Vesper

The 10 Commandments of football analytics https://theathletic.com/1692489/2020/03/23/the-10-commandments-of-football-analytics/ Last year, The Athletic’s Ben Baldwin wrote a piece detailing the 10 Commandments of numbers-based analysis of the other football. The one with the funny-shaped ball. The beautiful game lends itself to plenty of analysis using numbers, too but just because the data is there, it doesn’t mean that it’s always used correctly. This guide will give you a better appreciation of the context required when talking about teams and players, which numbers to focus on and how to better question what you’re seeing. Here are The 10 Commandments. 1) Thou shalt not use save percentage to evaluate a goalkeeper’s shot-stopping ability Example: “Martin Dubravka has been the eighth best shot-stopper in the Premier League this season with a save percentage of 73.9 per cent” Why it’s misleading: The equation for save percentage is shots saved/total shots faced. Straight away, there’s no accounting for the difference in the type and quality of shots that a goalkeeper faces, which will have a large impact on his ability to make a save, and therefore, his save percentage. Goalkeeper X facing 10 shots from inside the six-yard box is going to have a tougher time making saves compared to Goalkeeper Y, who’s facing all of his ten shots from 30 yards out or more. Expected Goals and its cousin, Expected Goals on Target, tell us that shots from further away are less likely to result in a goal and shots that are either right at the keeper or down the middle are more likely to be saved. Anyone reading who has watched enough football will, of course, tell you the same thing. By equally weighting each shot to calculate save percentage, we are doing a disservice to Goalkeeper X and making Goalkeeper Y look better than they actually might be. What to use instead: Comparing the quality of on-target shots by using Expected Goals on Target (or Post-Shot Expected Goals) to the number of goals conceded, which I’ve written about previously here, adds much needed context to a goalkeeper’s numbers. Goals Prevented tells us how many goals a goalkeeper saved given the quality of shots he’s faced, compared to the average goalkeeper. Through doing this, Martin Dubravka looks far better than his save percentage says he is, and Vicente Guaita looks like a world-beater: 2) Thou shalt not use distance or sprint stats to indicate effort Example: “Mesut Ozil has run more than any other player for Arsenal today, clocking up 11.2km” Why it’s misleading: Premier League clubs have had access to tracking data since 2013-14 and, as part of that deal, the media get access to derived outputs too. Up to this point, all we’ve really seen is distance and speed statistics. The reality is, these numbers are some of the most contextless around, yet they’re used frequently when analysing teams and players. The reasons for not using are plentiful. Firstly, there’s no correlation between the distance you run and your likelihood of winning a game. The amount of distance covered in a finite amount of time is only useful in a time trial, which football is not. From last year’s UEFA Technical Report on the Champions League, Shakhtar Donetsk ran the furthest on average of all 32 teams in the competition, yet finished third in their group and crashed out of the Europa League in the round of 32. Manchester United ran the second-least on average, yet were still able to reach the quarter-finals. Distance doesn’t really tell us much. Secondly, distance and sprints are going to be stylistic, as in, the numbers that players rack up will be linked to what’s asked of them, the system they play in, how the opposition sets up, game state, and various other factors. Without controlling for — or at least mentioning — these other factors, these numbers don’t give us much insight. Finally, there’s also some evidence to suggest that running less actually can be beneficial — just ask Lionel Messi. Most players have the fitness levels to last a full game but the manipulation of space is what matters. Similarly, there have been plenty of quick players to have played the sport but the very best know when to use their pace. Very rarely do players need to beat another in a foot race but it’s quick bursts of speed to get past someone or latch on to the end of a loose ball that are key. There’s value in this data but it’s on the athlete-management side and ensuring that the players are in the right condition to be playing. Football is a game of space and time, and the current tools to measure these are too blunt to be interesting right now. What to use instead: There’s not really a great substitute here. Either these numbers need to be framed properly before using or we’re probably better off without them. 3) Thou shalt not use possession as an indicator of quality Example: “Tottenham had 79.8 per cent possession in their 0-1 defeat to Newcastle; the second-highest figure for a losing side in the Premier League since 2003-04.” Why it’s misleading: As Marti Perarnau puts it in Pep Confidential (my pick for The Athletic’s list of favourite football books) “possession is only a means to an end. It’s a tool, not an objective or an end goal.” Leicester City won the league averaging 42.6 per cent of possession in 2015-16. Manchester City won the league last season averaging 67.7 per cent of the ball. In essence, it doesn’t matter how much you have — it’s what you do with it. Winning the possession battle doesn’t really tell us that much beyond how teams stylistically set up to play and in-game, can be entirely dictated by the scoreline. Take Atletico Madrid’s 1-0 victory recently against Liverpool in the Champions League. After a fourth-minute goal, Atleti set up shop, having just 27 per cent of possession. That figure may have looked entirely different had Atleti not scored early on. What to use instead: Possession is still a useful nugget of information to understand which side had more of the ball — but just don’t use it to win any arguments that one team is better than another. Expected Goals is a far better indicator of the quality of a team, so if you want to argue about quality, see how good your team is at creating and preventing goalscoring chances. 4) Thou shalt not judge a player’s defensive ability on the number of tackles and interceptions they make Example: “Ricardo Pereira is the best defender in the Premier League, making 119 tackles this season” Why it’s misleading: Not all the defending that a player does is tangible and the measurable output that can be counted is often biased by team style. Logically, if a team has less possession, they have more opportunities to defend, and vice versa. For that reason, tackle and interception numbers are better indicators of defensive style (i.e. is the player passive or active) and not necessarily the defensive quality of a player. Virgil van Dijk attempts just 0.76 tackles per 90 minutes, yet no one would make the case that that makes him a poor defender. In addition, because these defensive numbers are at the mercy of the style of team that a player plays in (mainly the frequency of time they are out of possession and therefore are called into action), it’s hard to compare one player to another. What to use instead: To combat this, we can adjust defensive statistics for the number of times that they make these actions for every 1,000 touches that an opponent makes when on the field of play — an interpretable method of getting all players on a level playing field. Jordan Henderson’s 2.6 tackles per 90 is 15th best in the league but, when adjusting for possession, he jumps to 4.6 per 1,000 opponent touches, the fifth most defensively-active midfielder in the league. Possession-adjusted defensive numbers give a more rounded view of defensive activity but these still only show style and not overall quality. 