Duppy Conqueror

aslong as he takes an extensive medical and passes it...Jovetic.

that Gary Cahill from Bolton,hope we never buy him,only done it at a small club,villa reject.is not our standard..oh wait......

biggest issue i`ve had in my two years here is the sudden appearance recently of the sexual abuse of children as a prop for humour. it`s not been extreme yet really but maybe a moment of thought to the fact that there is in all probability with the number of members we have. atleast a few people who were abused as children or youngsters currently enduring sexual abuse who could very well be reading such posts and it could have a serious negative effect. i realise that the persons who typed those remarks may have been themselves survivors of sexual abuse and to make some light of it may be your own way of coping with it. but please just think about it for a moment and it`s possible effects. i am a survivor myself and whilst i was not really offended by it,..my skin is tougher than a rhino`s ass these days. i can see how it could affect those who haven`t got to that stage in their lives yet. is just meant as a gentle request to all members,nothing more...i have no intention of holding anything against those who have already made those kind of comments.

waiting for the deal to be signed,before getting involved.

didn't realise it was that many after it. (i don't read newspapers atall anymore) yeah sealed bid seems how it was then with that many involved. cheers mate.

does anyone know if it was a sealed bid or a bidding war that Roman thought got out of hand ,so pulled out? for me i think that is something that would be interesting to know. *for anyone who doesnt understand what a "sealed bid" is ,it`s when the selling party tell potential bidding parties to come in with their best bid with just one bid allowed,the amount is kept private away from the opposition and whoever bids highest with their single bid wins. if it was a sealed bid i think i understand how Roman managed to get outbid,rather than him pulling out of a bidding war.

i`m probably one of the most patient people around but i do feel that we as fans sometimes are way too quick to write off youngsters as not being ready. they go on loan somewhere which doesn't fit very well and that`s it they done now,move onto next young talent flavour of the month. they didn't succeed at lesser team (in a short time) they are not Chelsea standard,never will be etc... we have become spoilt fat cats but i still remember the feeling when we were on the brink (atleast twice during my lifetime) of going into extinction. and maybe that`s why although i don't mind us spending to get good quality in,when we are talking about bringing players in that we don't really need or that aren't that much better than our youth,then yeah i`m against that. we shouldn't rely too much on youth but the door should atleast be left open all the time for them ready for when they are. it`s like not one youth player should even be given a look without a couple of loans under their belt. yes it worked out with Bertrand but for that we could balance it out with Jack Cork,proved himself time after time,got him jack shit. he deserved a chance as much as Bertrand did but was buried under the mountain of veteran midfielders we have/had at the club. and when we on the subject of waiting for players to mature to the mental side of being at a big club i can think of several veterans in recent times who have been the ones who lacked maturity,some of them being ones who we would class amongst our best players of all time. we cut the veterans who should know better a lot of slack but often give very little to our young players. some loans are worth doing and pay off but it seems like we throw the loan carpet over every single one of them rather than treating each player as individuals. we also pay too much attention to a players physical size rather than the size of their football brains...players of all sizes can make it in any league if they are smart enough. ideally i think we should have a young fringe player in every group of positions. e.g a young defender,a young midfielder and a young striker...we always have the talented prospects at the positions and although they won't play every week during a 60 plus game season that seems our regular quota these days there`s time when we can gradually blood them in..i`d rather see some youngsters get just say 10 games a season than 40 at Wycombe. it`s a better experience for them in preparation for what we should all want from them,to one day actually becoming long term solutions for us in the Premiership. some of our younsters were good enough to play in the lower leagues when they were still in school but after being trained and training with high standard of coaches and players off they are shipped to some lower standard of football and sometimes it can bring their level of play down. teams who loan out our youngsters aren't interested in the long term development of these youth players. they just flog them like workhorses and use them to get what`s best for their own club..they may loan a creative midfield prospect off us but fook that they need him to play somewhere else,off he goes and then comes back needing to be fixed of his bad habits learnt at lower level club. i`m not against all loans atall..tho if i had to choose between loaning every young player out or developing them entirely ourselves,i`d actually choose the latter. when we do buy players in we should atleast if we believe in our youth to atleast someday make it. buy veteran players who can bridge the gap..we have been fortunate lately with our young signings.but sometimes those signings have pretty much killed off the chances of our youth ever making it with us because with the veterans they can see a time when they will have to retire. with Hazard for example...that`s it.position not available for probably another 10-12 years. i love that particular signing but i`m just using him as an example due to age.

