The only place to be

Exactly, and I would have expected his loan to be extended. I know Watford are extremely keen to keep him. Personally I'd rather he get 20 games and hopefully a run in the play-offs but I don't know if the club have decided on him yet.

I can't see the point in recalling Chalobah from his loan. Part of the reason we have these loans is to get players used to playing an entire season and the fact he's playing regularly at a decent team in a competitive league is better than 80% of most loan experiences. I agree we probably need a DM though and I've mentioned before who I think we should go for. The other factor is David Luiz. Rafa tried him there against Nordsjaelland so it might be worthwhile trying him in the next 3 games too.

Is that all? We had more than that in Munich for the Champions League Final. Do the Corinthian fans not really care about supporting their team abroad? Plus in defence of most European posters, they've heard of the big Brazilian teams like Santos and Sao Paulo.

The problem PSG have is if you go there, you're still only playing in the French league. The league simply isn't at the level of other leagues so I think they might have problems down the line.

Agree with that 100%.

Actually I'm incorrectly using a popular saying. But yes, I watch La Liga. I did see us play Barca. If we're being honest, 9 out of 10 times we'd probably lose that match over two legs but we were heroic on the day. We had to bring our absolute best to beat them and when you can set up a team like that, then you're going to have some success.

It does surprise me when some fans think any game in the prem is 'easy' Swansea away should probably be 'insanely easy but any fan of the prem knows that any team can turn over another on it's day. We should've probably won away to QPR on paper but the reality is very different, especially with London derbies.

GET THE FUCK IN! :blue scalf: :blue scalf:

But why did those teams defend deep against Barca? Never heard the phrase 'attack is the best form of defence'? People talk about media bullshit regarding stories about Guardiola, but they're quite happy to indulge in these little urban myths about his teams. I just think it helps with good debate if people are a little more objective/honest about certain things.

But don't Real Madrid play the same teams? Surely you'd expect Mourinho's team to concede fewer goals than Guardiola's? What you're essentially saying is that they don't have a proper centre-back, attack a lot and play the same teams as Mourinho....yet they still concede less than him? I'm not trying to have a pop but I simply think the facts and reality don't support your belief. Am I reading the stats wrong or misinterpreting them?

Isn't that Barca? They actually conceded far fewer goals than Mourinho's Madrid in Guardiola's last two seasons and were extremely dominant for much of that time.

Sometimes the media are right - in this case it's just a massive open-secret. It isn't just Roman either, but most of the key guys at the top of the club (Gourlay and Emenalo in particular).

So Benitez isn't a very good manager, but Mark Hughes is? I can agree with your points about Chelsea before Abramovich (although we had our detractors and issues) but it isn't just about 'instant success', it's about building something long-term and he simply didn't fancy Robbie for that so he needed a stop-gap. I would've liked Wilkins back at the club but that wasn't ever that likely, so you have to look at who was available on a short-term contract. Hughes was actually employed by QPR at that time. And signing shirts isn't really that bad is it?

Rio's a massive twat but no player deserves that. It was disgusting.

Sorry mate, but it's the biggest open secret in football right now. The club is focused on getting Guardiola. I disagree with what you've said about Guardiola based on everything I've heard and read about him. He has something about him and I think we're in exactly the right point for him to come in and build something special. But I respect your views. The proof of that particular pudding will be in the eating. I absolutely agree with your view on the Glazer's spending, but United fans have actually cooled in their hatred towards them. You can tell just by the lack of protests and green/yellow scarves at games. The Glazers have also exhibited a bit more commitment to the club but I agree that Roman is ten times the owner. I love his little celebrations. And I agree with your last point. My view is that Mourinho is the best manager for winning now which is why he'd be perfect for City. But right now we need a coach who can develop something long-term and I think the best available guy is Pep. Out of interest, where do you see the managers ending up?

I completely disagree with your point about Guardiola. I've stated before what I think of him from what I've read and heard about him. Plus Roman views him as 'his guy' so I think we need to focus on getting him. I've recommended it before but there's a great new book on Guardiola by Balague that really does give a good insight into him. I'd love to hear any recommendations of books or profiles on him that you've used to come to your opinion of him. I've read your posts and I can't imagine you're the type of guy who thinks anyone could have managed Barcelona to the same success. You're way too smart for that. I also agree with your views on the Glazers' spending and Mourinho, but Ferguson will hold a lot of sway on that appointment and he could influence Mourinho. I think you're totally wrong on the Glazers long-term plan for United. Nothing I've read or heard suggests they aren't bothered about United. Ultimately I think our own long-term and short-term prospects are best served by City winning the title. I think a United win throws way too many variables into the equation and uncertainty is the last thing we need.

United were the away team and they did what they had to. It's a good result today and a deserved one. As for the second point, it's very hard to win the league when you rely on scoring one more goal that your opponents. Just ask Keegan. They've conceded multiple goals to weak teams already and they're vulnerable in midfield. Let's not forget that they threw away the league last season too.

My point about Mancini is if he wins the title this year he probably won't lose his job which means City probably won't chase Guardiola or Mourinho. We need a big manager to take over in the summer. And Guardiola isn't unproven, or at least not in Roman's eyes. He's the first choice for our next manager and we've structured the club's future around getting him. I also think Mourinho could absolutely go to United. I also think he could go to City (in fact I think that's the best fit for him).

The Chelsa and Liverpool games I agree with (Evans should've seen red at Liverpool with Shelvey) but they were the better team today. City looked a little toothless again today and City had too much up top for them. But United will still drop points - they concede way too many goals not to.

Sorry, but that's simply bollocks. Of course what we do is more important and I truly believe that the package we have to offer any potential manager is better than any other potentially on the table..... but you want as little competition in any negotiation as possible. It's remarkably short-sighted to think we exist in a vacuum.

Well someone is definitely going to replace Fergie as the Manchester United manager. I agree that they will have some major issues when he's gone but do you honestly think that they won't go after either Pep or Jose?? The second point I don't understand. Sorry. But if they don't win the title I think they'll dump Mancini and go after either Pep or Jose. How on Earth does that not potentially affect Chelsea Football Club's future?

I'll ask the same question I asked earlier - don't you think both Manchester clubs needing new managers (which is possible) could have a major impact on our future?

Let's just ignore the preposterous claims about Mourinho's legacy that you're making. Do you not worry about the manager situation that some of the fans in this thread have commented on? Our past achievements are there and no proper Chelsea fan thinks they'll be diminished or tarnished by anything City do. But what about our future?

I may not agree with everything you say, but you put it well.

So you don't see a danger in two big clubs possibly needing new managers in the summer? Who exactly do you think takes charge of us, United and City if we all chase Guardiola and Mourinho?