Barbara

and they wonder where the 5 stars come from

just had an orgasm with that brazil 5th goal That's brazil, bitches

I did, (the Neymar part gave it away), I just took the chance to talk about what I think will happen to our never ending list of AMs.

Mata had a few chances in October and he didn't shine in any of the matches... I'm all for him receiving more chances, but it's not like he capitalized the chances he did receive and created tons of chances (real chances) for the team. So it's not down to only the work-rate - his is still poor, even if he tries a lot (and he does try). He would have put more doubts in José's mind if he had been at least a shadow of his best days... he wasn't for one this season imo. Many players in many teams, grab their chances and capitalize them and never leave the team... he's had enough chances, he didn't capitalize. I'm not against continuing to give them, quite the opposite, we should give him more chances, but if he doesn't capitalize them you can't blame José... if others can capitalize without having many of them, why Mata can't? He has a great chance to win back his position because Oscar is playing average at best. hopefully he'll make better use of the matches he starts or the matches he comes in and do something with them.

Personally I think Piazon will be loaned again while the other two will be offloaded. But if he can come back on fire, he has a chance to fight for his place in better form. Thing is next year is WC year... while players have to play, if they exhaust themselves, they risk being injured for the WC. The best predicament is to be rotated, so you arrive at WC preparation carrying some form, but not exhausted. So if Kevin could actually find a way to play a few times a month, that'd good for him and for Belgium. Players such Oscar, Hazard and Neymar who are playing tons of matches for their teams are probably going to arrive exhausted for the 30-day preparation to the WC.

as a Brazilian, I don't fancy France in the WC

See why the WC needs Cris?

I'm not, I'm Portugal because well, I like them and because a WC without Cristiano Ronaldo is a crime.

I was actually trying to discuss something, not to take a jab and I felt the trolling comment was uncalled for - whether in gif form or words form. But as he didn't bother to try to discuss or say I was wrong and accused me of trolling and I was WTF?!?! The lack of quality is his answer is so ridiculous that I had to answer to it. When I said gifs and nonsense, the nonsense part was supposed to cover written answers, even if they're ridiculous as his answer. Also, my memory that while crappy isn't as selective as implied, is good enough to let me know the loan was criticized universally here, not only by Belgians. So the fact that I said as time passes I still get the idea the loan was good for both Chelsea and Lukaku, I didn't mean it was Belgians defending him because it wasn't. That's something maybe you and G. thought I meant, but I didn't because if you check the posts after the loan you'll see it was universal except for a few people who thought the loan was good (some of which Belgians too). So that's the problem, maybe people are reading too much into others' words because they expect some kind of behavior or opinion that isn't there. imo it's good for Lukaku and good for Chelsea, but I wanted Ba out of the team because I feel he never fit. But you do have a point, he would have very few matches and it wouldn't help him as much as being at Everton does. Again, I support the loan, even if he's better than Ba. @Robguima, I added a comment to my previous post, after you liked it (so maybe you didn't read it) and I really appreciate what you did, so I'm mentioning you again.

but I guess the mother of all problems was that no one wanted Ba but Arsenal and the club wouldn't loan him to Arses... I'm the first to say Lukaku >>>> Ba, but can you imagine how much game play Romelu would get if we kept the four strikers? I also agree on Eto'o being short-term, but Lukaku absence is only short-term too imo. I'm positive he'll stay with us next season and he'll be more mature, more tested, and better technically, so chances are he'll fight for his place in the team. He could be what Torres or Eto'o are right now. Alternating matches between mid-week and weekend. I think he needed to mature more to be able to handle the pressure at Stamford Bridge. A lot has been said about our striker force since Didier left and there's a huge amount of pressure that I felt like he would feel a lot. In addition to the pressure there's the technical aspect that he also needs to improve. If he had stayed (along with Ba) his situation would probably be worse than Kevin's or at most the same thing. Kevin's already disheartening as it is. and thanks for addressing the troll gif above. I really appreciate it. But maybe the pressure would affect his game, we don't know that. I treat those young talents very carefully. Why expose the boy to unnecessary pressure? Let's have Torres and Eto'o handle it, not the 20yo. He has a lot to learn even technically, the better place for him to do that is where he'll deal with less pressure.