5) Thou shalt not use tackle win-rate to judge a player’s tackling ability Why it’s misleading: I’m going to let you into a secret: tackles lost and tackles won are practically the same thing and ignore two other key outcomes when trying to make a tackle. Tackles are usually split into two categories — those that are won and those that are lost. Winning a tackle consists of a player winning back possession when challenging for the ball, while losing a tackle sees a challenge take place but the ball isn’t won back. Losing a tackle could be due to the ball being poked out for a throw-in for the opposition, the ball knocked loose for the opposition to recover, or some other reason. Tackle win-rate is currently defined as tackles won/(tackles won + tackles lost). What this currently tells us is the proportion of tackles that a player makes where his team wins the ball back. What’s the problem? Well, this currently ignores times when a player attempts a tackle and gets bounced off the player currently in possession, or when attempting a tackle, commits a foul. Of full-backs in the Premier League with the highest tackle win-rate, Martin Kelly is the best with 80 per cent of tackles won. The eye test tells us Aaron Wan-Bissaka should be amongst the top players, yet he’s only 11th. What gives? What to use instead: True tackle win-rate can help avoid this error by incorporating these two missing categories, with the equation of total tackles/(total tackles+challenges lost+fouls when attempting a tackle). Through this metric, Wan-Bissaka is top with a 78.9 per cent true tackle win rate, and Martin Kelly is down in 29th — much better. 6) Thou shalt not use goals minus expected goals as an indication of finishing ability in small samples Example: “Roberto Firmino has only scored eight goals from 12.7 xG, therefore he’s a poor finisher.” Why it’s misleading: When it comes to understanding goalscoring ability, there are two crucial elements that need to be considered and judged in isolation. The first is a striker’s ability to generate chances for himself. Goals are a striker’s main currency and to score goals, strikers need to take shots. To measure the quality of these shots, we use expected goals. If a player consistently gets into good goalscoring positions, over time, goals will come. It’s one thing taking shots, it’s another thing to finish them. In small samples — such as a whole season — a player’s goals and xG may not match up. Take Roberto Firmino. This season, he’s scored fewer than you’d expect given the chances he has but it is his best in terms of getting into great goalscoring positions. Firmino’s three prior seasons at Liverpool have seen him score above, below and on expectation. This isn’t enough data to give any concrete conclusions on his finishing ability. What to use instead: Comparing expected goals (the chances players have) with expected goals on target (what they do with those chances) is one method of considering finishing quality in a very basic way. Even over larger samples, use with caution, and consider at least several hundred shots. There’s a lot of debate in football analytics circles of whether finishing is a repeatable skill, though, so until there’s a proper answer, go ahead and rely on expected goals’ indication that, over time, most players score in line with their xG. 7) Thou shalt not judge a team’s performance with or without a given player Example: “Arsenal’s win percentage this season without Mesut Ozil is higher without him (40 per cent) compared to with him (28 per cent)” Why it’s misleading: With or without you (or WOWY, as it’s known in sports analytics circles) stats are intended to isolate the impact of a single player in a team to see how results change with that player involved compared to when they’re missing. These stats can work in sports with smaller segments to analyse such as basketball, which has more line-up changes and is far higher-scoring. In football, however, there are just way too many moving parts for this to be a good way of analysing if a player’s any good or not. There’s too much out of Ozil’s control that he gets penalised for in both situations. Here’s just a sample of things that ideally should be taken into account but aren’t with WOWY: What was the quality of the opposition? What was the quality of the other players playing alongside Ozil? Was there a red card? Was Ozil subbed on? Equally, you have the Burnley problem. Ben Mee and James Tarkowski have both played every minute of Premier League football this season. Which is better? We’ll never know. What to use instead: It’s better to analyse players within the context of their position and focus on just what they can control. For Ozil and other creative midfielders, that’s chance creation, for strikers, it’s goalscoring and so on. Leave WOWY stats to sports played by big lads indoors. 8) Thou shalt not judge a player’s pass ability on his passing accuracy Example: “Phil Bardsley is the worst full-back at passing in the Premier League, completing just 63.6 per cent of his passes” Why it’s misleading: The degree to which a player’s passing is accurate or not depends a lot on what they’re being asked to do, and the choices they make when on the ball. Some teams, such as Manchester City, play the ball very short and in certain areas of the field, under little pressure. Due to this, they’ll have a high pass-completion rate. Others, like Burnley, look to hit the channels and user longer passes instead of shorter ones — passes that are, on average, less likely to be completed. The passes may be, by the definition of the data, inaccurate, but that doesn’t tell the whole picture. Consider the example below, from a recent Leeds United game: https://cdn.theathletic.com/app/uploads/2020/03/22085743/costa_pass_example.mp4?_=1 Here, Helder Costa’s pass goes down as a failed pass into the area but it’s largely due to the excellent recovery run of the Hull City defender. Here, we should care about possession retention and the progression that Costa has enabled. There are various other times when this situation takes place — possession being retained but the pass incomplete — which players get unfairly judged on. What to use instead: I’ll write more on other options on this in future, as currently I don’t think that there are many metrics that properly cater to this issue. Expected Pass completion rates may give a more rounded view of why a player’s pass completion rates are low but that data is relatively sparse in the public domain. 9) Thou shalt not judge players if they fail a lot Example: “Trent Alexander-Arnold has made more unsuccessful passes than any other outfielder in the Premier League” Why it’s misleading: The Athletic’s Michael Cox wrote at length back in January on what being a “failure” in the Premier League means, so I won’t go into too much depth here. The Golden Boot winner every season will fail to score more times than they succeed in doing so. But if we want to find out the most clinical finisher, we’d look at conversion rate and therefore need goals. What to use instead: In most cases, if the focus is on how many times a player has failed, it’s worth turning that into a percentage to add more context. Have they failed a lot, or is it that they’re tried something far more than other players? 10) Thou shalt not compare players with differing numbers of minutes played Example: “Trent Alexander-Arnold and James Maddison are the joint second-best chance-creators in the league, with 75 each” Why it’s misleading: Players who play more minutes have more chances to do things on the field that are counted. By not putting all players on a level playing field in terms of minutes played, it means that those who have played less will nearly always look worse. I’m probably building some sort of a reputation for always fighting Emi Buendia’s corner but by adjusting for minutes played, Buendia is actually the second-best chance-creator in the league on a per 90 basis (3.3 per 90). What to use instead: By adjusting stats per 90 minutes played (that is, dividing the stat by minutes played/90), players who have played differing numbers of minutes can have their numbers compared, and more fair comparisons can be made.

