Vesper

also https://www.vipleague.st/wolverhampton-wanderers-vs-Chelsea-1-live-streaming

2022-23 English Premier League Wolverhampton Wanderers Chelsea https://www.sportshub.to/sports/2023/premier-league-wolverhampton-wanderers-vs-Chelsea-s1/

yes, it wasn't his fault at all that we missed a tonne of sitters his tactics looked solid to me I was hoping he would get a chance

as long as we are bringing everyone from the past back wish someone would double tap Putin, the Ruskies pull out of Ukraine and Roman is unbanned and buys us back, lolol

Crazy potential this lad has great move

He and Oblak are my two first choices

which is what?

CIES Football Observatory n°416 - 05/04/2023 Values Top transfer values for non big-5 leagues’ U23 players Weekly Post’s issue number 416 presents the 100 U23 players outside the big-5 with the highest estimated transfer values according to the CIES Football Observatory’s statistical model. Benfica’s centre-forward Gonçalo Ramos tops the list with an estimated value of about €70 million, ahead of three centre backs: António Silva (€66m), Gonçalo Inácio (€62m) and Jurriën Timber (€57m). The three U23 players outside Portugal and the Netherlands with the greatest estimated transfer values are Yuri Alberto (€35m) of Corinthians, Benjamin Šeško (€34m) of RB Salzburg (already signed by RB Leipzig) and André Trindade (€31m) of Fluminense. Maarten Vandevoordt (Genk, on loan from RB Leipzig) tops the list for goalkeepers (€20m), Devyne Rensch (Ajax) for full backs (€23m), and Kenneth Taylor (also Ajax) for midfielders (€49m). Brazilian Serie A has the highest representation in the top 100 with 18 players, followed by the Dutch Eredivisie (17), the Austrian Bundesliga and seventeen other leagues. By club, with 10 players, RB Salzburg is by far the most present ahead of Feyenoord (6), Ajax (5), Burnley (4) and PSV Eindhoven (also 4). The top 100 estimated values for last November and non-big-5 league U 25 players is available here.

