King Kante

See I don't see Sanchez as a progressive GK. For sure, he attempts to be however he gives the ball away too much and doesn't have the passing capability to do it. Sure, Petro doesn't either but at least he knows his limitations.

I don't disagree. I just rather we sell Sanchez than Petro. For sure, maybe sell both but it should go in order that is all. Was Palmer really that much of a surprise to people. I saw him a bit in the back end of City the season prior and thought he looked quality - ok not 30+ g&a straight away - but a good signing. Neto will live and die by his availability. However, I am happy with him as he was actually one of the players I had on my list as a buy if possible. As for the AM's hopefully this is the end of one of the current LW'ers.

Just out of interest what element of Sanchez's game do you think makes it better for the system?

Neto is a very good player when fit. The problem is keeping him fit. People should also not worry too much about his stats, the guy works his socks off and does all the work no one else wants to do. He'll essentially allow Palmer be the luxury player whilst chipping in. As for Noni, he should stay.

Not praising him. I also think he is average. I was just pointing out that Sanchez is worse and should be the first one sold but for some reason he is being spoken about as our No.1.

Erm, no. Caicedo played well in the last month of the season, however I wouldn't say it was world class and I would also point to the fact that this only happened due to Cucu and Gallagher doing the heavy lifting that he had proven to be incapable of doing all season. I said last season that when Lavia gets fit, he takes Caicedo's place owing to his better technical skill and understanding of the deep lying CM role - I base this on what I saw of Lavia at Soton and Caicedo last year. For me, Caicedo either ends up: a) in the utility role RDZ put him in at Brighton (as he also recognised his technical limits/physical gift to run around a lot - a fact that gets brushed over) b) his starting minutes in CM will come when we have to play really defensive as he isn't getting in ahead of Fernadez as the ball playing CM. c) we move to a midfield three. He may start for the first couple of months owing to his fee, but if Lavia can stay fit and pick up Enzo's system, he will soon lose his place to him in a double pivot.

Well he replaced Sanchez initially due to injury then on merit. So, he is better than Sanchez and Sanchez appears to be staying. His signing (as a GK2/3) is pretty much the only GK signing that has made any sense and now they're selling him.

Well that is problematic imo. If they're only focusing on strikers with that profile then it sounds like they don't understand how the system they want Enzo to play works. I will bet any money, they're probably thinking they need to get 'our Häland' without recognising that guy is a freak of nature and downplaying his ability to read attacking phases early.

Well it all depends. Does Samu have any technical ability or tactical ability? The biggest problem we've had with CF is going with physical skills and forgetting that unless a player has the correct skills they're going to flop hard. I will never forget having to tell people Lukaku was a Donkey and would be an absolute bust, but people weren't having it because he looked good in highlights and had decent stats in Italy. Jackson to be fair, actually started to show some good development last season, which is why a big defender of him when he fan base went after him. Guiu however, has shown that he has been able to do reasonably at all three so far so deserves a chance. Does Samu have enough technical/tactical skill as while I haven't seen him a lot of people are saying he is a bit of a lump which is a big concern for me.

Well Disaster should be sold or loaned without hesitation. As bad as the others have been, he has been worse by a distance simply because of how difficult he makes the basics look.

Noni and Lavia are the only ones that look completely clear on what they're meant to be doing. However, as a fan of Noni, I agree that he is the second best AM we have after Palmer in terms of impact in the final third - despite him not being great technically.

I am not sure what the manager is telling the players, but that high line with little to no pressure on the ball is suicidal. Thing that concerns me most is how confused the players look. James has on a number of occasions looked completely confused when being spoken to and then gone over to the sideline to apprantly seek further clarification. Same goes with Enzo and Colwill. So, I am not sure this is entirely the players not doing what they're being told, as it looks a bit like they're trying to do as instructed but are confused as to why they're having go do it due to the problems it is creating.

Braga or Sevette in the play-offs. https://www.chelseafc.com/en/news/article/Chelsea-learn-possible-uefa-conference-league-play-off-opponents

Yep. Yet some people on here talk about him as if he was some sort of midfield General for Brighton. Last season he showed for 75% of it his passing was poor, he then went and improved that to above average for 8 games and people started going on about him being 'excellent' in the final two months of the season. Guy is essentially a £130m Gallagher.

I mean I am not taking too much from preseason but Caicedo and Tosin are showing that they're going to have serious problems playing in such a ball orientated system. The second goal was really concerning. Firstly, Caicedo got pressured too easily and panicked by playing it back to no-one then Tosin for some reason showed Haaland inside. That is fairly basic stuff that they should not be doing. As for Mudryk he is even worse on the right than the left. Why even bother putting him there?

What are you talking about?!? Don't you know Man Utd wanted him? That makes some posters very confident he will be great.

A) Noted. B) Erm, I do not. I was just pointing out that the transfer policy of the club has not improved the level of the squad. That is a pretty factual statement supported by our output on the pitch. The club changed the the price increases for season tickets last minute, owing to fear of backlash according to Law. There were very strong rumours that the initial increase was going to be 10%+ then got cut back. Erm, you go on an list top tier options, do you not? He obviously isn't going to City, Real or Barca, but hardly any of our players would.

