Peace.

Rooney is a grumpy person who's acting sulky because things doen't go the way he'd like. And if I'm not mistaken, he is a player who has already held his club to ransom twice. Moreover, we tend to see this issue through the sportive aspect — I believe his unhappiness has deeper roots than just him not having enough playing time. As I aforementioned, Rooney has twice held Manchester to ransom. Both times Ferguson had to bow before him because he was their most important player and he couldn't afford to let him go. I firmly believe when Ferguson got the dutchman, it was pay-back time. Ferguson promptly gave the main Role to van Persie ; then Ferguson symbolically benched Rooney for their most important match of the season ; finally he gave the last blow by publicly stating that Rooney as handed a trasfer request, which eventually gave birth to that saga. On the second hand, van Persie, as well as becoming their main asset on the field, became their star. He replaced Rooney both at a sportive level and at a symbolic level. Rooney has been pushed on the side ; and, as the images of him being alone while his team mates were celebrating the goal(s) they scored against Swansea may suggest, he could be ostracised. It's a tricky and complex affair. We don't have such unrests happening in the backstage.

"I am not drawing comparisons between the two players and their abilities/capacities [...]" I solely point out some similarities in regard of one aspect of the deal(s). The comparisons end there. The sole parallel between both players is their role in both stories — not regarding their abilities or capacities.

As far as I can remember, last summer a lot of people (including me) were questioning Ferguson's will to buy van Persie, and were sceptical about this deal, because their striking force was already very good, while their midfield was grandly more in need for reinforcement than what their attack was. Ten months later, van Persie was the best goalscorer in the League, was the best player for Manchester, and he eventually won them the title. I am not drawing comparisons between the two players and their abilities/capacities — it's merely to put things into perspective.

"I definitely do but I also know that if I'd been Everton manager and Sir Alex had come asking for Leighton Baines and Marouane Fellaini, I'd have found it very difficult to keep them because I always felt the right thing to do was what was right for the players," Moyes. Well, mister Moyes, in that sentence you say everything that needs to be said. If it was Ferguson ; one of a best managers in Football History — You're just a nobody.

Well, I perfectly understand why so many people are being confused and angry regarding the fact we're about to splash £30m to strengthen our best area while we could (and should) strengthen other areas (center midfield) in priority. But, have you thought about the possibility that there is no suitable defensive/central midfielder available at the moment, into the board's opinion ? It's an eventuality which is more than likely. Or that we would have to pay over the odds to get one... the Board was unilaterally congratulated for not paying over the odds to get Cavani, wasn't it ? Or maybe we don't want to buy a short-term solution for that (CM/DM) position and prefer to wait next year ? In that regard, I don't see any problem in reinforcing our best department. It would be utterly ridiculous to not strengthen at all our team just because we cannot strengthen our weakest area. We don't have any information regarding who's available on the transfer market. We don't know which players have been considered as a possible purchase ; we don't know which players we have tried to sign. For Christ's sake, be happy that we can actually reinforce our squad, even if it is not for our most in-the-need area... Remind me, how many players have Manchester and Arsenal bought to reinforce their squad, huh ? So be happy with what's happening, yes there's better, but there's a lot worse.

For real ? He dares to go this far... What a rude-boy, take that Willian !

