OhForAGreavsie

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.

I don't think I've heard the story about Ossie and The Cat but it sounds too good not to be true. One of the Jeunesse Hautcharage (Luxembourg) players definitely had lost a part of one arm however. We used to run around the playground re-enacting the game by holding one arm across our chests. And now my question... What is unique about our seven FA Cup wins?

Nope, you're not.

What do people make of Jose's response when asked by a German reporter if he wishes to have more Germans in his squad? Of course it might just be a standard response to a question about transfer policy but I take encouragement from the little smile. I think that's a Mourinho 'tell' that appears sometimes so I prefer to think his answer means, "What do you think I am, stupid? Of course I want Marco Reus." P.S. I've got my fingers in my ears so if you're gonna tell me that I'm reading way too much into this, I just ain't gonna hear ya'. :)

Agreed, they've been lazy with their research. Even if we allow that they meant 'before this season', they are still wrong. There was an early season fixture against Liverpool in Jose's final season first time around. That figure should therefore be 34 if you count the City game and 33 if you don't. Still only 3 defeats mind. To be fair I'm taking their word for the number of defeats. Can't actually remember any myself.

That's not correct Alex. I saw tickets available for general sale on the website and, indeed, they were heavily promoted in radio advertising which ran for about a week.

And I want to buy tickets to sit in it. People often talk about the current crop of football club owners being no more than temporary custodians and about how they should not consider 'their' clubs as playthings to do with as they wish. Quite correct, they shouldn't, but I wonder how often we fans think about our own responsibility for the future? Our club, Chelsea Football Club, is no more ours to do with as we wish than it is Roman's. I care about my family far more than I care about Chelsea but they're about the only things I do put before my football team. Because I love my family so much I think, and plan, and hope, for their futures all the time. I accept that responsibility but what about the other great love of my life? As a supporter, is it my right to cling to my memories and insist that the club panders to my feelings of nostalgia? No matter what the consequence? Should I not also consider the future of CFC and ask serious questions about whether a cobbled together solution at Stamford Bridge really will enable my club to compete over the next sixty years? Fulham FC once had the ambition to be the best team in the world but then they refused to move into a new stadium at Stamford Bridge and someone else did instead. As a result, it's been way more than sixty years since they were even the best team in Fulham and these days they're going nowhere fast. Just a thought.

You may be too young to have memories of one-time Arsenal manager, Terry Neil. After leaving the game he appeared regularly as co-host of a football phone in, where he frequently issued the same challenge to callers that you've issued to me. Whenever a caller suggested that his or her team needed reinforcements Neil delighted in telling them that their point of view meant nothing* unless they were able to name the players who might fill their team's needs. I have to say that I always found Neil's view on this to be a profoundly stupid one. Let me tell you why. I watch every game Chelsea play; live or on Television and sometimes both. Just like everyone else here, I therefore can hardly help but form an opinion about the qualities of our squad and where it might be strengthened. I do not however have limitless time to watch football coverage from around the world. Nor do I have access to scouting reports, or the ability to direct areas in which Chelsea's scouts should concentrate their efforts. Any inability on my part to do as you ask therefore does not invalidate, or even slightly diminish the validity of, my opinions. All of us here have a passionate interest in Chelsea so we all could, and from time-to-time do, name players we'd like to add to the squad. Could I name any such players that you or others have not already thought of? Probably not, but so what? I happen to think my opinions on the subject are well observed and accurate, others think I talk a load of crap. That's the way it goes. * I'm not accusing you of saying my opinion means nothing, I'm describing the attitude Terry Neil used to take.

I think he has lived up to expectations. My guess is that the people who feel he hasn't probably got a little over excited by what Lukaku can do and didn't take enough account of the things he can't do.As for us robbing The Toffees, I feel it would be a bit arrogant of us to say that. If we could see Lukaku's limitations in his few Chelsea appearances, and obviously we could, then Martinez must have seen them too. It's only logical then for us to think that Everton knew what they were getting and that they decided it was worth £28m to them. That's their choice so good luck to them and to Lulu.

Agreed about youth development and this is why I say 'severely restricts' is a better description than 'prevents'. There are some things to note about this however: - It takes a l-o-n-g time, and a degree of luck, to develop players through the youth ranks. For example, our revamped accademy (by common consent the old one was not fit for purpose) was set up 9 years ago. Many people have complained that we have not yet managed to produce any first team graduates but the truth is that it is still TOO SOON to judge how well Neil Bath and his team are doing. The kids who are true products of the new system, those who joined the youngest age group in that first season at Cobham, are still only 16/17. Many (not all, I know but many) of the older lads who have knocked, or are knocking, at the door of the first team are not true accademy products; they were bought in. Bear in mind that any transfer fees and other costs of recruitment paid for youngsters who are 'bought in' DO count against FFP. A few decades ago we were all told we had to copy the Dutch system of youth development because they 'knew' how to churn out talented players. Then, when that production line slowed down, we were told to follow the Clairefontaine model. Until that went out of fashion too. We were then off to Barcelona but where are Barca recruiting from now? The fact is there is an element of luck involved in finding players of the right quality for the level your club competes at. All your academy can realistically do is help young men become the best players they can. No academy in the world is going to turn an 8 year old Joey Barton into a 21 year old Lionel Messi. In order to turn out world class footballers an academy needs world class prospects to walk through the door in the first place. The quality of player that just happened to grow up together in Holland made the Dutch system look good for a while. The system made them as good as they could be, but if they turned out to be great that was because they had great talent to begin with. The same was true for the French system and so too with Barcelona. Man Utd have had a world class youth system since 1948 but how has that been helping them recently? Just having a great youth structure is no guarantee that you will produce great players.