dee25

Wow! Just. Wow. He's on fire!

This has been a very good game by Oscar. His work rate is always excellent, but his passing and vision has been top class today.

We need another central midfielder. Most would probably agree. But it's sad to see how much under-appreciation there is for Frank on here sometimes. His performances hasn't all been stellar, but also doesn't merit the criticisms he's received. There's a reason why, behind Hazard & Terry, he's our 3rd highest rated player on squawka. This month though, he's taken his game up to a higher level & his performance in the 1st half against Liverpool is the kind of performances he's been putting in regularly all month. I'm just happy that he seems to be finally getting some recognition. Hopefully he can maintain this good form when he returns from injury. In any case, we put in a very good team performance against Liverpool and it looks like more of the players are beginning to raise their game. We've been lucky that Terry has been so consistent, but now's the time we really need to see that consistency from the others.

And it's not just in this game that Frank's presence in central midfield has been influential. I said it before in the Lampard thread & I'll say it again, lately (particularly this month) he's been among our top performing players. It could be because Mourinho has been rotating him more with Mikel & Essien which might explain why he's looked sharper than he did before when he was basically playing every game. Whatever the reason is, he's put in a couple of really top performances this month. According to Choulo though, that's a "largely unpopular opinion".

Had a feeling Jose would start luiz in there instead of Mikel. Would have preferred luiz in central mid in a 433. His last performance in the double pivot doesn't leave me with much confidence. Need a BIG game from him today.

As a matter of fact, I had a fabulous Christmas, thank you. Phil Driver, well someone had to say it. I don't know if he thinks his football knowledge is the be all & end all, but I've noticed that he makes a lot of bold and exaggerated statements that are often factually incorrect. We're all passionate about our opinions but even when it's clear that he's wrong, this poster still carries on arguing like his opinion is the gospel or something. And for an admin, that's unfortunate.

smh, your post is just such a convoluted mess of incorrect claims, unsubstantiated bold statements and just nonsensical opinions. But okay, I'll bite. 1. The majority of active users on this forum are 30 and below. That is not by any stretch of the imagination, "representative of a diversified sample size of the Chelsea supporter base." Nice try. 2. Even if there does exists a general consensus about Frank on Twitter & chelsea online forums (which you haven't exactly provided any evidence to) what does that even prove? The chelsea discourse on social networking sites is not at all representative of the larger thought/opinion of chelsea supporters. You *do* know there's a whole world of fans that exists outside of the cyber universe, right? 3. Within the small minority of chelsea supporters on social networking sites, the opinion about Lampard's performances are not even uniformly consistent. You have those who think he's been shit but there are also an equal amount who think he's been good and is being 'scapegoated'. 4. This statement - "unless you have a different means of showing that a large number of Chelsea fans think otherwise, it'll just be claims in the air" is just irrationality at the very highest. You're the one that brought up the point that my claim about Frank recently being among the top performing players in the team, is a 'largely unpopular notion'. The onus is on you to prove that not me. Rather than simply admitting that it's only unpopular on *this* forum, you're trying to extend the dominant view of Frank held by a select few on ONE online forum as a representation of the larger opinion. Are you for real? 5. I repeat, Frank has *lately* (again, emphasis on the word lately) been among the top performers in the team. In his last six starts (Basel being the one exception where everyone performed poorly) his rating on whoscored has consistently been among the highest. Comparing Frank's last six starts, to the last six starts of all the players you mentioned, none of them have consistently been rated among the top performances. Whereas Frank has. 6. Against Sunderland, he scored 1 goal, made 1 assist and had the second highest rating. If that isn't 'anything special' then I want what you're smoking. Finally, I'm gonna be perfectly up front with you. From what I've seen, you tend throw around the most exaggerated and farcical claims that are often wrong. The worst part is you try to pass these claims off as some kind of 'ultimate truth' without ever providing any sort of substantial evidence to back them up. In contrast to other mods/admins on this forum, you come across as the very definition of the arrogant, loud mouth, know it all and half the time the majority of the things you say are just plain wrong and bullshit. I actually can't believe people on here don't call you up on it more. But you know what, it's Christmas so I'll just leave it there.....

An unpopular notion to whom exactly? The enclave of fans on this forum who represent a very small minority of Chelsea supporters? That's what you're using to question the legitimacy of the point I raised? Umm, ok? I think I'll stick to my argument that *lately* (note the emphasis on lately) he's been among the top performing players in the team. You're free to disagree or agree. That's your own business. But the reality is, his performance against Sunderland was just as good as his performance against Arsenal. West ham, Sunderland, Arsenal & Southampton - that's already four games where he was among the best players on the pitch. Besides John Terry, what other player (since November) has been able to put in a top performance across 4 games in such close succession?

Couldn't disagree more with this. He definitely had a very good game against Arsenal and put in a great performance against West Ham. But he was also excellent against Sunderland in the league, was excellent against City, was excellent against Southampton and has had many other good games this season. He might have struggled earlier on in the season but lately he's been among our top performing players, regardless of the formation.

Do you mind linking the source? Just doesn't at all sound like something Michael Ballack would say.....