I want Oscar to be the player to be given the keys of our midfield (could it be as a n°10 or a central midfielder), and the game against Hull showed why. To my eyes, out of Mata, Hazard and him, he is the only one to act/play like a midfielder. Against all the quality clubs, winning the midfield battle will be important. That's why he should be the player to sit on top of two other central midfielders more defensive minded (Ramires-van Gikel for example). First off, he drops deep — on offensive phases he will drop deep in order to collect the ball and to conduct the play (to build the play, in other words) ; on defensive phases he will also track-back to help the other midfielders with the defensive work. If last year our pivot was defensively exposed and was a weak point in the building of the game, that's because the player in front of the pivot — Mata for most of the time, and a few time Hazard — didn't do that job. Secondly, Oscar is head and shoulder better than any of our other advanced midfielders when it comes to defensive works. He is very good at harassing and pressuring opponents, and for an attacking-minded player, he has great technique for intercept the ball and do tackles. His defensive abilities plus the fact he drops deep / track back will considerably strengthen defensively-wise our midfield — and eventually to our whole defensive unity —, something he cannot offer when playing on the wing. Finally, into my eyes, he is the more suited to be the playmaker, because he has the better understanding of the game. His movements and positional sense show this ; he knows when to leave spaces for other players (like he did for Brazil and Neymar), he knows when he gots to be involved in the play or when he has to fade away to not hinder others, etc... And he has also a better understanding of the tempo (i.e. he knows when to free the ball quickly, or at the contrary when he has to keep hold upon the ball). And, once again, the fact he drops deep is a strength, because as we dont have any deep-lying playmaker (or anyone able to decently build the game), it will help to ease the transition between the defenders and the attackers. Therefore playing the Brazilian there will grandly strenghten defensively our midfield — the back-line will have more cover and thus will be better, which as I said will strenghten the whole defensive unity of the team. Moreover, when on the ball, our midfield will be quicker execution-wise, sharper and more incisive in the tempo, more clever in the distribution of the ball. We have al lot to gain by doing this, at it seems that Mourinho knows this as well, which is a good thing !

I didn't see the match, though, the feedbacks about him that I could read upon this forum don't surprise me in the slightest — it was to be expected. Actually, it confirms the opinion I had on him and his role within the team that I had after the Hull game and that I even had last season. He must be given a limited role within the team and his playing time must be restricted to a certain type of opponents — especially if we continue to play in a 4-2-3-1 formation. The biggest reproach I have toward him is the fact that he is still playing just as if he was still 25 years-old and playing at the top of a three-men midfield. He goes way too high on the pitch for a player who's supposed to play in the pivot. And this fact alone induces a lots of disruptions for the team. First of all, as nowadays he lacks of mobility, when we lose the ball possession, it takes him time to leave his high-up position and to go back into his central midfield position. It weakens our defensive unity, especially the few seconds after the loss of the ball (in other words, when the opponents start a counter attack), as it leaves spaces, and it allows our opponents to out-number us for a few moments. Secondly, as Choulo has hinted it, he disrupts the operating of our advanced midfielders by getting in their playing area, he provokes a congestion in this part of the pitch. When you have Oscar, Mata and Hazard on the pitch, this area will always tend to be naturally congested... This is a probleme. And furthermore, aside of goals-threat, he doesn't offer anything in this area of the field. He cannot penetrate the opponent's defensive line, because he is slow and not agile, and isn't a good dribbler. Plus, he isn't an asset in the game building in the last third of the pitch, because his passing game is slow and isn't that good anymore. Then, once again as Choulo has hinted, he makes difficult the work that his partner has to accomplish, because in the one hand his partner is forced to stay deep to cover Lampard ; which limits what this partner can bring to the table, especialy when it's Ramires, which is a shame because he is so good in that box-to-box role. And on the second hand, his partner has to accomplish an extra defensive work. However, that's not all. It's not a secret to anyone — we're extremely slow in the building of our attacks. The base of our attack, i.e. the pivot, has a major responsability in it. And unfortunatly, Lampard doesn't help to pump-up the speed of the build of the game. As I aforementioned, his passing game is too slow and isn't good enough anymore. When you add the fact that we don't have any playmaker next to him, then it's a big problem for our game-building. Moreover, he isn't good at shielding the ball and keeping the hold on the possession of the ball. He lacks mobility, he lacks dribbling technique, he takes time to deliver the ball — as a matter of fact, whenever the opposition put pressure upon our midfield, he tends to lose the ball easily. And, defensively, his contribution is limited. The bottom line is that in my opinion, when you analyze the pros and the cons of his impact on our play, the cons considerably outweigh the pros. Therefore, he must be used as squad player to give a rest to the players who are in the starting eleven, when we're facing the smallest of our opponents. He definitely shouldn't be a starter against the big teams (i.e. ManU, ManC, Tottenham, Arsenal, etc... and also the big european teams), nor against the smaller teams which won't park the bus, and which will either offer a real battle in the midfield or will counter-attack us to death. The Hulls of this world are about the level of oppsotions against whom Lampard should start (these teams that are more than happy to sit back for 90 minutes while hoping to get a lucky point). My words are no bashing. In life, all the good things eventually come to an end — it's hard, but we should not hang on the past.

