CHOULO19

Of course you're free to believe your own subjective judgment over facts but obviously don't expect that to be as convincing over something backed by stats. I don't think anyone sane is arguing that Matic is not the superior player, he's one of the best in his position in the world, but Mikel is not very far behind apart from dynamism and mobility on the field. Also 'every aspect' is an exaggeration. For example, Mikel is slightly better in the air and at ball retention under pressure. Literally burst out laughing! :lol:

@NishC300, so your response to facts from unbiased neutral organization that are accepted by everyone as true is to bury your head in the sand and scream "not true" coupled with some wild conspiracy theories with absolutely no reliable sources or evidence save some propaganda videos? If I wanted to give you conspiracy theories and propaganda from the Hamas side or even the regular Palestinian side, we would have been here forever. Instead, I gave you hard facts that you can find reported in any reliable unbiased source (except for the last point which is not an event in itself but a historical fact). Your response of calling Jewish IDF soldiers 'antisemites' and the UN, the biggest global non-profit organization with people from all over the world, Israel-hating liars; that 'response' if I can even call it that, does not even start to rise to the level of the factual arguments made. If you wish to debate further, come up with a response of facts and provide reliable sources for them, please, because I refuse to sink to that level of 'debate'.

That's just out right false. Him and Matic are very similar in that area. A few quick stats from Squawka to prove that: Mikel plays a successful long ball every 34 minutes with a 58.3% accuracy while Matic plays a successful long ball every 26.5 minutes with a 64.5% accuracy.

@didierforever,@Pacquiao, drop it? You two are getting very boring and annoying. You're single-handedly destroying threads you 'debate' in and its starting to genuinely harm the forum. If you can't stand each other make use of the forum's ignore option. You two are on VERY thin ice, here.

Or we gave Fener a number we knew would scare them off because we don't want to sell. BBC don't usually 'make up' stuff... It makes complete sense that we block a Mikel exit, I predicted it before there we even exit rumors. Jose trusts Mikel a lot and he sees him as an experienced player who gives a lot of stability as a backup. He's a reliable option whenever needed. To rephrase Jose: "We don't have duplicates in any of the positions, our squad is not built that way, but defensive midfielder is a position we are very stable in because the differences between Matic and Mikel are very small."

City just took a very risky 100m gamble. As Chelsea fan, I'm delighted.

The story says both, is how I understood it.

As I expected, Jose has blocked Mikel's exit and wants him to stay: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/33477349

Very interesting choice if true. I think he could surprise many here. He's technically obviously excellent, he has a lot of winning experience, he can play tactical roles when needed and he's joining us for his prime years. I think the rumored buyout clause is fair. Certainly beats paying 50m for Sterling.

This ia a brilliant signing for them. Hr brings great ability and incredible experience. I think he'll take to thr EPL like a duck to water. It's undeniable that United are now solid title tivals for the coming season.

Oh for goodness sake, you two! Stop bickering or I swear I'll make you stand in the corner...

Should do that with all loanees to be honest...

His father confirmed he signed an extension: http://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2015/7/10/8927649/andreas-christensen-contract-extension

I really like Gladbach. They're a very interesting project. I hope he can break into the starting XI. I have a lot of confidence in Andreas. Best of luck to him.

To be fair to Frank, yeah he did lie to all Chelsea fans and put on a huge play, and yeah he did always put his best interest ahead of the club's and the supporters' unlike Mikel who (till now) has always been loyal to the club and fans, but Frank did play A HUGE part in a lot of our success so yeah, I'd still put him on par with Mikel. Call me a glory hunter for it if you want...

What exactly did you answer? You didn't answer any of the facts. Let me quote them again for you: Do you deny that any of that is true?

That says more about our own supporters thank Mikel, tbh. We're talking about a guy who's helped us win literally everything, from EPLs to FA cups to league cups to a CL and an EL. Since he's arrived here he's played in every cup final except the EL final in 2013 and the League Cup final this season which he was not available for. For me, personally, Mikel is only below JT, Zola, Cech and Drogba and on par with the likes of Ash, and Lampard. I don't own many original Chelsea shirts but I have the 2012/13 blue and gold shirt with Mikel on the back to commemorate his performance in the CL final.

@NishC300, yeah I'm still waiting for your replies about the facts I posted

Yeah I copied them and mentioned the source. Did you expect I was going to compile the list my self? Lebanon is a very small country that has contributed little to the world apart from the alphabet, and Britain is one of the biggest contributors to global culture. But what does that have to do with the fact that has also always been one of the biggest colonial countries in the world and still is? Unless you are saying that you are somehow entitled to invading other countries for your economic gains because of your cultural history?!