How Graham Potter lost the Chelsea dressing room and who’s in contention to replace him https://caughtoffside.substack.com/i/112644334/how-graham-potter-lost-the-Chelsea-dressing-room-and-whos-in-contention-to-replace-him Graham Potter was sacked by Chelsea on a dramatic Sunday. Chelsea’s new owners did something that didn’t even happen under Roman Abramovich: axed two managers in the same season. The simple answer to why Potter was sacked is because he showed a lack of progress... but you could write a book on all the finer points as to exactly why this didn’t occur. Chelsea fell into the bottom half of the table at the weekend after the 2-0 loss to Aston Villa, and Potter leaves with only seven league wins from 22 Premier League games. He lost eight and presided over just 21 goals. Chelsea’s board consistently backed Potter, far longer than Abramovich would have done so for. They gave him as much time as they could. But things changed rapidly into Sunday afternoon with co-sporting directors Paul Winstanley and Lawrence Stewart key to this story. Both are newer to the club and drove the decision to make a change, which in the end was referred to as “unanimous” by sources, and first came under serious consideration after February’s 2-0 loss to Spurs. Sacking Potter is the decision that the majority of the Chelsea fan base wanted, and have been asking for since January (and some even before the World Cup). The personal attacks on him, including horrific emailed death threats, a petition calling for his sacking with over 50,000 signatures on it, and the resounding boos after Aston Villa, all illustrate this to different degrees. The Villa loss was basically a microcosm of all the issues on the football side: Chelsea failed to score, lacked confidence, identity and leadership; and Potter’s selection and in-game tactics both came under question. The decision to play Marc Cucurella and Reece James in a back three totally backfired, as did starting Mykhaylo Mudryk and not bringing on Mason Mount. Since joining in September, Potter struggled to manage such a big squad, and in some ways it was an impossible task with all the new signings and injuries, but he also just didn’t appear to know his best XI. There will always be an element of player unrest within such a big squad, who couldn’t always fit into dressing room and team-meeting spaces at Cobham. That doesn’t mean Potter lost the dressing room entirely, but there were certainly some voices in it that made jokes and jibes (including calling him Harry Potter) behind his back. Potter wasn't seen as authoritative or consistent enough in how he managed the team despite being respected as a tactician. Mudryk’s start against Villa is one example. Potter said, and reiterated behind the scenes, the Ukrainian was effectively still in his “pre-season”. Yet then he got a start against Villa in a must-win game. And when a below-par Mudryk missed two big chances against Villa, it led to question marks. Hakim Ziyech starting against Fulham in early February was another move that wasn’t well received by some other players. Ziyech was just minutes away from joining PSG on loan on deadline day and only didn’t go due to an administrative error. Chelsea had spent the build up to the game planning without him. Yet Ziyech returned, immediately started without making an impact, and made the Champions League squad. Perhaps if form was better, or Chelsea won the game, this may have been viewed as a masterstroke. But ultimately it was seen by many at the club as further evidence Potter was trying too hard to please instead of manage. There were plenty of other little moments that contributed to Potter's downfall: the exclusion of Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang from the Champions League squad, and many match days, too, despite Chelsea lacking goals, was questioned by some, although it's understood Potter had firm ownership backing on this particular decision. It’s of course easy in hindsight to pin it all on Potter or football problems. Sources are clear, though, the power dynamic at Chelsea is complex and evolving. Behdad Eghbali, who holds not only huge power, but is heavily involved in everything, and Todd Boehly, are still learning on the job. That’s why their next appointment won’t be taken lightly. Chelsea will now focus on what is being termed an “exhaustive search” for a new manager, led by Winstanley and Stewart. Boehly and Eghbali will be involved but not in a leading sense, especially not in the early stages. This is significant. There is no permanent manager lined up just yet and club sources insist that Chelsea will speak to 5-7 candidates with former Bayern boss Julian Nagelsmann and ex-Barcelona and Spain boss Luis Enrique early frontrunners and already approached. Stewart and Christopher Vivell appreciate Nagelsmann and worked with him at Leipzig. But he is still contracted to Bayern until 2026 despite being fired, so an appointment would require negotiation. Chelsea are adamant that Nagelsmann’s sudden availability didn’t prompt Potter’s sacking and that there’s no guarantee anyone will be in place for the quarter-final first leg with Real Madrid in the Champions League, although Enrique is believed to be willing to start immediately. Nagelsmann’s default position is to start a new job next season, but a free hit at the business end of the Champions League might yet change his mind, too. The most important thing to stress is for Chelsea this is about getting the third appointment under this new ownership right, not just finding someone in time for Real. That’s why they will talk to other names. Mauricio Pochettino is expected be one of them. Prior to appointing Potter, Chelsea held exploratory talks with the former Spurs boss. I am told he wasn’t entirely convinced by the project. Let’s see if that has changed now a full recruitment team is in place and the ambition of spending is apparent despite the chaos and Chelsea’s league position. Pochettino isn’t short of options. Jobs at Spurs and Real for next season are on his radar as well. Keep an eye on Sporting boss Ruben Amorim who, as I've said many times even before Potter was appointed, is a name Chelsea respect. Luciano Spalletti could also be considered. I was covering Napoli vs. Milan at the weekend and Spalletti wouldn’t be drawn on links. He is entirely focused on winning Serie A and going as far as he can in the Champions League. There’s no way he’s giving a Napoli exit a second thought right now. So if he did become a more serious candidate it would only be for the end of the season. There are more likely options right now. One name we can rule out is Brighton boss Roberto De Zerbi. He is catching the eye of top clubs, but is not on Chelsea’s shortlist. As for Potter, I really hope he bounces back. Chelsea fans at large will be glad to see the back of him, but I still think he’ll be in demand by Premier League clubs: Leicester made a near-instant approach, but Potter wants to take his time before deciding what’s next. He won’t be short of job offers come the end of the season.