It isn't as easy as you seem to think it is. The problem is not Dortmund... I actually reckon they would be willing to sell him even for way less than £50m (let's say around £30/35 millions) to a foreign club if that means he won't go to Munich next year. The problem is the player himself — he wants to go to Munich, plain and simple. His agent said that the player wanted to go to Munich and only Munich. If my memory serves me right, the player himself said that he wanted to play for Bayern. And finaly, Jürgen Klopp has publicly stated that the deal "Lewandowski to Munich" was set and done. It isn't fifty million pounds which will change that ; nor José. We just need to forget this transfert and put into our head once and for all that the polish striker wants to go to Bayern ; not to Chelsea, not to Manchester, not to Madrid, but to Munich. The only way Lewandowski doesn't end up playing for Bayern, it's if Pep doesn't want him — which wouldn't surprise me as he doesn't seem to be sold on this player. However, if that was the case, we will have to wait one year to know because all camps will wait next summer to take a decision. The bottom line is — at the moment, going for Lewandowski would be a bigger waste of time than going for Rooney.

Today Manchester United and van Persie has shown us — and this for the umpteen times — how much it's crucial to have a great striker in your ranks, when you're battling for the title. A striker who will deliver you the goods over and over again, when it does matter. ManU today was distinctly average ; until the 34th minutes, it looked it was going to be one of those boring scoreless games. The next thing you know, van Persie changed the physiognomy of the game by scoring a goal from an half-opportunity. An instant afterward, the mancunian players, with their confidence being inflated by this event, scored their second goal of the game to put the match to bed. Without showcasing a quality display ; without sweating ; without playing an impressive starting eleven... Manchester came out of this tricky fixture without any scratch. That's how they won the title last year. That's why the champion is them and not us or City. And that's why they'll remain a dangerous oponent for the ongoing battle for the title. Right now, we do not possess any game-changer of the van Persie caliber. Actually, as I see it, we only have one player who fits the description of "game-changer" ; it's Hazard, but unfortunatly for us, he is yet to be that player. I expect him to reach that level very soon, but not this year. Considering this fact plus the fact he plays on the wing, we will have to wait a bit longer before he can carry us like van Persie did for Arsenal two years ago, for Manchester last year and like he will do this year again. Our strikeforce just cannot give us that goals-assurance. Ba is a good footballer, but that's that. Lukaku cannot go from being an excellent super-sub at a mid-table club to being an imperious starting striker at a club of our pedigree. We just cannot ask him that. And the ladyboy is a poor excuse of a footballer. Finally, as much as people love to bring up the "we can score from all over the pitch", this concept reaches his limits when you don't have a striker on which you can count upon. To conclude, if the aim of our Board is truly to win the Premier League this season, then we will have to make this transfert happen, or at the very least find a suitable plan-B... Because, Mourinho or not, if we don't dramatically improve our strikeforce or our central midfield, we will find out — at our expense — that life isn't a quiet river.

Exactly, I've been preaching this for months. And you did forget to mention the most important thing — he won us the corner. The Corner.

