Superblue

Who is this guy to those that watch a lot more football outside of the Premier League than I do??

So some other teams will now benefit for a week or two without his ineptitude, what a result then for Chelsea. Doesn't give us the two points back, but hopefully goes some way to the FA admitting the game was a monumental cluster fuck from the officials and might mean they're a little more lenient on Tuchel. Probably wishful thinking but they should do something to placate our club.

It's pretty disgraceful that when this came out, it barely made a ripple. If what Mark Halsey has said is true, then it should be thoroughly investigated and the PGMOL need to be held accountable.

I too can see and understand the links. Alongside the purchase of Sterling and the interest in Raphinha, it's pretty clear the profile of player Tuchel wants to target in the attack - pace, work rate, team ethic, ability to beat a player one on one. Everton are a pretty awful team currently too, so you have to look what he could offer a better team that can utilise his high intensity sprints and ability to take players on higher up the pitch than he's normally used to. This would be something for the data analysts at the club. The problem like many others have alluded to is the price. If this was a £20m deal I don't think eyebrows would be raised so much. I understand the offer we've made was heavy on incentives and in such a situation it makes things significantly better as it then relies on club and player to be successful for the uplift in price. If we can get him on a deal like this and also move on a fringe player or two in the deal then I have no problems with it. But if we're talking a deal that is going to be in the ball park of £45-50m I have serious reservations with a price like that.

I believe that Casedei was named in the U19 Euro's team of the tournament alongside Carney and Vale so that might give a bit more indication as to our interest in him. Seems to be a tournament we've taken a key interest in and scouted extensively. As I said earlier the problem with a deal like this one, like Carney, is the margin for error is so much smaller because of the price already being committed but hopefully he'll prove to be a good buy.

I don't mind an option like that in the squad because the issue of goal scoring is something we do need to consider and try to address but Ronaldo creates the same problems as Lukaku last season - it's a big name and big ego whereby if things aren't going well for them, you'll know about it regardless of whether the team is playing well or not. I actually don't think you'd quite get that same issue with Aubameyang so long as he was within the squad and not being marginalised I think he'd be much more receptive to being utilised within the squad as a whole as opposed to just expecting to start and play 90 minutes all the time regardless. The issue with Aubameyang is paying a transfer fee and a lengthy contract for someone who is 33. If we could take him on a year loan I'd be content with that move to fill a gap for the short term, but that's not happening.

I think that's definitely something to consider with regards to some of the players in the 16 - 18 age category we've hoovered up this summer and paid small fees for. If they don't make it here, the expectation will be that we can manage their early career to develop into someone deemed as a good player for a middling Premier League team who will be prepared to pay a few million or more for down the road. The risk-reward ratio is very much favoured towards us on this one. But the Carney and Slonina deals don't fall into this bracket, and neither does Casedei. The money invested in these deals makes the margin for error much smaller. There has to be a much higher degree of confidence in these deals that they will materialise into very good players and really that level of investment should be made on the expectation rather than hope they'll "make it" at Chelsea.

But would Ronaldo have contributed in the ways that Havertz did in pressing Spurs from the front and not allowing them to get their foot on the ball. The chances we were creating and possession and territory we enjoyed were as a result of pressing Spurs high and not letting them out. We saw last season with Lukaku in the team how much that side of our game can fall apart when just one person isn't doing it. Havertz can't live off that side of his game and not improve his goalscoring and expect a long career here but on the same token I don't think this idea of just having someone there to finish chances and offer nothing else is as straightforward as it seems because it impacts our ability to dominate a game and create chances.

