Superblue

The problem that you have with younger players is I believe there are restrictions in place on length of contract you can give them. I don't think a long term contract can be given to them until they turn 18 (although happy to be corrected if wrong). If Bate turned 18 in October last year, I assume they have been trying to tie him down since then. Not much more the club can do in this situation.

There may be a plan for him but I'm pretty certain it won't be starting XI. I just feel, even if they signed an extra year and went out on loan this season it would serve them far better long term. With a season playing regularly Bate could well still move to Leeds next season but he'd be more likely to be in a stronger position to push for their first team. He could very easily get lost in the shuffle for a couple of seasons making a few appearances here or there and before he knows it, he's 21 years old and barely featured. Loftus-Cheek probably lost 3 - 4 years of his career being on the periphery of our first team but not quite at a level to play regularly. His loan spell with Palace could and should have happened at least a couple of years earlier. The club I think will still demand a good fee, sell on clauses, etc because we could just hold him for a season and let a tribunal decide a fee.

I'm surprised by the stance of Bate and Livramento in particular who are both highly rated at the club. They both need to play football, and even if they moved to a mid table Premier League club, will they get enough game time this season to justify that move? I can't see Bate playing much at Leeds next season if he joins them, as they don't rotate in huge numbers and Bielsa already has quite a settled side that he trusts. They should take stock of where exactly they are currently within their career. For me, a loan to a Championship club would probably be the best solution for both where they can play regularly and hopefully in 12 months time they are far more polished and experienced to be either knocking on the door of Chelsea's squad (i.e. fill a backup role here rather than a backup role at a Leeds) or they can be pushing for a starting or more established role at a mid table Prem club whether on loan (like a Gallagher) or permanently (Guehi). I wouldn't recommend either signing long term deals at Chelsea, but I think it would have been sensible for them to sign a year or two extension and get out playing football regularly next season.

I think this might relate to a different incident a couple of weeks ago.

Yep, it seems someone has already been sentenced as guilty on Twitter if anyone wonders who it is rumoured to be.

I agree there is risk attached to it, but beyond Haaland what striker's are out there we could buy that we're all going to be confident will bang in goals consistently? The striker depth on the market is extremely poor in my opinion. We'd be taking potentially a bigger risk buying a player that isn't one of our top targets and hoping it pays off.

Maybe we don't need Werner and Havertz to produce those numbers. Firstly, I don't think it's completely unrealistic though if that were to happen because both have shown capability of this in previous seasons (albeit not in the Premier League). But if you didn't include Tammy (who if we didn't buy another striker you'd have to believe Tuchel would retain) then our current other 6 'attackers' of Werner, Havertz, Pulisic, Mount, CHO and Ziyech scored 24 Premier League goals between them, so 4 on average. I would be dumbfounded if they did not improve quite considerably on those numbers between them all next season. It shouldn't be unrealistic to expect across those 6 players to double that tally to average 8 Premier League goals each. It would only take one or two just to hit double figures to likely reach that let alone expecting someone to hit 15-20 goals minimum.

Werner and Havertz can both play there. It'd be no different to Werner, Havertz and Giroud last season seeing as Tammy didn't get a look in.

A privilege? Or a deserved spot for his contribution to the squads that made these finals?

It hasn't helped that neither has been first choice under Lampard. Rudiger nearly moved on last summer and was linked again moving in January and Christensen had a couple of runs but ultimately wasn't first choice under Lampard, so I could see the reasons why this time last year both may not have been prepared to commit, and similarly the club may have been anticipating to move them on ourselves. I'm pretty sure both will end up signing new contracts shortly, along with Azpi.

His skillset is very different to the rest of our attackers. We have an abundance of pace and players willing to make the runs but he's the one player who relies on sitting deeper and having the game played in front of him, being able to spot runs and make passes. I agree, I think if he can settle and stay fit better than last season he could be an important player for being able to break down some of the lesser sides playing low blocks.

If the right attacker isn't available, I think we'll look to use our budget in other areas of the team, probably a centre back, centre mid and wing back. I think given the price of Haaland it's one or the other, we won't be buying him and strengthening other areas. Or we end up settling on an alternative attacker but the options for this are extremely risky in my opinion and most will still command big fees which are quite frankly unjustified.

Was Mendy the person coming out after Alonso?