I will probably be roasted alive but I would take Klopp if he leaves Pool no, I am not drunk

Kante will have played 5 games under FOUR DIFFERENT managers

this is fucking stupid!! what the fuckery

20:45 - 22:30 | CET DFB POKAL | RB LEIPZIG VS BORUSSIA DORTMUND – S3 21:00 - 22:45 | CET PREMIER LEAGUE | MANCHESTER UNITED VS BRENTFORD – S1 21:00 - 22:45 | CET COPA DEL REY | BARCELONA VS REAL MADRID – S2 21:00 - 22:45 | CET PREMIER LEAGUE | WEST HAM UNITED VS NEWCASTLE UNITED – S4

bold speak English (some better than others), a few of the non bold can speak a little, some non bold I do not know if they do Julian Nagelsmann Hansi Flick Luis Enrique Joachim Löw Mauricio Pochettino Rúben Amorim (Sporting Lisbon) Lionel Scaloni (likely no chance atm) Zlatko Dalic (but just renewed until 2026 with Croatia) Diego Simeone (not a good fit though) Luciano Spalletti Gian Piero Gasperini Oliver Glasner (Frankfurt) Christian Streich (Freiburg) Urs Fischer (Union Berlin) Franck Haise (Lens) Régis Le Bris (Lorient) Philippe Clement (Monaco) Kasper Hjulmand Thomas Frank Roger Schmidt (Benfica) Sérgio Conceição (Porto) Abel Ferreira (Palmeiras) Marcelo Gallardo (last job, River Plate) Hugo Ibarra (last job, Boca Juniors) and one to watch down the road Karel Geraerts (Royale Union Saint-Gilloise)

Chelsea https://caughtoffside.substack.com/i/112568431/Chelsea Luis Enrique is a good coach with the right amount of experience and is really appreciated by Chelsea. He would love to work in the Premier League, particularly in London, and would only accept a long term project with clear plan/ideas. He’s waiting for the right opportunity and there is still no decision on the next steps at the moment. Julian Nagelsmann is the favourite for the Blues. He’s a strong candidate but isn’t the only one. He’s open to speaking to the club who want someone in place as soon as possible but don’t want to rush things. Ruben Amorim isn’t a name that has been mentioned too much at this stage, but he’s a great coach with excellent credentials - and a current €16m a year contract at Sporting. Chelsea interim coach Bruno Saltor: “If I'm here it's because club thought it was the right step. I spoke to the board, they have been supportive. It's a massive challenge. I have a lot of experience, I will try to help players and I feel I can help the young players. I'm in a really important club and I want to try my best. Chelsea are trying a long term project, everyone knows that. Graham was part of it, we were part of it — I think the vision of the club doesn't change.” Understand Kendry Paez deal could be signed in the next days — possibly this week as Chelsea have full agreement in place with Independiente for 2007-born midfielder to join in July 2025. Package could be up to €20m fee — mainly add-ons. Bayer Leverkusen and Borussia Dortmund were also following him but Chelsea won the race.

possible targets (not in any complete order, and just so no one asks where he is, ZZ will likely never manage in England, also NO to Mou and Conte) Julian Nagelsmann Hansi Flick Luis Enrique Joachim Löw Mauricio Pochettino Rúben Amorim (Sporting Lisbon) Lionel Scaloni (likely no chance atm) Zlatko Dalic (but just renewed until 2026 with Croatia) Diego Simeone (not a good fit though) Luciano Spalletti Gian Piero Gasperini Oliver Glasner (Frankfurt) Christian Streich (Freiburg) Urs Fischer (Union Berlin) Franck Haise (Lens) Régis Le Bris (Lorient) Philippe Clement (Monaco) Kasper Hjulmand Thomas Frank Roger Schmidt (Benfica) Sérgio Conceição (Porto) Abel Ferreira (Palmeiras) Marcelo Gallardo (last job, River Plate) Hugo Ibarra (last job, Boca Juniors) and one to watch down the road Karel Geraerts (Royale Union Saint-Gilloise)