Van Aanholt: Cole was a ‘mentor’, Big Sam’s ‘one of the best’, why I nearly quit https://theathletic.com/1697016/2020/03/25/van-aanholt-chelsea-palace-big-sam-rodgers-loan/ On Friday this week, Patrick van Aanholt marks the 10th anniversary of his first appearance as a Premier League player and in August, the Crystal Palace full-back turns 30. Yet even amid experience and maturity, the simple things still bring pleasure. The computer game Football Manager, for example. “Oh yeah, straight up,” he grins. “Whichever club I’m managing, I admit it: I am always the first signing I make. Pretty cool, right?” He reclines in his chair. The Dutchman has had a pretty cool career. Now a fixture in Roy Hodgson’s Crystal Palace team, he arrived at Chelsea as one of a wave of young international prospects picked up by the club in the early stages of Roman Abramovich’s ownership. Van Aanholt made only two league appearances for Chelsea, both under Carlo Ancelotti, in his seven years on their books while his many loan spells (Coventry City, Newcastle United, Wigan Athletic, Vitesse Arnhem and Leicester City) yielded peaks and troughs. Van Aanholt is engaging company and brings swagger, arriving in his customised van with a personalised nameplate. The exterior is black and muted but inside there is a PlayStation, Apple TV, a surround sound system and a mini-fridge. Yet it appears to be his only vice. Van Aanholt does not drink alcohol during the season. He has hired a personal nutritionist and a personal chef. He speaks about the charm of whizzing around to do the “big ASDA shop” with one of his children sat in the trolley. His idea of a day out these days is going to the soft-play centre. Yet a decade at the top has presented challenges and Van Aanholt, in typically Dutch style, is forthright in his views. Many players have spoken about the aches and strains of the Chelsea loan carousel but Van Aanholt’s story is a sobering one and it is not an exaggeration to say it nearly locked him out of the sport forever. Now he is ready to speak clearly about how he was left “feeling hopeless, ready to finish and stop his career”. The problems started at Wigan after signing on loan in summer 2011. He tells The Athletic the move “was the worst of my life. Literally. Everything that could possibly go wrong, went wrong. I went from a big club to Wigan and I expected to play. I played three (Premier League) games and nothing was wrong. Then, I went away on an international break and I came back and did not play a minute afterwards. I was not on the bench, in the squad or even travelling. That was a killer. It is a mental thing.” When cut adrift, away from home, what do you do with your day? “It was my girlfriend and I. It was just nothing. I just watched series after series, Netflixing. It was long. You’re not playing, your head is gone, you don’t know what to do. You argue with your girlfriend because you are not playing a game or training well. It is all mental. I wanted to play every game. I was young and I did not know what to do. “Thinking back on it now, really, it is my fault as well as the gaffer (then-Wigan manager Roberto Martinez’s) fault. He didn’t play me but I did not show enough in training. In my mind, I was coming from Chelsea to play. It was meant to be a season but I cut it short after six months. I just left. I did not say goodbye or anything. In January, I packed my stuff and I was ready to go. I called Chelsea and they said, ‘OK, come back.'” If Van Aanholt takes his share of the responsibility for the toil at Wigan, he felt differently about what happened next. Chelsea developed a close relationship with Dutch side Vitesse, dispatching numerous young talents there on loan, and Van Aanholt was one of them. He continues: “I did enjoy most of the loans but it felt like just as you were about to adapt and had made your friends, it was time to move again. That’s the hard part. It’s time to leave and you’re like, ‘What’s the point?’ That is football. In football, you do not really make real friends. Only team-mates, basically. It is just like that. Even when you see players hugging in the tunnel, that is just because they know each other because they played for the club. It doesn’t mean that, off the pitch, they are friends. “Anyway, I went to Holland with Vitesse and that was not a success for the first six months, either. That then made it a year of pretty much not playing football.” Could he reach out for support to Chelsea? When contacted by The Athletic, Chelsea confirmed there was no informal agreement or contract with Vitesse that required them to loan players to the Dutch side. “Michael Emenalo was the technical director,” says Van Aanholt. “I spoke to him a couple of times. I shouted at him! When my loan at Wigan was ended, I had an agreement to go to FC Twente, who were top of the Dutch league. Steve McClaren was manager and I wanted to play for him. He wanted me so badly, so I thought ‘Cool!’ But Michael called me and told me I had to go to Vitesse. I said, ‘No, I don’t want to go to Vitesse; I want to go to FC Twente.’ He said, ‘No, you have to go to Vitesse.’ I accepted it but then I got there and I didn’t play. “I called Michael up and said, ‘Listen, I had to come to Vitesse because of you and now you are going to make me play.’ He said he would call the manager but it did not work in the end. After that, my head was gone. I had problems on and off the pitch. There were loads of family problems at the time. It was all getting too much for me. But if I feel down, I am not a person who likes to talk. I keep it all inside me until it blows up and then… big problems. I have become more open but there are not straight lines in football and some people cannot handle it. “I just thought, ‘What is wrong with me?’ It was a year without playing and I thought, ‘What club is going to want me after this?’ I was ready to finish my career and stop. I told my wife (Linsey), ‘I don’t want to play any more. I’ll stop.’ She was like, ‘No! You are good enough. Another team will come. But it is your decision, so if you want to stop, OK.’ Then my agent called me and the two of them together said to me, ‘Don’t stop. Carry on.’ After that, Vitesse said they wanted me back because they had a new manager. I was thinking, ‘I don’t want to come here ever again.’ I hadn’t played for six months, so what am I going to do there? I was on holiday, feeling hopeless and ready to finish. Stop my career.” And yet, it transpired, the new Vitesse manager Fred Rutten really did want Van Aanholt. He became a staple of the first-team over two seasons and, slowly, but surely, fell back in love with his sport. His renaissance earned him a permanent move from Chelsea to Sunderland under Gus Poyet. He admits to relief at finally cutting the cord with the west London club at age 23. Yet there are happy memories too and a friendship that endures with former team-mate Ashley Cole. “I arrived at 16 from PSV and it was, ‘Wow, is this really happening?’ You see those guys on the TV and now you are having lunch with them and they say hi every morning. In my first few weeks and months, I was still adapting: new country, new language, new system of football. When you are young, you want to learn quickly. It was crazy, sitting down for lunch with Ashley and John Terry. It is not scary, it is nice. “Ashley was a real mentor. He was amazing off the field. He gets criticism because of his relationship with Cheryl (Tweedy). He is not that person at all. Such a nice guy. He took his time to take me everywhere: he took me for dinner, I stayed in his house, everything. His best advice was to be yourself and if you want something, you better work for it. At Chelsea, my position changed too as I arrived as a centre-back. Brendan Rodgers was the reserve team manager and he said that a centre-back in England needs to be tall and very strong. I was more about technical ability and not six foot tall. I had technical ability, to go forward, and he made me a left-back.” At Sunderland, Van Aanholt found a Premier League home. “I lived in Newcastle and it is the best rivalry and derby I have experienced. We, Sunderland, dominated them. We beat them four times when I was there. Maybe five. That’s the game of the year. The move made me a proper ‘Prem’ player. Lee Congleton (the head of recruitment) signed me for Sunderland. I am thankful but it is my feet that did the work. From that moment, I was ready to show myself.” At Sunderland and subsequently Palace, Van Aanholt has grown in prominence, making close to 200 Premier League appearances. Palace’s win percentage this season is more than 40 per cent higher when he plays compared to when he is absent. In an interview with The Athletic earlier this season, his former manager Sam Allardyce — who coached Van Aanholt at Sunderland and then signed him in a £14 million deal for Palace — argued only the Dutchman’s lack of defensive concentration has held him back from being one of the very best in the division. “It is true,” Van Aanholt nods. “He has told me that, too. I don’t switch off any more. I am alert now. The past two and a half years, I have been spot-on defensively. Sam is right. Sometimes I did switch off. I don’t know why. It’s something I have always done but the players around me talk a lot to me to keep me switched on.” You played for him and then you signed for him, so you must really like Big Sam? “Tactics-wise, he was one of the best managers of my career. He had a huge influence on me. He is old-fashioned, but it works. He is always right. For example, if we didn’t play one game how he said we should play, he would come into the meeting and say, ‘I told you. If you don’t listen to me, you won’t win.’ The next game, we listened and got the points. He knows what to do. If you are a manager who wants to play football, then very nice. Everyone wants to play football nowadays. Everyone wants to play out from the back. But it is also about points on the board. If you don’t, the fans start to get frustrated. “At Sunderland, Sam left for the England job. He came to speak to me in person and he was honest. He said, ‘I’ve been offered the England job and I am going to take it.’ I said, ‘But I signed a new contract because of you’ but then I said, ‘If it is a dream come true, then you have to take it. Follow your dreams. I will be fine. We’ll see each other soon.'” Despite Van Aanholt’s blessing, Allardyce’s tenure would be hopelessly short-lived with England and soon, the pair were arranging to reunite in south London. “He called me straight away (after getting the Palace job in December 2016) and said, ‘I need you.’ I said, ‘Sam, I am coming!’ I had a bad time at Sunderland off the pitch. I had problems with my wife. My wife moved back to Holland because she didn’t love living in Newcastle. So I chose, for my family, too, to move back to London. Sam was so good. If you are tired, tell him: he gives you another day off, as long as you perform on a Saturday. If you need two days off, you can tell him. Performance is all that matters to him.” Van Aanholt’s current Palace boss Roy Hodgson is similarly respected. He says: “I have a good relationship with Roy; he listens to me, talks to me, understands me.” What about the noise from outside? Newspaper ratings? Social media? “You know when you have played a good game or bad game. I don’t care if someone gives me a four in the paper. Sometimes, they just don’t like the player, so they give a four. I don’t care. Social media is different. I had scored the winner at Old Trafford in August. My phone was popping off. But you have to move on. I always look at my phone. I don’t look really at social media. I watch my clips back to see what I did wrong and what I can do better. We get clips sent to an app either on the night of the game or the following morning. I learn from it. I get criticised sometimes by the manager and I listen, learn and improve. “When things go wrong, that’s where you really want to watch it and know you should have been there. If you want to be a top player, it starts with that. That is what I strive for every day. I am happy now — and I’m not stopping.”