I think in December he'll receive more of them. I feel right now he has two problems working against him: lack of match rhythm and lack of confidence. The 'trying too much' that some pointed out imo is because he's trying to show something to impress because he needs to impress, but he doesn't need something different, he just needs to go back to doing his thing. He was signed by Chelsea and he led Belgium in the qualifying doing that, he doesn't need to do something else, but I guess he feels he needs. I think he needs specific guidance from Mourinho and for Mou to reassure him, and tell him to relax from the tension and pressure and just do his usual game, help the team pressing and do his thing. imo the mental aspect influences his performance even more than the lack of match rhythm.

I didn't watch the match against Crystal, only the match against Spurs, what I meant was the last match I've watched. I also watched a couple of Belgium matches in the meanwhile, and if I'm not wrong he started in at least one of them (but I guess both). I only meant that while he was scoring this topic was very hot and bothered about how the club is stupid, or Mourinho is Maleficent or how Lukaku is Chelsea's savior. The boy is 20, he's in the middle of his learning curve, he'll score a lot, but he'll also be anonymous at some matches, more likely at Chelsea than at Everton, imo. That's the only thing I meant, that I don't think the loan was such bad business as pointed for 30 pages here while he was scoring, although the topic went suddenly mum once he didn't for two matches... I didn't question his quality, he has it, I'm just saying he's showing that he's still a bit inconsistent as he should given his age and there's nothing appalling on our part to have loaned him. Once Benteke got injured and the responsibility in Belgium was his, in the matches I've watched it seemed he felt a bit the pressure, although in his press conferences and other interviews he said he was going to win back the spot he considered his (I guess he was striker before Benteke, or something like that) and @mediator, if an actual conversation that actually require words and thinking and not only gifs and nonsense is considered trolling now, then some people posting some complaints about quality may have a point. Let me go back criticize David Luiz or Frank Lampard (although I'm not even criticizing Lukaku, just defending the loan). Haven't received this kind of answer on their threads... unsurprisingly

when was the last time he scored? I've watched Belgium and he was harmless again (had already been the last Everton game I've watched, don't remember against who, I guess Spurs), but this topic has been so quiet lately (it was even in the second page of the current squad section). This is not a jab, just an honest question about his scoring stats (and maybe even current capabilities) that made people go crazy when he was loaned - while a few others stood by their opinion that he wasn't ready to take the responsibility in our attack (which has a lot more pressure than Everton's), as a supporting player, let alone as the leader as a few others suggested. Also, maybe the kid will learn to speak a little less because if memory doesn't fail, I guess he's scored only one goal (or no goal at all) since his legendary quote that he hoped/planned (or whatever) to score more goals than Chelsea's strikers (which should be his goal, he just could go without voicing it to the press). Funnily - or oddly enough - ever since our strikers have been scoring every other match... It's all part of his learning curve... both in the pitch and off it and I continue to believe he wasn't ready for us. And hopefully no jinx, to the kid or to our strikers (shall they all score). It's just an observation.

Luiz is a center-back, end of it. If someone else is playing better than him, he has to get his shit together and win back his position in the team as a center-back. We don't have problems in the right-back and although we do have in the pivot, Luiz isn't the answer to that and he can contribute to improving it by playing well as a CB,with his good distribution and long passes - that while are not as accurate as a DLP, he makes up for the lack of one, but as a CB, not a DM. Hopefully playing for the national team will give him some confidence and he'll come back to us fired up or at least more consistent. But imo there's only one position for him to play and one where he can offer something more and be a differential for us, and that is by Terry's side. Until his level prevents him from starting, he should be benched and Mourinho's and Luiz's efforts should be on making him a better CB.

using this thread for something else, but I'm not about to open a whole new topic for something that might take only one post to answer me. Mourinho mentioned in one of his recent interviews that having English players in the squad was important for a lot of reasons and one of them was to explain to foreigners why they play on boxing day - which is actually weird for me. Every other league (especially in countries where Christian religions are prominent) don't play around xmas time, but it's a tradition in England. I'd love to know why

I won't blame the defeat on him because I think every player will make a mistake like that... but I feel like he's slower this season to find his best form and I don't think his form in the attack has much to do with his overall form. His overall form is good imo, he's working hard, he's pressing, he's presenting himself and moving around to receive the ball. He does seem to be lacking a bit of confidence though and that's why I think we haven't seen him explode this season yet.