Chelsea https://caughtoffside.substack.com/i/112358504/Chelsea Chelsea officially announced the decision to sack Graham Potter last night. Bruno Saltor will take care of Chelsea as Interim coach. The Chelsea board always supported their manager in difficult moments but things changed yesterday as they held internal conversations over his future. They were not happy at all as they dropped out of the top half of the Premier League table. Graham Potter’s sacking is not surprising as the situation was very tense after Villa game, and the feeling was that some of the players were not happy with how things were going. The Chelsea board decided about it in the night between Saturday and Sunday with communication to Potter around lunch time. It was not an easy moment because the whole board supported him for a long time and all really wanted him in the summer when they replaced Thomas Tuchel. It was not easy to communicate on the human side, but this is football. They decided to change as they felt this group needed different kind of ideas and different energy; Potter was no longer considered the right man for the job. I think this is a decision we can understand as the feeling was never so positive on this appointment. Chelsea also still feel they can do something in the Champions League, and a change in manager can be the right kind of shock for the squad. Julian Nagelsmann is emerging as a strong candidate for the job. He’s really appreciated by the board and the owners, so he’s an option for sure. I think he’s an excellent, talented coach who could do great job in the Premier League. Chelsea like his vision, fresh ideas, they know the next coach has to be the right one for many years and they feel Julian could be perfect. It’s important to remember that Nagelsmann is still under contract at Bayern and there has been no agreement yet on terminating the contract. Still, he is considering the option of going to Chelsea, but it’s not clear yet if he will come straight away or at the end of the season. Chelsea will try to have Nagelsmann as soon as possible, but let’s see what he will decide. He’s very disappointed with how things ended at Bayern, it was a shocking story for him. From what I understand, Nagelsmann has already spoken with those close to him to get their opinions on the Chelsea job, what they think about the club, and the project, and whether it would be good to join now or at the end of the season, so these talks will be crucial. Ruben Amorim and Luis Enrique are also appreciated; no contacts with Mauricio Pochettino at this stage, but he was on the list last September before Chelsea appointed Potter. We know Pochettino is a big name on the market right now, but at the moment he’s still not speaking with Chelsea, and he’s also an option for Real Madrid in case Carlo Ancelotti leaves at the end of the season - the Champions League will be crucial to determine his future. Enrique has fans on the Chelsea board and he’s been public in saying he’d love to go to the Premier League. Amorim, meanwhile, is doing great work at Sporting, he has a great relationship with the club’s board and with the fans, he’s doing an excellent job and he’s one to watch as well.

