Vesper

EU downgrades sanctions rationale against Roman Abramovich Abramovich’s legal team had formally requested the EU to adjust the designation in line with the court’s ruling, a request that has now been granted. https://www.jpost.com/international/article-840452 The EU has officially amended its sanctions justification against Russian-Israeli businessman Roman Abramovich, removing previous claims that he financially benefited from the Russian government, according to a statement released on his behalf on Monday. The change, which was made on January 27, follows a December 2023 ruling by the European General Court that dismissed the EU Council’s argument linking Abramovich to Russian decision-makers responsible for Crimea’s annexation and the destabilization of Ukraine. As a result, the EU has removed the claim that he has “benefited from Russian decision-makers responsible for the annexation of Crimea or the destabilization of Ukraine.” Despite the amendment, Abramovich remains sanctioned by the EU. The court upheld his designation solely on the grounds that he is a “Russian businessman” – a broad classification under current EU regulations that applies even to passive shareholders in sectors unrelated to the war. Abramovich’s legal team had formally requested the EU to adjust the designation in line with the court’s ruling, a request that has now been granted. Revising sanctions This marks the second major revision of sanctions justifications against Abramovich. In 2022, the UK had to significantly alter its own designation, removing over 190 words from an initial 432-word statement. This included the elimination of allegations that he had received financial benefits from the Russian government and that Evraz PLC, a company in which he is a minority shareholder, had provided goods or technology contributing to the war effort in Ukraine. A spokesperson for Abramovich stated that the latest revision further proves that “the sanctions imposed on Mr. Abramovich were never justified by a direct connection to the war.” The statement emphasized that Abramovich “does not have the ability to influence the decision-making of any government, including Russia, and has in no way benefited from the war.”

good thing it was not a lorry

https://football-observatory.com/WeeklyPost491 The 491st CIES Football Observatory Weekly Post presents the U25 players who are sportingly the most deserving for a senior national team debut. The rankings were established on the basis of a performance index* specifically designed by our research team using Wyscout data. They include the ten players with the highest performance scores from 50 nations around the world. For the major nations, the following U25 non-full international footballers are considered the most deserving: Santiago Hezze (Olympiacos, Argentina), Jarne Steuckers (Genk, Belgium), Murillo (Nottingham Forest, Brazil), Elliot Anderson (Nottingham Forest, England), Hugo Ekitike (Eintracht Francort, France), Nico González (Manchester City, Spain), Yann Aurel Bisseck (Inter, Germany) and Marco Carnesecchi (Atalanta, Italy). For all the players listed, the Post also presents the estimated transfer value according to the CIES Football Observatory's statistical model, based on the assumption of an international debut. In this case, the five highest values were recorded for Jamie Gittens (England, €74.2m), Désiré Doué (France, €62.9m), Santiago Castro (Argentina, €60.5m), Archie Gray (England, €56.6m) and Dean Huijsen (Spain, €51.2 m). * The index is based on the footballers’ playing time over the last year, the sporting level of the matches played and the players’ performances in six areas of the game (method here). >>> >>> Any organisation interested in our services is invited to contact us to find out more about all the possible applications of the multiple procedures developed. Most deserving U25 players for a national A-team debut, according to the performance score Date: 10/02/2024. * Projected value based on the assumption of an international debut.

2 Wine Pros Choose Their Favourite Bottles For Valentine's Day Frederic Grappe is the founder of Dynamic Vines, the UK’s leading importer of premium biodynamic and organic wines – which recently opened a great wine bar and shop in East Dulwich. Hannah Crosbie is the Guardian's new wine critic and a Sunday Brunch regular. Here, they pick some of their favourite bottles for Valentine’s Day. FREDERIC GRAPPE SPARKLING Cru Mari ‘Vermell’, £49 Sicus 2013 This sparkling rosé is from a single vineyard called La Masia that produces at high altitude in Catalonia, Spain with strong maritime influences. Sexy, bright and with delicate bubbles, it’s a light rosé from hand-harvested grapes with ten years on the lees before disgorgement. Perfect to enjoy on its own to start the evening and with fish or shellfish. Available here WHITES VDF ‘Coeur Vaillant’, £43 Caroline Bain 2020 Translating as 'Brave Heart', this is for all those who are feeling a little courageous this Valentine’s Day. Rich, pure, complex and with mineral notes from limestone soils, this textured wine from producer Caroline Bain in the Loire Valley offers a little slice of heaven. Best paired with a rich cheese tart or poached fish with classic sauce. Available here Côtes-Du-Rhône ‘Bloom’, £25 Rémi Pouizin x Vin des Potes 2021 For an extra touch of luxury, this exceptional white wine represents an authentic sense of place from L`Enclave des Papes at Visan in France. Aromatic, outgoing and charming, it’s the ideal accompaniment for an Asian-style dinner or some cold cuts and cheese. Available here Blaye Côtes De Bordeaux, £23 Matthieu Cosse This is a blend of sauvignon and muscadelle grapes, perfect for a fruity night in. The goal of the winemakers is to showcase the gluttonous character of the grapes grown in Bordeaux soils, often lacking in other wines produced in the region. Best paired with asparagus spears or a flat fish with creamy sauce or – if you're feeling lazy – a charcuterie board. Available here REDS IGP ‘Terres Burgondes’ Pinot Noir, £40 Emmanuel Giboulot 2022 Producer Emmanuel Giboulot goes for a ‘less is more’ approach with his pure, precise and elegant Burgundian wines. Anyone searching for the perfect red, a bottle of his 2022 works in harmony with grilled meat or something hearty like a beef bourguignon. Available here IGP Pella ‘Bucephale’, Xinomavro 2019, £48 Ktima Ligas This intense, savoury wine is a deep expression of Xinomavro. For the adventurous drinker, it’s considered a more ’serious red’ with high tannins and good structure from long ageing. It’s an ideal match for a rich tomato sauce with pasta, capers and cioppino to warm you through in the cold weather. Available here ORANGE VDF ‘L'Orange’, £25 Domaine de Courbissac Bring a clean, elegant freshness to your Valentine’s Day celebration with L’Orange. It’s a very classy affair with this bottle. Grown in high temperatures, winemaker Brunnhilde Claux’s orange wines have a fresh and floral aroma which balances perfectly against the more savoury elements of orange wine. Pairs well with olives, light salads or a selection of cheeses. Available here Dynamic Vines, 149 Lordship Lane, Dulwich, SE22 8HX Visit DynamicVines.com HANNAH CROSBIE SPARKLING Blanc de Meunier, £69 Chavost Special occasions always call for champagne – and people are starting to cotton on that you can get decent champagne outside of the big houses and brands. Everyone seems to be going a bit nutty for Champagne Chavost at the moment – its bottles pop up in cool wine bars from Copenhagen to New York. This wine is made from pinot meunier, the unsung hero grape in a champagne blend that’s edging ever closer to the spotlight. This wine shows its strengths: weight, texture and aromatics. Available here Billecart Salmon Rosé Champagne NV in Gift Box, £75 Fortnum & Mason If you’re after a reliable grande marque, you truly can’t go wrong with Billecart Salmon: my favourite is the rosé. It’s energetic yet not overly fruity like some other rosé champagnes are – it’s poised and elegant. Available here Brut Rosé, £15 Graham Beck If you’re on more of a budget, Graham Beck’s sparkling wines punch well above their price point, with both a rosé and a white sparkling ready to be picked up at any Majestic. Available here Piggy Pop Pét-Nat Rosé, £24 Wildman Wine Looking for something a little funkier? The Piggy Pop rosé is a pét-nat bursting with red fruit flavours and a real gastronomic versatility. Available here WHITES Classic Pinot Blanc, £16.90 Famille Hugel A delightful and bright pinot blanc, balanced by a real weight and minerality. This is a good gateway drug into delicious Alsace wine. Available here Gemischter Satz, £8.75 Familie Mantler I can’t get enough of aromatic white wines at the moment. This absolute steal of a bottle is from Austria, with a peach-laden nose and a vibrant palate. Available here REDS Tom's Block Pinot Noir, £22.99 (was £27.99) Neudorf This wine is a truly special pinot noir, currently on offer at Waitrose. Expect aromatic notes of dark cherry and spice, with a gorgeous light body. Available here Cotes Du Rhone Villages, £9 Tesco Finest Signargues This is a rich, intense wine from Tesco’s Finest range. This is a meatier wine, perfect for pairing with red meats or earthy vegetables, if you’re going veggie. Available here Hannah Crosbie’s debut book Corker is published by Ebury. Follow Hannah for more wine recommendations here.

