CHOULO19

Tiny club? Like us when we bought Oriol from Barcelona? It is done all the time for young players as is a first option at a fixed price like the Fabregas case with Arsenal. I think that the main factor in that is probably the player himself and his will to return to the club.

Coincidentally, this is almost identical to the "Global Political Power and Influence" chart...

Well, you don't draw the line, at least not in the foreseeable future. We are required to win trophies every year and that means having the best squad possible every year. The promising young players will continue to be loaned out until they are good enough to be part of the regular first team, except for extraordinary talent or circumstances like Ake and (I hope) Christensen.

Actually, we won a free kick because Benayoun took down the corner flag!

Might be a better idea to contact the club rather than the fans so that maybe they'll have something up on the screen on the 28th minute.

Are those buttons on the home shirt? I kinda like it. The away shirt looks like a wool sweater my grandma would knit

I think it's best if he is sold and we include a buy-back/first option clause. His position is incredibly competitive here and it would be very difficult to see him being an important part of the team in the next season or two.

Mr. Hinsley is an 'acquired taste'

I'd rather face Liverpool over two legs than in the final where anything can happen.

And I'll post the naked picture of @ I have

And hence god exists because you want to mean something? Evolution is not even debatable anymore. The evidence is overwhelming and all your questions and more are answered by countless science books. Evolution is as common a scientific fact as the round shape of the earth or how the sun works.. No, I was talking about zero evidence for morals coming 'from above'. In fact there are plenty of evidence to the contrary. The fact that we now know that morals are physical aspects of the brain and are the work of neurons, the historically global moral values, the fact that morals exits long before any organized religion mentions them, the fact that people of varying beliefs have similar morals...etc. I can go on and on. That's another scientific and historical fact: Morals were not invented by religion. There are no two ways about it.

I see Liverpool have finally found their level...

Satisfying maybe, but with zero evidence. It would be satisfying if every straight male got to marry a girl like Emma Watson, but it would be deludedly optimistic to believe that everyone will

Pretty much spot on until the bold part. There is a very clear distinction between 'instincts' and impulses and conscious thoughts. So, no, morals are NOT anything like the "preference of music". That's a massive misunderstanding (or deliberate ignoring) of how the human brain works. Again, no one, anywhere in the world, would disagree in principle that lying or killing is bad, even if they chose to do it in certain situations where the urges are contradictory. There is absolutely ZERO logical link between this point at the previous points. No, morals don't have to 'transcendent' just like the reasons of why you eat, have sex and run when someone points a gun at you are not. And if they do seem transcendent to us it's because they do not come from the conscious part of our brain and are not, in their simplest forms, beliefs that we can acquire or discard. They are hard-wired into our brains and we are influenced by them even if we can chose to ignore them. But what you (or the guy who wrote this, if I'm correct to assume that you copied that from somewhere) did give is an insight into why some people feel they 'need' god and it's actually a pretty good argument against what it's advertising. There is absolutely no evidence or need that morals come from above. The need for 'transcendence' there is completely subjective, internal and at best human-related. You are trying to extrapolate the existence of an omnipotent being from the subjective understanding of a word. Basically you/he/she are saying that the reason that god exists is all in my head and he exists because I want him to.

Yes, yes, and yes. It's actually very clear to me but like you said, it's a matter of opinion. But if you're looking to why Jose and the coaching staff have not lived up to your expectations on youth integration I think this would be one of the main candidates for the possible explanations. Jose probably views the like of Boga and RLC like I view them. Go back to his interviews, ever time he talks about them he says something along the lines of "very promising but very far from ready" while he says that Zouma is first team quality and Ake very nearly there.

I think, regardless, the players still hold a big responsibility for the failure of that period. But that's all ancient history, now.

Yeah, but better have them rushing over to a fake injury than walking slowly to a potentially fatal one!

He said "chairman", isn't that Bruce Buck. Why would he expect Roman to be around any way?

Of course they have the capability of beating Derby and similarly Derby have the capabilities of winning as well. No one said they would have definitely lost but from what we knew about Derby and the match I think they would have severely damaged our likelihood of winning the match and I think that was proved by the performances yesterday. And, please, don't tell me that you seriously believe that Boga can perform as well as Schurrle in any circumstance! That's just ridiculous over-hyping that ends up only hurting the players themselves like what happened with Chalobah. No one from our academy currently is even remotely close to first team quality. Zouma is the only youngster close and you can make a case for Ake but he's unfortunately been injured in the period where he might have been given a couple of chances. Everyone else, from RLC to Boga, Baker, Swift, Christensen....etc. even if they were given more time this season they are still going to have to go on loan and prove themselves before they could become part of the first team. Anyone who thinks differently is just deluding themselves, imho.

Eventually worked out for the best, I guess, even though it is clear that Andre was not treated fairly at Chelsea.

I repeat:

Thought he did much better than Cahill has in the past few games

“Eva was saying at least three times prior to that through the radio, ‘Bring the stretcher’. We could hear it,” said Cech. “I think that was why everyone was upset with the call. We heard ‘Bring the stretchers’, ‘Bring the stretchers’ and ‘Bring the stretchers’ but nobody was coming. I think that’s why the players got involved." “The doctor was there quickly, everybody was there making sure he was OK. Our medical team and the referees they did really well. The other guys took a little bit of time, but I don’t think the player was in danger at that time because the doctor was with him, Eva was with him.” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/chelsea/11298711/Petr-Cech-clash-of-heads-with-Chelsea-team-mate-Kurt-Zouma-could-have-been-much-worse.html Hopefully this sparks some discussion on how the medical teams on the ground should respond. In certain situations, quick response can be the difference between life and death. We know all too well from the Muamba and Foe incidents.

AVB slamming Tottenham, Levy and the Sport Director: http://www.portugoal.net/portuguese-abroad/114-avb-i-ve-had-my-fill-of-media-sensationalism-and-false-promises