MrExcalibur100

Mourinho said it himself that it's easier to score in La Liga than the PL. I'm sure he knows much more than us so I go with what he says. "If you are an attacking player and go to Barcelona or Real Madrid, it is easier to score 50 goals than if you’re playing in England. Of course these clubs are a big attraction. You can’t blame a player. As a manager I had that instinct, too. I wanted to go to Madrid myself. “So if a player has that feeling it’s very understandable. But I keep thinking in my case, where I enjoyed most is where the competition is. It’s high here. If I was a player I wouldn’t leave the Premier League."

Hahahahaha, I'll take it that's a yes.

That's just so unprofessional to the core. Truly pathetic. Btw, are you a fan of Greizmann or something?

It's them. The guy with the long hair at the back is also holding a jersey.

Cesc cut his hair. According to a Facebook comment, that's Filipe and Diego Costa in th background. Now I don't know how anyone can come to that conclusion.

Pshhh, those were Hazard's stats when he was 19. Doesn't even come close to justifying the absurd figures.

Another thing that irks me about this is (aside from distorting the transfer market) that Madrid are strengthening the rest of our champions league and premier league rivals especially by these buys. Last season it was Ozil to Arsenal. This season Di Maria is most likely off to PSG and one of Isco or Khedira might be coming to one of our PL rivals.

If he's unwilling to take too large a pay-cut, I won't mind a situation were we pay part of his wages till his contract expires so he can leave. I'm not sure how feasible that is but I know for sure it's done.

TBF, the guy had two impressive games against them, especially at their place were I thought he was the best player. He also does well in Europe were the pace is not so intense and it's less physically tasking. The pace of most La liga matches are not so intense also. I still feel there's a player in there somewhere. We won't see that with us though and not in the Premier league.

http://www.marca.com/2014/07/20/futbol/equipos/valencia/1405892088.html "Licensing issue" whatever that means. It's a shame because I'd have loved to see him here. Ex-player, lots of experience, more depth, good passer, camaraderie with the other Atletico guys and can play in the holding role next to Matic if Fabregas is playing as a number 10.

http://www.marca.com/2014/07/21/futbol/equipos/real_madrid/1405897029.html Apparently it's done for 75 million euros. If Rodriguez is worth that then Di Maria is worth 150 million euros! Disgusting behaviour by Real. They're probably going to lose Di Maria now to PSG, further destabilizing the team that won La Decima. Ancelotti probably doesn't have a say, he's just a puppet of Perez. I hope this comes back to bite them in the arse.

https://es.eurosport.yahoo.com/noticias/mercado-atl%C3%A9tico-y-chelsea-cerca-de-acuerdo-torres-211809813--sow.html Atletico Madrid are apparently ("close") interested in him. It makes sense after losing Costa and Villa and only bringing in Mandzu. We should accept any offer no less than 10 mil euros for him. No need to negotiate too long lest they lose interest, just sell.

The game is going to be in Austria apparently, so some travel within Europe.

"two nil and you fucked it up, two nil and you fucked it up, two nil and you fucked it up, two NIL and you fucked it up!!"

Lol. At least we have a lead to chase.

He really didn't say anything about Fabregas. This is what's so sad about the British media. Mourinho said nothing bad but because it's him the clueless hacks create a non-story using sensationalist headlines. It's just a sad reflection of the football culture in Britain, most especially in England. The players are bang average. The pundits are completely clueless. They know nothing about European football when compared to their European counterparts. "If it didn't happen in the Premiership, it didn't happen" is the mentality. The coaches are dire and antiquated, emphasizing physicality and "passion" over technical and tactical skill. The big, bulky kid always get's an advantage over the smaller more skilled ones in youth set-ups. This among many reasons is why England only have one World Cup to show despite apparently being a "big" footballing nation.

I'm not suggesting we have four strikers ourselves. We can have three like last season. My point is that Lukaku's whining has created this misconceived notion that Diego Costa is going to play every game and that the next guy is a no-hoper who is relegated to the "second" striker status, which is untrue. My other point was that if our board falls for that and we start the season with a strike force of Costa, Torres and 36 year old player/coach Drogba, we will struggle to achieve our goals, despite our other signings. We definitely need a forward of the level of a Firmino or Lavezzi to come in to replace Lukaku.

You didn't bother to read my comment. The point is our back up now is shit and we are getting rid of the one good one. The other point was that such words as "backup" make little sense right now as every player has to prove they're number one. One mediocre "back up" (Torres and maybe Drogba) is not enough because it puts an incredible amount of pressure on Costa to score goals. Madrid are a different side because they can rely on Ronaldo to score their goals. Still, it's arguable they were a better side at least in La liga with Benzema and Higuain contributing 50+ goals between them.

