🇨🇴 Radamel Falcao

[Spike 12,049]

Actually we bid for him many times, atleti didnt want to sell but eventually we brought Torres. Then afterwards in next window he release statement on his website saying to leave. If we didnt have torres i know we would have aguero. having just brought torres though and having drogba it was too money much to put out on 3 wages.

At one stage a bid was accepted but again Aguero was stubborn with wage demands and the club was even more stubborn just not giving his wages. Both bastards. Somone like Aguero who came from absolute poverty; you'd think he would be lessy money grabby.

[fAnta 107]

At one stage a bid was accepted but again Aguero was stubborn with wage demands and the club was even more stubborn just not giving his wages. Both bastards. Somone like Aguero who came from absolute poverty; you'd think he would be lessy money grabby.

What?? i dont think so. could you find a source? as far as i knew atleti never accepted a bid but were forced to sell after he put the statement up which was after we had torres.

[OneMoSalah 8,886]

What?? i dont think so. could you find a source? as far as i knew atleti never accepted a bid but were forced to sell after he put the statement up which was after we had torres.

I'd imagine if Atleti were going to sell him we'd be in negotiation having tracked him for at least 4 or 5 years.

[Spike 12,049]

What?? i dont think so. could you find a source? as far as i knew atleti never accepted a bid but were forced to sell after he put the statement up which was after we had torres.

Maybe I'm wrong I can't find a source. Just millions of pages saying "Aguero joinging Chelsea".

Anyway...I want to move off of this subject because Aguero is/was one of my favourite players.

http://www.espn.co.uk/football/sport/story/103457.html

BACK TO FALCAO BEFORE WE ARE HIT WITH THE BAN HAMMER!

[fAnta 107]

Maybe I'm wrong I can't find a source. Just millions of pages saying "Aguero joinging Chelsea".

Anyway...I want to move off of this subject because Aguero is/was one of my favourite players.

http://www.espn.co.u...ory/103457.html

BACK TO FALCAO BEFORE WE ARE HIT WITH THE BAN HAMMER!

Yes they just rejected, i remeber 52 mill bid rejected

We cant let the same happen with falcao it will be a joke. hopefully we learn our lesson from aguero situation (even though this is different because they need the money).

[Spike 12,049]

Yes they just rejected, i remeber 52 mill bid rejected

We cant let the same happen with falcao it will be a joke. hopefully we learn our lesson from aguero situation (even though this is different because they need the money).

Maybe if they but Falcao we will get Aguero? Or even Dzeko, I really like Dzeko.

[Reddish-Blue 2,506]

Maybe if they but Falcao we will get Aguero? Or even Dzeko, I really like Dzeko.

There is something we agree on!

My only worry is that, if we do happen to sign Falcao for a hefty price, then Sturridge will be gone

Torres and Sturridge may not the best strikers out there...but both of them will score goals when given the opportunity. Torres is still a class striker & Sturridge has the potential to be a solid striker.

[Thor 2,705]

There is something we agree on!

My only worry is that, if we do happen to sign Falcao for a hefty price, then Sturridge will be gone

Torres and Sturridge may not the best strikers out there...but both of them will score goals when given the opportunity. Torres is still a class striker & Sturridge has the potential to be a solid striker.

Sturridge has the ability to be more than just solid. He was scoring goals last season cutting in from the wings and mainly from distance. With this midfield behind him, hes going to have no problem getting better chances through on goal, and if there is one thing Sturridge can't be criticized for its his finishing. Powerful, precise and clinical. Hes also got a great touch on the ball. Like I said in another thread, the only thing that might be hampered with Sturridge up front is the link up play between the solo striker and the three amigos (Mata, Oscar and Hazard), since Sturridge isn't the best passer. Once again though, he just turned 23, he will improve on this if given time up there.

I seriously don't think we need a Falcao. If we're going to get any type of striker I think it should be someone like Dzeko; a target man.

[calculatingInfinity 1,472]

Yeah he is awesome and if we sign him think we can retain CL and take the premiership...

But he's already cup tied because of Europe League, no?

[calculatingInfinity 1,472]

Yeah he is awesome and if we sign him think we can retain CL and take the premiership...

But he's already cup tied because of Europe League, no?

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

Yes it does not, thank you for agreeing

How immature. He's clearly proven you wrong.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

How immature. He's clearly proven you wrong.

Trust me I tried reasoning with logic and stats and all I got back is phrases like: "Are you serious?!", "I can't believe you think that..." or "Some people are delusional"....etc So this was plan B.

And for the record, you can't prove anything without logic and evidence.