Of course this 4-3-3 is a better fit for us. First of all, to echo what TorontoChelsea said two posts ago, your 4-2-3-1 is too weak defensively ; there's a lack of genuine defensive quality in the lot (especially within the front four). Hazard has improved his work-rate during the season though his defending is still not good ; de Bryune too isn't a very good defender ; Mata just cannot defend to save his life. And whoever the striker is, it won't improve the situation because, neither the ladyboy, Lukaku and Ba are good at defensive tasks. Moreover, when it's coupled with your unorthodox midfield-two, it's a recipe for disaster. The both of them are not genuine defensive midfielders ; there are more of the type "box-to-box" players. And because of this fact, one can imagine that this duo will lack of a defensive discipline and of a defensive rigor (especially for Ramires, in my opinion) which can lead to even more defensive shakiness. We cannot afford to play with four front-men who are average at best when it comes to defensive duties and a midfield-two without a natural defensive midfielder. That's way too much holes in the defensive unit of our team. Firstly, against the big clubs, this 4-2-3-1 is a no-go. And secondly ; I am not even convinced that we could afford to play such a team against the lesser teams in the League. For a team which aims the title, all games are important (at different degrees of course, but all have an importance). With such a team, we could be vulnerable to any decent team attacking-wise, and to my eyes we would be so especially vulnerable on the cunter-attacks. Of course, we could play that line-up for the casual games, though we shouldn't play too much around... Secondly, your 4-3-2-1 induces having a problem which has already hindered us the whole past season. Indeed, one of our major problems last season was the fact that our double-pivot was isolated ; and this could it be on defensive phases or attacking phases. Upon attacking phases, we lacked cohesion between the back-line and the frontline ; the transition between the two lines wasn't good. And, upon defensive phases, the pivot was permeable and vulnerable. The players playing in this pivot were at fault, but only partly, unfortunately (yeah, it would have been too easy). That's obvious that we didn't have good enough players to play in there, but the way how the team was set-out didn't help them in the slightest. Indeed, if they were isolated upon attacking phases, that's also because there was no player before them to drop deep, to collect balls and to help the transition from back to front. And, if upon defensive phases the pivot was left exposed and thus vulnerable, that's because there was nobody before them to provide 'em a protection (or at least give them a hand in defensive duties). It's neither Oscar nor Hazard that could have provided this help to the pivot, due to the fact they were on the wings and already busy with tasks upon these wings. The problem is the way the midfield-three was set. The player occupying the role of the n°10 was not truly playing like one. Indeed, Mata was playing more as a second-striker than an advanced midfielder (this also applies to the seldome times Hazard has played there). As a matter of fact, it resulted in a big hole in the center of the pitch..... Which is one of the major reason, in my opinion, that we were so easily losing the midfield-battle throughout the season. That hole in midfield meant no defensive cover for the two "defensive" midfielders ; and as well, no possibility to have a smooth transition between the defensive line and the attacking line. So playing this formation will perpetuate this issue. At the contrary, with Oscar in front of the two "defensive" midfielders, such as in your 4-3-3 line-up, we should be significantly better in the midfield (defensive and attacking-wise). Not only the brazilian will provide that extra defensive cover, but he will also help a lot more in the building of the game (read : bringing the ball to the front). That's why we should favourite such a formation... Actually, it doesn't really matter whether it's a 4-3-3 or a 4-2-3-1 — the important thing is that there's a third player in front of the two center-midfielders to help them. P.S. Agree with your view regarding Lukaku.

No, Hazard is not as good as Iniesta regarding dribbles. The belgian is a very good dribbler, he's most certainly among the best in this aspect of the game, though he isn't on Iniesta level ; not yet. Of course, the difference between them isn't wide, even though, from what I have seen, there is a slightly margin between them two — slight but significant margin. In my opinion, Iniesta has a better dribbling technique, and, most importantly, his dribbles are more effective than Hazard's. That being said, there's nothing shameful in the fact of being less good than Iniesta when it comes to dribbles. He is one of the best player of the world, one of the few genuine World-Class players, etc... And beside Messi, I fail to see anyone who's superior to him in that department (or at least significantly better than him). If he keeps developing, then he has the tools to reach the same level of dribbling that Iniesta has. For now, while being among the best dribblers at the moment, he has still a little step to overcome before being of that caliber. As for your definition of their style of dribbling, you're right. Iniesta is more about finess and technique (he's a Magician) while Hazard use more his athletism (agility and dynamism/pace).