@CHOULO19,@, @, that TAPA user is a transparent troller, that took it to the next level in the live match against WBA. I don't understand why he hasn't been banned yet. Some of his comments are so against-Chelsea and so obvious and his trolling ways are annoying the whole board... Just a suggestion/report/complaint though

well from the television I was shocked (and also impressed) by the noise made by Schalke supporters and how they didn't stop singing even when the team was losing 3-0... I sort of felt bad at that moment because our fans in the stadium didn't have a 'comeback' to them, even when we were winning - at least that was the impression from the TV. It's a deep problem I guess, based on the many reasons you and others who actually go there explained. As a fan overseas I'm just sad

and somehow people blame this on the defending responsibility he's assumed this season and I just can't link one thing to another... The only problem a player who isn't used to press can have once they start doing it, is getting tired faster or more than they usually did. Hazard is supposed to be one of our faster players, so if he's pressing someone in the first third, maybe he won't be where he usually was (waiting in the second as he watched the game), but he's fast, he can win the ball in the first/second half and run with it, or he can receive a pass from who intercepted it. That (and getting tired) should be the only detractors on his play because he's defending. What does defending have to do with the horrible ball control he showed in the perfect pass Oscar gave to him? I see people blaming Willian - who is short and not used to heading the ball - missing a sitter header, but I literally saw no one complaining about the ball that Hazard received that could have won us the game... but his first touch was so poor, that the only time in the match we actually had one splitting pass from our AMs was completely wasted. I agree he's facing some confidence issues. I've touched that weeks (I guess months) ago in this thread when I said I wish he was more like Neymar in that aspect: just tried the dribble, if he misses a few of them, it's part of risk and the game, he'll probably be successful in a few others. When he receives the ball and does nothing with it, but pass backwards or to the side it has nothing to do with the defending responsibility he now has. And I can't think why pressing would affect his confidence either, so I think the problem is more on Hazard than on the tactics, but lately almost everyone blame the tactics and the manager for the players poor form. I'm not exempting Mourinho, it's part of his job work with his players for them to improve their form, but it's also laughable exempt a player like Hazard from his own bad shape. He's been average at most this season and maybe, just maybe, his defensive responsibility affected that, but it's not the biggest cause imo because it makes no sense. He continues to receive a huge amount of passes in the final third. Against Newcastle no other player received more passes in the final third than Hazard did (others matches too) and except those two occasions he and Mata pretended they were playing for Barcelona, he produced nothing... how can we blame that on defending responsibilities or tactics?

Something crossed my mind earlier today when I was reading an article on Ivanovic... I feel like Mourinho is keeping Lampard, Ivanovic, Terry and Eto'o in the team because he feels like he needs the experience. While Luiz isn't any kid, he has the eventual brain fart. Our AMs are all young and susceptible to inconsistency and may crack under pressure with the exception of Mata and Willian. Players like Ramires and Cahill while not that young, don't carry any leadership gene in their DNA and while they're hard workers and always put all of their hearts for the team. So I feel like Ivanovic and Lampard, for example, may play more because José needs some sort of leadership, experience and back up in the team to handle pressure, the unfavorable moments in the matches or matches that aren't easy to find a way out of them. Out of the whole squad the only guys who are this experienced and can back him up, but also are playing well are Cech, Terry and most recently Eto'o. Maybe José is playing a bit too safe because he doesn't trust the youngsters that much (to take ownership of the match, to take it on their hands to get out of the hole) and he feels they'll crack without the stability those older guys bring... If that makes sense and that's the case, would the answer be taking some risks with the younger guys and the older guys that lack leadership such as Mikel, Azpili (who isn't even older actually) or should he back the youngsters up? Or would it be better to handle his 'eggs' with as much care and precaution as possible, waiting for them to mature at their own time, providing them a good environment for that with others supporting them even if some of those other players aren't on their best technical form?