[Irakozium257 350]

But he's already cup tied because of Europe League, no?

No, he isn't. If Atletico were in the UCL, yes, but since it's a different competition, he can't be. It was the same situation with Torres when we bought him, Liverpool were in the Europa and when he came, he played the 1/8 game against FCK along Anelka.

[Reddish-Blue 2,506]

But he's already cup tied because of Europe League, no?

He's not cup-tied.

According to UEFA regulations:

A player that has played in the Europa League can play for another club in the Champions League, but only from the Round of 16, providing he was registered prior to the deadline. Clubs may only register one such player, and if the A list is already full, they must remove a player to register another.

[Las7 951]

We needed one more striker to switch in 4-4-2 (or whatever, 4-1-2-1-2). Carlo's first move when Torres' signing was secured: playing a 4-1-2-1-2 at Sunderland. We had the players for a 4-4-2 with Essien who had a decent season (in the absolute, not if we compare with what he is/was able to do) and who had a great distribution (best passing stats for that season) and covered a lot of ground.

Malouda and Ramires were suited for the wings at that moment

That's a revision in history Carlo did try playing with 2 up top but we performed very badly during that time and towards the end of the season we reverted back to Drogba up top. Anelka on the wing with Kalou/Malouda. Essien was back from his injury and was very poor, Lampard was also finding it difficult to gain form and Malouda was one of our worst performers after Torres's arrival due to the more orthodox role he was given and the fact he wasn't really producing the type of form he had in our Double Winning Season. I remember that season and prior to December Malouda was up to par after that he had 1 assist in like 15-20 matches.

After December Anelka; Malouda and Kalou had a whopping 5 assists our of around 70 games between them.

Sturridge at Bolton outscored Drogba Anelka and Torres combined during that period.

Anyone who says that the signing of Torres and Luiz was a smart move ahead of getting wingers and creative midfielders is out of their minds. Thats what I thought at the time even before we had finalized the two transfers - it was obvious that creativity was the main issue because we were barely creating enough chances - something which would repeat the season that followed even with Mata being signed. We had Drogba; Anelka; Kalou and Sturridge so another striker to play two up top was not a necessity especially when you recall the "great games" Anelka had when playing with Drogba up top when he initially came(his first 6 months at the club were awful). Or Sheva before that is another example - Torres was signed to take over for Drogba but he failed to do so and thus Drogba stuck around for another season.

I've maintained that the position into which Torres or any other striker we might have signed at the time would have been very difficult(possible exceptions are forwards that create their own chances I know we were linked with Kun and Neymar at the time as well) - I didn't envision the fiasco that followed but was expecting for Torres to be below par in that team. Had we addressed the real issues which were facing the squad and signed Torres in the summer he might have had a great season. In hindsight the whole situation lead us to an unlikely Champions League Victory on the backs of our veterans and Ramires; Luiz; Cahill and Mata.

[Muzchap 8,966]

Anybody IMHO who says Dzeko over Falcao isn't aiming high enough...

Fair enough Dzeko might be a good player, but Falcao is where its at right here, right now...

If City get him then everybody else in PL is fucked - again my opinion, agree/disagree as much as you like...

We are Champions of Europe and CAN win the PL with another striker in addition to Torres + Studge...

50 million euros (currency dropping daily) is a small price to pay for that level of success...

Fuck off Manchester - London is where it's at!!!

Again my opinion

[Las7 951]

What do you regard as a revision in history? We needed one more striker to rotate the front 3, especially Drogba who was suffering from Malaria. I completely agree about you when you say Torres should have been signed in the summer though, it was the plan but Liverpool asked way too much money

Look at the front 3 evolution until Torres came and just after (Drogba rested for that period), you just cannot say Torres' signing was not for rotation purposes.

I won't develop again why Torres was chosen, that's a mix between Roman's money, Torres' commercial value, his sporting impact (as a modern striker). And as a striker, he was one more option for Carlo.

Torres was signed to take over for Drogba but his inability to score goals with the limited service we were providing at the time lead to his downfall, hence he was dropped from the starting line up as we reverted back to 1 person up top. Main reason was that despite Drogba's bad form he still provided far too much in a defensive avenue and we needed stability at the back especially on set pieces. It was criminal that Sturridge wasn't played back then.

I don't agree with the chances thing, we did create enough chances in 2010/2011 a lot more than in 2011-12. Creativity wasn't the issue, that's way too unprecise to say that ; chances were there. Our issues were tactical ones, defensively in our transitions. The potential was there in the squad.