The problem is the complete lack of consistency with how the rules are used. Last season we had a goal disallowed against Southampton for a 'foul' by Azpilicueta (which itself seemed soft) and this was longer than the 40 odd seconds this one was. Similarly there's arguments over phases of play but again referring back to the Southampton goal, the ball pinged in and out of the box a couple of times before we scored. Yes we won the ball back in the Spurs goal but the ball hasn't cleared our box so these arguments over phases of play and the defensive team being able to reset are again dubious. I'm actually more angry to be honest though with the offside call. It's clear as day that Mendy is looking around Richarlison and the ball ends up going the other side of him. Richarlison even moves towards the ball too. I guarantee you there will be a similar incident at some stage and the goal won't stand. And then moving on to the second goal, again the rules are such a grey area. You can't reverse decisions like corners once play has restarted. But play hasn't restarted when they look at the Romero incident so as far as I'm aware if they had made the decision that they should have, it would have resulted in a free kick to Chelsea not a corner to Spurs. The decision to defend the officials and not charge Romero post match quite literally sums up the state of the game. The argument that it isn't in the rule book is a complete cop out when they set a precedent previously for banning Robert Huth for pulling Fellaini's hair. There's a reason most women go for the hair when they get into a scrap - it's because they know just how much it bloody hurts! When it's done as aggressively as that, it's no different to an elbow or headbutt in my opinion. Anthony Taylor is useless and no matter what people want to think, the sheer volume of inept decisions he's made against us over the last few years which have directly contributed to us not winning games justifies our position with him. But Sunday's game also highlighted wider problems with the referees in this country. They're far too protected and insulated. I get they can make mistakes like anybody can but there's no accountability which is what frustrates everyone. Too many rules are far too open to interpretation which in my opinion also doesn't help matters and just adds to the inconsistency of decisions, only compounded when you feel your club has had decisions go against them across both sides of the fence. Because of the levels of protection, the referee contingent are essentially there own little fraternity nowadays. This becomes an issue for VAR I feel as referees seem too afraid to call each other up on mistakes. Whether we like it or not, the future of the game in terms of refereeing is through VAR and in my opinion for it to work at it's most effective and efficient manner, the VAR officials should be trained and brought through independent from the match going referees.

Only basing my own assumptions on this and Matt Law seemed to be the media mouthpiece or certainly the one ITK on these shores with regards to Boehly/Clearlake and their bid throughout.

Pretty certain he was never asked to join and there was never an intention from Boehly to take him in. I believe Candy said that about Goldstein when it was put to him if he'd join any other bids, or specifically Boehly's. As far as I'm aware he never rejected them because he was never asked.

They can question whatever they want. These owners of football clubs are hugely successful business people or consortiums with multiple links and ventures. Journalists can try to piece together links if they wish but ultimately the Premier League cannot prevent business deals taking place that are completely outside the remit of football. So long as deals are made "above board" and there's no reasons to suggest they wouldn't be, there's not even a question to be answered here.

There's a reason why Candy didn't get past the initial bid process and it's because his bid quite clearly wasn't strong enough. He knows exactly what to say to Chelsea fans because he is one. That doesn't mean he's a top candidate for the role of owner. To be honest, my preference is a non Chelsea fan who can look at things with an impartial view without blinkers on. Candy was already quoted saying he wouldn't have sacked Lampard and appointed Tuchel. If he wanted to do the Roman stadium, where is he raising that amount of money because he doesn't have anything close to that himself? If Boehly/Clearlake manage to get the capacity increased to something around say 55,000 and are able to renovate it without the club moving away for years on end, that's significantly better than a brand new stadium we have to wait half a decade or more for. The idea Roman had simply is no longer feasible for the club.

You know the media will be salivating at trying to bridge links between Boehly/Clearlake and Saudi PIF. They've already made one attempt.

I did very similar, decided from a fairly young age that I wanted to be comfortable with both feet and taught myself at home literally kicking a ball against a wall. It wasn't something that was encouraged or coached into me which I've always found baffling. Probably the only thing I could never quite get was that my left foot was always that little more stronger for brute force or power if say, shooting from distance, but everything else I was just as comfortable on my right foot. My boy is 8 years old and just really getting into football in the last 6-12 months and due to join a local team when they start back up later this month. However he is coached by them is their prerogative but when he's at the park or in the garden kicking a football around with me he's made to use both feet, and he's been made fully aware the quicker he becomes comfortable using both feet, he'll be a significantly better and more useful player as a result.

There were sometimes where the passes the likes of Koulibaly, Jorginho and Cucurella made looked risky and watching on TV they didn't really look like they were there but it was done extremely well and ultimately they helped us keep the intensity and pressure up and prevented Spurs from trying to press us because they were being played through too easily. Like Tuchel said playing with that intent got the crowd going too, and in turn the players fed off that more. It's a 2 way street to ensure the Bridge is as intimidating and difficult a place to play for opposition teams.

