. Sell the soul of the game? "That'll be a fiver sir!" "Oops we're fresh out of souls. They've been one of our best selling items. We do have a replica soul made to the highest of standards. Yours for a couple of quid or 50 notes with the name of your choice printed on the back."

Typical political nonsense from politicians trying to look good for their constituents. They are calling for an answer from the RFU. An answer to what? Nothing pertinent has been said to the RFU by Chelsea so there is nothing to answer. My own guess is that if a formal approach were ever made it would have next to zero chance of being accepted by the RFU in the first pace. Some RFU board members would undoubtedly hold with the view that, 'Twickenham is the sacrosanct home of rugby and no round ball shall ever darken its doors', while the others would be sold on the idea that the cash just would not be worth the massive PR hit they'd take. That's my view anyway. Other opinions are available.

The precise figures are regarded as both private and sensitive so they have not been disclosed. It is not possible to discover the amounts very easily from the public accounts because they are often too vague and many of the items which appear in them are not accountable for FFP purposes. What has always been known is that the FFP regulations themselves state that uefa will examine any 'related party' sponsorships to see if they represent 'fair value'. If they do represent fair value then fine, no problem. If they do not then uefa accept only the amount they determine represents fair value and exclude the rest before deciding if a club has passed FFP. City, PSG and Monaco all fell foul of the fair value rule. City tried to argue it but lost. PSG stuck their hands up and said, "it's a fair cop."

I'm on strike until Blatter and his cronies get rid of the stupid, annoying breaks. I don't watch international games on TV and I certainly don't buy tickets. If all of us did that, even for just two successive matches, old Sepp would have to think again. Blatter is just taking the Michael. Creating more and more meaningless games, to generate more and more cash which he can redistribute to National Associations in a way that keeps them voting for him. Everything else that comes out of that bloke's mouth by way of justification of his policy is hot air. The base of it is to con us into giving him money which he can use to cling on to power. And what are we getting in return for financing his power grab? Damaged domestic football and watered down internationals that excite no one. So watered down in fact that European FAs are planning a so called 'friendly tournament' to compensate for the absence of competitive football. An absence created because uefa have gone along with Sepp's little scheme and produced a series of hopelessly lopsided qualifying groups. PLEASE, NOBODY BUY TICKETS FOR THIS CHARADE. Unless we stand up for ourselves Blatter is going to keep bleeding us for all we've got and laugh at us for being such mugs. So what would I like to see instead? Scrap international breaks. That would shorten the domestic season and leave room for a 4 or 5 week 'International Season' which would follow the domestic one. The qualifying groups would be more streamlined and would be played, in their entirety, during that season which would then get everyone's full attention, attracting better crowds and TV audiences as a result. Win - win. It's not a new idea but it is a good one. Wake up Herr Blatter; wake up or clear off.

I wouldn't exactly say that it's making a mockery of FFP. After all, it was precisely because uefa refused to accept this particular sponsorship as a genuine business relationship that City were sanctioned. If they had been allowed to count the full value of that 'related party' deal in their FFP accounts, City would have passed the FFP test and would have had no problem. uefa did not allow them to count all of it however. Only the part of it which was deemed to be a reasonable commercial value was accepted by the governing body and so City failed FFP.

Nice work but you still didn't name one of my 7.

Correct. No other team has achieved three or more wins without at least one manager leading them to triumph on more than one occasion. You have also robbed me of my supplemental question which was going to be, 'Name them', so, sticking with the number 7, I am instead going to ask.... Without looking them up, I can think of 7 Premier League records held by Chelsea. Can anyone : - Name those seven, and Tell me if we hold any others that I haven't remembered.