Man United 2-1 Chelsea

[GodZola 630]

I don't agree.

He was on the wrong side of 30, what was the point of extending a contract? We're not going to offer a 33-year old a contract when we're trying to keep our wage list & all this financial aspects down. It was a logical step to release players who were at the end of their contracts.

We could've signed a suitable replacement for him. A younger, attacking, playmaker. We chose otherwise, such a shame..

It's living proof that we have missed him this season from midfield & as I already stated he was willing to take a pay cut to stay. It's ok to let players go who are no longer good enough & passed there sell by date ala Deco & Belletti but Ballack still had more to offer. He could of aided Ramires & also the likes of MacEachran could of learnt from him. I don't fall for this age thing, old or young if their good enough then they should play.

As for the financial aspect thing, we then went out & spent 70m & gave Torres 180k per week? Very strange!

[LDN Blue 7,903]

It's living proof that we have missed him this season from midfield & as I already stated he was willing to take a pay cut to stay. It's ok to let players go who are no longer good enough & passed there sell by date ala Deco & Belletti but Ballack still had more to offer. He could of aided Ramires & also the likes of MacEachran could of learnt from him. I don't fall for this age thing, old or young if there good enough then they should play.

As for the financial aspect thing, we then went out & spent 70m & gave Torres 180k per week? Very strange!

We've only missed him because everyone else got injured.

It's all good Ballack saying he'd take a pay cut but what's the point in signing a 33 year old to a new contract? That's not thinking long term at all. At the time we could've potentially bought a player like Ozil, Khedira ect. Hell Yaya Touré would've been a good replacement.

Torres is a worthy investment. He's 27 and proven world class. He's still at a ripe age as footballers go, so it's not exactly the same thing is it.

[eldo 868]

It's living proof that we have missed him this season from midfield & as I already stated he was willing to take a pay cut to stay. It's ok to let players go who are no longer good enough & passed there sell by date ala Deco & Belletti but Ballack still had more to offer. He could of aided Ramires & also the likes of MacEachran could of learnt from him. I don't fall for this age thing, old or young if their good enough then they should play.

Ballack was injured for a big part of this season.

[GodZola 630]

Ballack was injured for a big part of this season.

I know that eldo, he broke his leg but you cannot assume that he would be injured playing for us if he was still here.

[GodZola 630]

We've only missed him because everyone else got injured.

It's all good Ballack saying he'd take a pay cut but what's the point in signing a 33 year old to a new contract? Th

at's not thinking long term at all. At the time we could've potentially bought a player like Ozil, Khedira ect. Hell Yaya Touré would've been a good replacement.

Torres is a worthy investment. He's 27 and proven world class. He's still at a ripe age as footballers go, so it's not exactly the same thing is it.

Giggs is 37 & has been the best player on the park against us in the last 3 games. You cannot have it both ways in terms of financial aspect & signing the world & his brother, Toure's on over 200k a week? Concur about Ozil but he was never going to come once Real got involved, not Khedira though he is no different from what we have already.

We have missed him because Mikel, Essien & Lampard have had poor seasons not just because we've had injuries. He was arguably our best player in those last 20 or so games last season, he has great vision, can see that pass, gets the ball moving quickly, he was happy to stay for another year so a long term contract was not the case here.

[LDN Blue 7,903]

Giggs is 37 & has been the best player on the park against us in the last 3 games. You cannot have it both ways in terms of financial aspect & signing the world & his brother, Toure's on over 200k a week? Concur about Ozil but he was never going to come once Real got involved, not Khedira though he is no different from what we have already.

We have missed him because Mikel, Essien & Lampard have had poor seasons not just because we've had injuries. He was arguably our best player in those last 20 or so games last season, he has great vision, can see that pass, gets the ball moving quickly, he was happy to stay for another year so a long term contract was not the case here.

Lol you can't compare Ballack to Giggs. Giggs is much better than Ballack, much fitter & has kept relatively injury-free!

Ok, Touré & co are a bad shout, but understand my point. Signing Ballack to a new contract when he's 33 is silly. He's not that good that we should risk him as such an age. What we should've done was sign a better, younger, replacement!

