TorontoChelsea

Against Swansea and QPR, we had 50 shots, only 10 of them on target and 0 goals. 0 goals on 50 shots!!! Torres only took 6 of those shots. Luiz and Ivanovic combining for 16 shots in those two games with 2 of them on goal..

The off-side was tight. He was probably very very slightly offside but possibly not. There was no penalty. There was no dive either (I hate how refs think it's either/or) but that would have been a ridiculous penalty. Ba definitely looked much more dangerous though. He got his head of a couple of balls in the box and looked dangerous overall. He should have come on earlier.

Who the club and managers clearly never trusted as a striker. It was an odd choice not to buy another striker over the summer and instead spend all of their money on attacking midfielders.

He certainly forced our managers to play him this season by not buying another striker in the summer.

This is just turning into a nightmare season. We played very well in the first half but just got unlucky. Second half we weren't nearly as impressive. Down 1-0, I'd be OK going away. Down 2-0 is a lot harder. We've been just awful under Rafa with some historically bad performances. Losing 2-0 at home to Swansea? Are you kidding? We looked much better once Ba was on (of course). Oscar had one beautiful pass but was invisible. He is simply not a winger. Marin at least provides some real width.

Oh Jesus....fuck off.

http://www.freefoot.ae.ma/ http://www.day.to/ Keep your nut though...

We outplayed them badly but couldn't finish. (Mata and Ramires with the best chances). We're moving the ball very well. Luiz is having easily his best game as a midfielder. Hope Rafa doesn't wait too long to make changes if the score-line continues.

One bad mistake and it's in....fuck

That was some pass by Oscar....

This game needs a goal...from us.

Beautiful movement. More of that!.

No. You're just wrong. Fellaini's pass percentage is around 79% that's what it was last year as well when he was playing as a central midfielder. That is poor for a central midfielder. (Arteta's was 88%, Ya Ya Toure's 90%,). Where Fellaini excels is in the air where he is elite and and in making lots of tackles where he is very good but fouls way too often. And no, Fellainai's fouls are not normal. He has more fouls than anyone in the Premier league per game this season, led that category last year as well, was 10th in the Premier League the year before, and was second the year before that. And he's much more mistake prone than Mikel who is not mistake-prone at all. .

This is exactly it. Fellaini is a very good player but he doesn't fit at Chelsea. His best position, no matter how he sees himself, is as an attacking midfielder. As a central midfielder, his passing is poor, he's mistake prone, and he fouls way too often. I don't understand why you would buy someone in order to play them in a position where they were worse.

It says "Fellaini could be a Chelsea player very soon....he has a buyout clause of"...I can't even finish. It's just the same transfer rumours you're seeing elsewhere. If anything really happens, you'll know.

Simple...we'll just play the old 3-6-1 with 6 attacking midfielders. It's like a reverse parking the bus...is that driving the bus? Cech Azpilicueta Terry Luiz Moses/ Mata/Hazard/Fellaini/Oscar/KDB Ba

That's what I look for in a woman. Someone who is willing to better herself.

I agree that stats can be misleading, but they do have some value. Yes, Iniesta and Messi only have slightly more key passes per game than Isco, but Iniesta has 11 assists and Messi has 27 goals and 6 assists. Isco has 4 goals and 1 assist. The problem I have with him statistically, is that he's not even close to being one of the better players on Malaga. Whoscored.com has him as their 9th best player. You say that Isco's stats are poor because of the team he plays on, well Joaquin plays on the same squad , also as an attacking midfielder and has been much better. (4 goals, 4 assists, 3.1 KP per game). Also, Malaga are in 4th in La Liga, they're hardly some crappy side.Now stats can be misleading, but not THAT misleading. In the Champions League, where we've seen him, he's been fantastic, but he's been quite mediocre domestically. Buying someone because they played very well over 4 games is not good enough for me. However, the biggest issue I have with this is twofold. One, we don't need to be buy anymore 20 year olds. We have plenty of youth on the club. We don't need to develop any more. We need players who can be ready to play at their top level the day we buy them. Second, we don't need a central attacking midfielder. Chelsea have spent 80M pounds+ in the last two years on players who play as a #10. We simply don'y need any more. Is Isco an upgrade over Mata, Hazard, or Oscar? No, he clearly isn't. So, what's the point? FFP means we have limited resources and money should be spent buying players at positions of need rather than getting a 4th central attacking midfielder.

