tiby2979

¿And? That has nothing to do with my comment. Precisely what i say is don't need play like Barcelona to play good football.

I always enjoy with the defeats of our rivals (City, Arsenal, Liverpool, United, Spurs...) but at this rate PL will it be stripped of a place for CL.

Identity is not to follow the fashions that other impose you, it is being faithful to your beliefs although the rest goes down against you. Nuno, coach of ValenciaFC: "Barça of Guardiola has been bad for football. It is a pleasure to watch them play, but today it has created a trend that's only that is football and isn't true" I fully agree with this guy, also this topic already bored.

oh please, no this shit again

.

However much some prefer living in a state of denial regarding Lampard, Chelsea and City are rivals. If we apply the same analogy, Lampard lived almost all your life in a country and then chose move and fighting for other that is at war with your former country... People can feel and saying anything, but at the end of the day, actions mean more than feelings and words

You know, the TC forumers know more about football that the media, pundits, players and former players, the manager, fans, etc.

That's not the point. If Chelsea is nothing special ¿what it is City and the remaining teams? the english football is a shit, then. To belittle Chelsea as he did, Nasri directly discredited his own team.

¿Nasri? ¿a player whose team is seven points behind us and parked the bus against Roma, who had received 7 goals Bayern at home? ManCity players aren't in position to talk about our performance.

This is absolutely ridiculous, accusing him of biting, headbutt, strangling. he does not do nothing of that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgE61_oOp28

Also Wilshere to Fellaini

That's right. Despite how I feel about it, I'm pleased he wasn't booed. The club and the fans showed much class. In fact, more class than he had of when he joined our rivals. Being understood as Loyalty = Class. If i had been in his place i would have felt ashamed of myself when was cheered by Chelsea fans while i walked in front of them in a City shirt.

The proper fans were those who sang "Chelsea" when he made his entrance. That's all.

I wish win the quadruple parking the bus every match while the haters foam at the mouth and spit bile. There is nothing that i care less that the others' approval about our game style.

Must have been disappointing for him having not scored. Probably he wished it. I wish him luck in his future, but i hope our paths not cross again anymore.

Only Diego knows if it was intentional, cannot prove that it was in no way. https://v.cdn.vine.co/r/videos/9D39E6A1C21171949209872912384_36acdf028fc.1.5.12701805348979487441.mp4?versionId=mPDNMJWTPVjVyuL9tXLCrC0.7vCCvDND

You think the club signed drogba for sentimental reasons? to give him the chance to play again at the squad? do not kid yourself, they did because was needed a striker and he was a agent free. If Demba Ba had not wanted to leave the club Drogba had not come back. But that one is my point, the reason why Lampard chose to play in City was because they were a top club and rival for the title.

I do not think signing Drogba was a snub to Lampard. Would have been the case if they were playing in the same position, but it is not; the situation in midfield and up front was different. There were too many midfielders in the team, while in the front was needed a striker to replace Demba Ba. Drogba was free agent and had been very foolish not to take the opportunity to sign a good striker at no cost. If Lampard is smart has to have analyzed these things and not take it personally. People talk as if City had been the only option Lampard to stay in Premier League, but it was not. Lampard said he had offers from other teams in the league and that he had rejected them by NYCFC.

CFCBroadcast ‏@CFCBroadcast Reports: Qatar Airways have outbid Turkish Airlines to become Chelsea's new kit sponsors.

The problem here is not that Mourinho lied but rather the sentences are taken out of context and do not read the full statements: "They were offered new deals. We were in this process until the end, but you arrive into a moment where you ask what’s the best for the team? What’s the best for the other players? What’s the best for them? And it depends also on their mentality." Mourinho said he was offered a new contract, but in those same statements he also said the club had to think about what was best for the team. My theory is that is that not yet reached an agreement and the club decided to withdraw the offer of renewal. So both statements had make sense. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2629621/Frank-Lampards-Chelsea-future-balance-talks-threaten-break-down.html

Someone is subscribed? I can't read the full article

Pellegrini en december: "It's not so easy because Frank is a New York City player. He is only on loan until December 31, so we must respect the other people." Now: Manchester City have admitted making mistakes regarding Frank Lampard’s status, with the club moving to clarify he never signed a two-year deal with New York City FC and so the midfielder was never on loan from the MLS franchise. A clarification issued on Friday by the club said: “The statement on the NYCFC website in July saying Lampard’s two-year contract took effect from Aug 1, 2014 was a mistake. [The] initial statement on City’s website that it was a loan was also an error.” This is evidence that inicially they lied for some unknown reason.

Frank said he has been other opportunities to play in England and that he had rejected by the NYCity. So that contradicts the excuse that his priority was to stay in England.

If he signed by Manchester City and not by NYCity what was this shit? "I had 13 years at Chelsea and it's something very dear to me, so it would have been difficult to play for a club so close. From that point of view coming out here to New York is a good option. It's a new start."