Find it a bit strange that you say people are kicking off about this then proceed to kick off yourself. As for the contract, if you honestly believe a 1+1 (don't forget he has 1 year still) extension is not the club trying a PR effort/trying to protect the value of Gallagher's fee, then you're quite simply being obtuse imo as it has no correlation with anything else the club does in terms of contract length/guarantees. If you've got evidence to counter that, then please provide it. As for me, last Summer I did not want to sell Gallagher as I said Caicedo was essentially not much of a better player than him and I also think KDH is not a much better player but both of them are slightly better system fits. It is why I believe Lavia - if he stays fit - will relegate Caicedo to the 'ratter' role which is likely to be CM2/3 when we have less of the ball/play more technical teams and need to gey in and about them, whereas KDH and Enzo will play when we are more progressive. Imo, I just don't see how buying such players and causing constant turnover of playing staff makes sense, when the gains are so minimal. That is before we even get to Trev vs Disaster and Tosin, where I actually believe the latter two are a downgrade (albeit not a massive one.) As I ask above, please provide examples of where the Clearlake have done this before? It is quite obvious that he wasn't ever going to accept it and it allows the club to sell and then deflect. If you want him sold, fair enough, but let's not become a shrill for the board. This is all fine and well, if we were buying proven talents that were obviously upgrades. Last season we literally saw the club buy Disaster for £35m to try and sell Trev for £25m. Disaster then proceeded to be one of the worst CB's we've had in living memory and Trev came back and took his place after a long injury almost instanenously and our form picked up immediately. People are talking about this making so much sense, but that relies on KDH stepping up and exceeding Gallaghers output. This isn't about people thinking Gallagher is WC it is about how the club don't buy well enough and only provide us within minimal upgrades or even downgrades. For me, Gallagher's sale is one thing (I appreciate he isn't a system fit) it is just the pretending that: a) the extension wasn't a obvious ploy by the club to curry favour with the fan base and not a real offer Gallagher was ever likely to accept. and; B) the boards general transfer strategy. That is winding people up. By all means, sell Gallagher and Trev, but just don't go replacing them with downgrades (Disaster/Tosin) or players of a similar level (KDH) as otherwise what is the point?

Are people saying he is a £50m player and would want to buy him for such a sum, or are they saying they don't see him being much worse than those that we are buying and the contract he has been given shows the club do not value him? Big difference.

A) we don't know the wage offer and how this compares to what he would get elsewhere. B ) they've not provided him with assurance by making the deal so short. Gallagher clearly wants long term commitment here, or the biggest deal elsewhere. He is perfectly right to feel that and more importantly gone about things in the right way - I.e. the way be played last season when the club kept trying to sell him. A lot of players down tools or take the easy money straight away.

Do you actually believe that? The deal put to him is all about the club protecting his transfer value and they will continue to push him to the door. His decision is really, do I sign and allow Clearlake take a bigger fee for me, or do I run it out and take the fee Clearlake would get for me of I sign? Making out him signing the new deal would mean the club would stop trying to sell him is either incredibly naive or disingenuous. If anything, him signing a deal like that would increase thwir intensity of pushing him towards the door.

Guiu makes very good runs and seems to know as a CF that his principal job off the ball is to move in a way to find himself a yard of space between the goal posts. His movement so far reminds me of Crespo's - although I need to see more of him and in real games before I reckon it is something he can do at a suitable level. One thing he does need to improve however is his finishing. At the moment he isn't hitting the ball clean enough when getting presented with chances as he is snatching at the ball. That can be overcome. Personally, I do not see why he won't be kept as a CF3 at minimum. Jackson as CF1 and Nkunku as F9/CF2. Also good to hear people liking what they're seeing with Lavia. I said last season that once he gets fit he would show people what a proper DM looks like compared to Caicedo. The question - if he stays fit and can keep consistent - is who plays alongside him. If we need a ratter it'll be Caicedo, if it is a ball playing CM then Enzo or KDH

Well tbf, it looks like the club offered him a one year extension plus an optional year. That is piss take after the way he got his head down since he came back and the way we go around buying no marks and giving them long contracts for big fees. Do not blame him at all if he runs down his contract now. Clownlake at its finest on display in this situation.

If this is true - I don't think the source is great. Then I suspect that the length of the deal is the issue. It is essentially a equity preservation deal as it only extends him to three years, which will means 6-12 months (maybe) of no media speculation/the club actively trying to move him on, then it all starts over again. For me, people need to be a bit more realistic when it comes to footballer contracts. In the end, all of them - even for players who feel strongly for their club -- will come down to terms. From my perspective if my employer clearly never valued me, tried numerous times to try and push me to go elsewhere, then tried to get me to sign up when they thought there was something in it for them, then I would also be of the mind of 'pay me properly, with real assurances, or I will fuck you back'.

Let's see. At the start of the Summer we were apprantly happy to go with Sanchez as No.1. Within a week of the squad coming back we were in the market for a GK. I would say that indicates EM knows Sanchez isn't good enough. Another positive is the lack of Disaster seeing the pitch so far. Whilst I hate ideological managers, so far he has shown me he does seem to have some evaluation skills - if I am correct in my interpretation of what we've seen.