Xenophobic? List of wars Uk has been involved in since the 18th century: 18th century[edit]War of the Spanish Succession (1702–13) - England and Scotland, later Great Britain, Holy Roman Empire, Portugal and the Dutch Republic, were allied against France and SpainQueen Anne's War (1702–13)Jacobite Rebellions (1715–16; 1719; 1745–46) - Civil WarClifton Moor Skirmish, near Penrith (1745) - last land battle in EnglandBattle of Culloden (1746) - last land battle in Great BritainWar of the Quadruple Alliance (1718–20) - Great Britain, France, Austria and the Dutch Republic v. Italy and SpainWar of Jenkins' Ear (1739–42) - Great Britain v. SpainWar of the Austrian Succession (1742–48) - Great Britain, Austria and the Dutch Republic v. France and GermanySeven Years' War (1756–63) - the first "world war"French and Indian War (1754–63) - Great Britain, Hanover, Portugal, and Prussia v. Austria, France, Russia, Sweden, and SpainAnglo-Cherokee War (1759–63) - Britain v. Cherokee nationPontiac's Rebellion (1763–66) - Britain v. American Indian coalitionFirst Anglo-Mysore War (1766–69) - Britain v. Kingdom of MysoreAmerican Revolutionary War (1775–83) - Britain v. United States, France, Netherlands & SpainFirst Anglo-Maratha War (1775–82) - Britain v. Maratha EmpireFourth Anglo-Dutch War (1780–84) - Britain v. the Dutch RepublicSecond Anglo-Mysore War (1780–84) - IndiaThird Anglo-Mysore War (1789–92) - IndiaAustralian frontier wars (1788–1930s) - Britain v. Australian AboriginesFrench Revolutionary Wars (1793–1802) - Great Britain, Austria, Spain, Russia and Germany v. FranceWar of the First Coalition (1793–97)War of the Second Coalition (1798–1801)Fourth Anglo-Mysore War (1798–99) - IndiaIrish Rebellion (1798) - Britain v. United Irishmen and France19th century[edit]Australian frontier wars (1788–1930s)French Revolutionary Wars (1793–1802) - Great Britain, Austria, Spain, Russia, Prussia, French Royalists v. French RevolutionariesWar of the First Coalition (1793–97)War of the Second Coalition (1798–1801)Napoleonic Wars (1803–15) - United Kingdom, Prussia, Austria, Sweden, Spain, Portugal and Russia v. FranceSouth American War (1806–07)Anglo-Turkish War (1807–09)Anglo-Russian War (1807–12)Gunboat War (1807–14)Peninsular War (1808–14)Hundred Days (1815)First Kandian War (1803–04) - Sri LankaSecond Anglo-Maratha War (1803–05) - IndiaVellore Mutiny (1806) - IndiaWar of 1812 (1812–15)Anglo-Nepalese War (1814–16)Second Kandian War (1815) - Sri LankaThird Anglo-Maratha War (1817–18) - IndiaFirst Anglo-Burmese War (1824–26)Upper Canada Rebellion (1837)Lower Canada Rebellion (1837)Syrian War (1839–40)First Anglo-Afghan War (1839–42)Battle of GhazniFirst Opium War (1839–42) - United Kingdom v. ChinaGwalior Campaign (1843)First Anglo-Sikh War (1845–46) - IndiaNew Zealand land wars (1845–72)Second Anglo-Sikh War (1848–49) - IndiaSecond Anglo-Burmese War (1852–53)Crimean War (1854–56) - United Kingdom, France, Ottoman Empire, and Piedmont-Sardinia v. RussiaSecond Opium War (1856–60) - United Kingdom and France v. ChinaAnglo-Persian War (1856–57) - United Kingdom and PersiaIndian Rebellion (1857)Pig War (1859) - United Kingdom v. USAAnglo-Bhutanese War (1865)Expedition to Abyssinia (1868)Second Anglo-Afghan War (1878–80)Anglo-Zulu War (1879)First Boer War (1880–81)Gun War (1880–81)Mahdist War (1881–99)Third Anglo-Burmese War (1885)Sikkim Expedition (1888)Anglo-Zanzibar War (1896)Tirah Campaign (1897–98)Second Boer War (1899–1902)Boxer Rebellion (1900) - United Kingdom, Austria-Hungary, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, USA, and China20th century[edit]Anglo-Aro war (1901–02) - NigeriaBritish expedition to Tibet (1903–04)World War I (1914–18) see Military history of the United Kingdom during World War I - United Kingdom, France, Belgium, Serbia, Italy, Russia, United States vs Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and Ottoman EmpireEaster Rising (1916) - IrelandAllied intervention in the Russian Civil War (1918–22)Third Anglo-Afghan War (1919)Anglo-Irish War (1919–21)World War II (1939–45) see Military history of the United Kingdom during World War IIAir warfare of World War IIPacific War (1937–45)Anglo-Iraqi War (1941)British–Zionist conflict of Palestine (1945–148)Greek Civil War (1946–47)Cold War (1946–90)Malayan Emergency (1948–60)Korean War (1950–53)Mau Mau Uprising (1952–60)Cyprus Emergency (1955–59)Suez Crisis (1956)Brunei Revolt (1962)Dhofar Rebellion (1962–75)Indonesia-Malaysia confrontation (1963–66)Aden Emergency (1963–67)Northern Ireland Troubles (1969–mid-1990s)Cod War Confrontation (1975–76)Iranian Embassy Siege (1980)Falklands War (1982)Gulf War (1990–91)Bosnian War (1992–96)Operation Desert Fox (1998)Kosovo War (1999)21st century[edit]Sierra Leone Civil War (2000)War on Terror (2001–07)[2]War in Afghanistan (2001–14)Iraq War and Iraqi insurgency (2003–09)Libyan Civil War (2011)Military intervention against ISIS (2014–Ongoing)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_the_United_Kingdom Yeah, you're literally pacifists!