I agree with you that if you can upgrade, you do, but we are not short of attacking midfielders. For me, someone like Isco is just not what we need. I've only seen him a bit and he has clearly talent, but he's also obviously not the finished package yet. He has tremendous skills, but he also has flaws. He's an attacking midfielder who only has 1 assist and 1.1 key passes a game. He also has 4 goals on 42 shots which either means he shoots too much or is a poor finisher. He also gets dispossessed more than any of his teammates. We already have a number of players we need to develop, and if we are going to buy someone else, I want someone who is a finished product. Not another young player with excellent potential and an exciting youtube reel. I would also like a natural winger or a central midfielder if we added someone because that is where we do lack depth. There comes a point where buying new players loses all its value. Whoever we'd buy at AM, won't replace Marin because Marin never plays and therefore needs no replacement. For next season, for 4 midfield spots, we already have Mata, Hazard, Moses, Ramires, Oscar, KDB, and Marin. That's without counting Luiz, Josh, Piazon, Kakuta, or Chalobah all of whom could force their way into playing time. We could afford one more midfielder but if we get someone good, all that means is that someone else who should be getting playing time, won't. Getting Isco would mean that players like Oscar and KDB wouldn't get as much development time. Chelsea already have three players, all of whom are young and extremely talented, for the #10 spot. That would be De Bruyne's most natural spot as well. This is literally the last position we need to address.

We only "parked the bus" (hate that phrase) for three games. Two against Barca and the final against Bayern. Mata was also poor against Benfica and was not influential for the second leg against Napoli. Lampard played well throughout but especially against Barcelona. Again, I don't think it's worth dwelling on, because I don't think it has any bearing on the future.

The rules are complicated. Kakuta will count as homegrown but not Piazon I think. And don't speak to me of that turncoat Hargreaves (Canada has some decent players but like Julian De Guzman and Junior Hoilett they don't seem to want to play for Canada.) I think the best thing to do is to find a few key players that are homegrown. We had Terry, Lampard, and Cole for years. If you have that, the quotas are easy to make. If you don't, you're always going to have to be dealing with a silly issue and doing things just to make the quota (like buying players who aren't good enough to play or bringing players that should be on loan on to your bench just to meet the quota).

Frank was great during our CL run. Mata wasn't. Mata had a long season and was tired and our defensive style didn't fit with the way Mata plays. Mata is our best player right now and by a fair bit.

Actually, haven't made many arguments about this. I hate to see people slamming Lampard but the club was around before him and will be after. If it were up to me, I'd offer him a one-yer contract on reduced wages because I think he's still good enough to give Chelsea something, but it's not up to me.

Piazon doesn't count as homegrown but he's still under 21 so he doesn't count against us. It works in reverse. You're only allowed 17 non HG players. (which usually means 8 homegrown because you usually have 25 men). So, Cech, Ivanovic, Luiz, Ramires, Torres, Mata, Mikel, Marin, Azpilicueta, Ba, Hazard, Oscar, Romeu, Lukaku, and KDB (not sure with KDB because his mother is English but not sure if that matters at all), is 15. That would mean that at a maximum, Chelsea would be able to bring in 2 or 3 non-homegrown players without getting rid of someone. It makes sense for the club to try to bring in a homegrown player or two who could be in the core of the squad so you don't really have to worry about this issue every year. Lukaku would be under-21 as well, so that would be 14 meaning we'd be able to sign 3 more non-homegrown players.

I don't remember either, but we probably only have a few spots open to foreign-born players.We're definitely going to have to bring in some homegrown ones this summer.