Exercise bikes, skipping ropes and weights sent to Chelsea’s housebound squad https://theathletic.com/1699691/2020/03/26/exercise-bikes-skipping-ropes-and-weights-sent-to-chelseas-housebound-squad/ It has been less than two weeks since the coronavirus outbreak shut down the Premier League, but it already feels like a century ago. All over the world, football has been forced to make a jarring transition to the fringes of public life and Chelsea, like many other top clubs, are still adjusting to this new reality. Even if you were able to take an idle walk past Stamford Bridge or the club’s Cobham training ground, there wouldn’t be much to see. Both sites are now populated only by essential maintenance and security staff – “key workers”, in accordance with the latest UK government guidelines. All other club personnel are working from home, where the players have been for some time. Callum Hudson-Odoi’s positive test was announced on March 13. The rest of the first-team squad and staff were immediately told to stay away from Cobham and self-isolate as a precaution. That requirement formally ended on Monday – 14 days after Hudson-Odoi was first instructed to stay at home after displaying cold symptoms – but social distancing is still the order of the day. But how do footballers work from home? Chelsea acted quickly to establish a new daily routine. Exercise bikes of the type found in the gyms at Cobham were delivered to all players at their homes, together with a GPS watch that logs their physical activity. Skipping ropes and weights were also sent out. Fitness programmes are tailored to each individual, as they would be at the training ground, and staff monitoring the results provide daily online feedback. Workout schedules consist of two sessions per day. They are intense and not limited to work on the bikes. For players who live in houses out of London near Cobham, the garden is the new training pitch: they are instructed to do sprints, as well as extra exercises designed to maintain core strength. Those in apartments closer to Stamford Bridge have been instructed to find quiet outside space for running. Communal gyms are now out of bounds. Healthy diet and nutrition remains a key emphasis during self-isolation. Some players have also been sent packages of fresh fruit and vegetables. With so much uncertainty around the date of football’s return, Chelsea are determined to ensure that standards of fitness and conditioning are kept as high as possible in the interim. Frank Lampard and his backroom staff are in regular contact with the players, and not simply to make sure they are doing the work required. There is also a desire to check in, to chat, and above all to make sure that every member of the squad feels personally supported throughout what is an hugely unprecedented and unsettling situation. The training measures have been met with no complaints, and the players are doing their best to face their new restrictive circumstances in good spirits. For the foreign players with particular family concerns, the club are dealing with travel requests on a case-by-case basis. Willian was allowed to fly home to Brazil to be with his wife and young daughters, while three Chelsea Women players have been granted leave to return to Scandinavia. Boredom is the main enemy for most. Players everywhere are having to get creative in search of light-hearted ways to fill their time. The #StayAtHomeChallenge, featuring kick-ups with a roll of toilet paper, has proved popular, while Emerson Palmieri posted a video on Instagram of him playing a tambourine to traditional Brazilian music. Most unexpectedly, it seems club captain Cesar Azpilicueta has taken up jigsaw puzzles. Others are taking an opportunity to help those less fortunate. Christian Pulisic announced earlier this week that he has donated to Feeding America, a charity in his native USA that runs food banks aimed at providing access to meals for people in difficulty. Mason Mount, Ruben Loftus-Cheek and Billy Gilmour are participating in a FIFA 20 charity stream to raise funds for those affected by coronavirus. At club level, Chelsea’s community work continues, stretching beyond Roman Abramovich’s high-profile decision to make the Millennium Hotel attached to Stamford Bridge available to NHS staff working in hospitals across north-west London. The old and vulnerable are also receiving regular phone calls, newsletters and video messages from the club’s foundation coaches and well-being staff. Mindful of the fact that schools across the UK have been closed indefinitely, the Chelsea Foundation are working to make an online resource available to pupils, parents and teachers, and are setting up virtual classrooms. Coaches are also preparing football skills sessions for children that are specifically designed to be done in the garden. The two-year foundation degree in coaching and development, run by Chelsea Foundation in collaboration with St Mary’s University, is moving online. So too are the entrepreneur and start-up programmes launched in 2018 to educate those thinking of self-employment and starting their own business. Football, of course, cannot be played online. The uncertainty around when live sport will be able to resume hangs over everyone at Chelsea, and this unscheduled break is all the more frustrating for the players on Lampard’s previously extensive injury list. Pulisic, having been sidelined since January 1 with a persistent thigh problem, had just returned to full training and had earmarked the second leg of the Champions League last 16 tie against Bayern Munich on March 18 for his return to action. Hudson-Odoi, as well as making a swift recovery from coronavirus, is also no longer bothered by a previous hamstring injury he aggravated in training earlier this month. Most tantalising of all is Loftus-Cheek, who was finally on the verge of making his first-team return after spending nine months battling his way back from a devastating achilles rupture. He also looks in excellent physical condition now, but has been forced to accept the fact he doesn’t know how much longer he will have to wait to play competitive football again. Chelsea, like several other Premier League clubs ravaged by injury in recent months, have good reason to be optimistic that when football does finally resume, they may well be able to do so with a squad returned to full strength. In the broader context of world events, however, these are trivial concerns. Until football comes back, all anyone can do is stay fit, stay ready and stay at home.

