BlueDutchy

I don't think we should be focusing on his age too much. If he seems to be ready, and imo he does, why not just try him. If a player looks good enough, I think the age shouldnt be a reason not to try it. There are as many examples that it turned out to be wrong decision as there are that it turned out to be a right one. It differs per player.

Am I the only one who is actually more concerned about the assistants than about Di Matteo? I believe nobody here underestimates the importance of the assistant manager having Clark, Wilkins and Rodgers as former assistants. Some of the problems I come across in this topic and in general are problems that could and maybe should be resolved by assistants. Di Matteo can't deal personally with every individual and their performance (especially not in depth). This is part of the assistants' job. For example, Torres movement. http://www.weaintgotnohistory.com/ wrote a very good report on this (http://www.weaintgotnohistory.com/2012/11/12/3634910/chelsea-fc-liverpool-width-fernando-torres). As it says in the report, we aren't even creating as much chances as we could because Torres' movement isn't what it used to be. Is this something that Di Matteo personally should deal with? No I don't believe so. I assume Chelsea analyze their own game and that they are aware of this problem since it wasn't the only game. I believe that these kind of things should be dealt with by the assistants. I think assistants should be working with the individuals on improving their game. They are the one who are talking about these kind of stuff with the players. When Henk ten Cate worked with us, I remember Drogba saying he improved massively because of Ten Cate. Ten Cate was a great field trainer. He liked to be on the pitch and work with players, he was a great assistant. I admit that I don't know how well the Steve Holland and Eddie Newton are functioning but these kind of problems (making players better, working on their movement/passing/shooting) is something assistans should work on with the players. I worry more about the training and what happens there (also in terms of drilling automatisms) than what happens during the game. We are a team in development and the training is now more important than ever.

Do you want to play with a false #9 just because Barca did it and it worked? You already point out the essential difference between Barca and our squad when you say that you won't compare the qualities of the players but only point out the similarities. That is exactly the problem, there is no other team that could play like Barca because nobody has players who are that good. Just copying their formation isn't good enough, you'd have to copy their playing style and philosophy and we could never do that. Why do you think Barcelona transfer deals are almost always bad deal? Because non-Barca players have no idea what it's like to play like Barca. Even a La Masia product (Fabregas) struggled when he came back. Players in La Masia are being teached to play exactly like the first team have played under Guardiola. We can't just use their formation and expect it to work. You have to play like them, you have to think like them and that would take years of adaption. Technically wise, our players aren't at the same level as Messi, Iniesta, Xavi and it would be extremely risky to play like them. A false #9 works for a dominating side and we don't have the qualities to dominate like Barcelona. Besides, I don't think Barcelona would win the title in England. Their pressing would be less efficient against kick-and-rush. Nowadays, kick and rush is a bit gone, but against Barcelona everybody would use it. Barcelona/Messi have always struggled against physique, defensive (English) sides (Chelsea mostly).

Expect that during the season we'll see the development of some automatisms and a standard way of attacking. For now, We rely on Hazard (Mata is still tired), Oscar still has to adapt and Marin is injured. I just hope it doesn't take long until RDM sees that Ramires as right winger isn't working. I also expect that when Azpilicueta starts playing he adds a new dimension to our attacking ability. We have to remember that a lot of players came in and left, especially Drogba is a big loss. We need to find a new style and players don't have a connection with each other yet. Give it time and it will get better.

Just wait and we'll see how manages the bad periodes in the winter. That was the period that broke up Villas-Boas and we'll see how RDM does. RDM isn't a great manager but he definitely deserves some credit . I wouldn't have started Oscar, who isn't used to the EPL and the atmosphere in british stadia, in a hostile environment like Loftus Road. This time it didn't work out for Di Matteo but when he played Mikel-Mereiles a couple of weeks ago, it was a great move. We spend a lot this summer and RDM is still building a squad. We don't see how players perform in training, we don't see the interaction and connection between player. No I don't agree with everything he does, but then no manager has ever did what I wanted him to do. If he turns out to be incompetent, we'll just hire De Boer (Dutch Guardiola..)

23 players are out on loan at the moment. That's across every age group, that's a lot of players and it is a good sign that our academy is improving. I disagree with you. Luiz isn't a holding midfielder, in fact all the arguments why you want him to be a holding midfielder are arguments why he shouldn't be. Is there any good, 'risky' (to quote you) holding midfielder. Was Makelele risky? Is Busquets or even another type of holding midfielder: Modric? A holding midfielder needs to be a safe choice who doesn't lose the ball. As a defender Luiz already loses the ball too many times, it would be even worse as a holding midfielder. Cahill is too average to become our captain (I hope). Yes he is English and more of a leader than, for example Luiz, but Cahill is never going to be so 'untouchable' (i.e always a starter) that he would be our captain. He is not so that talented. When he and Luiz partnered up, they both showed that they don't have Terry's organising skills. Ramires isn't per sé useless in the position he now plays (altough it doesn't suit him). Our playing style just doesn't bring out his strengths. He can't make those runs behind the defense because we play more offensive. The fact that you 'won't get started' about Mikel says enough. He has been one of our best this season and he was good at the end of last season.

In what thread did you write about Sky's doping and such. Interesting read though, thanks

Chelsea lead 1-0 through a Patrick Bamford goal. Todd Kane with the assist. Judging by the reports Chelsea is very dominant so far, very good at keeping the ball.