I have never said something of that sort. Don't have a narrowed vision of my words. Of course, not all of his last-ditch challenges are due to him. In some cases, it's because his team mates put him into these situations ; in some other cases, he gets into these situations all by himself. That's nothing exceptional to state, it does apply for every defenders, at different degrees. It just happens that Gary Cahill finds hismelf in this kind of situations more than your average Joe ; and it's not because our team is unbalanced as you suggested, or at least, it is far from being the primary reason. "You can't honeslty sit there and tell me that the team wasn't unbalanced" Did I even made an allusion regarding the fact that our team may have not been unbalanced ? No. I have merely stated that the correlation between the fact we were an unbalanced team and the fact that Gary Cahill was making so many last-ditch challenges (isn't there a fucking synonym ?!) was not a strong correlation. I am aware of the outcomes of an unbalanced team and all those things ; I have acknowledged that had we had a better defensive unit, then he would have to make less of these challenges. But our weak defensive unit does not justify Cahill's habit to resort to the so called last-ditch challenges in such an inflated way. The primary explanation for this resort to these challenges is — as I said and I'll repeat myself — that Cahill is a passive defender who backs off his direct opponents. Instead of being proactive and opposing to the opponent's action, he waits until the opponent is about to finish his move in order to block his pass/shot. Making last-ditch challenges is probably his best ability — he plays to his strength, just as some other defenders would rely upon their athleticism. That's the way he plays, that's that... it's not my fault. And if it's not Cahill's own fault, then whose fault is it ? And I don't know whether the last paragraph is aimed at me, but if it is, then you got it wrong. I believe that Cahill is a more than decent defender and that we should keep him, he is a valuable back-up option for our center-backs (i.e. third or fourth position)(and probably better than a lot of 3rd/4th choice CB at other top clubs).

The fact that Cahill makes so many last-ditch challenges has nothing to do with the fact that we're an unbalanced team. Actually, it has some connection because if we were better in defense then he would obviously have to make less of these challenges... Though that correlation isn't strong. ... That's because it is the way whom Cahill plays — plain and simple. He isn't an aggressive defender, he's rather (quite) passive. He doesn't jet out in order to dispossess the oppoenent or to make an interception. He neither does stay on his ground to block the opponent's path. He relies heavily upon his sharp ability to make last-ditch challenges. He constantly give up ground to the opposition's players, and drops deeper and deeper until the opponent decides to finish his action (shot/pass/cross/...). That's the reason for which he has to resort to this kind of challenges so many times. The way he plays gives time and space to opponents to be dangerous. That's why he had a fairly good spell during his first six months stint here ; di Matteo set up the team with a deep defensive bloc/unit (especially against Barcelona and Munich), and as a matter of fact, it gave way less space and time to the opponents to work in — the flaws inherent to his game were partly nullified. But this past season, he has been found out ; the defensive bloc wasn't as deep as it was, and his style of play turned out to be quite risky — the flaws inherent to his game were stressed out.

Bale, a World-Class player ? What did he actually achieved ? What trophies did he won ? The Champions League ? The Premier League ? The sole trophy he has ever won is the mighty League Cup, and it's generous to say that he won it because he played one game in it. This player has had just one very good, nay great (for the debate sack) season in the Premier League — and he didn't even manage to carry his team in the top four (against an eternal average Arsenal and a Chelsea on his knees). Moreover, it isn't his goalscoring ability that sets him as a World-Class player... In the League, he has scored more than ten goals only once. He is not World-Class by any means, and it's a long way until he can be labeled as one ; the first step would be to actually win trophies, and then have more than one great season. And the greatest British-born player since Gascoigne ? What about Scholes, Lampard, Rooney, Ashley Cole, etc... ?? You know, players that have actually won trophies and that have had an handful of great seasons. For now, he is barely worth to lace their boots.

