OhForAGreavsie

Are City even going through?

It could be that the situation isn't as clear cut as it seemed. I read an article on WAGNH yesterday which included excerpts from the competition rules for The FA Cup. Two of these appear to be contradictory. Section J, clause 1 says: - A player on a domestic temporary (loan) transfer (including a player on loan either to or from a Welsh Club that competes in the Competition in the current season) is ineligible to compete in the Challenge Cup Competition unless permission to do so is given by the lending Club in writing. This suggests that a player can play against his parent club if they give permission but section J clause 4 says: - The Association will not give permission for players on loan or work experience to play against the lending Club. My guess as to what the two clauses mean when taken together is that a club can give permission for its loan player to play against them but, if the parent club does not give its permission, then the FA won't overrule them and directly allow players to face their parent clubs. In other words, it's up to the lending club which would mean that it is Chelsea who are keeping Conor out of the semi-final. Why Conor Gallagher cannot play against Chelsea in the FA Cup semifinal - We Ain't Got No History (sbnation.com)

Because the whole thing is a made up, nonsensical bloody farce and a con.

I appreciate that the conversation has been largely about trophies and trophy count but I think there is another way to define surpass. In 2003 the BBC invited submissions from Chelsea fans for an article about Roman's takeover to be published on their sports site and mine was selected. Among many other things they wanted to know what I hoped Roman would achieve with Chelsea. I wrote about my hope that he would establish Chelsea as a permanent member of the world's elite football clubs. There is room for debate as to whether that's a valid aspiration and, if so, whether or not it has been achieved. My own view is that it is the most valid ambition since trophy counts follow from it. I do not think that it has been achieved however. In that sense I believe Roman's achievements not only can be surpassed, but they must be.

One of the things people, perhaps even including you I don't know, pointed out before the completion of Rom's return was that he would not suit TTs pressing scheme.* The lack of effort manifests itself in multiple ways. As I say, been saying about Rom since 2011 actually, he is what he is and what he is is not the right answer for Chelsea. *Though not me. My issue with Rom's game is, and always has been, about the limitations imposed by his technical level.

Mason is the best we have for the role that he plays. Unfortunately this is a problem, not a solution.

My hope is that no one blames Rom. He is what he is as a footballer. It's up to others, not him, to evaluate his quality. If those 'others' got the evaluation wrong that's not his fault so he should not be blamed or booed. The fault rests elsewhere.

Ever since the signing of Marko Marin I have been of the opinion there is/was an immaturity at the heart of our transfer business. Immaturity of football judgement that is, meaning an opinion which is too easily influenced by the flashy or the headline grabbing. Fixing this could be one upside to the change of ownership.

Let's keep it honest here.

If you think supporting Dopey Donnie is just a political affiliation you need to wake up. I repeat, absolute and total deal breaker.

Thanks. This is what I thought I'd read but the comment to which I replied made we wonder if I'd misremembered.

Have those involved in the bid supported Trump in the form of advocating for him or donating to his campaign(s)? I know that some here may disagree with me on this, and some among the wider Blues' fanbase certainly will, but this would be an absolute and insurmountable deal breaker for me.

Sadly this was already the case several seasons ago.

I didn't mean to suggest that I think my opinion is any more valid than yours. All I can say is that in that five minute conversation he came across differently to how you portrayed him. Of course in that kind of event he could be expected to be an his 'best' behaviour.

I think you are right. It would be only natural for them to be most impressed with the bidders who are most impressed with them. Unless they have all decided to leave the club once the bidding process is over, they should really recuse themselves from the decision about which bid to accept. I've met Bruce Buck, at a Chelsea Foundation event, and I must say that on that occasion he did not come across as arrogant. Quite the opposite really. When you brought him up I thought that you might mention the incident with CPO vote on whether a move away from Stamford Bridge would be acceptable. That was when a 'bribe' was offered to those who voted in favour, and only those who voted in favour, that they would have their names inscribed, forever, on seats in any new stadium. That offer was a disgrace and had to be walked back fast. I don't know if it was dreamt up by Bruce, Roman or someone else but it was a bad mistake.

This is the first unimpressive thing I'm aware of him saying. It's unimpressive to the point of silliness. I've said many times, in a different context, that the only way for a 17 year-old Lionel Messi to emerge from a youth academy is for a younger Lionel Messi to have entered it some years earlier. There are many things a footballer can be taught but talent is not one of them, and talent is the vital ingredient for top level players. It is sound to hope for a regular supply of Champions League capable youngsters but it is unsound to expect it. Very unsound. All that a club can do is make youngsters the honest promise that it will help them become the best player they possibly can. For most youngsters however the best they can be will not be good enough for Chelsea. I'l be surprised if, within a decade, we see another group of kids like the crop who graduated in the last few years. The odd one here and there but a whole stream of them would amaze me.

Conoville is not a man who has ever impressed me. I don't regard him as qualified to offer an opinion.

What the hell has happened to Americans? The place is a mad house. Only thing to be said for Gov. Ricketts is that he wasn't the one displaying the stunning credulity to believe such drivel. I hope he at least had the sense to disavow this nonsense.

By the way, congratulations to everyone at Man Utd for the fabulous turn out to watch their women beat Everton Women 3-1 today. More than 20,400 saw the match; by far the WSL's biggest crowd of the season to date. Good work everybody. P.S. Alesya Russo who scored twice for United today is ex Cobham.

Was meant to be there but my mother's carer couldn't be with her today and the old girl isn't safe to be on her own for a whole day so I had to bail out and go over there. We'd gone out of the way to do Mother's Day for her yesterday because I was going today as well. Got all but a tenner of my train fare refunded but the match ticket went to waste. Would have been my first time at the King Power. Shame. Watched the game and wow. Irrespective of the score, this was CFCW's best performance for a couple of seasons. They can often be every bit as clunky as CFCM sometimes are. Not today though. They were slick; great movement and great passing throughout the game. Guro Reiten (letf winger come wing back) was out of this world. This win put us top of the table for the first time this season, one point ahead of Arsenal. Both sides have five games remaining.

Where's the justice? Now, let's accept that this bloke is not Roman. Let's also accept that this bloke is unlikely to be as squeaky as he presents himself and let's accept that it is possible that the sanctions may be justified. All of this either is or might be true but what is also true is that no information supporting the actions taken against these people has been made public. Justice is supposed to be blind but it mustn't be hidden.

I'll believe it when I see it. Such talks have been rumoured before but the rumours then were rubbish. Nothing we know about Roman suggests that he has the skills and personality to make a useful contribution to peace talks. I'll need to read much more about this from a source I distrust less before I hold out any hope that this might go anywhere.

You mean if we had spent on Hakimi we would not then have felt we could afford Rom too? Possible I suppose though I doubt it. In any case the way the decision makers seemed to be leaning my guess is that if they had had to choose between Rom and Hakimi Rom would still have come here and Hakimi would still have wound up in Paris.

This echoes what the fans are saying about Levi. They are baffled that he hasn't been starting but the fact remains that he hasn't been. They are as thoroughly hypocritical as you would expect any set of football fans to be by the way. On the one hand, they boast that their club has been good for Levi, as well as for other CFC loanees, so they argue Chelsea should let Levi return to Huddersfield next season. Especially if the go up. On the other hand they see Chelsea as destroying football with the loan system and we should be banned from doing it.

He's only started two of the six games since his return and on both occasions he was left out for the following game. Could be that he's getting back up to speed but he's been back a while now.