Chelsea https://thedailybriefing.io/i/156977237/Chelsea Dean Huijsen to Chelsea transfer stories are not going away, with a new exclusive update on the Bournemouth defender’s future emerging this morning. Joao Felix: “I didn’t ask AC Milan to play every game, just to play in my position… and Sergio Conceicao wanted exactly to put me in my best position. That was crucial for me to pick AC Milan.” Pablo Barrios to Chelsea? Reports in Spain claim the Atletico Madrid midfielder is a €70m target for the Blues… Could Raheem Sterling be heading to the MLS next summer? Simon Phillips has an update on the Chelsea misfit.

I predict Sporting will sell Gyökeres in the summer for 60m to 70m euros (50m to 58m pounds)

he cost Citeh the game tonight

if you take away his ball-playing/distrubution skills (best in the world for years) Ederson is a very meh shot stopping GKer

Citeh's first home CL defeat in around 6 and a half years (2018)

that RM CL pedigree just wow

2 3 Bellingham

2 2 Diaz

2 1 Håland (pen)

1 1 Mbappe

1 nil Citeh Håland

https://www.vipleague.pm/champions-league/manchester-city-vs-real-madrid-1-live-streaming https://www.vipleague.pm/champions-league/manchester-city-vs-real-madrid-2-live-streaming https://redditsoccerstreams.org/event/manchester-city-real-madrid/1506879 https://soccer-100.com/event/uefa-champions/real-madrid-vs-man-city-live-soccer-stats/732187