Yeah, mind you... He is so much ready to die for Chelsea that he didn't hesitate, back in 2009, to put his life on the line by taking a pay rise to stay away from Manchester City.

Well, Oscar has to redouble his defensive efforts because the other attacking midfielders aren't good at defending — and that's an understatement. And as he isn't sur-human, the volume of work and energy he puts in defensive actions, he cannot put them into offensive actions. And because of the context, he was always going to be the third wheel of the cart regarding the offensive phases. That's just like if two people make 90% of the food for the diner ; the third one will only be able to cook the dessert and to wash-up the utensils. That third man won't have his place under the sun as the one who made the cooking, but that doesn't mean he didn't have a significant and necessary participation to the diner.

Thanks I'll only reply you in regards of the following quotes, if it doesn't bother you ! "What I personally see in Wayne is a very talented player that is frustrated at not being allowed to play in the best circumstances and we at Chelsea potentially have the right environment for him to excel. He's a player that when fit, motivated and under the right roof is easily a top 5 player in the world." While I definitely agree that if Rooney gains back his motivation and fitness, he would then be among the very best players in the world at the moment ; I am less optimistic than a lot of people regarding the probability of him regaining this fitness and this motivation. To my eyes, it is a big if. While reading throughout this thread, I saw a lot of comments implying that basically, the change of team and the Mourinho effect will be enough for him to regain his motivation. However, that's not as simple as saying "hello" ; the Mourinho effect is kinda overrated into my eyes — he is an excellent motivator, though he isn't the King Midas of the motivation. I do not believe that Rooney's loss of form (let's call it this way, so we don't enter the "on decline / not on decline" debate in this part) comes from the fact he is a big baby who's sulking because he's frustrated and jealous of not being Ferguson's darling number one anymore. I believe that the origins of this frustration, this loss of motivation and of fitness, root deeper than the sole bad temper of the player. We gotta take into consideration that despite his relatively young age, Rooney has already 11 seasons at the top level behind him ; nine at Manchester United and two at Everton. To that you can add World Cups and three European Cups. It does represent 479 matches for clubs, and 83 for his country. Moreover, if my memory serves my right, he has been involved heavily with the starting eleven right from the start, as suggests us his 77 appeareances in his two first footballing seasons at Everton, and this basically at the age of ~ 18. He's a player who peaked and fulfilled his development pretty early. When you are on top of your game for seven or eight years, there comes a time when your body is washed-out. That's a lot of strain put to your body. Furthermore, Rooney has never been know to be a big partisan of fitness and he seems to be initially "big boned", which put even more strain on your body. And I deeply believe that because of this, he will never be able to be as fit as he was. I just think that his physical capability has toned down of one level — which is something absolutely normal in my opinion (and in the light of what I just said). However, he might reach a level of fitness not far from his very best, though he will have to put in a lot of work — and for this he has to be motivated once again. As for the motivation, I don't know... When I look at him, he kinda reminds me of someone who's depressed — as if he was going through his midlife crisis ( laugh out loud ). The way we see him regularly sulking... The way he has taken United into hostage twice because of a supposedly lack of ambition from the club ; and now he is irritated because he isn't the number one anymore... To me it looks like he is searching his feet ; he understands that he isn't the same anymore, and he find it hard to accept this very fact. In other words, I don't think that giving him a new sportive challenge will have any significant effect upon his motivation. As a matter of fact, I deeply believe that giving him a fresh motivation won't be that easy, not at all. I might sound all doom and gloom regarding his future, but that's not the case. I am not saying he is good for ending up his career right now. I simply believe that to have a near-his-best Rooney will require more than a few pats on the head given by Mourinho and a "you're the best my sweet little Wayny". The bottom line is that I am not saying he won't nor he will regain his motivation (and fitness), but that it won't be an easy task. It's merely food for thoughts.