I genuinely think that's why there's been no movement so far. The club are trying to move players out to be able to have a better understanding of our transfer budgets as it may impact who we end up targeting, or particularly in the case of Haaland, could we add another player or two to the squad as well as him? It's never ideal to be bringing players in late in the window, but I would ultimately rather we get the right player even if they are coming in towards the end of the transfer window.

He has taken a Chelsea pen before without the hop, can't remember who against maybe Spurs? The hop isn't my favoured choice of penalty style but his overall penalty record for Chelsea and Napoli holds up against other players. And I much prefer the way Jorgi and Bruno take a penalty to the way Rashford and Sancho tried to take theirs with about 25 stutters in their run up.

I completely agree, it's not ideal but you don't have much choice but to trust the backup in this situation.

Penalty miss and Donnarumma's subsequent save for Saka probably cost him player of the tournament. From about 20 minutes onwards and particularly in the second half him and Verratti dominated England. It was almost embarrassing in the second half how timid England were. I couldn't understand that Southgate didn't copy the formula that Spain implemented, pushing players high on Verratti and Jorginho. I think scoring so early was the worst thing that could have happened to England to be honest, despite the talent, too many players in that team have very little experience of winning trophies and seeing that out.

Whilst it's hardly ideal, I think even if Mendy was away for the duration, it may only be something like 2 league games and a round or two of the FA Cup.

To be fair, I can remember how hard it was negotiating with them for Sarri and Jorginho. Make them taste some medicine for a bit (although ultimately we could do with moving Emerson on).

Chelsea have always been fair with players that have given top service, it's something we never get credit for. Giroud's professionalism here has been exemplary, especially after he was seemingly off 18 months ago and we cancelled at the last minute. There was no moaning and bitching he just put his head down and fought his way back into the reckoning. He's played that selfless squad role for a long time now at Chelsea, and at his age he fully deserves the opportunity to just be playing regularly. His game time diminished nearly as much as Tammy's by the season run-in. Particularly if he still has ambitions to play on for France and try to hunt down the goal scoring record (which I personally hope he does).

I think he'll thrive in Italy for another couple of years. It's no coincidence that his best performances this season for us were in Europe where games are usually slower and more tactical then the frenetic pace domestically. He'll be a very good signing for Milan, but he certainly goes with my blessing. For what looked nothing more than a short term stop gap to appease Conte, he's turned out to be a really effective and value for money buy. He's a bloody likeable and selfless personality too.

You'd assume some sort of discussion on numbers will take place though between Chelsea and Raiola before trying to broker a deal with Dortmund, otherwise it's a complete waste of time. I think the rumours he is our number 1 target is completely true and I think the reason why there's been no movement so far is we know the cost involved to bring him in both in terms of agents/wages and transfer fee and it'll pretty much use our entire budget unless we can move some players on for reasonable prices. Therefore we're giving ourselves as much time as possible to assess the market and see whether we can make any other deals alongside Haaland. The biggest consideration for me with the Haaland deal is I assume at some stage he'll want to play for Barca or Madrid. It's just something that is likely to have to be accepted in a similar way to Hazard. I'm not sure whether we'd accept some form of release clause in there but if we're paying say £120 - 150m then any such clause would have to be the £200m bracket. Even if the end game is Madrid down the line, it still wouldn't put me off him. If you got even 3, 4, 5 years out of him at a high enough level that Madrid came calling in the future, and then got your money back or more then it's worth the effort if he's fired us to some more trophies in that time.

Why would we sell someone, we need minimum 4 midfielders in the squad and Gilmour has already left on loan.

In all honesty I don't know if that will be viewed as a big enough step up for Ings. He was at Liverpool and that spell was just completely wrecked by injury. I think he'll look to back himself for a move to a big 6 team and try to write those wrongs. Depends on Southampton's stance with a move this summer but even next summer just hitting 30, I think on a free he would be pretty desirable across the Prem, even for the top clubs because he'd be a more than decent rotational option.

You'd assume not. However Tammy had completely been frozen out. I wouldn't be against Tammy staying but if Tuchel doesn't fancy him then it's pointless. I would say Giroud was starting to fall into the same bracket. He'd make the bench for pretty much all the games but how much game time did he receive in the final weeks. I don't have the info but I'd assume if was very little. I don't want us buying for the sake of it, we've been there and suffered as a consequence (we still are in some cases). However we do also need to make sure that Tuchel has a squad that he trusts. I do worry that might not be the case with Tammy and Giroud.