Unwritten: How Chelsea almost lost Stamford Bridge https://theathletic.com/1691469/2020/03/25/unwritten-how-chelsea-almost-lost-stamford-bridge/ Chelsea supporters could be forgiven for feeling downbeat about Stamford Bridge. With planning approval set to lapse on March 31, Roman Abramovich’s lavish redevelopment project remains on indefinite hold amid spiralling costs and the Russian’s ongoing stand-off with the UK government. There are no clear indications it will ever be resumed and the current stadium, while iconic, is too small and old-fashioned to meet the needs of a modern European superclub. History, though, offers greater perspective. Chelsea are fortunate to still be playing at the Bridge at all, even if we are now almost three decades removed from the chain of events that led them to the brink of losing their historic home. The battle to decide the fate of the west London stadium – and by extension the fate of the club – raged for 10 years from the conference room to the court room, with chairman Ken Bates on one side and property developers on the other. This is the story of how Chelsea nearly lost Stamford Bridge – and, in doing so, ended up forging a new relationship with a ground that defines the club to this day. Abramovich is not the first man to harbour lofty ambitions of making Stamford Bridge the envy of world football. The history of the stadium is punctuated by a succession of grand design projects, beginning in 1904 with the vast, open bowl with a maximum capacity of 100,000 that was commissioned by Chelsea’s founders, Gus and Joseph Mears, and drawn up by renowned Scottish stadium architect Archibald Leitch. In 1961, architect and lifelong Chelsea fan Charles Brown published dazzling plans to redevelop the site as a sports centre featuring a three-tiered national football stadium that could hold 150,000 spectators. The project sparked considerable excitement, but the financing depended on the Football Association guaranteeing the FA Cup final would be played at the new ground on an annual basis. They refused to do so. Nine years later, chairman Brian Mears, Joseph’s grandson, launched a redevelopment project that had more far-reaching consequences. Stamford Bridge was to become a state-of-the-art arena with a capacity of 80,000, looming as high as Barcelona’s Nou Camp over the adjacent Fulham Road and featuring a 330 square-metre restaurant in the South Stand that granted views across London. The estimated total cost was £6.25 million, a gargantuan sum at the time. Beset by logistical problems and unforeseen expenses, the project never made it beyond phase one: the construction of a new East Stand. Chelsea’s relegation to the second tier of English football in 1975 took a further toll and, two years later, the club faced liquidation with debts of around £4 million. In the course of restructuring the finances, accountant Martin Spencer made the fateful decision to separate Stamford Bridge Properties Limited (SB) – the company that owned the freehold to the land the stadium sat on – from the football club. When the Mears family finally offloaded Chelsea, and the associated debts, to Ken Bates for just £1 in 1982, the freehold to Stamford Bridge was not part of the agreement. The incoming chairman tried to strike a separate deal for SB Ltd that consisted of a £450,000 cash payment and assuming liability for the £1.6 million debt incurred during construction of the East Stand. There were, according to Bates, some other extras. “David Mears (Brian’s brother) was going to get £5,000 a year for five years plus a Volvo estate car – it’s amazing how giving people cars swings them, you know? – plus a seat in the box, all the usual things,” he says in Rick Glanvill’s book “Chelsea: The Official Biography”. “But it all took so long. He always says he couldn’t get me to the table, but Sheila Marson (Bates’ secretary at the time) will tell you it was the other way around.” Bates’ offer was rejected and SB Ltd was instead sold to Marler Estates for a million shares in the property development company. The deal gave Mears a lucrative stake in the profits arising from any Stamford Bridge redevelopment, but it also made Chelsea tenants in their own stadium, vulnerable to the business interests of a hostile new landlord. “When this gets out, you’ll be a fucking leper,” Bates told Mears. Chelsea had signed a seven-year lease to play at the Bridge until August 1989, but Marler’s priorities were clear. The stadium sits on a hugely valuable plot of land in the heart of affluent west London, and preserving it for the sole use of a football club did not constitute the best return on investment. Marler’s chairman David Bulstrode envisioned a “much smaller and more compact stadium”, and in January 1985 his plans were given the green light by Hammersmith and Fulham Council. Bates knew that if he allowed Chelsea to be forced out of Stamford Bridge, the club was unlikely to ever return there. The terms of the lease stipulated that Marler had to find the club an alternative home within 15 miles. The firm offered £3 million to buy Selhurst Park to facilitate a ground-share with Crystal Palace while it developed a £32 million housing and office complex. Marler already owned Craven Cottage and in 1986 a new Labour-led council had to step in to veto a similar proposed arrangement with Fulham. The following year the property developer pitched something even more outlandish: a merging of west London neighbours Fulham and Queens Park Rangers to form a new club, “Fulham Park Rangers”, to be based at QPR’s Loftus Road, while Craven Cottage was transformed into luxury riverfront housing on the Thames. Chelsea, it was hinted, would then become co-tenants with the merged club. Bates’ strategy throughout this period was to wage a war of attrition. He sought to delay and frustrate Marler at every turn, even purchasing a 20 per cent stake in SB. “He is a real bastard to get in a tangle with,” David Mellor, the member of parliament for nearby Putney from 1979 to 1997 and a Chelsea supporter, said of Bates. “He knew the score of business and was completely ruthless. He used the Companies Act at every opportunity. There are unattractive sides to him, of course there are. But the people who took him on didn’t realise how sharp he was.” In 1989, with Chelsea approaching the end of their seven-year lease at the stadium, Marler sold SB Ltd to another property developer, Cabra Estates. John Duggan – previously a major investor in Marler – was now the man in charge and Bates refocused his efforts on exasperating and exhausting a new adversary. Cabra served the club notice to quit the Bridge but it was quickly embroiled in more legal proceedings that stretched beyond the expiry of the lease. “Chelsea had got planning permission to redevelop Stamford Bridge themselves but there was a clause which stated they had to implement it,” Mark Taylor, the lawyer who acted for Bates against Cabra, tells The Athletic. “I think they dug a few trenches and claimed that was implementation of the planning permission and Cabra issued court proceedings to say that it wasn’t.” Events far beyond Bates’ control then tilted the battle in his favour. The UK economy lurched into recession and the property market tanked, devastating the value of Cabra’s assets – including the Stamford Bridge freehold. “By 1990 the ground was worth much less than in 1989, so Cabra suddenly changed course, withdrew the case and said Chelsea had implemented the planning permission,” Taylor adds. “They wanted £17 million or £18 million and it was worth £12 million. Ken fought them on that, saying they couldn’t withdraw their case.” Bates also contested Cabra’s valuation of SB Ltd, but suffered defeat at the High Court and Court of Appeal. His last hope was to petition for permission to appeal to the House of Lords and wait for a hearing date. “It’s very likely that Chelsea would have lost that case, not been allowed to appeal and that would have been that,” Taylor admits. But once more, fortune intervened on the club’s behalf when it was most needed. Duggan, tormented by a relentless barrage of abusive phone calls at his home from Chelsea fans, was also out of moves. Cabra, having posted a pre-tax loss of £22.1 million, went into liquidation in November 1992. “The reason Chelsea won is because they didn’t go bust before Cabra did,” Taylor says. “The property crash in the 1990s finished them off, but Chelsea were probably one court hearing away from losing Stamford Bridge. “Ken’s fortitude in fighting it was astounding, because I don’t think anybody ever told him he’d win the case. He just bought time, more time and more time, and eventually won because the other side died, effectively.” “I had to remind him that he was not the first guy who had tried to do such things to sport — to want to put a five-storey development on to a ground,” Mellor said of Duggan. “I told him that the reason it would never be done at Chelsea is that there is a life in football that will never die. Much later, I had another meeting with him when he shook his head and admitted he should have listened to me in the first place.” Royal Bank of Scotland assumed control of SB Ltd and, on December 15, 1992, struck a deal with Chelsea: a new 20-year lease to stay at Stamford Bridge, together with an option to purchase the freehold to the site at any time for the fixed price of £16.5 million. Bates was informed by a phone call at 7:30pm from trusted aide Yvonne Todd as he drove home in his Bentley, listening to classical music. “I don’t care what anyone says about me,” Bates said in Brian Woolnough’s 1998 biography “My Chelsea Dream”. “I kept my promise. I said from day one that Chelsea would not leave Stamford Bridge and that phone call confirmed it. When I walked through the door for the first time I saw what I wanted from this club. I didn’t realise it would take so long because I didn’t realise that Chelsea were in such a mess. But I knew that night in 1992 that anything was possible.” Bates did not dwell on his victory for long. “Ken went off to see his son in South Africa and came back in early January,” Taylor recalls. “He called me on January 15, 1993 saying, ‘I’ve had this idea.’ He wanted the fans to own the freehold of the site so the problem with Cabra would never happen again. “The initial idea was to divide the pitch into 70,000 squares and sell a square to each person for £100, which would have raised the £7 million needed to buy the freehold to the pitch from RBS. I spoke to the Land Registry and they said, ‘You’ve got to be joking!’ So what we decided to do was set up CPO as a company that owned the freehold, then sell shares in the company.” Bates’ idea became CPO, short for Chelsea Pitch Owners. It offered the fans a lasting stake in Stamford Bridge – and Taylor went to great lengths to ensure it could never be taken away from them. “It was my idea to limit the number of votes you got, however many shares you owned, to make sure some property developer couldn’t come and just offer all the shareholders a lot of money,” he explains. Voting rights were limited to 100 per shareholder. Sales of CPO shares didn’t get remotely close to raising the required £7 million, so Bates and Taylor got creative again, using some of the £75 million Chelsea had raised using a securitised Eurobond in 1997. “Chelsea Village (the holding company) sent CPO £10 million so it could buy the freehold to the ground, and CPO granted a lease to Chelsea Football Club for 199 years at a peppercorn rent,” Taylor says. But there was a final touch: “I put a clause in the lease which said that if Chelsea stopped playing at Stamford Bridge, the lease would automatically determine and the name ‘Chelsea Football Club’ could no longer be used by Chelsea Football Club anywhere else,” Taylor adds. The unique structure of CPO did not take long to prove its value as a deterrent to those of a similar mind to Marler and Cabra. “In 1998 an American fund approached us to buy Chelsea,” Taylor reveals. “We were very suspicious and as soon as they found out about CPO, they pulled out. They obviously just wanted to knock the stadium down.” Abramovich came closest to taking the freehold back out of supporter hands in 2011, but fell short of the required 75 per cent majority in an acrimonious CPO vote. The defeat forced Chelsea’s hierarchy to refocus on ways to redevelop their historic home, rather than pursuing high-profile alternative stadium sites nearby, such as Earls Court and Battersea Power Station. Without it, the now-paused vision for a new “cathedral of football” on Fulham Road would never have even been conceived. There are now approximately 13,000 CPO shareholders globally, owning around 21,000 shares in total – an enduring testament to Taylor’s efforts. Bates’ legacy can be seen in CPO and in Stamford Bridge as it looks today; victory over Cabra and acquisition of the freehold paved the way for the construction of the Matthew Harding Stand, the renovation of the Shed End and the expansion of the West Stand, as well as the hotels, bars, health club and flats that make up Chelsea Village. The latter has not enjoyed universal approval. “If we had to do it over, we would have just built a top-notch stadium,” Bruce Buck, Bates’ successor as chairman, said. “We would not have built the hotels, and certainly not the flats. We would have built a bigger stadium — or a stadium that could have more easily been capable of being expanded.” Chelsea are limited in financial terms by the 42,000 capacity of Stamford Bridge, and it is far from certain whether Abramovich’s grand redevelopment project will ever happen. But if Bates had not found a way to set the club on its modern course, it is almost impossible to imagine the Russian arriving at all – or the cascade of trophies that followed.