Nan, I don't think I said that speed and pace define the volume of play... I neither did say that you had to be fast in order to have a big volume of play. And I know that you have to have stamina ; I even have alluded in this sense (c.f. "the number of minutes you can do that"). But let's start from scratch as it seems to have a general misconception regarding what I intended to say. Your velocity is a physical tool that permits you to put into purpose your will of mobility. When you are at your physical peak, your physical capacities allow you to produce a certain volume of activity on the pitch. Though, once you physical ability is on the decline (because of your age, your lack of fitness, of injury(ies), etc...), with the same amount of energy given, you can no longer produce the same amount of activity because it will take you more time to go from a point A to a point B (for example) ; and when you repeat this move umpteen times, the difference will be even bigger. Of course, you can lessen the effect of your physical decrease by having a good positional sense and a tactical nous — still, on the long run, it won't matter because you will not manage to compensate all of your physical decline. And it doesn't matter if you're fast or not. Because your physical peak X will allow you to have a certain amount of activity Y. But when your phisycal capacities decrease and are X-1, the amount of activity you can have will also be, roughly, Y-1. And I repeat myself, not matter how fast you are, a loss of speed/mobility will induce a loss of activity/volume of play. As for your point on Pirlo, yes he was one of the players who ran the most during the last Euro ; italians were in general the players who ran the more during this competition. That's why we saw an absolutely knackered Pirlo (and italians) during the final of this tournament... When you're getting old, you have to give more energy to achieve the same things that you once did. And because of the thing called "causality", when you give more energy to move yourself around, it means that you have less energy to give in others areas : less energy to focus ; less energy to pass ; less energy to think ; etc... A player like Xavi has still a high activity on the pitch ; though, he has lost the edge and sharpness he had once, his passing game is not as incisive as before. It's because he's on his last leg and that his physical capacities aren't as good as before ; as a consequence, the techincal and "mental" aspect of his game suffer. Back on Rooney. Yes, it is enough to prove he's on the decline. His physical capacities aren't as good as before. As a consequence, his volume of play is not as good as it was ; his influnce on the game isn't as good as before ; he isn't as imperious as he was ; he needs more space to beat his man ; etc... He is simply no longer the player he was, and unless a shaman voodoo'ed him,

Because, as TorontoChelsea has already mentioned in his post.... Wilshere is NOT an attacking midfielder. He is a central midfielder. Arsene Wenger said himself "He's a box-to-box player, more than just an holding midfielder". Scoring goals is not his job — that why he is being rated highly despite not scoring goals...