Looks like I'm in the minority but I thought he was the worst player on the pitch. Every time the ball was played into his feet it resulted in a turnover. He caused 3 turnovers, made 18 passes and had a pass success rate of 67%. It's one thing for your striker not to be scoring goals consistently, but when they can't even hold the ball up and are constantly turning over possession each time they touch the ball, it makes it even more difficult to build attacks.

Not even a close contest. If you want a centre midfielder who is not only top class but also complete, then Matic by a long way. I rate him very highly. He's an excellent defender, can tackle well, passes well, scores goals, aerial dominance, physicality, strength, good vision. He has it all. He’s just quality. Also has a great attitude, hard worker and a team player. Really hope the club just puts in a bit more money and signs him. Matic, Ramires, Van Ginkel & Mikel – with Chalobah gradually being integrated – would give us very, very strong options in central midfield. Also Matic will allow us to experiment with playing Oscar in central midfield.

Agreed. Xavi and Iniesta bring others into the game but then there's also Fabregas who often is the one that provides the final pass. If we're going to play with 2 dribblers on the wings then the no.10 needs to be able to provide incisive passes into the box otherwise you'll struggle to penetrate the opponent's defence. The point of the no.10 role is to give freedom of movement to the player occupying the position so he is able to influence the game, get into dangerous areas and get on the ball as often as possible. If our system isn't set up for the no.10 to be a playmaker then the creative outlet needs to come from somewhere else but it hasn't so far. If you look at Bayern last season, Muller who was employed in the 10 role wasn't that creative and he played a similar role to Oscar. That worked for them though because they had schweinsteiger behind Muller and they had two extremely good attacking fullbacks.

Don't think Xavi & Iniesta's sats can be used as a relevant comparison. Xavi plays deeper. Iniesta has been inconsistent this season and last (by his standards). Also Barcelona's system completely centres around Messi. What kind of an identity can a system really have if the no.10 hasn't managed to make a single assist in 14 games?

They signed him for 11 million euros and selling him (a year later) for 15 million euros (plus bonuses). How's that a loss?

Gianluca Di Marzio, who broke the story, is reporting the fee to be 15 million euros (12 mill pounds) plus bonuses. http://www.gianlucadimarzio.com/calciomercato/inters-guarin-between-man-united-and-chelsea/

Having mixed feelings about this signing. My first thought was - wait until the summer and spend a little bit more on a top quality player, but people are forgetting that top class central midfielders are very expensive. Bayern signed Martinez for 40 mill, City signed Fernandinho for 30 mill plus, Witsel went for 35 mill or so. Modric went for 40 mill. We can't afford to spend that much, not because we don't have the funds but because they're at least two other areas we need to invest in - centre forward position & left back. If it's true that we're after Luke Shaw and if the rumoured fee of 20 mill is correct then we're looking at spending anywhere between 60-70mill for a striker and a left back. I don't see us spending big on a central mid on top of that. I think a midfield pair of Ramires and Guarin is perfectly fine. It's not perfect but its good enough to take us forward until Van Ginkel, and hopefully Nathaniel, comes good. Also if Romeu continues to impress at Valencia, then we'll him, Guarin, Ramires, Nat and MVG. Those are good options.

I noticed the same thing too. John terry is good at releasing the ball quickly, but Cahill is just so slow. I don't know why he feels like he has to take so many touches before making the simplest of passes. Or sometimes he'll leave the defensive line and move up the pitch with the ball, but instead of moving the ball quickly he'll literally just stand there with the ball looking around! Eventually he ends up being pressed, he then panics and has to make a pass back to John terry or a hurried long ball. You're putting the team under unnecessary pressure. I know he's trying to help the attack but he either needs to make his decisions quicker or just stay in the defensive line.

I think people make the mistake in thinking that playing time is the only thing that can stunt the development of youth. It's possible that playing in 10 matches at Chelsea might make more of a mark or an impact in the development of a young player than making 25 appearances at some random championship club. You're pretty much following a one size fits all formula. I see that as problematic.

Agreed. That injury came at the worst possible time for him. Most likely would have carved out a spot in the starting XI under Benitez like Azpi did.

He hasn't even been recalled and you've already determined that he'll play in 5 games? Nathan Ake, without being loaned out made 3 appearances last season. You're telling me that Chalobah who made 38 appearances last season and scored 5 goals won't manage significantly more than that?

lol so now suddenly Marco is being described as an experienced youth with two seasons at one of the best teams in Netherlands? I think you're revisioning things to suit your agenda because from what I've seen you certainly didn't think so highly of Van Ginkel a few months ago. In fact you claimed that McEachran was even better than him. Also I simply don't get your point about Kalas nor do I think you do either. Kalas completed two seasons in the same team Van Ginkel played for. There's really no difference between the both of them in terms of development.

You're contradicting yourself. Our performances are not stable enough to take chances on young players but yet Mourinho started Van Ginkel in the first game at home against basel. And, let's avoid fixing up the facts. Kalas was injured for much of the first part of the season. That has to be taken into consideration. If Mourinho promised Kalas starts then most likely Kalas would have seen some game time if it weren't for the injury that set him back in fitness.

Are we assuming that Essien wouldn't have seen more minutes if he were more fit? Even Van Ginkel was played ahead of Essien.

But Oscar has been more wide than Ramires has. Look at how many crosses Oscar has attempted.