this is a team whose manager and executive have been saying that they're aiming the future first, the identity, then the rest. We finished 3rd, 14 points behind, so if we finish 8th only 10 is progress. You're treating this whole deal in such a simple and naive way... it's not just that simple because no matter who the manager is, when there's a change in command it's expected to come struggles with. Look at Pelegrini, Moyes, Ancelotti... If things were as simple as you're implying, football wouldn't be what it is. We are spoiled, it doesn't mean being spoiled is bad. That's the thing you and Raphael took from my posts. I'm not judging anyone. Anyone can support the team the way they please, I don't care and it doesn't even bother me too much). It's unusual for me to have people being so proud to be right about the bad (and that's coming from someone from a country where managers are exchanged a few times a year in many teams - a few times a year, I'll repeat) and asking for manager heads, but overall, we support our players. I read in so many posts we should get rid of Luiz, Mata, Hazard, Mourinho, Torres, Mikel, Lampard, etc. As if they didn't belong to the club, as if they were so bad (or were so deprived of chances by Mourinho) that they should all leave in January or maybe receive the Malouda treatment. It's a feeling of overreaction, I never said people don't have a right and shouldn't overreact. The only person in all my posts I come nearly to judge was you (but never implied what kind of fan you are, just your opinion about what we're facing here)... Denying we're in transition seems just like that to me, denial, as you said with all words we aren't in transition right now. Being in transition isn't an excuse to the lack of titles, but it's a very natural and valid reason for struggling. Football isn't simple like that. And said who to rebuild a new thing you don't have to take steps back? Maybe it's possible to do without it, sometimes it isn't. Our so amazing legacy from last year is a EL title we struggled more to win than the UCL title we beat Barcelona and Bayern. So what's so great from Chelsea last year that Mourinho should make sure is kept? If the best managers in world (or any manager) could always handle to just fix what's bad without affecting what's good, their lives would be much easier! Sorry if I think your view of this isn't realistic. The day football is as simple as you're making it out to be I'll lose all interest and will stick with volleyball.

there's another change in the philosophy. We're signing younger players because we want to mold the players ourselves. That's the biggest mark in Barcelona and what Bayern has been trying to emulate. This interview (actually I've watched it, not read as I said before, as now I remember it better) Bayern's president was talking how he went to Barcelona's academy and saw how it's done. It's about you having a philosophy and teaching it to your players since very young age. First we need to create the philosophy (what kind of football do we want to be known by? Possession? Counter-attack? Total football? Attacking? Defensive). Once you establish that you start working in your academy and with your young players in the main squad to make sure they think, breathe and sweat that philosophy. That's why we've changed drastically the kind of players we've been signing. We see Eto'o signings for very specific needs, but the tendency is for us to keep signing Piazons, Lukakus, Oscars, Hazards, van Ginkels until we can identify those players like we did with Traoré, when they're 15, 16 (or even younger) and we mold them in our philosophy from the beginning. I wish Roman was interviewed like other owners and presidents were so he could talk more clearly about his plans. But based on what Emenalo and Mourinho have been saying, that's the conclusion I came. Maybe I'm wrong, but there are too many evidences of that in their interviews.

I'm not pointing fingers, Raphael. I'm talking about a feeling. I have opinions, and I'm lucky a lot of them match with Mourinho's, so it's easy for me to support him. We do think the same about a lot of things. So when something goes wrong and a lot of people come yelling at the top of their lungs they were right and Chelsea is now bad, I'm shocked by it. That post initially included a Brazilian aspect to it, even your name was there along other Brazilian fans. I feel it's different here. We bitch a lot, but we don't want to be proved right when our club is losing! We bitch about our managers, players and cartolas (board members), but I'm not familiar with fans bragging about being right and the team being screwed or losing, but still being proud of being right all along. I see people upset, defeated, angry, but not proud to be right... Sorry if for me that's a foreign concept. I thought it was cultural, but I guess it's not. Also when did you ever saw me relishing on Chelsea's loss because I was proved right? Maybe the Mazacar episode? Well I bitched, before, during, after it and then I moved on. It's obvious we can't play them, but I never said Oscar, Mata or Hazard shouldn't be Chelsea players anymore (as I've read many times only in the last 24h) or that Mourinho isn't the man for the job. I said Mourinho made a mistake imo, I said it before the match and I repeated it after the match. I'm not saying he's shit, Oscar, Mata or Hazard are shit and none of them are the men for the job as I predicted months ago. Can you see the difference of what I'm saying here? Bitching is normal, but the moaning is much deeper than I'm used to. Can I have a right to be foreign to this kind of reaction? If you keep reading the post you'll see I conclude that paragraph saying that I'm not saying supporting like this is wrong, just that's it's a wild concept for me.