Hope we draw Ajax so I can watch them at the away game. Always a good experience to play against Ajax and they won't defend with 10 men so could be two easy games.

Excellent post. One thing you didn't highlight enough (imo) is the lack of diversity we have now that Didier left us. Last year we won against Barca for several reasons, but one of them is the lack of tactical diversity at Barca. They can only play one way and that is their 'tiki-taka' (or something). We managed (succesfully) to counter that and we end up winning the cup. In the whole run to CL victory we showed our tactical diversity. Our approach against Napoli was very different from the one against Barca. Didier gave us the options to change our playing style. Lukaku, Sturridge and Torres won't give us that kind of diversity because they are either not good enough or the playing style doesn't suite them (i.e Lukaku is in a way similar to Drogba, but isn't good enough to carry us like Didier did). Furthermore, just an excellent and complete post. I still miss a playmaker in central midfield. I know pre-season doesn't say a lot, but everytime PSG pressed our double pivot the forward 4 became isolated. I believe that wasn't just an incident in preseason, we will struggle with that fact coming season. Opponents will notice that our double pivot is weak and they can beat us by pressing far up the pitch. Last thing, Ramires can play as right winger as well (imo). He gives (more) defensive security and his runs will be less of a risk as a right winger.

You have a starting 9 players? You are allowed to use 11

Blackman is imo very talented. I'd prefer him to be our back-up over Turnbull and Hilario. The question is how long does he want to be just 'a back-up'. For the next few years he won't mind staying at Chelsea. But he'd also be a great back-up for Courtois in de future. I don't think a new second goalkeeper is necessary.

I don't think Oscar is going to be that great this season. He is coming straight out the Brazilian league and he'll probably need a season/period to adapt. I wouldn't put him straight into my team but might make him a gameweek transfer.

Hart is just 7 mil. For a player who scored 166 points last season 7 million isn't that bad considering Walcott (scoring 169 points last season) is 'worth' 9 million.

Pussay Patrol

For exxample, just sub a defender for a forward and your formation turns into 3-4-3.

Does Chelsea participate in this year's Milk Cup? I've read things about United's U-17 playing and in the past we have also competed in the Milk Cup. Do you know something about this?

Joined! Still not sure about my team though. Will probably change it 1000 times before I go on holidays

Oh, That is an excellent idea. Fine by me but since Hutcho made one as well you'll just have to decide which one to join.

I've made my own league on fantasy.premierleague.com. This is the code: 27588-9729. You are all welcome to join!

You do underestimate the influence of Laporta. He came when Barcelona was a mess and reorganised it and eventually appointed Guardiola. Laporta was again appointed because Cruijff supported him (that was at least one of the reasons). Cruijff didn't just have indirect influence on the succes of Guardiola and Barcelona. He still has a big direct influence. This stopped when Rosell became the new preses. Guardiola is the most responsible for Barca's succes, but Laporta and Cruijff deserve a lot of credit as well. People who say anybody could have achieved with this team are ridiculous. Xavi wasn't worldclass until Guardiola came..

He gave an interview on a local broadcast. Here are some quotes: Kalas: "Everybody at Chelsea recognised me. Something I really didn't expect. The level of training was very high, which I benefited from" Kalas: "But I don't want to just train, I wanna play games as well. That's why I'm here at Vitesse." He also said that a lot has changed in the summer at Vitesse with the arrival of a new coach but they hope to perform even better.

What about a loan elsewhere in Europe? If Chelsea would agree with you, SeB, on his physique but do think he should play regularly then they could ponder a loan to Holland. Technically wise you can hardly find better competitions for players to develop. However, I think his physique is ok. Black players (not being racist) are usually more athletic and full grown at a young age (see for example Lukaku). Of course Chalobah is more built like Ramires, but Ramires is also a though, athletic player.

I disagree with you, Tomo. You are right about Bertrand, but I don't really see the point of your post. You now have found one youth player who got into the first squad (not even as a regular starter) even though he had many disappointments and didn't always have a bright future. I'd rather see it like we should be happy that Bertrand stuck with us even though we didn't really give him a lot reasons to do so. Many players wouldn't have done that and Bertrand is probably extremely patient. However, we can't assume every youth player will be like this. We'll lose a lot of talented players if we always buy players of positions instead of looking at our acadamy. Not everybody is as patient as Bertrand and we can't expect them to be. Talented players don't like to wait until they're 22/23 to make their (European) debuts. Buying a lot of players wíll block the development of youth players. It's a good post but you have overlooked so many things. Bertrand, fortunately, had succesfull loan spells. Sometimes the player is to blame when the loan spell turns out to be a disappointment, but at other times it was just the wrong choice and the player couldn't help it. Bertrand had a lot of succesful loan spells which gave him experience and maybe even confidence that one day he would make it into the first squad. I already pointed out the difference in patience/mentality of players.

It's just working both ways. Messi would still be great without Xavi and Iniesta but he probably wouldn't have scored as many goals. And as you said, Iniesta and Xavi benefit from Messi since they lack scoring ability. Messi offers them great runs, surprise, penetration in the box and most importantly; he creates soo much space. At Spain there isn't a player who needs two players to cover, no player who is always dangerous and creates space. Messi does that for Barca/Xavi and Iniesta. Messi is obviously the best in the world. He only lacks aerial ability, but that's just because of his length. His heading is actually quite good