I love British culture and most of the British people I've met. I generally enjoy more British music, literature, and even TV shows more than any other, including Lebanese. But that has absolutely nothing to do with British war policies that are decided by very few powerful 'elites'. In the last couple of decades alone you've invaded Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and helped start a devastating civil war in Syria and that's just in the middle east. Call it whatever you want if the term "neo-colonialism" upsets you but you constantly make wars for more power and money for your corporations. That's not really questionable.

As for the final picture if your movement is so innocent and true, why do you need to make fake pictures of Israelis? P.S: The Hamas were the people the Palestinians elected, I think that's a good way of looking at the Palestinians right? You should read how Bret Stephens often responds to people who believe in cutting defence spending. As for your 1st paragraph, I haven't followed your conversation, but for the more money in pocket thing - I'll give you an example. During the Reagan administration, Reagan lowered the top rate tax. And it increased the tax receipt as incomes rose. Higher incomes means higher tax receipts, not invoking taxes that suffocate the economy and reduce economic growth and ofc ultimately lower incomes. It's simple economics, the more disposable income people have, the more they spend, the more demand increases, more employment in the economy and more economic growth. Since you're a Tory supporter, I saw this quote by Cameron: ‘True compassion isn’t giving people a benefits cheque – it’s giving them a chance." Wow so since you can't beat my argument, you pretend that I'm an agent. Typical of someone who has no response. As for the whole Israel thing, I've been on this forum for a few years now and this is the 1st time I've been debating about Israel. So you did exactly as I said you would: Ignore everything I said, not answer any of the facts and then repeat the same soundbites and carefully crafted terms that you have been taught. Brilliant. To be fair, you did actually add a few silly cartoons to try to counter the actually pictures on the ground that I posted... You can repeat that rhetoric till you're blue in the face but it won't change facts: - Israeli soldiers shoot at civilians for fun. - The IDF at best does not care for any civilian losses and even targets civilian areas as collective punishment. - The IDF has intentionally fired at schools with civilians refugees on many occasions, 2, 3. - Israel puts the entire Gaza strip on a 'diet' by having calorie limit per person on the amount of food that enters the strip. - Israel actively aims at keeping Gaza economy at the brink of collapse. Source. - Their prime minister is against the right of Palestinians to have state. Menachem Begin's Herut, the founding ideology of the his Likud party says that it will never relinquish its claim for all of Palestine and even jordan.

But that's different. Screaming "beware the socialists" is just more scare-tactics. He didn't go out and say vote for us for more cuts to all government and social services. Ah, the old 'trickle down' concept. You know, propaganda can make people believe a lot of silly stuff but the 'trickling down' has got to be the silliest. Basically, you're saying that there's a fat guy having a meal alone and we should put in front of him food enough for 100 people so that enough of it would spill while he's eating and spill down to the starving people under the table so they don't die. Here's a crazy idea: Get those starving people from under the table, sit them next to the fat man and let them share the meal. You'd need a lot less food and you'd drastically decrease the chance of them starving to death. You really like using the word "socialism", don't you? I'm not one for labels but its weird how that concept seems to have been completely altered. Everything that is not 110% pro-corporate is now 'socialism'. The richest country in the history of humanity was the US in the 50s and early 60s. Literally nothing in history even compares. They had more than 50% of the entire wealth of the world, the most stable economy in history. Do you know how they maintained that stability? They had above 91o percent taxes on the rich. That was the leader of capitalism in the world. All the studies actually suggest that lower taxes for the rich only have a small 'boom' period followed by a collapse. Historically, a healthy middle class is the main insurance for a stable economy and society as whole. Not paying taxes doesn't work. This culture of maximizing short-term benefit at any cost is not sustainable. It's the same culture in which we know that shortly we will hit an energy crisis and millions of people will die from global warming and we could even affect our own survival chances on the planet yet we are still running at full speed towards that cliff and right now we are extracting more oil than ever and the tories, for example, are canceling susidies for renewable energy because it gives short-term gain. Finally, you phrase that last sentence in a weird way. You're suggesting that you're waiting for the terrorists to bomb you so you would respond, like you haven't been bombing the 'terrorists people' for fucking ever. Also, if you're bombing the terrorist's people and not just the terrorists themselves, doesn't that make you terrorists as well? There is absolutely nothing 'defensive' or 'retaliatory' about the British army. You're a neo-colonial nation that only seek exploiting other nations resources through wars.

75K/Wk is not at all a lot now. Josh McEachran makes 40K/Wk. Very hard to find players as good as Mikel in Europe's top divisions who earn more. Also, Mikel costs nothing on amortized fees because he's been here for ages. He's currently our second least expensive first team player on our books after only Salah (if he stays). Financially, Mikel is great for the club.

This is a good loan for him if he can stay fit and do well. It could well salvage his Chelsea career turn around that ship which looked like it has already sailed...