Barbara

I don't like our lineup to be honest. Yes, Demba scored the saving goal for us Tuesday, but his middle name is offside so he's the opposite kind of player I'd play in away games. He's useless as they get. I also don't feel happy to welcome Ramires to the team although that would be unavoidable. bleh But I absolutely LOVE our three AMs and I believe in the win.

I haven't read Pellegrini's press until now. What a cunt. And that's the thing, if we don't win I'd hate for Liverpool to win it, but I really respect and like Rodgers and I can't stand Pellegrini, so even if Liverpool win it and I hate it, at least I'll be comforted about the fact that cunt, arrogant Pellegrini didn't win either.

luiSSSSS suarez Luiz is our little warrior

even if there was a chance of that happening. WHAT.THE.ACTUAL.FUCK? How that could help? Go read all threads here about people being impatient with a team that isn't mature enough to handle pressure and play well against minor sides because they lack the winning mentality and then people ask to promote U-20's? So we won't win this because we can't beat Palace, Stoke, Villa, etc... and why is that? Because the team still lacks some character to play with high motivation against minor sides. Then the answer is promoting even more young players? Some people make no sense at all. he won't, but Liverpool will be granted a penalty, that's for sure.

Oh I said some had some understandable reasons, even if I disagree I understand his #1 point if he concludes that City has a better team. Leading the table for a few rounds, while City had games to do and winning them could pass us, wasn't realistic, but it certainly made us believe. So I get the feeling that spread among fans, but it was never realistic... we were fighting, but we weren't really leaders if the other team could play their matches and winning them pass us. I definitely agree about #2. But I completely disagree about #3. If this team couldn't make it because of too much immaturity, promoting youth in an already very young team makes no sense in my head. It's not only about winning the title, but developing the ones that are already in the first team. What does playing a couple of matches make to one of those boys? Basically nothing. So let's focus in developing the young guys (not as young as the youth boys) we already have before bringing even more just for the 'charitable' match that will say, oh at least Baker or Ake played 90 minutes this season. So what? It doesn't mean promotion at all. We can't afford it now with so many young players in the main team. So that's why I disagree - but understand/respect - those arguments. City being better than us doesn't make us unsuccessful, not promoting young players when we have plenty of them already in team doesn't make us unsuccessful. Not signing a decent striker definitely makes our WINDOW unsuccessful and influences on our season. But I still get a positive at the end of the day.

well, as much as Liverpool winning the title would suck monkey balls at least with this City loss we're sort of back for real in the title race. We still have to win all our matches and hope for them to at least drop points in one more match. I still think the title is very far now, but let's see what happens.

And Everton just passed Arsenal. LOL forever

the haters I don't mind, but it never ceases to surprise me how fickle people can be. The moment to discuss if the season is failure is when it ends or when you're out of every possible competition. Where are the people who voted it's a failure? And I'll take a step further, does everyone who voted something in the between still think the same? We're in UCL bloody SF with a squad that became thin in the competition very quickly (I don't think we have a thin squad for EPL, it could be deeper, but it's not exactly thin). People jump to conclusions too fast and just because they have unrealistic and delusional expectations that couldn't be reached, they call it a failure (and some something in between - although some people gave fair arguments for that, it's the ones with unrealistic expectations that make no sense). I just read the problem is that we were top of the table for a considerable time and let it slip between our fingers. Was Arsenal EVER seriously the team that would win this? We were top of the league when City's matches started being postponed. Mathematically we were NEVER top of league, during all rounds we stayed there, if City won their belated matches they would take the spot from us. Liverpool is a worse squad than us with TWO - not only one, but TWO great strikers, one of which world class and probably the best in the world right now. Haven't those people seen ManU win a title all because of van Persie last year? Let me tell a very simple rule in football: whenever you outscore the goals you concede you win three points. Winning three points week in and out because your striker just push the ball into the net makes you champion, not matter how weak the rest of your squad AND/OR system is. Sometimes things couldn't be more obvious and simple if you asked them to. I can accept that we didn't make the best out of the summer window, but we had a target that didn't work out and the market wasn't favorable. I'd rather have André, Marco, Willian, Eto'o and then Salah and Matic than spend all that money only in Cavani. Cavani solves our problem, probably gives us the EPL title and we're back to what we were years ago. A team that wins now and then and when one of the starts is injured and other teams start to figure us out, the manager is out, the team fades away and the titles go away. This generation lives out of fast food, expect patience is clearly a stretch and it annoys me to no end. So the fact we're fighting for the title til the end, in UCL SF despite having no striker force and with a few bumps in the way (injuries, players having dip of forms because of their inexperience and immaturity, bad days in the office - God forbid those to happen) we have to come here and say it's either a failure or simply that it wasn't as successful as they expected (that's what the in between people are saying). I honestly would like to know what their down-on-earth expectations were. Because being top4 in Europe (it could be more) and fighting til the end for the league title - the hardest to accomplish imo - isn't enough to reach their expectations. At least the people who calls it a failure make it very clear where their delusions are. The people (some, not all) that say it's not a success admit that they accept this is a team for the future, they accept that Mourinho needed time, for fuck sake, some of them even accept this is a transition year and still they say not a success or a failure. I must admit, understanding you people is VERY, VERY, VERY difficult.