We said everyone would save our season. From Lampard to Essien to Mikel to Benayoun. Ballack couldn't have done anything. We always look to an ex-player or injured player to "save" us. That's dumb. We should be signing new players and make them the stars to stay in the team.

[GodZola 630]

Lol you can't compare Ballack to Giggs. Giggs is much better than Ballack, much fitter & has kept relatively injury-free!

Ok, Touré & co are a bad shout, but understand my point. Signing Ballack to a new contract when he's 33 is silly. He's not that good that we should risk him as such an age. What we should've done was sign a better, younger, replacement!

We said everyone would save our season. From Lampard to Essien to Mikel to Benayoun. Ballack couldn't have done anything. We always look to an ex-player or injured player to "save" us. That' dumb. We should be signing new players and make them the stars to stay in the team.

I'm not comparing Giggs to Ballack, what I'm saying is if players are still good enough at that age then they should still be playing, essentially Ballack is more creative than what we have, is still very FIT & could of done a job for us this season - the facts speak for themselves. Ask Ferguson if he thinks signing older players to a contract is silly? What is crazy is letting the wrong players go when they are good enough. You cannot predict what impact Ballack would of had but I will tell you this, we would of been playing with more creation with him in the side & his experience would of been vital during our poor spell.

I agree we should of signed a young playmaker but as I've already said Ballack's experience could help nurture that talent.

[LDN Blue 7,903]

I agree we should of signed a young playmaker but as I've already said Ballack's experience could help nurture that talent.

In that aspect you're right. Also with the creativity.

However you must understand the reasoning of not signing him to a new contract if his current one had expired.

[spuz 143]

If we'd have kept him people would be blaming him for our poor form and saying he's well past his sell by date.Just like Lamps and Drogs.

[Madmax 9,219]

We're missing Essien more than we're missing Ballack imo. Ballack's been replaced with Ramires, it's Essien who's gone missing most of the season. Add to that Lampard's and Benayoun's injuries and you see why we struggle for rotation (Lampard) and creativity (Bena). Could have been solved by getting a playmaker in Jan, but no, we'd rather splash 50 million on a striker and 26 million on a defender than address the real issue by getting flair and vision in that midfield. I've been saying this all along - we need creators, not finishers.

[GodZola 630]

In that aspect you're right. Also with the creativity.

However you must understand the reasoning of not signing him to a new contract if his current one had expired.

No mate I don't understand or agree with it, I've given my reasons & they are more than justified to sign him to a rolling yearly contract, it says it all that Ancelotti came our & said it was mistake to let players like him go & let's not forget we are talking about Germany's Captain when we made that decision not some run of the mill premiership player!

[Steve 10,227]

[Madmax 9,219]

^Some painful images to look at there. What could have been ....

[magicrico 175]

If we'd have kept him people would be blaming him for our poor form and saying he's well past his sell by date.Just like Lamps and Drogs.

You can excuse Drogs from that

[LDN Blue 7,903]

Cunt.

[spuz 143]

You can excuse Drogs from that

No I can't. Some people on here want rid of him.

[steve5221 91]

No I can't. Some people on here want rid of him.

Drogba is so tempremental, he has to be the main man or he sulks...now we have Torres that will not work. He has been great for us, but to move forward I think we need to think about getting rid of him and the Drogba click (Malouda, Anelka)

[dodojojo 510]

Drogba is so tempremental, he has to be the main man or he sulks...

It's not just about sulking. It's about moving away from a system where you rely on a striker to be both the goalscorer and the creative force. It's moving away from a system where you have a goal scoring midfielder who no longer creates nor can he control the middle of the pitch. And when those two players can longer to do it over an entire season, the team suffers.

It's not just about rebuilding around Torres, though of course he's a key component. It's about rebuilding a team where you have a midfield comfortable with passing and moving and strikers always on the move and who aren't burden with having to do everything in order to score a goal. If Dalglish (and Clarke) can get Maxi Rodriquez and Kuyt to score hat-tricks, surely Chelsea can play a more dynamic game? Bring in 2 or 3 players who don't play the way Chelsea plays right now and it may be as much as revelation as Suarez has been at Liverpool.