The most fascinating young players in Europe's Big Five Leagues (redux) https://www.scoutednotebook.com/p/squad-most-fascinating-young-players-europes-big-five-leagues Before this weekend, 1,612 outfield players had played at least 360 minutes across Europe’s Big Five Leagues this season. 467 of them were born in the year 2001 or later. I have selected 20 fascinating profiles to share with you. This is the SCOUTED Squad. First things first, I have also excluded goalkeepers as there are so few with meaningful minutes in Europe’s Big Five Leagues. Also, none of the players in the below graphic will be in the Squad as they secured their place in the first instalment. That does not make then any less fascinating. Since that newsletter, we have explored a host of new metrics, refined our processes for discovering talent, redefined what is fascinating in the current football landscape, developed new player profiles and worked out how to provide some data visualisations. Translation: this is going to be a big one (and it took much longer than I anticipated). Centre-backs To refine the discovery centre-backs, I filtered the dataset to players tagged as Defender only on Stathead. This produced 576 players - this will be the context for all percentile rankings in this section - and 137 were born in the year 2001 or later. For young players, minutes played can be the most impressive metric. That applies to our first pick, Pietro Comuzzo. In our dataset, Levi Colwill, Cristhian Mosquera and Pau Cubarsí are the only 2003+ centre-backs with more minutes; only 28 minutes separate Cubarsí and Comuzzo. This 2005er will turn 20 this month and ranks well when looking at season totals: . He also has the second-best % Dribblers Tackled rate of any 01+ defender to challenge at least 20 dribblers (78.3%). On the ball, Comuzzo’s long-range passing is the standout. The Italian is one of four 2001+ defenders to attempt 7+ Long Passes per 90 while maintaining a 70% success rate - Pau Cubarsí, Malick Thiaw and Nuno Mundes complete the set. You could describe Charlie Cresswell as a magnetic lighthouse. Only two teams in Ligue 1 have conceded fewer goals than Toulouse and the Leeds United academy graduate appears to be a major reason why. The 2002er ranks in the 10% for Blocked Shots, the top 5% for Clearances and the top 3% for Aerial Duels Won. He backs up this volume with incredible efficiency, winning 73.% of his Aerial Duels. For context, Virgil van Dijk is winning 74.2%. Cresswell is also a big box threat, ranking the in the top 10% for xG and Shots when compared to the 576 defenders in this dataset. At the weekend, Cresswell scored his first-ever goal for the Ligue 1 side, finishing the game against Auxerre with more interceptions and more aerial duels won than any other player on the pitch from his position as CCB in a back three. Giovanni Leoni only just meets the minimum minutes threshold but is exactly what I am looking for when putting together these squads. The 2006-born centre-back ranks in the 100th percentile for Duel Success rate among defenders of all ages and is winning 75% of his Aerial Duels, contesting just under 2 per 90 - that stat is not a surprise when you consider he reportedly stands at 195 cm tall. Remember, this data does not exclude the latest round of fixtures; on Sunday, Leoni scored his first-ever senior goal. Get him on your radar immediately. Left-footed centre-backs: a curated shortlist Read full story Once again, I am lacking a left-footer. That’s not to say they are not any fascinating left-footed centre-back prospects, but I have covered the likes of Dean Huijsen, Nathan Zézé and Konstantinos Koulierakis plenty of times this season. When I put together my shortlist, Llew highlighted Mikayil Faye as a potential pick for Generation 04. With a few more minutes behind him following a permanent move to Rennes this summer, let’s revisit him. Usually deployed as the LCB in a back-three, he is displaying proficiency in the skills associated with that role. He is yet to be successfully dribbled past by an opponent, although it appears that he is willing to commit a foul rather before letting that happen. His other standout attribute was the combination of Progressive Actions per 90. This metric is a combination of Progressive Passes and Progressive Carries with all Passes and Carries into the Penalty Area removed - which becomes more helpful when looking at midfielders. Faye is averaging 6 per 90, similar to Dean Huijsen (5.9) and Lucas Beraldo (5.8). And although most of these Progressive Actions are Passes, his 1.7 Non-CPA Progressive Carries is only bettered by 20 2001+ defenders, the majority of which are full-backs. Full-backs For this position, we dip into the pool of players tagged at least once as a defender. This produces a set of 716 players for our percentile rankings, 181 were born in 2001+ or later. First, I want to use Myles-Lewis Skelly to introduce one of my ‘custom’ FBref metrics. Stathead does not provide Ground Duel Success Rate, however, due to spending lots of hours looking at how that metric is made up, I have built an alternative for anyone using FBRef data: Non-Aerial Duels. Here are the metrics and calculations you need: Non-Aerial Duels Contested = Dribblers Challenged + Fouls Conceded + Fouls Won + Attempted Take-Ons Non-Aerial Duels Won = Dribblers Tackled, Fouls Won, Successful Take-Ons Non-Aerial Duel Success Rate = Non-Aerials Won / Non Aerials Contested This metric helps remove Target Forwards and Lighthouse Centre-Backs. But you can also combine Aerials and Non-Aerials to get Total Duel Success rate. From this set of 716 defenders, Ezri Konsa (80.6%) is the only player with a higher Non-Aerial Success Rate than Myles Lewis-Skelly (78.6%). This one stat not only highlights why I used Konsa to help build my centre-back profile with SkillCorner data, but it is also a product of Lewis-Skelly’s superpower that Llew highlighted in SCOUT NOTES. Now you know his name Read full story So, rather than including Myles Lewis-Skelly in the Squad, I looked for another young player that ranked well for this metric. Step forward Nathaniel Brown. Only three 2001+ defenders ranked in the top 10% for Non-Aerials Won and Non-Aerial Success Rate: Myles Lewis-Skelly, Brown and Max Rosenfelder. However, the Eintracht Frankfurt wing-back is the only one that also ranks in the top 10% for Tackles Made; he is not just an efficient ground dueler, but a prolific one as well. Less surprising, given his wing-back role, Brown also ranks in the top 5% for Touches in the Attacking Penalty Area and Shot Involvements - he is a brilliant set-piece taker. My next left-back is Adam Obert. The Slovakian has played the majority of his career minutes as a centre-back for Cagliari but has operated exclusively as a left-back this season. Have we found the heir to Dávid Hancko? That would be exciting. At 188 cm, Obert is the same height as Hancko and displays the same attacking thrust that belies his size. The 2002er ranks in the top 10% for Non-Penalty xG and for Shots, with most of them coming from open-play. But the headline stats are Tackles + Interceptions (96th percentile), Touches per Progressive Action (95th percentile) and a 100th percentile figure for his percentage of Completed Passes that are Non-PPA Progressive Passes - 13% of his successful passes tick the Progressive threshold. These three stats combine to paint a picture of a front-footed and proactive full-back that is keen to win the ball back and get into the most dangerous areas. I’ll use that word again: thrust. I enjoy refining and customising metrics but sometimes it is best to keep it simple. Luck Zogbé, for example, is averaging 6.7 Tackles + Interceptions per 90, more than any other 01+ defender in our dataset and the third-most overall. Capable of playing at both left and right-back, the Ivorian (69.5) has the second-highest Percentage of Dribblers Tackled of any defender to make 3+ Challenges, only Alejandro Francés, a member of the first SCOUTED Squad, ranks higher. Zogbé also ranks in the 94th percentile for Fouls Drawn. Yet to feature in the UEFA Champions League, keep an eye out for this 2005er when Brest name their XI to face PSG on Tuesday. I included Tom Rothe in the previous SCOUTED Squad, a 192cm German left wing-back. To complete the full-back list this time around, I’m adding a 190cm German wing-back on the right. Holstein Kiel’s first-ever Bundesliga season has not been a fairytale campaign, but 2002-born Lasse Rosenboom is intriguing. Only six 2001+ defenders in our set average more Touches in the Attacking Penalty Area: Tiago Santos, Ian Maatsen, Joško Gvardiol, Destiny Udogie, Riccardo Calafiori and Malo Gusto. I would need to investigate how Rosenboom accumulates these touches, but the fact 5.8% of his total each game (97th percentile) are inside the box has piqued my interest enough to earn a spot. Centre-midfielders For the No.6 spots, I restricted the search to all Midfielders that had not played as a Forward. This produced a list of 457 players with 143 born in the year 2001 or later. The first profile I looked for is a Quarter-Back. I have written about Angelo Stiller, Adam Wharton and Adrián Bernabé as standout examples of this profile, so I avoided repeating their names again. Only one other 2001+ player joined Wharton in the top 10% of our dataset for Progressive Distance per Pass and Non-PPA Progressive Passes: Tommy Doyle. Doyle is also one of two midfielders, of any age, to average 20% of their Completed Passes as Long Passes, a metric that helps identify those Hail Mary Quarter-Backs. The current iteration of Wolves may not be the ideal environment for Doyle to flaunt these talents more consistently, especially given the quality and the profile of the starting Brazilian duo João Gomes and André, but he is a true outlier for this particular profile