TorontoChelsea

Before people overreact too much (and I guarantee that's going to happen, actual match threads are almost unbearable due to the insane overreactions), 1 point away in a derby is not a terrible result. We didn't play terribly either. If Hazard hits one of those sitters or we get one penalty, we get three points. We had many more great opportunities to score than QPR. That said RDM is very conservative and our starting XI was incredibly defensive but RDM seems hesitant to make any changes. The changes he made were the right ones, he just made them too late. Pissed off at Torres for storming off. That's not the way you play the game. He had a poor match and deserved to be subbed off. It's the first time in four games. Does he think he's going to play 90 minutes every single match?

And Torres went straight down the tunnel.

Sturridge coming on it looks like. Hopefully for Torres.

Moses for Bertrand. Good change.

Not nearly as bad a half as people are making it out to be. QPR had no real chances, Hazard should have scored (set up by Ramires), probably should have had a penalty as well, and Torres had a great chance.

Bertrand could have seen red there. Silly challenge.

RDM is so conservative In his unwillingness to make changes. I fully expect us to win anyhow, but at some point, other players are going to have to play their part.

This would be just to pick up somebody else we like and then we'd loan him elsewhere. Olivera isn't even ready for regular action in Portugal. He scored 0 goals last season. Nothing to do with Falcao or Cavani who would be bought as #1 strikers.

Not one of those players would be playing regularly, if at all, for Chelsea. None of them is remotely close to being a star. We have hundreds of youth players that come and go, we really have two choices. 1) Keep every single one until they are 35 which means having about 20 youth teams and spending millions of pounds on players who will never become anything. 2) Use our best judgement and let most of them move on. This means that inevitably, a few will develop into decent players.

Is there any other kind of power? Congrats you two. Although Choulo, your profile no longer says "Member of the month" so you have to add that to your signature or something just to keep reminding us.

Great to see. Loved him when he was with us. Scored a goal every 3 games despite playing largely as a substitute.

http://forum.talkchelsea.net/topic/14516-warning-please-read/page__fromsearch__1 Other than that I don't know. I don't know exactly what was said, but I broadly agree with Jim on this. Hillsborough was a tragedy where 96 innocent football fans lost their lives. It could have been anybody who died. It's not OK in any way to make fun of that.

If he can't pass well enough to play as an attacking midfielder, there's no way he can pass well enough to play as the deep-lying midfielder. That's a position that require the skills that Ramires doesn't have and doesn't use the skills that he does. Really, he just doesn't fit into this system which is a shame.

He did often drift to the centre last year, but he also played LW with Valencia and he is perfectly capable of playing that position. I'm not attacking him because he's one of our best players and his instructions probably come from RDM anyway, but he really needs to move wide for us to have prolonged success. Right now, his positioning is overlapping areas that Hazard and Lampard are supposed to be in and not being on the left side leaves a massive hole. It imbalances the entire side both in attack and defending. About Ramires. I agree that he is more suited for the counter-attack style, but the position in this system is not as a true winger. It's an attacking midfielder on the right side. Again, he's not really suited for that position either, but there's really nowhere else to play him in the 4-2-3-1 if RDM wants him in the lineup.

Happy birthday Steve!

Mata and Hazard have pretty much only played as wingers in their career so I see no reason why one of them (I prefer Mata) should be moved to the left. I don't love Ramires on the right by any stretch of the imagination but he was at his best there last season and he provides defensive cover that our other attacking midfielders don't. I'd love to see Moses or Marin take the job long-term but for different reasons (Marin hurt, Moses late signing) none of them have featured at this point.

It's true but it's not only Ramires that is to blame for that. We are essentially playing with no wingers at the moment because Mata and Hazard are both playing in the middle of the pitch and the other attacking midfielder has either been Bertrand or Ramires neither of whom belong there. Our shape needs some ironing out, We need Mata or Hazard to play more to one side for starters.

Reminds me some of Ramires, good player for a specific system, but not good for ours. Like Ramires, he has some very good skills and is flexible, but overall, it's hard to place him in a system,. He's an attacking defensive midfielder who is not a great finisher or creator. Doesn't fit with Chelsea. With Everton this season, he's playing centrally behind the striker which is already crowded for us. He's certainly not nearly a good enough passer to play as the deep lying midfield. Would likely work in a 4-3-3,

It's hard to use sarcastic exaggeration when people are even more exaggerated than your sarcasm and are actually being serious.

Yes, and it was harder because everyone had to play in black and white. Sometimes couldn't even tell who your teammates were.

I am very good at geography and got 128. Apparently that puts me at 70% which either means 1) A lot of geographers take the test 2) People cheat. I vote for 2 although I don't get why anyone would. It's amazing what simple countries you forget when you're doing this. (West and Central Africa always kill me. So many relatively new small countries there).

I'm a Tigers fan. No idea how they haven't run away with the division yet. White Sox just having everything going right for them this year...Tigers have more talent. They should be in first. Personally, I blame Mikel.

Not true. Churchill ordered the purposeful killing of tens of thousands of civilians. So did Truman. The real change has been twofold: First, in our attitude towards civilian deaths. Overall, this has been a fabulous change. We no longer accept carpet bombing of civilians (by most countries anyway, Russia did it in Chechnya to almost no outcry, the French killed hundreds of thousands of Algerians in the 50's and 60's and few even remember that). What constitutes a war criminal now is a much lower bar than ever before. Again, this is generally very good. The second change and more important has been in how wars are fought. Even in the second world war, most battles were fought in battlefields. Soldiers against soldiers.People in uniform against other people in uniform. It was possible to have massive battles without many civilian causalities. This has changed dramatically. There are virtually no wars fought this way anymore, instead, it is guerrilla warfare where one or both sides are not identifiable as soldiers. This is illegal in international law and rightly so because it creates a tremendous number of problems. If you're a NATO soldier in Afghanistan for example, and you see a teenager coming at you on a bike, he might be an innocent teenager but he also might be a Taliban suicide bomber. War isn't a video game where you get extra chances and so soldiers will make mistakes.(Which is what the insurgents want.) Battles are not fought on battlefields, they are fought in crowded city streets.. America and everyone else, is fighting differently because the way to fight is different. (and it is continuing to change-cyber warfare is of increasing importance as are unmanned drones) Ideally, you would avoid going to war in the first place.

Was being sarcastic but the poster below me blew my sarcasm out of the water. Lampard was one of our better players last season. His scoring, passing, and even defending were vital to us going anywhere. The idea that 3 mediocre games (in a season where we've started 3-0-0) means Lampard is useless is a ridiculous overreaction. Lampard is still a vital part of this club.

Yes, but he's 34 years old so he's no good.