no, sweetie, you're the one missing it. Cerezo (their president) said they can't afford the fee (it was posted pages ago) and then UEFA came and said the contract between the parts is null from their perspective... so the point is, Atletico can't pay the fee, UEFA won't force the fee to be paid and Courtois theoretically can play - despite the contract between the parts. The decision as it is falls on Atletico. Unless Chelsea play some cards like - if you play him, you won't have him next year. And that's where the problems start... I have a problem with Atletico disregarding a clause they agreed to and I have a problem with UEFA not sanctioning a loaned player to play for the parent club. The former is about honoring their agreement (and using UEFA's position to make them not pay and play the player). The latter is about ethic. If a player can't play none of those other developments will follow. Such as speculations of it playing a part in the loan renewal and/or Costa negotiation.

And let's not fool ourselves here, this Barça team isn't a shadow of what it used to be. It has a terrible defense and their attacking players are struggling at the moment for different reasons - form, physically, adaptation, etc... I'm not saying they're poor, but they aren't even a resemblance of the team we beat two years ago. Their manager isn't that much great imo and I think they never got over the spanking Bayern gave them last year. The team dismantled since then (also coinciding with Messi's injuries starting about that time too). I'm not diminishing Atleti, I'm not underrating them. But they're only slightly better than PSG imo (have a better manager imo), while I think PSG have more experienced players in UCL. I think the prospect of reaching UCL final may be too much for them to handle and they'll crumble because of it. One split moment, one bad decision and boom, it's over. We all know that's how it works in tight games at this stage and I don't expect last season's Super Cup to be repeated at all (for any of the sides). We didn't have a team as good as now, there wasn't much at stake (that's a mickey mouse trophy) and we had di Matteo but then, not Mourinho. So I don't expect that show of horror to be repeated. That was one of the worst matches I've seen Chelsea since following the club.

So let me guess... we make this agreement with RM, spend 10-15m more on Modric as he's obviously that amount more valuable than Oscar and then we spend another 40m or so on Reus to replace Oscar and another 15-20m on another super talented young AM (I guess this Gritzemann guys fits the bill) so we have squad depth. That's such a genius idea. Make sure you fax it to someone in the board... (ps. and lol forever at Modric being the best CM in the world. LOL)