so I had to include him. Who is the most progressive passer of them all? Read full story The second No.6 profile I like to look for is Press Resistors. In the previous squad, now-Lazio midfielder Reda Belahyane ticked this box and he has since proved why. But the player that I cannot seem to escape is Amadou Koné. The 2005er is the only player in this dataset that ranks in the top 10% for Successful Take-Ons, Take-On Success Rate and Fouls Drawn. And he has the best Non-Aerial Success Rate of the entire midfield set (75.9%). I am very aware of sample size, but the early signs are both remarkable and fascinating. Is Ryan Gravenberch the second coming of Mousa Dembélé? Read full story We are using the same midfield pool for No.8s to try to avoid as many wingers and attacking midfielders as possible. But it’s worth mentioning that Jude Bellingham, Florian Wirtz and even Cole Palmer feature in this set. Anyway, I immediately wanted to find a Ground-Eater. To do so, I looked at players that ranked in the top 10% for Non-CPA Progressive Carries, Percentage of Carries as Non-CPA Progressive Carries and Progressive Distance per Carry. After eliminating wingers and wing-backs from the search, which only returned 14 players across all ages, this was the final shortlist - the presence of Rice and Reijnders was reassuring in terms of identifying a particular style of player. Andy Diouf is the SCOUTED Squad selection as he is the only 2001+ player that ranks in the top 5% for all three key metrics. Expect Crystal Palace to reignite their interest in Lens’ 2003er this summer. Expect other clubs to join the queue. After picking up Diouf, I then explored a way to find a literal box-to-box midfielder by calculating the percentage of each player’s touches by Third and by Defensive and Attacking Penalty Area. Looking at players with at least 4% of their touches in each area and at least 20% in each third produced this list of 2001+ players, again eliminating wide players: The player I want to focus on is 2004-born Kévin Danois. He ranks in the top 10% for Touches per Progressive Action and Non-PPA Progressive Passes and the the top 1% for Percentage of Passes as Non-PPA Progressive Passes. The reason he was not selected as the Quarter-Back pick is due to the fact his Progressive Distance per Pass and Passes into the Final Third rank only just above average. Both his data profile and his heat map scream box-to-box midfielder, which is different to Ground-Eater as it does not require the coverage of large distances in even larger chunks - Danois’ Progressive Distance per Carry ranks in the 55th percentile. Thinking about it, his 96th percentile rank for Tackles + Interceptions suggests he would be the perfect player for that Wolves midfield duo I touched on earlier. Attacking Midfielder For attacking midfielders, the only exclusions were players that had featured exclusively as Defenders. This produced a list of 1,036 players, including 330 born in 2001 or later. This is the most difficult position to identify with FBref filters. Building our new Archetype ft. Florian Wirtz Read full story First up, I ran a percentile version of the Wirtz-inspired search from the Omni-10 newsletter: The only players that matched this search were Lazar Samardžić and Ousmane Dembélé. The only players that averaged 6+ Shot-Creating Actions excluding Dead Balls were Kingsley Coman and Samardžić. I simply have to include the Serbian because of those stats. However, the fascination extends to whether this output is sustainable outside of the Atalanta environment and as a consistent starter. The other area of intrigue is that for all of this volume, he ranks in the 68th percentile for Non-Penalty xG + Expected Assisted Goals per 90. I am a big believer in ‘get volume first, ask questions later’ but the more I follow Samardžić, the more questions I have. While the above search rewards volume by any means, I have started to apply the thought behind Touches per Shot for Strikers to passing metrics for attacking midfielders. To find a No.10 that is constantly searching for and actively targeting players in dangerous areas, I looked at Passes Attempted per Passes into the Penalty Area, Passes Attempted per Key Passes and Passes Attempted per Shot-Creating Action from Live Passes. However, the majority of players that ranked in the top 5% for all three metrics were centre-forwards: Liam Delap, Erling Haaland, Alexander Isak and Hugo Ekitiké all appeared. When adding a top 10% filter for Touches in the Final Third, only Mohamed Salah and Dejan Kulusevski remained. In order to filter out centre-forwards and wide-forwards, I locked in the top 20% for Passes Attempted and the top 20% for Touches in the Final Third and then looked through the key three metrics to try to find an old-school Playmaker. It turns out everyone is a winger now… Wingers This next dataset includes every player tagged as a Forward. It produced a list of 579 players with 187 born in 2001 or later. I have wanted to build a Button Masher profile inspired by Mohamed Salah for a long time. The best way to do this with FBRef data is to combine Shots and Key Passes into Shot Involvements and then combine Passes into the Penalty Area and Carries into the Penalty Area in the Penalty Area Entries (Pen Entries); the latter will have a different definition on other sites - sometimes it only includes passes - but that is the definition for the following section. To prove this metric works, Mohamed Salah has at least 53 more Pen Entries than any other player across the entirety of Europe’s Big Five Leagues this season, not just this dataset. He also ranks first for Touches per Pen Entry, getting the ball into the area every 6.8 Touches. Getting the ball into the area is very good. Doing it that often is very, very good. Two lesser-mentioned 2001+ wingers that rank well for this metric are Bryan Zaragoza, on loan at Osasuna from FC Bayern and Malick Fofana, Lyon’s pocket rocket Belgian winger. The most fascinating aspect of Zaragoza’s output is the fact he receives the fewest Progressive Passes per 90 minutes of the 43 players that ranks in the top 10% for Pen Entries and Touches per Pen Entry. That already suggest a One-Man Army approach, his top 1% ranking for Progressive Yards per Carry confirms it. A prolific dribbler you may not have heard of is Benjamín Domínguez. The 2003-born Argentine joined Bologna at the start of the season and is attempting 6.3 Take-Ons per 90 as well as winning 2.7 fouls. Meanwhile, the Antoine Semenyo formula threw up some interesting names. Only 10 players ranked in the top 25% for Aerial Duels Won and Successful Take-Ons within this dataset, one of which was Semenyo. I have previously mentioned my intrigue in Nick Woltemade’s profile so I have included another player to add to this profile: Matteo Cancellieri. As teams look to induce chaos by sending long balls to a specific, wingers that can consistently compete will become much more valuable. 2001-born Cancellieri fits that mould. Centre-Forwards The striker percentile rankings are based on a pool of 207 players that have featured exclusively as forwards, 51 of those were born in 2001 or later. The Victor Osimhen Test Read full story My first instinct was to repeat the Victor Osimhen Test. The top 10% for Touches per Shot and top 10% for Penalty Area Proximity produced 10 players, including Mateo Retegui, Ollie Watkins and Erling Haaland. The 2001+ representatives were Gonçalo Ramos, Folarin Balogun and Nicolas Jackson. After expanding to the top 20% for each metric, three more 2001+ players popped up: George Ilenikhena, Elye Wahi and Thierno Barry. The fact that Barry has the fewest Touches per Shot alongside the most minutes played means that he gets a spot. The fact that Balogun and Ilenikhena show up while Monaco have just signed Mika Biereth means that someone has the opportunity to sign a very good centre-forward in the summer. The new Power Forwards, Gvardiol’s secret weapon and Barça’s superhuman duo Read full story My next pick is a Power Forward. I have mentioned Emanuel Emegha in previous newsletters but I have been looking for an opportunity to do so again. He ranks in the top 1% for Non-Penalty xG per shot and is 12.6 yards out on average for each effort. He is slightly lacking in terms of elite shot volume (52nd percentile) but he is making up for it, for now, by registering 1.75 Shots On Target per 90 (95th percentile). He is also averaging 4 final third touches per shot which suggests that an increase in service could help lift the shot output. The final pick is a player that caught my eye when researching my next SkillCorner piece, which profiles the anatomy of a Power Forward using tracking data from 2023/24. In this dataset, Roberto Piccoli ranks in the top 5% for Final Third Touches per Shot - the same as Emegha - and in the 88th percentile for Penalty Box Proximity in the Final Third. The Italian’s jump up in rank when compared to Penalty Box Proximity for all Touches (75th percentile) is usually the sign of a Target Forward. His 85th percentile ranking for Aerial Duels won and a quick check of his shot distribution - 31.8% of his Serie A shots this season have been headed efforts - confirms that he is more Target Forward leaning. Cagliari have an option to buy this 2001er from Atalanta in the summer, I am fascinated to find out whether he can jump another level. If you made it to the end, congratulations! I appreciate this was a bit of a monster newsletter. The decision to rank players based on all ages combined with so many new metrics to calculate meant that putting the Squad together took twice as long as the previous edition. I thought exporting the data early would help me avoid publishing this late. I was wrong. The next Monday Night SCOUTED Squad, whenever that may be, will include fewer players. Have a great week, Jake.