Labour in any form is vastly better than the oligarch-driven, freebooting pirate Tories (and their even more extreme and despicable Nigel Farage type of cousins) Sorry but I will never be down with destruction of the welfare state and massive wealth extraction/transfer from the broad base up to the narrow top of the pyramidion, all underpinned with an appeal to xenophobia, classism, and racism (bother overt and covert). The Lib Dems can sod off too, as they for years propped up the odious austerity-ghoul driven agenda of the feckless Cameron (and also campaigned on a Brexit style referendum). The Lib Dems are deeply stained by austerity. Don’t trust them With a new leader the party is enjoying a resurgence, but its support for the Tories in coalition can’t be forgotten so easily https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/23/lib-dems-stained-austerity-trust-tories The Liberal Democrats are back, or so we’re told, with Jo Swinson’s leadership victory being pitched as the rebirth of the party. The unique conditions of Brexit have given the Lib Dems not only a reason to exist but the opportunity to detoxify their brand after their fatal coalition with the Conservatives, and to cast themselves as a reforming, progressive party in troubled times. And yet remarkably little has changed since the days when Nick Clegg stood laughing in the Downing Street rose garden next to David Cameron as he signed Britain up to years of sweeping public spending cuts. When asked throughout this summer’s leadership campaign, Swinson (and her opponent, Ed Davey) consistently defended her party’s role in austerity measures. In an interview with Channel 4 News, Swinson said she had no regrets about the coalition, stating it was the right move “to get our country back on track”. This is despite the fact it has been shown that austerity shrunk the British economy by £100bn, and has even been linked to 130,000 preventable deaths. Swinson acknowledged “there were policies we let through [in coalition] that we shouldn’t have done”, naming the bedroom tax, but remained unrepentant on a whole host of others. Instead, Swinson repeatedly claims credit for the Lib Dems being a moderating influence on the Tories. They may well have helped to rein in the Conservatives on some things (the party is said to have forced George Osborne to temporarily shelve child tax credit cuts) but this fundamentally misses the point: the Lib Dems weren’t coerced into the partnership, they voluntarily chose it, and as such were a reason every Tory cut that was passed was possible. Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson says the party was a moderating influence on the Tories. Photograph: Hannah McKay/Reuters This isn’t about holding grudges or some sort of ideological purity. Political parties naturally evolve depending on the political times, and progress in policy positions should be credited. It was four years ago this week that the Labour party adopted its abysmal abstention strategy for key “welfare reform”, but the party has since wrestled internally to have the strong anti-austerity message it holds today, winning back support in the process. The same cannot be said for the Lib Dems. This is a party that as recently as last year spoke of sacrificing some of the poorest people in society to benefit sanctions in exchange for a 5p tax on plastic bags while in coalition. Nor are their MPs against forming a pact with the Tories again, with Swinson simply ruling out joining forces with Boris Johnson or any Brexiteer. Swinson, for her part, could hardly be called a fully progressive figure. As employment minister, she reversed workers’ rights by introducing charges of up to £1,200 for the privilege of attending an employment tribunal (a move later ruled unlawful by the supreme court) and even considered cutting the minimum wage, all at a time when workers faced an unprecedented squeeze. There is a sense in some circles that disabled people and working-class families should “get over it”; that those who can’t summon optimism for the revived Lib Dems are too tribal, irrational, or stuck in the past. But this insultingly dismisses the scale of suffering austerity has caused – typically by commentators who have never experienced the pain themselves – and recasts it as a historical slight. Go to your closed local Sure Start centre or try to get your elderly mother a social care package and this all seems ever-present news. Similarly, it’s often inferred that compared with Brexit, cuts to services are insignificant. The danger of no-deal Brexit is real and this will hit the poorest hardest. But the idea that this is enough to revive the Lib Dems – and that all else should somehow be forgotten – is a symptom of a political discourse that too often suggests nothing but Brexit matters. Some voters may find it easier to switch back to the Lib Dems, but large numbers of disabled and low-income families will find it considerably harder to trust them ever again. If you’re queueing in your wheelchair at a food bank because the coalition took your disability benefits, it’s unlikely you’ll be tempted to the yellow fold, even by the promise of a second EU referendum. Besides, the two issues are linked. While credit should be given to the party leading the charge against Brexit, there is irony in the Lib Dem position. After all, savage cuts to services and living standards helped create the conditions for the leave vote in the first place. Indeed, it feels a bit rich to see a party that helped heap austerity on to struggling families now leading concern for the country over Brexit. For many disabled and poor people, years of Lib Dem-enabled cuts mean hardship is already here. Austerity has harmed millions of people in Britain, and continues to wreck lives. It is not too much to ask that the politicians who administered it learn lessons before their rehabilitation begins. As it stands, the rebirthed Lib Dems are still deeply stained.

nice to see Manure getting beat (and clean-sheeted)

1 nil NUFC

ah yes, Billy Reid lol, he IS a fat dwarf

I normally do not disagree with you, but Conte is poison after his inevitable honeymoon period