well, I can tell you from an auditor POV and that's how it works: Julius Cesar's wife not only should be the most faithful woman in the world but LOOK like the most faithful woman in the world. That's the basic principle in audits, ethics and laws. The regulation in place should assure that nobody can have the chance to take advantage of breaches. It doesn't mean people involved will. I'm not questioning ours, Atletico's or Thibaut's integrity. I'm questioning how this opens breaches for questions from people who are there to make those questions. The moment a situation provides a conflict of interest it doesn't matter at all if people take advantage of that or not, it shouldn't exist. That's the basic principle. All three involved could act in absolutely integrity and honesty, but one mistake, one unpredictable or unexpected situation could lead others to question those things and it's unnecessary. And I don't think we're above of using this situation regarding a potential Costa negotiation, a potential new loan involving Courtois (and maybe even other players). Atletico may also have interests that aren't above their work ethic. In a comrade agreement between the parts one side could make concessions now about things for the future - which while isn't illegal and maybe not even unethical, it shouldn't exist. Chelsea shouldn't have any advantages allowing him to play the same way Atletico shouldn't have any by preventing him from playing. Thibaut can feel like making a decision himself to avoid those situations as well. Anyway, I'm not talking about shady stuff happening, I'm talking about opportunities being created for shady stuff being speculated and situations such as those players futures being affected by the decisions made. We don't know if the rumor about Chelsea conditioning the loan renewal on his absence is true or not, but if there was a rule prohibiting him from playing no questions would be made. Clean cut business. The way it stands it's too inviting to all sort of rumors and even investigations depending on what happens. And I'm not naive to believe Chelsea and Atletico won't have interests that conflict here. They certainly do if not involving Costa as well, at least Thibaut's future...

but that isn't even the point (being capable of beating them). We don't want to be investigated because of something stupid just because someone may want to demoralize or bring instability towards us and we all know they'll do with the smallest breach the tie may bring (unless we lose). But I get what you and others mean (about being capable of beating them with him). I'm still against it and whether he plays or not, I see us in the final. As I said I think we have a slight edge (Mourinho, experience, players who've been there, doing it before in recent years) while the teams are sort of equivalent technically. I think with La Liga still being so tight, with their lack of experience in this level, we're more (even if little) comfortable than them. It means little or nothing to some, but it made the difference against PSG imo and I can see it making a difference against Atleti too.

but regardless of the contract. Respecting and honoring the contract is the honorable thing to do. I got both things mixed in my post. Having this rule is the ethical thing. So if we don't follow the contract not only it's not honorable on Atletico's side imo, but it's also unethical. If there's no clause in contract it's unethical. End of the story. We all know a lot of people have been trying to incriminate us and Roman for years, alleging we don't play fair - as far I know we do, we spent as much money as we wanted when there were no rules for FFP and now we're abiding to it. It seems like a golden opportunity for someone with bad intentions to find the small breach they were looking for to harm us because nobody likes it that we have money, but also much more than that. Nobody likes our success and there are too many bitter people and people with interests of their own who may have a chance to open a process or go to UEFA to question all things involved if he plays and we win - which let's be real here, it's at least a 50% chance of happening, as I think - just I did with PSG - that the teams have sort of the same chances with us with the slight edge. I think we even have a bigger edge against them than I thought against PSG because what's at stake here is a spot in the UCL final, I'm not sure if that's not out of Atletico's league (mentally speaking). So there's a good chance we win this and if he plays then all sort of questions could be asked by whoever wants to ask them... Don't we agree sometimes about 'doable' saves? Some people think Cech could have saved some of the goals we've conceded while others think it's natural for a keeper - even his level - to concede such goals. It's too much gray for me to be comfortable and we all know we make a lot of people jealous, envious and bitter - and that's not only regarding fans and opposition players and managers, but also people in UEFA and FA. Weren't we accused a couple of weeks ago of influencing Vitesse and not allowing them to win the league so we don't have a chance of facing them in UCL? What do you think they'll do if an unfortunate situation happens with Thibaut (who may be more nervous than usual not only because of what's at stake but also because the situation he is in) and then someone decides to open an investigation on our integrity? It's a MESS and a disaster waiting to happen. Even a blind can see it.