Valentine’s Day cologne picks: Sweet, fresh, and grown-up scents for every vibe Which scent should you wear on Valentine's Day? https://www.themanual.com/grooming/mens-cologne-for-valentines-day/ Whether you’re celebrating with a date or friends or indulging in self-love, Valentine’s Day is all about indulging in the pleasantries of life. Perfectly curated plans, a fresh haircut, and a stylish outfit aren’t complete without the right fragrance to tie it all together. But wait–you don’t want to reach for your everyday staples when spraying on a cologne for a special occasion. Instead, try enjoying a few sprays of something you don’t wear often, or treat yourself to a new fragrance altogether. Whichever option you choose, it’s key to pick a fragrance that fits the mood of your V-day festivities so your scent doesn’t clash with how you’ll be enjoying the holiday. We’ve all encountered that one guy in life who smells like an extremely strong, lavish cologne…on a random Tuesday. Preventing a scent that’s overpowering and misplaced allows you to set the mood for yourself and those around you a whole lot better. Let’s take a look at some options. Sweet & romantic We all have an inner hopeless romantic, no matter how deep it’s buried. Roses, candlelight, opening car doors, and other sweet, selfless gestures. Those moments where love takes center stage may not have a scent that’s all their own, but you certainly can add one, so whenever you smell that fragrance again, you’re reminded of that moment. These fragrances convey a romantic mood without being too sweet, synthetic, or harsh on the nose. Prada Luna Rossa Black: This cologne blends musk and amber in a way that is mysterious yet elegant and uplifting. Byredo’s Gypsy Water: If you’re an advocate for fresh, earthy tones with hints of citrus, this is your new go-to special occasion fragrance. Lemon, pine, juniper, and velvety bergamot create a scent that is unique and memorable. Jo Malone Myrrh & Tonka: This cologne combines vanilla and almond in a way that is rare in the fragrance world. What helps them blend so well, you may ask? Myrrh. The middle note has perfect woodsy tones that marry with the sweetness of almond and vanilla perfectly to create a fragrance that’s comforting and soft, kind of like a bed at the Ritz. Grown & sexy Whether you’re going for after-dinner drinks, gracing the floor at a lowkey jazz club, or aiming to recreate one of your favorite romance movie scenes, your confidence has got to be up to par. Keeping that grown and sexy mood alive would be ruined by a scent that makes your date sneeze or makes them wonder, “What is that?” More often than not, colognes are considered strong and overpowering to keep an air of sexiness and maturity. That’s completely false, though. These are some sexy special occasion scents to opt for when you’re trying to convey sophistication and sensual allure. Xerjoff Naxos: Lavender, tobacco, honey. All unique notes that you may or may not think to pair together on any given day. Lucky for you, this is a special occasion, not just any random day. So, the smooth hints of boldness and elegance in this cologne are perfect for Valentine’s Day. Tom Ford’s Ombre Leather: Smoky and leather go together seamlessly, creating a scent that’s masculine and mature without smelling synthetic or cheap. This fragrance is rich, amber-heavy, and accented by notes of different smoked woods and leather. Maison Francis Kurkdijan Grand Soir: This high-end cologne creates an interesting blend of jasmine and amber. With other notes like lavandin and cinnamon leaf, the scent is balanced yet powerful and memorably unique. Fresh & fun If you’re up for a date that’s lighthearted and energetic, a fresh and fun scent will accompany the occasion well. This variety of scents is also perfect for daytime dates or public outings like a trip to the park or your local aquarium. Here are some recommendations with low to medium projection that still have amazing staying power and a fresh and whimsical scent profile. Hermès Terre d’Hermès Eau Givrée: This crisp and refreshing scent mixes citrus notes with woodsy tones that make an ideal scent for a casual day out that will last throughout the day’s activities. Versace Eros: Vanilla, mint, and green apple are blended together with notes of patchouli to create a scent that is energetic and captivating. This is the perfect cologne to wear when you want to leave an impression of being cool and fun, but still well put together. DS & Durga Debaser Eau de Parfum: This niche fragrance has the excitement and uniqueness of a weekend trip to New York, with the complexity and richness of a luxury vacation abroad. If you’re looking for a scent that’s fun but still mature, this is it. Honorable Mention If you’re looking to spoil yourself (or someone else), Clive Christian No1 is the way to go. With nuts like nutmeg, tonka, and sandalwood, you may be wondering what makes this scent worth the $790 per 50ml price point. Aside from the legendary Clive Christian branding, this cologne is a master’s display of perfumery skills. The main notes are blended with 15+ other notes such as bergamot, lime, mandarin, pink grapefruit, lily of the valley, vanilla…the list goes on. This unique master mix makes for a scent that is undeniably one of a kind but also smooth and luxurious smelling, with no synthetic tinges or lingering notes that aren’t blended into the cologne properly. No1 is a favorite among celebrities and devout fragrance enthusiasts, and with good reason. If you’re ready to splurge on something new or are fortunate enough to already have this scent in your collection, it’s the ideal date night cologne to fit any mood.