It's amazing how a club like Man City can have four top class strikers but still manage to make all of them content. All four of them better than Lukaku. I know Pellegrini plays with two strikers but still he can only play with two at a time. We shouldn't have problems with having multiple quality options to play as a striker. Costa will certainly be our best striker next season but I don't like how the tag "second" striker is placed on the next guy. Dzeko for instance started the season as Man City's third striker but began to outperform Negredo and became second choice and a starting XI partner to Aguero. At the end of the day every player still has to prove himself to the manager from scratch. This is what vexes me about the Lukaku thing. Of course we won't know for sure what happened behind closed doors till leaves. There was a rumour that the club never contacted him even once during his second spell at Everton. Then he says this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2646047/Romelu-Lukaku-insists-wants-stay-Chelsea-despite-uncertainty.html It's either the kid is bi-polar or the club are trying to force him out of the club for whatever reason.

Potentially our first major blunder of the transfer window. If our board thinks Costa, Torres and Drogba are good enough (despite other additions) to challenge City's strikeforce all season then their sadly mistaken. Costa is great but this will be his first season in the PL, Torres is a busted flush and injury prone while Drogba, legend that he is, is a shadow of his former self nowadays, so much so that Galatasaray fans want him out. And if Lukaku has to be sold, it should be to a foreign club and for a fee no less than 25 million pounds. I hope we don't mess it up because I've been so happy with our business thus far.

Goals in the last THREE seasons in ALL club competitions, for people saying he doesn't score a lot. (Stats from ESPN) Hazard : 22, 14, 17. Robben : 16, 13, 21 Bale : 12, 23, 22. And in a harder league too I'm fairly confident that next season, with our recent additions, he'll establish himself as the best player in the league.

She knows more about Islam than Ibn Kathir? She knows more about Quranic exegesis than Ibn Kathir, one of the greatest Mufassir in history? Good one bro. She's an author. She wrote a book about Muhammad. So what. Karen Armstrong wrote books about Muhammad and she makes him sound as pacifist as Gandhi. I can read another book about him and he's portrayed as Genkhis Khan. Books are opinion.The life of Muhammad is detailed in the Hadith and the Sira literature. I've read a lot of Bukhari and Muslim in the past and part of Ibn Ishaq. Are those biased sources too?

It's hard to imagine you're being honest here or maybe you don't know the circumstances surrounding the revelation of Qur'an 9:29. This verse was apparently revealed when Muhammad was on his way to Tabuk and he heard a rumour that there was an army of Byzantines there so he decided to confront them probably in hopes of taking some plunder for him and his army who were dehydrating in the heat. This people never bothered him before. This is the brief summary from Ibn Kathir: Allah, Most High, ordered the believers to prohibit the disbelievers from entering or coming near the sacred Mosque. On that, Quraish thought that this would reduce their profits from trade. Therefore, Allah, Most High, compensated them and ordered them to fight the people of the Book until they embrace Islam or pay the Jizyah. Allah says, "O ye who believe! Truly the pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-knowing, All-Wise. Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." (Surah 9:28-29) Therefore, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) decided to fight the Romans in order to call them to Islam. (Ibn Kathir, The Battles of the Prophet, pp. 183-4) This is very clear. No sign of anybody fighting to "defend your country" which is a popular lie repeated by Muslim apologists. Let's see what the Qur'an says in context of Ibn Kathir's tafsir. I've already done this before but since you keep on defending the indefensible: Quran 9 verse 28 O you who have believed, indeed the polytheists are unclean, so let them not approach al-Masjid al-Haram after this, their [final] year. And if you fear privation, Allah will enrich you from His bounty if He wills. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Wise. Quran 9 verse 29 Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled. Quran 9 verse 30 The Jews say, "Ezra is the son of Allah "; and the Christians say, "The Messiah is the son of Allah ." That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded? This is the full context of this verse, both from Qur'an and Ibn Kathir. Now, where my dear friend is the DEFEND YOUR COUNTRY WHEN ATTACKED part. It's a blatant lie. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tabouk

Jihad simply means struggle but offensive Jihad, which is the Jihad in question (as mandated by the Qur'an in 9:29 and several other places) is one of the greatest terror threats the world faces today. This is a decent video that uses Islamic scripture to detail how Muhammad practiced Jihad during his life.

If you're going to accuse Jews of Islamophobia ( standard cop out when the fact of Islamic oppression of minorities worldwide is brought up) then I might as well accuse you lot of antisemitism. It's not okay to accuse Jews of intentionally killing babies and berate them for being proud to be Israeli by calling them "Zionist" scum. It's hypocrisy. You can't eat your cake and have it.