i don't like to blow my own trumpet, but i will...i was one of the very few on here who supported the Ramires signing from the start,Luiz too tho i must admit i wasn't impressed with his defending for us up until the last few months atall..and wondered what the hell happened to the Benfica Luiz. he was immense out in the Benfica away game tho,so much that i was texting Mancs back in England during the game,telling them Luiz is the new Maldini ,read it and fookin` weep! lol they laughed it off but don't laugh no more...they don't use the gary neville line "Luiz defends like a 10 year old on an xbox" lol anymore.

we aint a "help a disabled kids dream come true" foundation ffs and Courtois aint a disabled kid. no need to feel sorry for him. there are some of us fans who travel everywhere to see Chelsea and the club owes it to us to do what is best within the rules to help Chelsea win every game they play in.not what a loaned out youngster who aint done shit yet for Chelsea wants. i presume the player himself is mature enough in the game of football to understand this.. i don'`t think him saying he would have liked to play in the game is a true indication that he has a problem with his employers decision. folks who think playing in the game could only be good for his development are focusing too much on a lil part of the picture. if Chelsea spank Athletico it could blow his confidence or if he lets in a howler it could knock his confidence AND hinder his second year on loan .he could be dropped to ride the pine and he could be accused of letting it in deliberately by Athletico players ,coaches and fans. it`s what is best for Chelsea and could very well be what is best for Courtois himself.

in the past teams like Porto have been able to sign young brazilians whilst we in England couldn't ,with that not being the case any more the trips to Porto (and Benfica) for talent will dry up in the future i`m sure. i know it`s not only brazilians we have got from Portugal but they are the most recent signings from there. Mourinho was value for money and Carvalho was definately worth every penny. (i actually rate him as the best CB import in the history of the premier league)

when you replied to a quoted post that asked the question how is Mvila better than Mikel with the opinion Mvila is a better passer. i don't see how different i could have took it. but i`ll accept that wasn't what you were trying to express now. with Mikel i guess he`s always gonna polarise fans..and the site has had more than enough debates on the pros and cons of Mikel so i don't wanna start another one. i agree that we don't need Mvila also because of Oriol. (and atleast in my eyes others we already have.)

he`s done it plenty of times already. i`m sorry for you that you haven't been able to pick that up off a small screen but even if Mvila can pass better that don't make him a better player than Mikel. we aren't talking creative playmakers here.

The fact he can play in a variety of roles is the only reason i can see why we interested in him. 20m is obviously a lot of money but i`d say in todays football that`s a reasonable price for him. when you consider Jordan Henderson went for that and Everton bought him for 15m and he`s improved as a player since then. i don't personally think we need him, Oriol is gonna be a superb player of that i`m pretty damn sure,him and Mikel should be the DM`s in a double pivot with Lampard/Ramires/McEachran competing for the other more creative spot in it. quite a few midfielders would need to leave to make room for him i think.

i don't agree with that atall..but more importantly it looks like neither does the club.

welcome to TC, illya.

unless his contract is running out soon..he can cry himself the Mississippi river, ain`t gonna change a thing..he`ll stay in Munich until they decide they don't want him any more.

Bayern,probably hardest club in the world to sign a quality player from. at this stage i highly doubt the validity of the rumour that he`s available. i`d take him over Hulk if he becomes available tho. nothing against Hulk,just think Muller is better option due to age and probably a lil cheaper,experience and proven in higher level of competitions etc..

great player that Dortmund produced and will have for atleast 3 or 4 years. i`d rather us sign Hulk than hang out on a limb for 3 or 4 years minimum..and panic buying any RW/RF player we can get out hands on when the transfer window starts to close.

Welcome aboard Eden. may we have a long and trophy filled time together.

just a matter of crossin` the dots...

end product the difference. 1-0.

Everton haven't got a long list of strikers....

we don`t have to imagine what Mikel,Lampard and Ramires would be like against Barcelona.. :blue scalf: :blue scalf:

that in part was what i had typed out in the post that didn't send . that i think the fact that he could play LB was what may have resulted in him starting so many games on the bench. i think Carlo saw him as being good to have there so he could cover two positions.if you have Malouda on the bench he`s only really covering for one. i will always love Yuri because i really think he saved our bacon,our double when Cole missed that time through injury that season. i really can't remember him letting us down when called upon and unlike Malouda ,Yuri always seemed to play with his heart in it. we didn't see the best of him because he was kept away from showing it but there was still some golden moments. i`ll be watching him in the Euro`s and wishing him well,atleast i presume he`s in the Russian squad. he`s the only player i have had in signature pic on here..

just the usual football agent pimping out his whore. we got three better LB`s than him already on our books.