OhForAGreavsie

German is just a stonking blockbuster of a language. The vocabulary is out of this world. 🙂

When we blew it in the semi against Monaco and when even Morrientes admitted that what ultimately proved the winning goal should not have stood. It's arguable of course that Jose's Porto would have beaten us in the final anyway, but it's impossible to escape the feeling that we missed a big opportunity that year.

Was it? Misery likes company so I'm delighted we're not the only team with big squad rebuilding to do.

Should have been our second!

Standing ovation to those two spectacular footballers. Yes, I know they have played for three clubs who have experienced overlapping periods of dominance during that time but even so. Outstanding stat.

Well lets hope they don't read this forum then else your game will be up.

We did it in 12/13 and survived. That season we played every possible round, of every tournament barring the League Cup Final and The Cup Final. The top clubs need the League cup because they need squad harmony. They have the power, their participation cannot be compelled. They control the Premier League and the rest of English football would gladly cut off both arms rather than give up the Premier League handouts. If the Premier League said our clubs are not playing in the League Cup anymore, the football League would try to find a way to keep them in but, ultimately, their response would be 'yes sir'. If top clubs want out they'd be out. The fact that they are still in is evidence that they've settled for the status quo. They've found an accommodation with it for now but as soon as they want out, they'll be out. I don't think we need to worry about it. P.S. I never thanked you for the recommending Blueprint For Armageddon and The Guns of August. Both excellent. I enjoyed them a lot and learned lot. That from someone who thought he knew a fair amount on this already. If I had to choose I'd go for the Dan Carlin because he set out to tell a story so his narrative flows but the quality and depth of Tuchman's work is evidenced by the number of times Carlin quotes her.

I would describe it as a rush of blood to the head rather than selfishness. It certainly wasn't stupidity. My feeling at the time was frustration, I can't abide low percentage pot shots taken at the cost of a higher percentage pass. Frank himself used to wind me up something chronic with a lot of his speculative shooting.

We're on the same page re the importance of the stadium. I wasn't so convinced by the proposed building however. Leaving that aside, two other things come to mind. Was Roman ever serious or was the planning permission a strong selling point to deliver to proposed buyers? I only pose, or rather restate, the question for discussion. I don't really believe it myself. We have a lot of players, not fringe players, but key members of the squad who fall in to at least one of the following categories: - - They are not good enough - They know they are not good enough - They know that they have no future at the club - Beyond a wage packet they don't want a future at the club. Indeed, more than a few fall into more than one of those groupings. The squad overhaul that we all desperately want, really is as necessary as our posts make it sound. Can Roman fund the rebuild and raise the money for the stadium? It's a complicated picture, for example, it's a fair bet that governments all over the world are going to be bending over backwards to incentivise major construction projects. Cheap money, tax incentives and all sorts will be out there. (Amazing how many elections European conservatives win by talking down Keynesian economics, and how often they turn to it when things go south.) Football revenue is going to be down and continue down for a long time however. Not necessarily the whole of the time we'd have to be away from The Bridge, but for a good chunk of it. In the face of that, major spend on the squad and a stadium rebuild is hard to believe in.

A normal practice. It is why the weekly calculation of Sanchez's deal at ManU is so high and even going back a long time now, it is why Sol Campbell's deal at Arsenal was huge for the time.

I need more evidence before I believe the Barcelona story, though I accept I'm out on my own there. I agree with everything else you say though.

Salou is a nickname given him by Jose.

Firstly, I need to remind people that I was calling for a Willian upgrade within months of his arrival. I'm aware of his shortcomings but I really don't like the level of vitriol being thrown at a Chelsea player. We can't ever factually settle the Kalou or Willian question, but I can tell you that were I given the opportunity, I would never select Salou over Willian. It's clear you don't agree but bear in mind please what I told you above. I'm not blinkered to Willian's output, or lack of it but, even so, I take him over Saloman every single time. P.S. Take this for what it's worth but, every time Salou was looking to renegotiate his deal there were rumours of interest, and a mega millions offer, from Arsenal. I always poo-pooed that claim because I never believed that Wenger would be interested. Sure enough, when Salomon became available on a free, there was not a peep of interest from Arsenal. Compare that with Willian's situation now. Remember too that when Salou left Chelsea he was in his prime, unlike Willian now.