Only Malouda and Drogba were really productive in that aspect 2010/2011, Drogba ended up with 13 assists in the EPL while Malouda had the most key passes in the League. Even the malaria suffering Drogba was our best creative outlet, while Malouda had maintained good form till December and the arrival of Torres lead him to strange positions . Lampard was poor; Anelka was in awful form; Essien was injured we had no creative potential in that squad - fact is that two years later only Lampard remains.

hat is your "Torres was signed to take over Drogba" based on? That's your own conclusion, lineups show he was used as rotation purpose to allow the variety we lacked offensively in the first half of the season.

What was Torres signed for in that case? Drogba has never played well with a partner up top - Crespo; Anelka; Sheva proved that.

Do we really need to buy a player for 50 million, give him 13 million per season in wages if we plan to rotate him with a 34 year old?

Torres and Luiz were signed as squad players ; the fact the club had enough money made them sign two expensive players. I don't remember Ivanovic being that crap that season... And I don't remember Drogba overflowing energy playing every 3 days with Malaria at 32

I think you should re-read what you wrote. I mean is there even a point in arguing with a person who thinks Torres was signed to be a squad player. Ferreira was a squad player; Sidwell was a squad player; Diarra was a squad player............

Kalou has never been regarded as a reliable option on the wings (Anelka, Malouda played injured instead of him, enough said) and even less through the axis.

Kalou was a forward converted into a winger, he was about as productive as Walcott there - just not as fast. Considering we just had 3 options and you said we have "potential" in the squad I thought that's enough.

Sturridge had never been regarded as a reliable option upfront either before Torres came, he had to pass a mental step he succesfully did at Bolton to play regulary for Chelsea, he was helped for that by Coyle's massive influence.

So all young players must pass some test to be deemed good enough to be given a start at CFC? The B S about Coyle's massive influence is just B S, Coyle just had the balls to play younger players in the EPL things Chelsea weren't prepared to do even as Drogba & Anelka struggled. Same as last year as Sturridge had more goals than Torres and Drogba combine for the AVB reign but was given a total of 1 start up top with the reserve squad in the Carling Cup, same with Lukaku.

[Reddish-Blue 2,506]

That's where you probably miss my point, I shall have been unclear on that.

We needed one more experienced striker, a 3rd choice would have been perfect. But that wasn't the current club's policy ; Torres isn't a panic buy, he's a precise target for half a decade who confirmed season after season how he filled every criter to possibly help the club on every aspect: commercial, sporting and with the image given (statement of intent, we sign expensive players, we want to win the CL etc...) who has been bought at a very moment where the conditions made that the sale was dependent of the club who sold the player, here comes the expensive fee.

Squad player isn't the right expression. The striker was signed for rotation purposes, the club decided that he could sign a world class player (also to anticipate things regarding Drogba). We had a world class rotation player (at least that was his utility on his first 6 months, a bit like Anelka). Like for Anelka, the club didn't rely just on them to score, they were strikers able to add quality and quantity to a part of the squad that lacked depth in a season where we were running after the title contender

Torres was a panic buy. We could of signed a younger, more talented striker instead of Torres for 50 million.

As for your comparison to Anelka, he was only signed for 15 million & he provided us with an effective rotational option at CF, SS, RW, LW.

Torres looked pathetic in the 'rotation' role...hence we could have saved 50 million and signed a top-class striker who doesn't require good service at all times in order to score goals.

[Swoopz 183]

Torres was a panic buy. We could of signed a younger, more talented striker instead of Torres for 50 million.

As for your comparison to Anelka, he was only signed for 15 million & he provided us with an effective rotational option at CF, SS, RW, LW.

Torres looked pathetic in the 'rotation' role...hence we could have saved 50 million and signed a top-class striker who doesn't require good service at all times in order to score goals.

Torres was not a panic buy, it was our owner going after what he wanted. Its not secret that Roman was an admirer of Torres since he played at A. Madrid, he finally found the opportunity to score one of his favorite players for his own football team...

[dumps 284]

Anyone see us buying Falcao with Torres used as a swap?

I don't see why torres wouldnt want to go back, and i dont see Athletico complaining with Torres plus a bunch of cash.

I think us having Falcao and Torres and sturridge will lead to Torres getting upset, and Sturridge leaving at the end of his contract - so i dont think we can keep Torres.

If falcao ends up coming to the PL and its not our club, then we would have really missed out there. the only otehr club i can see getting him is Man City, and by god that would piss me off. Only thing is surely Man city wouldnt buy another striker, they have too much quality in that position already.

Im getting wet thinking of Oscar, Mata and Hazard behind Falcao. good god what a line up!