super header by Melanie v Arse, and she scores in the first video too putting in a hard tackle here great goal here

You know what Serb I also really rate would love your opinion on him Filip Kostic he can play so many positions LW LMF AMF CMF SS he was tracking to 15/16 goals and around 20/211 assists on a shit Eintracht team super technical, great passer, good size (1.84m) decent pace

Aleksandar Mitrović I think might work out as a backup Giroud replacement he is a fucking warrior

I absolutely agree he is very immature and a massive dice roll hard pass

she is a superb MFer was the Bayern captain 2016 Olympic Gold medalist and Euro 2013 Gold with Germany too massive signing! would be like the men signing Leon Goretzka (and he stays healthy, lol, he is tracking to around 18 goals and 20 assists over 3600 or so minutes)

short, short timeframe, but Gilmour has been a beast in the few minutes he has played Kovacic is POTY by a mile biggest disappointments KEPA Bats Emerson Mount (to a point, I will be patient) Pedro (age caught him, if he was 23yo he would cost £80-90m or so I have zero ill will towards him and he will go down as a minor semi-legend here, truly a shame we never had had at his pure peak other than 1 year, but he was injured a bit then too,) From 2009 to 2016, he was off the charts, 6 seasons, 114 goals, 72 assists all comps and that was not playing crazy minutes) He was one of the fastest Spanish (actual Iberian, not African transplants) players I have ever seen, insane pace. Azpi (he was SHIT at LB, just dogshit, and his legs are gone) Willian to a point, wish the fucker scored more, he is so up and down, his saving grace was his defence at times, I admit I hate him, but that is so so for his shitstick attitude, which he shows far too often, one of teh most frustrating players we have ever had, up there with Morata, Mutu, Bats, Shevchenko, Bakayoko, and the ultimate shitbox, Fernando Torres, Drinkwater we ALL knew was dogshit so it was not frustration with HIM, it was murderous frustration with the fucking fuck-fucks on the board.