I don't know how popular it is, but I certainly believe it is incorrect. Start by taking Salou out of his Chelsea team and placing him in Willian's, then do the reverse to Willian. Now compare.

Better nowhere than elsewhere.

Seems to be linked with everybody but us.

No links at all to a lad who is very high on my wish list at the moment; at least as high as Havertz. Still, there are stories about Jorgi and N'Golo moving on which would at least make room for him. Germany seems to be the place to go shopping at the moment.

Willian is a nice lad who, on his day, is utterly brilliant. There have rarely been enough of those days to keep the fans off his back, but he's given his best and, as well evidenced this year, he's worked hard. It's absolutely obvious why Frank likes him. Now it seems that he's off, he'll go with the thanks and best wishes of Chelsea fans. Speaking personally, I'm embarrassed by the level of vitriol in some of the comments posted here. People decide for themselves how they want to support the club and its players. I can only say that the people posting the comments I'm referring to are choosing to do it differently to the way I'd prefer. I'd find more quality in one Willian dribble, at pace, through the midfield than in one hundred thousand such posts. Just in case these comments lead anyone to misjudge my view of Willian. For many seasons I used to say that Willian is an OK footballer but that if we were to become the team we'd like to be, he would not get into the side. Once again therefore I find myself defending a player when I was previously among a minority criticising him. He's a Chelsea player, he's worn the shirt and made the best contribution he could to successful Chelsea sides. That will always earn him respect and affection from me. Just because I don't believe he's the player we need, does not mean I will react to him with an aggressively dismissive attitude. Never going to happen.

P.S. Quite apart from being in the dark regarding the facts of the failed Allison transfer, how can we know that his mistakes would not have been more regularly exposed behind Chelsea's defence? How can we know that Allison would not be coming under critical scrutiny right now if he had joined us?

I've read these allegations quite frequently on here. What I have not seen is any credible and convincing evidence to support them.

In fairness, every deal will involve these considerations. If media reports are correct, and Havertz has made up his mind to join Chelsea, then Marina will try to make this a card she can play. Say no all along and hold firm to it then concede it right at the end in exchange for some helpful concession by Bayer. She'll try no doubt, but whether it will work is another thing.

I'd forgotten that Brian Laudrup situation. In fact, whole years go by when I don't remember he played for us at all. 🙂 On this occasion I trust the commentator more than I trust the injury excuse. My speculation for the real reason may not be accurate but, until I hear something which convinces me to change my mind about the the injury claim, I'm afraid I simply don't believe it.

It's pretty certain that injury would be the cover story agreed upon by all parties but neither the commentator nor Danny Murphy are prone to hyperbole. The commentator would not have said what he said without reason, and no way at all would Murphy claim to have a good source if he did not. The injury tale is a good one because it could be true that Willian felt pain, without that pain being sufficient reason to miss the game. The comment could therefore be accurate, while still hiding the real reason for the player's absence. I do not believe that the commentator was mistaken or misinformed.

When I saw that Willian wasn't included my belief we might win fell a notch. Like all of us I thought it must be a fitness issue. When the commentator said that apparently he was not injured however, I immediately thought conflict of interest. This view was reinforced very shortly afterward when Danny Murphy said that he had heard from a very good source that Willian's future had been resolved and hinted he would be leaving for another Premier League team. The dots fell into line.. If he's moving to Arsenal then asking him to contribute to eliminating them from Europe is asking him to act against his own interests. No Europe next season would damage Willian's sporting interests, and as his earning power. If this is the reason he missed yesterday, I suppose we'll have to wait for someone to write a book before we know if it was Frank, the club or the player himself, who didn't want Willian involved under those circumstances.

Reply moved to player thread.