The New Authoritarianism https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/02/trump-competitive-authoritarian/681609/ With the leader of a failed coup back in the White House and pursuing an unprecedented assault on the constitutional order, many Americans are starting to wrap their mind around what authoritarianism could look like in America. If they have a hard time imagining something like the single-party or military regimes of the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, or more modern regimes like those in China or Russia, that is with good reason. A full-scale dictatorship in which elections are meaningless and regime opponents are locked up, exiled, or killed remains highly unlikely in America. But that doesn’t mean the country won’t experience authoritarianism in some form. Rather than fascism or single-party dictatorship, the United States is sliding toward a more 21st-century model of autocracy: competitive authoritarianism—a system in which parties compete in elections but incumbent abuse of power systematically tilts the playing field against the opposition. In his first weeks back in office, Donald Trump has already moved strongly in this direction. He is attempting to purge the civil service and directing politicized investigations against rivals. He has pardoned violent paramilitary supporters and is seeking to unilaterally seize control over spending from Congress. This is a coordinated effort to dig in, cement power, and weaken rivals. Unlike in a full-scale dictatorship, in competitive-authoritarian regimes, opposition forces are legal and aboveground, and they often seriously vie for power. Elections may be fiercely contested. But incumbents deploy the machinery of government to punish, harass, co-opt, or sideline their opponents—disadvantaging them in every contest, and, in so doing, entrenching themselves in power. This is what happened in Venezuela under Hugo Chávez and in contemporary El Salvador, Hungary, India, Tunisia, and Turkey. Crucially, this abuse of the state’s power does not require upending the Constitution. Competitive autocracies usually begin by capturing the referees: replacing professional civil servants and policy specialists with loyalists in key public agencies, particularly those that investigate or prosecute wrongdoing, adjudicate disputes, or regulate economic life. Elected autocrats such as Chávez, Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Viktor Orbán, Narendra Modi, and Nayib Bukele all purged public prosecutors’ offices, intelligence agencies, tax authorities, electoral authorities, media regulatory bodies, courts, and other state institutions and packed them with loyalists. Trump is not hiding his efforts to do the same. He has thus far fired (or declared his intention to fire, leading to their resignation) the FBI director, the IRS commissioner, EEOC commissioners, the National Labor Relations Board chair, and other nominally independent officials; reissued a renamed Schedule F, which strips firing protections from huge swaths of the civil service; expanded hiring authorities that make it easier to fill public positions with allies; purged more than a dozen inspectors general in apparent violation of the law; and even ordered civil servants to inform on one another. Once state agencies are packed with loyalists, they may be deployed to investigate and prosecute rivals and critics, including politicians, media companies, editors, journalists, influential CEOs, and administrators of elite universities. In the United States, this may be done via the Justice Department and the FBI, the IRS, congressional investigations, and other public agencies responsible for regulatory oversight and compliance. It may also be done via defamation or other private lawsuits. The administration doesn’t have to jail its opponents to bully, harm, and ultimately intimidate them into submission. Indeed, because U.S. courts remain independent, few targets of selective prosecution are likely to be convicted and imprisoned. But mere investigations are a form of harassment. Targets of selective investigation or prosecution will be forced to devote considerable time, energy, and resources to defending themselves; they will spend their savings on lawyers; their lives will be disrupted; their professional careers will be sidetracked and their reputations damaged. At minimum, they and their families will suffer months and perhaps years of anxiety and sleepless nights. Plus, the administration need not target all critics. A few high-profile attacks, such as a case against Liz Cheney, a prominent media outlet, or selective regulatory retaliation against a major company, may serve as an effective deterrent against future opposition. Competitive-authoritarian governments further subvert democracy by shielding those who engage in criminal or antidemocratic behavior through captured referees and other impunity mechanisms. Trump’s decision to pardon violent January 6 insurrectionists and purge prosecutors who were involved in those cases, for example, sends a strong signal that violent or antidemocratic actors will be protected under the new administration (indeed, that’s how many pardon recipients are interpreting the pardons). Likewise, a loyalist Justice Department and FBI could disregard acts of political violence such as attacks on (or threats against) campaign workers, election officials, journalists, politicians, activists, protesters, or voters. They could also decline to investigate or prosecute officials who work to manipulate or even steal elections. This may appear far-fetched, but it is precisely what enabled the consolidation of authoritarian rule in the Jim Crow South. Protected by local (and often federal) authorities in the aftermath of Reconstruction, white-supremacist groups used violent terror and election fraud to consolidate power and disenfranchise African Americans across the region. Finally, state institutions may be used to co-opt business, media, and other influential societal actors. When regulatory bodies and other public agencies are politicized, government officials can use decisions regarding things such as mergers and acquisitions, licenses, waivers, government contracts, and tax-exempt status to reward or punish parties depending on their political alignment. Business leaders, media companies, universities, foundations, and other organizations have a lot at stake when government officials make decisions on tariff waivers, regulatory enforcement, tax-exempt status, and government contracts and concessions. If they believe that those decisions are made on political, rather than technical, grounds, many of them will modify their behavior accordingly. Thus, if business leaders come to the conclusion that funding opposition candidates or independent media is financially risky, or that remaining silent rather than criticizing the administration is more profitable, they will change their behavior. Several of the country’s wealthiest individuals and companies, including Jeff Bezos, Tim Cook, Sam Altman, Mark Zuckerberg, and Disney, already appear to be adjusting in that way. Democracy requires robust opposition. Opposition parties and civil-society groups cannot function without money and without a large and replenishable pool of talented politicians, lawyers, journalists, and entrepreneurs. But using the state’s power against critics will likely deter many of them, depleting that pool. Talented politicians may decide to retire early rather than face an unfounded investigation. Donors may decide that the risk of contributing to Democratic candidates or funding “controversial” civil-rights or pro-democracy organizations is not worth it. Media outlets may downsize their investigatory teams, let go of their most aggressive editors and reporters, and decline to renew their most outspoken columnists. Up-and-coming journalists may steer clear of politics, opting instead to write about sports or culture. And university leaders may crack down on campus protest, remove or isolate activist professors, and decline to speak out on issues of national importance. Civil society therefore faces a crucial collective-action problem. Individual politicians, CEOs, media owners, and university presidents act rationally and do what seems best for their organizations. They work to protect their shareholders’ interests and stave off debilitating investigations or lawsuits. But such isolated acts of self-preservation have collective costs; as individual players retreat to the sidelines, the opposition weakens. Some of these costs will be invisible. The public can observe when players sideline themselves: congressional retirements, university presidents’ resignations, the ceasing of campaign contributions, the softening of editorial lines. But we can’t see the opposition that never materializes—the potential critics, activists, and leaders who are deterred from getting in the game. How many young lawyers will decide to remain at a law firm instead of running for office? How many talented young writers will steer clear of journalism? How many potential whistleblowers will decide not to speak out? How many citizens will decide not to sign that public letter, join that protest, or make that campaign contribution? Democracy is not yet lost. The Trump administration will be politically vulnerable. Unlike successful elected authoritarians such as Nayib Bukele in El Salvador, Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, and Vladimir Putin in Russia, Trump lacks broad popular support. His approval rating has never surpassed 50 percent, and incompetence, overreach, and unpopular policies will almost certainly dampen public support for the new administration. An autocratic president with an approval rating below 50 percent is still dangerous, but far less so than one with 80 percent support. The new administration’s political weakness will open up opportunities for opposition in the courtroom, on the streets, and at the ballot box. Still, the opposition can win only if it stays in the game. Worn down by defeat, and fearing harassment and lost opportunities, many civic leaders and activists will be tempted to pull back into their private lives. It’s already happening. But a retreat to the sidelines could be fatal for democracy. When fear, exhaustion, or resignation eclipses our commitment to democracy, competitive authoritarianism succeeds. About the Author Steven Levitsky is the David Rockefeller Professor of Latin American Studies and Government at Harvard University.