This worked effectively in my opinion due to the personnel and having a couple of versatile players in key positions to swap seamlessly. In Chilwell and Cucurella we now have two players who are comfortable playing either wing back in a 3 or full back in a 4. With the pace and energy that both possess the roles don't come massively dissimilar. Compared to Alonso for example who physically has never been ideal in a back 4 without that additional protection he's afforded as a wing back. And then if we do use the RLC/Reece James combo on the right hand side it allows those transitions really well. RLC gets the licence to move into more advanced positions with the ball and Reece is comfortable with becoming a right back in support of the attack, but both also seem to possess a very good understanding defensively. Son got completely shut down for the whole game to the point where I can only remember him being on the ball once when Reece took a booking. I want to see how this works against some of the lesser teams in the league. We played yesterday with a lot of intensity and really squeezed the pitch in the first half to the point where we were leaving Silva and Koulibaly with Jorginho sat in front and James and Kante were nearly the furthest forward in the press at times. If we play with that level of intensity and quality week in week out, we'll be fine this season even with inconsistent attackers. The acid test is Leeds next, can Tuchel get the boys playing in the same way for that one.

I still stand by what I said previously. If the club has identified him as the best and outstanding candidate for the role then they should wait for him. We'd say the exact same thing if a number one target wasn't available yet on the playing staff, so why should that be any different in the board room. It's been chaotic at times this summer and Boehly is obviously having to learn quickly on the job but we've so far signed three excellent players in my opinion for the first team, with possibly one or two more to come despite no opportunity to plan ahead months in advance like other clubs so it's not like this summer has been a mitigated disaster.

I'd argue RLC has found his best role in this team as a right wing back. It suits him being able to be more advanced than the midfield two whilst also offering him more space and time on the ball than he is afforded in the centre. His defensive workload and combinations with Reece have also been strong, especially considering he's played against Madrid and that side kept Vinicius quiet and then yesterday, the only time I can remember Son playing was being pulled back by Reece from our corner. In my opinion our transfer strategy should be striving for the best players possible that should be able to impact on our starting XI. Sterling and Koulibaly are definite starters and improvements and there can be a debate over whether Cucurella is better than Chilwell or not, but it's clear as day at the very least competes for first choice in his role as opposed to just a squad signing. Being linked with the likes of Dumfries and now Gordon for significant money, I'd just stick this season with RLC and Reece as the wing back options. Is RLC the long term solution at wing back? Possibly and probably not but arguably our three best performances since we were first sanctioned - Southampton away, Madrid away and yesterday he played in all of them. He's earned a crack at that role this season when the options out there on the market are limited at best.

He's only played about a combined 20 minutes over the first two games so difficult to say whether he looks ready. I was actually pleased with his cameo against Everton and whilst he's obviously still raw at his age and with only one Premier League season under his belt, he does offer a lot of the traits we're looking for in a front man for our system. He's filled out a bit since last summer and looks like he'll be able to handle himself against opposition defenders but is also deceptively quick, willing to run the channels and press from the front. He's also, unlike Havertz, a natural number 9. Obviously he falls into the same bracket of we'd be taking a punt on him being able to score the goals we need from him but we'd be doing the same now with most striker options out there. I do think that our current squad is very capable of making the top 4 this season. What may stop us from competing for the title is a goal scorer but I'd rather wait for an opportunity to open up next summer than panic buy one this.

The problem for us is striking the balance between someone more clinical but also able to bring other strengths to the teams all round game. Lukaku could easily be classed as a 'serious number 9' but his inabilities to press hard and high up the pitch and offer link up to the rest of the team was detrimental. If we knew that Havertz could get 12 - 15 goals a season, I'd rather have him than someone like Lukaku or Ronaldo who offer little else to the team even if they were getting 18-20 goals a season. The problem is so far in his 2 seasons Havertz hasn't shown he's capable of this. But a bigger problem for me, is that there isn't much available on the market this summer.

He's not got that burst of acceleration that Rudiger has but he's certainly no slouch and I think someone that is capable and comfortable of playing a high line and not worrying about opposition playing balls in behind. For that trade off though I think Koulibaly is a more tactically aware defender and better on the ball. Maybe won't drive the ball up the field like Rudiger would, but far more capable playing a 30-40 yard ball up field. Age is the only concern for me to be honest, and being able to maintain his standards well into his 30's. Not expecting him to be the next Thiago Silva, but if we got 2 years of him still in his prime and a year or two more of him at a high level to still offer something to the squad then I think it'll have been a really good deal all around for us. Anything more will be a bonus.

His performance wasn't pathetic but he has to bury that chance.

I hope the intensity we showed today, particularly in that first half wasn't reserved just for a big derby at home. We looked significantly more sharper and fitter today, put that into this game and moving forwards and we'll be fine.