People want to be so 'politically correct' here that they fail to notice they're supporting something unethical. If we created a clause it should be reinforced - if not by us because UEFA decided to be nosy about it, then Atletico should honor their own signature. To the hell if he deserves, to the hell if UEFA forces us, to the hell all things involved. If they agreed to that the right thing to do is that. Even if there wasn't such a clause, it's still an opening for conflict of interest for everyone involved (being an auditor for processes for many years, I'd never approve the lack of a rule prohibiting that). That's why I support the rule in the football associations. This opens space for shady business/interests and even if it's pristine clean, it could still raise suspicions. What are Chelsea interests? And Atletico's? And Thibaut's? Not having that rule in UEFA regulation is already bad as it is. Anyway, I don't think loaned players should ever play against their parent club to avoid all that sort of issues, but the case we have a contract that clearly (or supposedly) has a clause about it, it should be respected, if not by legal reinforcement, it's the honorable thing to do. Now it becomes a bargain chip to renew his loan contract or to easy things up to Costa signing or to leave a slit for UEFA investigate the match and decide to make whatever shady decision to harm us they want (it's in their hands to allege whatever stupidity they want to put at stake the integrity of all involved). He shouldn't play because it's the ETHICAL thing to do. The one that doesn't leave doubt for any questions and that should be UEFA's rule, not Chelsea or Atletico's decision. Too many interests in conflict. It's stupid not to have that rule in the first place.

yes, now let's hope we play the first and away match on a Tuesday so we have 5 days to recover for Liverpool. That's one of the most things imo, having the first match on a Tuesday

there's always the chance of Atletico being honorable and honoring the bloody contract they agreed to and deciding themselves in a show of fair play, not play Courtois. I doubt it, but it'd be the right thing to do.

Real Madrid can say goodbye to la decima and as I just said, in a potential final, we have better chances in one single match in neutral field against a team like Bayern than the other two We've done it before!!!!!!! But let's screw (pardon my English, I'm pissed at UEFA instance on Courtois) Atletico first. Rape preferably

at least we're deciding at the Bridge!!!! It'll be epic

Please be Bayern x Chelsea 22/04 Chelsea x Bayern 30/04 (although getting ahead of myself and thinking about a possible final, playing Bayern in a neutral and unique match would be better than the other two)

not a mugshot, but my fave Irish pub in Campinas just became all more perfect

did we? I wasn't aware. As much as I love those matches before the season starts, I love covering our pre-season in Cobham much more and what you said as well...

no, you're the one who didn't understand me because I never used the word shouldn't or included you in the answer, I was talking strictly about us as a club. It's very clear English (and someone else answered you exactly the same just after me), so I don't get your answer? What's the point of creating such clause after the Super Cup match - that is a mickey mouse trophy - not to use it? It makes no sense if the club didn't trigger and I'll be VERY surprised if we didn't.

don't we have enough of those? In all honesty, watching Schurrle, Salah and Willian stepping up in their first season for us I'm already heartbroken knowing probably two of them won't play as much as they deserve. I simply love Reus, but we have enough AMs as it is in the team and they're quality (not counting the many others loaned everywhere). All we need is patience to allow those players to mature, adapt and develop further their game as they're all very young with the exception of Willian (who isn't old, but at age 25 he's mature enough, but needs to adapt still). Schurrle is proving to be deadly, even if he isn't the most talented in the bunch. Salah seemed absolutely lively and that was only in his first match with us. Willian's growing. Despite having a dip of form, Oscar already proved he can be very good for us and Eden doesn't need introductions or words. Why is it that we must look at every new talented youngster there? We have enough AM's - and good ones on that - as it is and we have a few squad members if we recall a couple of players or promote them from the youth. We don't need another AM, no matter how talented, young or whatever. We could disrupt the development of those we already have and having a special player in Hazard; a different kind of special in Oscar; a flair, pacey player in Willian; a master in movement and killer instinct in Shirley and a lot of talent and pace and pace and pace in Salah, we're definitely well served and I don't get any thread about any AM at the moment. We have Traoré and Piazon that could be recalled, kept and be useful as squad members if we must, but we don't need to sign more of those. Our problems reside somewhere else. Also, splashing money in a player like Reus means not spending it wisely where we really need it.

haven't we done enough charity this season preventing (or at least massively helping) Palace and Stoke from being relegated? Why on earth wouldn't we trigger it? One of the sources even informed said clause was created AFTER the mickey mouse Super Cup match...