Yes, into my opinion he's on the decline. And I'll try to explain you why. Regarding the stat you use as example, you could have a point, but not really. It neither does show he has not declined ; nor does show that he has progressed. So you can grasp my point, I will use a few exaples. For instance, Lampard has scored 15 goals (and only one assist) in 21 starts ; which is statistically good for a midfielder. Though, you will agree with me, he is declining (and this for many seasons) and he was fairly average the past season. Another example is David Villa. In 17 starts in La Liga, he has scored 10 goals and made five assists. That's roughly similar to Rooney (for the dabate sake !) — though once again, this player is on the decline and had a bad season. By stating this, I am not trying to prove that he is declining. I am just trying to stress out the fact that these kind of stats and a player's progression (or regression) are not necessarily correlated. Some players, despite being off-form (or in decline), will still score a fair amount of goals because they have it in them ; that's the case of all the aforementioned players. To extrapolate, Pirlo and Xavi are still among the best playmakers, even if they are far from the players they were, because they have the playmaking DNA. But let's drop statistics for the moment and let's concentrate ourselves upon perception, and perception only. I do agree with Ferguson on the matter — we already saw the best of Rooney. And in my honest opinion, ever since grosso modo 2010, Rooney is on the decline. That doesn't mean that he has become a poor player. He has still managed to stay a top player. That's because he has adapted his game ; he has compensated the loss of certain abilities he lost by adding other abilities to his game. Indeed, nowadays he is a lot more versatile than he was before, his passing game is better, he use more his brain, etc... Rooney has lost pace and speed. A few members have already stated this fact, though some others retorted that it didn't matter because it was never a part of Rooney's game... I'll claim it high and loud : Rooney has started to decline ever since he has started to lose his pace and speed — as "slow" as he may be. Losing your speed doesn't only mean that you'll be less fast...!!!! It also implies a loss of another thing which is more important, in my view, in football than speed — the mobility. And if you lose your mobility, you won't have the same, what we call in French, "volume of play". It's such a shame there's no equivalent in english, because it's a very important notion in football, into my eyes. It's hard to explain, but in short, the "volume of play" is : your work-rate + your participation in both defensive and offensive phases (i.e. participating in the defensive duties, participating to the building of attacks, moving to make you available for a pass, moving to out-number the opponent in one area, etc...) + the ground you cover + the runs you make + the number of minutes you can do that.... For instance, Ramires has a big "volume of play". This is a key notion, because this is what allows players, besides their technical abilities, to set their influence on the game. You can have a Messi in both of your feet, if you stay still, you will do nothing. Speed has never been a part of Terry's game, though now he doesn't have speed anymore -> he lost his mobility and thus he finds himselves pretty often in situations where he's all over the place (Against Liverpool two seasons ago and against Newcastle last season, for instance). Speed has never been a part of Xavi's and Pirlo's game ; they still have their technical abilities, though they can't have the influence on games like they had before because they have a lesser "volume of play". The same goes for Lampard. Speed has never been a part of his game. But now he's less mobil, he doesn't provide half of the influence on the game he had before. This is exactly why I claim that Rooney is on the decline. He has lost in mobility and velocity. He doesn't have the same "volume of play" any more. He doesn't have the same influence on the game that he had pre-2010. He still scores a lot of goals because his sheer quality is way above the one of your average footballer and he has adapted his game so to lessen the abilities he has lost. I am not implying that he will become as good as Heskey overnight, but he is on the downside part of his development — which is irrefutable. He will nonetheless stay a very good players for the years to come, because he has excellent technical abilities and has a great football IQ. Voilà voilà.

Of course he is a puppet — he's Ferguson's puppet. The latter man has most certainly left his job because he couldn't go any further because of his health condition (and I believe because he knew that an area was about to end and wanted to leave United on a high). I genuinely reckon that he'd have stayed had he had the possibility — his new place within the board hints in this sense. Ferguson is all but idiot. He knows that Moyes isn't ready to take the United's job. So, in short, Ferguson will still be their for the grand scheme while Moyes will be the one on the bench and the end to train players every days. If you will, Moyes is to Ferguson what Jordi Roura was to Tito. Ferguson will fully disapear when Moyes will be "old" enough or when they will have a manager competent enough. For now, I reckon that United's place in the table will depend on the proportion of Ferguson's implication within the managerial role.

For Christ's sake, how many times will we have to go through this...?! Hazard earns 540 000 fucking EUROS per month, which does 135k euros per week = £116k at the current exchange rate. All French-speaking medias are reporting this figures. Oscar was bought for 60 000 000 R$ which does 20,4 millions d'EUROS which does 17,6 millions pound at the current exchange rate. We should put a banner, visible for everyone, that reads these figures at the top of this forum. Those journos are dumber than newborn babies. Sweet Jésus.

He's back to London ? Oh my God, that means he's gonna be sold.