Sacking another manager will not change a thing Changing the manager will achieve nothing and ignores the real problems https://siphillipstalkschelsea.substack.com/p/sacking-another-manager-will-not I’ll be honest, when I looked at the Brighton result and saw the reaction, I realised I barely have any emotional energy left for football. This club and how it’s being run, and the constant scapegoating of the manager when the real problems come above him, its sucking all my enthusiasm for football out of me. I’ve been through this all before and I really cannot be bothered to have the same conversations three years in a row. Maybe the owners who read this should start taking fans views seriously, instead of congratulating themselves on what is actually failure or spinning failure as success. Sadly, its also clear to me now at least some of our fans may never have the patience for a long term manager, because one bad run of form for any manager, and we tear him apart, bring him down & hound him out. We were indoctrinated to do this under Roman Abramovich and can’t get our heads around how football has changed. Between the start 2010/11 season and the end of 2021/2022, all under Roman’s ownership we challenged for the title 4 times in 12 seasons and missed out on CL football twice. We finished over 30 points behind the PL champions in the last 5 years of Roman’s ownership as well as the first 2 of the new ownership. This decline has been coming. The new owners I thought would change this, so far they’ve merely continued as a side which battles for top 4, with two cup runs and one lost final. The manager is not the most important issue right now. This magic bullet theory about managers has been proven false. You only have to look at the most successful clubs right now - Manchester City, Liverpool, even Real Madrid, all have built success with stability at management level. Arsenal’s best team in years has appeared doing the same thing. Fact is, in today’s game, you can’t build sustainable long term success or attract top players to your project without stability at manager level. Our fans need to get this into our heads, and fast. Nothing much will change if the manager changes right now. The biggest, most fundamental issues at our club right now are Clearlake Capital, the Sporting Directors and GK guru Ben Roberts. I’ve talked about why this is so many times I’ve lost count, and I can’t deal with anyone thinking they’re doing a good job. Look at our recent form. Look at our squad with its lack of depth so our first XI have become burned out. Look at the lack of leaders, an elite core and good experience to help our young stars. Look at the abysmal treatment of players and total waste of money in the transfer market. Anyone can see it. Every Chelsea fan I know, without fail, is angry right now and we have a right to be. The recent results show the squad building has been absolutely horrific and Enzo Maresca, like his predecessor Mauricio Pochettino, has been let down in the transfer market when he asked for a proven elite striker. Its impossible to judge a head coach when they aren’t given the tools they ask for to do their job. If we had a top GK, a proven elite 9 (who our last TWO managers have asked for and not been given), and quality depth in midfield, and Trev had been kept in the summer, I think we’d be in a better position now, regardless of who the coach is. And of course, if we signed 4-5 grown adults who have won trophies, are proven at elite level, with leadership qualities and good experience, as well some prime years ahead, we definitely wouldn’t be. But the self professed geniuses in charge, think that experience is bad despite EVERY successful title winning squad in PL history having a blend of both youth and experience. The “youth only” plan is not the plan these owners - or rather Todd Boehly - had in mind when they came here. PART of Todd Boehly’s plan was to sign a lot of elite young talent from all over the world, as we have. I still believe in that aspect of the project, I’ve not lost faith in that. But as myself and Simon have advocated for years on this site, Todd also wants some experience and proven players alongside that & is willing to be flexible to achieve it. He wants best in class people running the club and his main goal is to win. He knows how to win in sports ownership, and how to build relationships with fans and players and respect the culture of the club. Clearlake had no experience in sport ownership before this and have skewed the project in favour of kids only, with no good experience. Its absolutely ridiculous. Right now, we’re not on course to win the biggest trophies. And in my view we’re not going to win those trophies again without a change right at the top of the club. Another reason not to sack Maresca, is that no serious manager will get considered for or take our job right now, because they never get backed by the SD's, have no say on transfers or squad building whatsoever, and have to pick the GK Ben Roberts wants. It’ll be the same “project manager” who’ll follow orders. Nothing will change. The biggest tell is we won’t dare hire a truly elite manager like Klopp, Pep, Tuchel, Carlo or someone of that level because the self professed geniuses running our club think they know more than all of them and want someone who they can control, rather than listen to and trust people at the absolute top of the game. If that doesn't tell you the manager ain't the problem, I don't know what does. We’re currently on course to become a top 6 side who occasionally gets CL football , and whose best players get pinched by the real elite sides every few years and win a few cups, with a few easier European trophies. Basically Arsenal 10 years ago. That’s embarrassing. We’re Chelsea Football Club, not Borussia Chelsea. Regardless of the owner's ambitions - and I know they are bigger than top 6 - that’s where we are right now. And that’s NOT where Chelsea should be. We’re not a feeder club for other big clubs, it's absolutely shameful we’re in this position where people are even considering this might happen. I also don’t want to hear the excuse of our current league placing, because these issues will remain regardless of where we finish this season. If we succeed its down to Enzo getting the most out of this squad despite these issues, not due to the genius of the Sporting Directors. There’s no external saviour coming. Roman Abramovich is not coming back no matter how many ask for it, and his way of running a football club belongs in the past anyhow. The only way we can get real change now is Todd Boehly buying out Clearlake Capital, and even then, it's only faint hope. Yes. Todd’s links to that ticketing firm aren’t ideal, but if you think the timing of that leak, coming at a time Clearlake is heavily under fire, was a coincidence, I think you’re being very naive. Todd is the best man for the job. He’s a born winner, has a track record of winning, his first goal is to win, he has a long term perspective, he respects fans and our views & he understands what it takes to win and what type of characters you need to do it. And he has an emotional attachment to the club. Todd, if you're reading, we need you right now. Don’t give up on Chelsea, many many Chelsea fans would happily see you replace Clearlake and that only increases with every defeat. I for one am sick and tired of the same story two years in a row now. About this time every season we have a bad run and everyone wants the manager out, manager changes, nothing actually changes. And the people really responsible blame everyone else for their failures, the fans lap it up and think its all new and “this time” it will work out, when they real culprits face no accountability and are allowed to keep on making their mistakes & even pat themselves on the back for it. Because they appear to care more about their CVs than what's good for Chelsea FC. I’m tired of us fans fighting amongst ourselves (including me at times), about managers or players, when it’s clear who we should be calling out and directing this anger towards first. If necessary, and I hope its not, we should be (peacefully) protesting. Quite frankly, the people at the top need to realise how strong the depth of feeling is amongst fans, and its increasingly they won’t listen to us on socials, you could easily make an argument they don’t care about our views. The real problem at Chelsea is obvious and something has to be done. It’s heartbreaking to see us in this situation for a third year running and I’m just tired of excuses. We need to forget about judging the manager for now and focus on the real problem, the people above him who built this squad he has to coach. Clearlake and the SD’s need to sort it out, make the decisions necessary, show some ambition and start being not just competent, but exceptional. If not, they should leave for someone who’ll do a better job. Then we can have a conversation about the manager. The Score