If it makes you feel better, in no way I am writing off our chances with Sancho like I did with Werner.

As long as they leave the Hákarl and Svið at home, and bring plenty of Bæjarins Beztu Pylsur, we all good. heavy on the pylsusinnep

Former Chelsea player reveals season at new club ‘has been rubbish’ https://www.chelsea-news.co/2020/03/former-chelsea-player-reveals-season-new-club-rubbish/ There are some players who leave a club and are instantly forgotten, and some who leave a real legacy and a massive hole behind them. Eden Hazard would be welcomed back at Chelsea in an instant; there is not one fan, coach, or board member who would not bring him back if given the chance. Chelsea have struggled since he left, they have been without a real game changing player, a player with the ability to score a goal from absolutely nothing, a player to lean on to get them out of trouble when under the cosh. Hazard was that man. He joined Real Madrid last summer, describing it as his dream move. Naturally, it is the club he supported as a boy. But things have been far from dreamy during his first season there. He turned up at pre-season over weight, he then suffered injury niggles, and he has really yet to light things up in La Liga. Hazard has admitted that his first season ‘has been rubbish.’

Chelsea centre back target ‘will hand in a transfer request’ https://www.chelsea-news.co/2020/03/chelsea-centre-back-target-will-hand-transfer-request/ Whilst the current football season remains entirely up in the air, Chelsea will still be planning their potential transfer business for this summer regardless. One area they have been touted to bring in a reinforcement is centre back, as Frank Lampard looks to sure up his back line. The Blues boss has constantly shuffled between his four current options Fikayo Tomori, Andreas Christensen, Antonio Rudiger and Kurt Zouma throughout the season, suggesting he isn’t entirely sold on any of them just yet. One player who is a number one target for that area is RB Leipzig centre back Dayot Upamecano, according to The Mirror. The 21-year old certainly fits the bill as the type of dominant defender Lampard is looking to bring in, and he is prepared to hand in a transfer request this summer to force a move out, according to German outlet BILD (as cited by The Sun). It could be an interesting time when the transfer window does reopen!

There will be NO football this summer. Not a chance in hell. Any planning for the rest of the 2019-20 season is delusional at best. The season will be null and void, unless they do something insane like extend the season to a two year window with like 60 games en toto between 2019 and 2021. That cannot happen, as teams bring in transfers, so it would be a false conjoining. Sorry, but that is the way the corona cookie crumbles. At least the Scouse vermin will not get their title and we make the CL for next season, whenever that is able to start. It is quite possible that NEXT season is shot too, at least partially. Go read up on the Spanish Flu pandemic of 2017-18 to see how long shit can last. Only a vaccine can sort this. Do not shoot the messenger. Stay safe all!!! We are in for a ROUGH fucking ride.

Jadon Sancho: Four alternatives if Chelsea lose transfer battle with Manchester United https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/jadon-sancho-chelsea-transfer-battle-manchester-united-four-alternatives-a4397001.html Jadon Sancho is a wanted man. The young winger's decision to leave Manchester City at the age of 16 has been vindicated and then some, earning his stripes for England after a sensational few years with Borussia Dortmund. According to the CIES Football Observatory, Sancho is now the most valuable footballer in the top five European leagues born after the year 2000, with an estimated price tag of £184million. That makes Dortmund's decision to sign Sancho for around £8m in 2017 one of the great deals in recent memory, but it is likely that BVB will accept something closer to £120m for the attacker, who turned 20 today. Sancho's time at Dortmund has been fruitful for both: BVB got their hands on a potential generational talent for a song, while Sancho has been given time and space to develop in front of huge crowds in a technical division similar in pace to the Premier League. But Sancho's spell in North Rhine-Westphalia has not been without its ups and downs: the winger was dropped and fined in October after returning late from international duty with England, and there appears to be an acceptance that should an offer north of £100m come in, Dortmund would bank that. The real question now is: where will he end up? Standard Sport understands that Manchester United lead the race, with Dortmund officials viewing the Red Devils as favourites to sign him ahead of Chelsea. That's not to say Chelsea are out of the running: should the Blues qualify for Champions League football when the season restarts, a return to London to play in a young, exciting team led by Frank Lampard would be a tempting offer. United currently sit a place behind Chelsea in fifth, but Man City's impending Uefa ban means they also currently occupy a Champions League spot - and Ole Gunnar Solskjaer can also offer Sancho a starting role in a young front line with the likes of Marcus Rashford, Anthony Martial and Mason Greenwood. While Sancho faces one of the biggest decisions of his career this summer, he is in a privileged position: his situation at Dortmund is comfortable, and he can wait to see which Premier League team qualifies for Champions League football - and then wait for the best offer. What is clear is that one of Chelsea or United will be left disappointed at the end of the next transfer window - and here are a few options who could soften that blow... Hakim Ziyech | Ajax (will join Chelsea this summer) (Getty Images) Chelsea have, of course, already completed a deal for Ziyech to join the club from Ajax, with the 27-year-old starring in the Eredivisie. Ziyech has notched 10 goals and 16 assists across all competitions this season: while he is clearly capable of playing on the right flank for Chelsea, his most impressive displays this season have arguably come in the centre. So while Ziyech will definitely be wearing a Chelsea shirt next term, Lampard may have a decision to make regarding his role. If, as expected, the Blues miss out on Sancho, will Lampard opt for Ziyech in a wide role - or will he make him the creative hub of his side and seek out another signing? According to SmarterScout, Ziyech has spent 882 minutes as a right winger this term, and 607 in a central role. In that central role, he has been influencing games more both on and off the ball, excelling in both his ability to disrupt play (80/100) and recover the ball (93/100). His creativity is clear with 94/100 for passing towards goal, while on the flank his link-up play and hassling drops slightly in favour of a keener eye for goal; his shooting soaring from 38/100 to 76/100. It may be the case that while Ziyech is a clear solution on the flank, he may end up being wasted out wide. Lucas Ocampos | Sevilla The Argentine's impressive form for Sevilla could put him on Chelsea's radar. Like Ziyech, he would fit Lampard's high-energy game with excellent defensive numbers: 96/100 for defending quality, including 80/100 for disrupt and 91/100 for recover). (REUTERS) Ocampos boasts strong scores across the board, and his ability to dribble (85/100) and receive the ball in the box (89/100) mark him out as somebody who could play well with Tammy Abraham and Callum Hudson-Odoi. Solid in the air and with some height, Ocampos would also be an asset at set-pieces, and wouldn't cost the earth. The 25-year-old has scored 10 LaLiga goals this season, but his output in terms of assists - just two - mean if Lampard is looking for more of an outright winger, Ocampos is more of a Pedro than a Willian. Serge Gnabry | Bayern Munich (AP) The 24-year-old failed to make the grade at Arsenal, but is now dominating in the Bundesliga. Gnabry has scoring 11 goals and set up another nine more in the German top flight this term, and has netting six in the Champions League - four in the 7-2 victory at Tottenham, and two at Stamford Bridge in Bayern's 3-0 win. Gnabry's adaptability has seen him play on the left, centrally, and on the right this term, which would offer Lampard plenty of options for when games come thick and fast - and with an attacking score of 97/100 out wide, Gnabry makes a strong case for becoming one of Europe's leading forwards in the coming years. The Germany international would not be a like-for-like alternative to Sancho, but going in for him with Ziyech already wrapped up would bulk up Chelsea's attack considerably - especially when it comes to winning duels, scoring 65/100 in possession, 87/100 without the ball, and 81/100 for ball retention. The main problem would be in actually convincing Bayern to sell: the Bavarians wanted Callum Hudson-Odoi and were unsuccessful, so it stands to reason they might not be keen to sell Gnabry to the Blues. Gnabry also looks settled in Germany, so unless Chelsea could come up with a huge contract, guarantee Champions League football and something akin to a five-year plan, it looks doubtful Gnabry's love for Arsenal may also count against any move, but were Chelsea to use the money earmarked for Sancho, Bayern could have a big decision on their hands. Ismaila Sarr | Watford (REUTERS) The 22-year-old has had a mixed debut season at Vicarage Road, though it mitigation, the Hornets have had three different coaches. Sarr seems to have found his feet with current boss Nigel Pearson, with his starring role in the 3-0 win over Liverpool - with two goals and an assist - evidence of the huge potential he has. SmarterScout shows favourable stats for Sarr, who scores highly for attacking output (88/100), defending quality (79/100), and ranks 99/100 for shooting, dribbling and receiving the ball in the box. This summer may come too early for Sarr to make a switch to a bigger club, but Everton's big-money move for Richarlison suggests the Hornets are open to selling on young talent for a premium. Sarr could well be better served by spending another year at Watford, providing they stay up - but should they be relegated, Chelsea may fancy their chances of a cut-price deal