I think saying we played a good first half was somewhat deluding, but someone else (sorry forgot who), raised a valid point: Mourinho already reacted negatively in the press room last week. He wouldn't (and should't) blame the players again. I think he's struggling a lot dealing with this squad because certain players are less resilient or mentally strong than he's used to or than he expected them to be. So while at first I agreed he was deluding himself believing that was a good display, I believe he wasn't being absolutely honest. Of course there were positives, but he knows certain things need to change, it's just he won't crucify his players again. It was wise and for the best he shielded the squad. I'm positive he'll be more realistic with the players, but I still feel he has a good amount of players that can't deal with pressure and he has to find a common ground between pushing and understanding. It's a hard thing to do, but people think it's an easy job... He complained exactly about being passive last week, which reinforces the idea I pointed above. He was shielding and protecting the squad. If he complained about waiting the goal to arrive last week (those were his exact words) I'm positive he didn't change his view in football in 7 days. If you compare both pressers you'll see he's saying opposite things about philosophy in both of them. He's lying to protect the players now, but I'm sure he'll be very honest with them when they meet again. 1) Still City took years to win the league with the same investment. The same can be said about other teams in other countries, but still winning in England is harder. There are barely 2 serious contenders in Bundesliga, La Liga and Serie A (sorry, I don't even talk about the rest, the other leagues aren't in the same 'league' as those major 4). Serie A is more competitive but Italian football has been in crisis for a while now (corruption does that to you), so instead of leveling it from the top, it's been leveled from the bottom. But Inter, Juve, Milan as the biggest forces and then Roma, Lazio and Napoli are rarely very strong (to their standards) in the same season. It's rarely a close championship with more than two of those fighting for the title. So having money doesn't mean automatically winning titles. Maybe in Canada and USA it does (I don't follow any leagues of any sports there, can't say), but in football - especially in those big European leagues - it isn't just as simple. Again, Chelsea fans are spoiled by the prompt results we had once money was injected, but we're the exception that proves the rule, not the rule 2) Mourinho wasn't hired to make our attack be fluid (or for the attack not to be fluid), he also wasn't hired to make those players win everything this season (those players weren't signed for that either) so if that's why he shouldn't be considered the man for the job I'm sure he'll stay for a long while because that's not even the job he was hired for. Just what I said above, as he wasn't hired to make those boys win everything this season - and he was probably the wrong guy for that job - it's okay. The problem is fans don't seem to be aligned with the club's main objectives now. We're Chelsea, we're always going to enter a competition to win it, but that's not #1 priority now. As fans is hard for us to accept or even understand that. So I say that's the problem... fans wanted a manager because their goal is to win titles this season and nothing else matters. The owner - and consequently the club - is aiming something bigger because the owner already through this phase of his life as a business man in the football business. Now that he's proved himself as a business man even in football, he's taking it to the next step, so at the end of the day it's just that our objectives and the club's objective diverge a little bit.

Sometimes I feel people are supporting more their ideas than the team. It seems like they keep waiting (and wanting) to prove themselves right and consequently that the manager is bad, players X, Z and Y are bad just to prove manager A, B and players C, D and F are better... Being from a country that breathes football just as much as England I'm appalled by this sort of supporting. Some people don't support a team. They support their ideas to said team, and they stick with those (their ideas, not the team) til the end and when CHELSEA loses and their ideas are proved right, they're somehow proud to come here and say they were right from the start. Shocking. I'm not saying supporting like this is wrong, just that's wild for me as in the culture I'm part of we rarely see that. Look few people dislike Benitez more than I do... when he was appointed I couldn't watch the first couple of matches because I was getting used to seeing that man commanding my team, but I had to work around it. I'm a Chelsea fan more than I'm a Benitez hater (if the word is even that, it seems too strong. I just disapprove of his morals as a manager and I don't like his tactics - or lack of them). I was happy to know he was only the interim and wouldn't be around longer, so maybe if he was permanent I would have a harder time supporting him. But bottom line is I had to support him. I still dislike him with a passion, what people here worship him for doing (although just go check his thread and find the same people criticizing him) is having an attacking minded football based on what I read. Still we finished 14 behind ManU when we were I guess 5-6 behind when he was appointed. We struggled against Europa League sides with much inferior squads than ours. We've got our ass kicked out of the Cups - by ManCity and Swansea and still people are here now talking about the good times when we had an attacking team under Benitez management. Talk about selective memory! When every big team gave up on Europa League we treated it as if it was Champions League (which is the right thing to do, I'm not disapproving how we dealt with it), and then it was us and a bunch of 3rd tier teams, some of which we won the same 1-0 (or 2x1) I read some people complaining was the scoreline we had in Mourinho's first spell. Against THIRD TIER FOOTBALL CLUBS! Why is that people - when it's suitable to them - make the mediocre look outstanding and also degrade something of quality? Only Chelsea fans would degrade Mourinho's first season here... I bet opposition fans who may read certain comments here will laugh their arses off or will look absolutely stunned, confused and lost.