The data is clear - Squads with no experience don't win titles They love data so much, then pay attention to THIS data! https://siphillipstalkschelsea.substack.com/p/the-data-is-clear-squads-with-no Having finally watched the entire 90 mins of the Brighton game, I share a lot of the criticisms others have made so well elsewhere. But the biggest one of all for me was the clear lack of leadership and experience on display. People were blaming each other, waving hands at each other, heads down, no one taking responsibility. This isn’t Chelsea Football Club, for starters. It’s just not. And its not what a serious team/squad looks like. Myself and Simon have been blowing the trumpet for years on the subject of experience, and its more true than ever. So I decided to find actual data which backs up this argument. There’s plenty. Our “football genius” (according to him) co-owner Behdad Eghbali and his “football genius, best in class” (according to Behdad, them and no one else) Sporting Directors seem to think it is, and in time, they’ll become leaders and come good. But that’s not how it works. Young players at big clubs, expected to win now (not Borussia Dortmund, no, Bayern Munich, Real Madrid, the clubs Chelsea SHOULD be competing with), gain experience, learn a winning mentality, learn how to deal with set backs, learn how to grow as players, as much from more experienced players as they do from actually playing. This isn’t just speculation, its a fact. Data shows it. Let me show you. The average age of Chelsea’s current squad is 23.9. The average age of a PL winning squad since 1992, is 26.8. As you can see there’s quite a significant difference there. The ‘youthful’ Chelsea squad which won the Champions League in 2021 had an an average age of nearly 26. It had Olivier Giroud, N’Golo Kante, Jorginho, Antonio Rudiger and Thiago Silva, all experienced players with leadership qualities. Below are the average ages of the last 8 PL Champions squads, going back to the last Chelsea PL win in 2016/17. So the last 8 seasons, a pretty good metric. 2023/24: Manchester City: 25.0 years old 2022/23: Manchester City: 27.8 years old (treble winners) 2021/22: Manchester City: 27.0 years old 2020/21: Manchester City: 26.1 years old 2019/20: Liverpool: 26.6 years old 2018/19: Manchester City: 26.4 years old 2017/18: Manchester City: 26.0 years old 2016/17: Chelsea: 27.0 years old The average age of the Liverpool squad currently topping the league is 26.4. They have some proven elite players and winners with experience and leadership qualities in key positions - Mohammed Salah, Virgil Van Dijk, Allison Becker - alongside a lot of young talent. Arsenal’s squad, currently 2nd in the Premier League, has an average age of 26.8. Again, there’s a lot of young talent but also more established players. Midfielder Declan Rice is 26 and a leader, centre back Gabriel is 27, goalkeeper David Raya is 29, Jorginho is 33 and Ben White is 27. Newcastle, in good form and top 4 contenders, have an average age of 27.9, and Nottingham Forest, a good side challenging for top 4, an average age of 26. That’s all the evidence you should need. In fact its more than enough. I’d also add all the squads who won PL titles had a healthy mix of youth and experience. They had leaders, winners, proven players, some of who had won things, alongside the young talent they had. None of them were a squad of kids who had played together with no experience or leadership around them for a few years. Ironically the greatest Chelsea team of all time, 04/05 season, won the league with an average age of 23.9, the same as our squad now. But there was a HUGE difference. John Terry and Frank Lampard, for example, had spent 3 years working and playing with Marcel Desailly, Gianfranco Zola, Graeme Le Saux, Jimmy Floyd Hasslebaink, Emmanuel Petit & Frank Lebeouf, and learned from them all. Had freedom to make mistakes. So their development into their prime came with experience around them, and both players still acknowledge the importance of some of those players for their development even now. Also that Chelsea squad had Claude Makelele, a 31 year old who’d won everything at Real Madrid. Our current squad has no one like this. The only one we had, Thiago Silva, left last summer. Also back then, football culture was different. Players were men at 23/24. Not to mention Lampard became a first team regular at 17 at WHU, around more experienced players, so had 5 years experience around proven players before he even joined us. JT had been playing for Chelsea for 5 years by 2004 too, around a lot of experienced players. Likewise the United team who won the double in 1995/96 with “kids” had leaders and winners like Steve Bruce, Gary Pallister, Peter Schmeichel, Eric Cantona as experienced players, a young-ish Roy Keane who was a born leader, and even Ryan Giggs had 5-6 years experience at that point. So they had experience, winners and leaders around them. Basically, recent history especially, but history generally, tells you you need a squad with an average age of 26/27 to win the PL title and do it consistently. The clubs who win the Champions League tend to have a squad who is pretty experienced, and a balance of youth and experience. There’s also a stat I found from CIES Sports Laboratory, saying that the median age of champions in the five major European leagues in the 2010’s was 26.5 years old. Even young teams who win things, have had experienced players either in the squad or who have been at the club whilst the young players developed. Proven, experienced, winners, or players who are already the finished article, with leadership qualities. Liverpool signed James Milner for this reason. They signed finished article players in key positions like Allison and Virgil Van Dijk, their biggest money signings under Klopp, and they completed their team and they won the league. Jose Mourinho brought back Didier Drogba in the summer of 2014 as a squad player, to provide experience and leadership, and Chelsea won the league. Behdad and our Sporting Directors, all with zero days experience working at a giant football club prior to 2022, think they know better than all the data I’ve shared above. They are clearly betting on waiting until our squad gets to 26 years old in 3 years for us to be title contenders and potential CL winners. Even then its a huge risk when they have no experienced players to guide them or support their development. I’m also not quite as sure all of our squad will wait that long. Also its ridiculously unfair on young players to ask them to carry the team themselves over a whole season. It does them no good at all and you can see how that pressure is telling on them now. If we signed some proven elite players, finished article players in their prime with leadership qualities, maybe we’d not have to put the weight of carrying our team on inexperienced players. Maybe then we’d be able to rest them or take them out of the team just to take pressure off them, and those players could guide them. This what happens in normal successful teams. When Eden Hazard joined us in 2012, we still had Lampard, JT, Ivanovic, Cech, Ashley Cole, all there to help him integrate, help him understand club culture, adapt to the PL and take the pressure off him. Our current squad have no one to help them do this. Oh, sorry, no, we have Marc Cucurella, who’s never won a club trophy or anything with Chelsea, Reece James, who is injured half the time and isn’t vocal, Trevoh Chalobah, who will be gone in 6 months, and Tosin Adarabioyo, who has, checks notes, never won a major trophy. That’s not remotely the same. We have no pure 9, no elite GK, no commanding CB, and arguably no pure 6 despite £1.4 billion spent over 6 windows, and no leaders, no proven winners still in their prime, almost no experience, with tons of players we now need to move on who’ve flopped. According to Behdad Eghbali and themselves, this means our Sporting Directors are world class and doing a great job. But of course that’s nonsense. This is not a squad set up to win. Right now we resemble Borussia Dortmund, not Real Madrid or Manchester City. Which is embarrassing. We’re basically a bunch of kids playing good football together, who get close and may even get CL football, but never seriously compete for the major honours (I mean the Premier League and Champions League trophies). I don’t know how many more ways I can say this which will be clear: You cannot create a winning squad without good experience, leaders or winners. I hope they heard that. I hope that wasn’t discomforting, but its so frustrating this glaringly obvious factor has been actively ignored for over two years. Behdad Eghbali and the Sporting Directors need to get this concept into their skulls. It’s SO obvious to anyone who remotely follows football and studies successful clubs and teams. If they genuinely don’t see it, quite frankly they shouldn’t be working in football, because everyone else knows this. Like, everyone. If they, with their combined ZERO experience of winning, or building winning squads, think they know better, all I can do is laugh. If they think they know better, they should go tell Sir Alex Ferguson and Jose Mourinho, who helped build multiple title winning and CL winning squads (Jose arguably built the core of our 2012 winning squad too, to be honest). They should ask them what they think of trying to win the big trophies with no leaders, no winners, and no experience. Fergie and Jose especially would literally laugh in their faces. This doesn’t mean I don’t believe in the project by the way. I In fact, totally the opposite. I’m happy to have 20/21 young players in the squad to build and develop together long term for sustained success. That’s a GREAT idea. I believe in that. But you need those 4-5 players between 24-26 who have good experience, are top players, leaders and winners. It literally does almost no damage to the youth-centric approach to do this. One maybe doesn’t even need to be a starter. The data is in, the evidence is clear, there is literally no debate to be had on this subject. Keep with the same approach it will take at least 3 years, if you sign a balanced and strong squad (already failed in that regard with £1.4 billion btw), to be title challengers. And there’s no guarantee either, no data to say this approach actually works. It’s taking a massive risk with the clubs money and time. And if they think players like Cole Palmer are going to be happy to scrap for top 4 for 3-4 more years - maybe getting it, maybe not - before even challenging for the league, potentially winning nothing and stay here, they’re living in cloud cuckoo land. Palmer loves it here and is committed, but top players ultimately want to be challenging for the big honours every season, and playing Champions League comfortably, every single season - and big clubs WILL eventually try for Palmer if we keep on fluttering around the top 4 without certainty and not winning trophies. I’m really tired of educating alleged, self appointed experts on the literal basics of building a successful squad. This is not rocket science. It doesn’t take any qualifications to know how to do it, just a working knowledge of football and what successful teams and squads are made up of. Just one look at the data, the average ages of winning teams, tells you all you need to know - and NONE of those squads were 25 young players who all developed together, all of them had proven elite players, leaders and winners in their squad to help the young players develop. The owners love data, maybe they should look at the data, the history, which supports their approach. The fact is there is none. You can’t measure intangibles like good experience, leadership directly, individually on a spreadsheet, but the eye test (and even some data) shows these things actually matter. Behdad and the sporting directors are the only people who seem to disagree. Let this silly baseless idea go, and sign some proven, elite players, leaders, winners, in key positions. It’s not rocket science, it’s obvious. The Score

AC Milan could offer Fikayo Tomori or Rafael Leao in swap deal for Joao Felix https://www.thechelseachronicle.com/news/ac-milan-could-offer-two-key-players-to-Chelsea-in-swap-deal-to-sign-joao-felix-reece-james-is-a-huge-fan-of-one/ snip Felix scored on his debut and played a key role in their hard-fought win at the weekend, with Milan likely to push to make that deal permanent at the end of the season. However, the price tag Chelsea are likely to demand is going to cause them an issue, and could force them to offer players instead to try and get the deal done. According to CalcioMercato, the Champions League side may offer either Fikayo Tomori or Rafael Leao in any deal for Felix, due to the Blues’ previous interest in the pair. The centre-back has been a target of many Premier League sides in recent seasons, however his previous time at Stamford Bridge could make Chelsea the favourites should they pursue that avenue. Leao meanwhile has been near the top of the list for the Blues for a dream winger signing ever since the new owners came into the club, and could be achievable based on the attacking strength Milan currently have.