Chelsea handed major Moussa Dembele transfer boost because of Lyon decision Chelsea have been handed a major boost in their pursuit of singing Lyon striker Moussa Dembele in the summer transfer window. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1257772/Chelsea-news-Moussa-Dembele-transfer-Lyon

Man Utd transfer target Jadon Sancho wants to agree deal because of three players Manchester United transfer target Jadon Sancho is open to moving to Old Trafford because of three players. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1260189/Man-Utd-transfer-news-Jadon-Sancho-Borussia-Dortmund

Man Utd most likely to sign Jadon Sancho after Liverpool and Chelsea transfer decision Manchester United are the favourites to land Jadon Sancho this summer. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1260326/Man-Utd-news-Jadon-Sancho-Liverpool-Chelsea-transfer-decision-Ed-Woodward-rumours-gossip Manchester United lead the race to sign Jadon Sancho after Liverpool and Chelsea baulked at Borussia Dortmund's asking price for the winger. The England international has been tipped to return to the Premier League this summer. United, Liverpool and Chelsea are all eyeing the 20-year-old. However, according to the Mirror, United are increasingly confident of landing the Dortmund winger this summer. They say United could end up paying around £120m for the former Manchester City ace. It's claimed Liverpool and Chelsea have baulked at Dortmund's asking price ahead of the summer transfer window. The Mirror add that Real Madrid and Barcelona have also been put off by Dortmund's valuation of the England youngster. snip

Chelsea put contract talks with five players on hold due to coronavirus Chelsea have halted contract talks with five first team players due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1260419/Chelsea-news-contract-talks-five-players-on-hold-coronavirus Chelsea have put contract negotiations with five players on hold as the Blues wait to see the full impact of the coronavirus crisis on the current Premier League campaign. The season has been postponed until at least April 30 and is at risk of running well into the summer if all of the remaining fixtures are to be played. That means a number of players are left awaiting clarification over their contract situations with deals set to expire on June 30. Chelsea have four players – Willian, Pedro, Olivier Giroud and Willy Caballero – who are all out of contract and are set to leave the club at the end of this season. The Blues also want to sign Tammy Abraham up on a new deal, with the club’s top scorer having just two more years to go on his current contract. The Telegraph now report that Chelsea have halted all negotiations due to the uncertainty surrounding the culmination of the Premier League campaign. snip

Chelsea star Tammy Abraham tells Marcus Rashford to ‘stay away’ from Manchester United target Jadon Sancho https://metro.co.uk/2020/03/25/chelsea-star-tammy-abraham-tells-marcus-rashford-stay-away-manchester-united-target-jadon-sancho-12457517/?ITO=squid&ito=newsnow-feed Tammy Abraham has jokingly warned Marcus Rashford to ‘stay away’ from Jadon Sancho, with Chelsea and Manchester United set to do battle for the Borussia Dortmund star this summer. Ole Gunnar Solskjaer has identified Sancho as United’s top attacking target ahead of the 2020/21 campaign and Dortmund reportedly expect the youngster to be playing his football at Old Trafford next season. The Red Devils are even prepared to offer Sancho the coveted number seven shirt, currently occupied by Alexis Sanchez, in a bid to lure the forward to the Theatre of Dreams. However, Chelsea have not given up hope of landing Sancho and, like United, are prepared to meet the Englishman’s giant £100 million valuation after Frank Lampard asked the board for a marquee signing up front. snip

CM: €35m Chelsea midfielder ‘dreams’ of Milan return – attempt was made in January https://sempremilan.com/cm-e35m-chelsea-midfielder-dreams-of-milan-return-attempt-was-made-in-january AC Milan discussed the possibility of bringing midfielder Tiemoue Bakayoko back during the January transfer window, a report claims. Bakayoko joined Milan on a season-long loan in summer 2018 and won over the heart of Gennaro Gattuso and the support of the fans after a difficult start. However, Gattuso’s departure meant that Milan did not use their €35million option to buy the Frenchman from Chelsea and instead he moved back to former club Monaco, again on a season long loan. Rumours of a potential return to Milan have never been far away, and according to Calciomercato.com it was something that was actually discussed. The outlet claims that Bakayoko’s dream is to return to the San Siro and play for the Rossoneri again, as you could gauge from the multiple interviews in which he has expressed his love for the club. In January, Maldini and Boban had talked to Monaco and Chelsea about the possibility of bringing the 25-year-old back, but failure to sell Franck Kessie means they were unable to fund the deal. The future prospects regarding a reunion do not look good though. If Ralf Rangnick takes over as head coach and sporting director he is unlikely to pursue Bakayoko due to his cost, and he is more likely to bring in players from his own wish list. snip