Chelsea in for Robinho!!!!!


http://msnsport.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_3602748,00.html

At all True blues. I've read some of the recent posts and agree with many of them. I think we need a serious overhaul of both team and Coaching crew and I also think we need to think seriously about our pattern of play, we need to be getting more goals in rather than just being content after scoring one or two and we just need to get away from this constant 4-5-1 pattern we should get someone that is willing to be more experimental in the saddle. Grant most times is too scared of making changes and taking responsibilities though I don't blame him much after a difficult season of trying to pick up from where the special one left. I also think Drogba should come in for more blame than either Anelka or Terry. What the heck got into him to do something like that in such an important match? Was he crazy? If he hadn't been sent off, he'll probably have taken one of the penalties and though there's no guarantee we'll have won at the end of the day but at least we'll have had less "only if's" to moan about. Anyway it's all a game it's over this season and we can only look at the future. As someone suggested earlier, I think we should let Drogba go and get attackers that would be more commited to the club. Drogba's problem is his ego and the fact that we haven't really got any other serious attacker contending with him in the club. All the other attackers have proven themselves to just be empty barrels with nothing to give. Just look at the line up : Pizzaro, Anelka, Shevchenko, all hitherto fairly good strikers before they came only to come the club and be complete wash outs. I think we should get more of the younger strikers that are still looking to improve and achieve something for their careers than all these ones we are getting that have already seen it all.

Anyway that's just my 2cents. The loss was sure painful but we have to move on and learn from our past mistakes.

Frank Rijkaard remains favourite to succeed AG?

Guyz what do think?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/article1202378.ece

Some further news on the Mourinho front to cheer up Somze and Ako . . . . .

Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich and former coach Jose Mourinho have shared three "cosy chats" in the last six weeks, but Frank Rijkaard remains favourite to replace Avram Grant. (The Sun)

Hehehehe . . . . . . fingers crossed eh? Not for me sha.

nateevs:

So why do we route the ball to Drogba to get to attack? Well!!! because we have a very poor midfield. We have a midfield that doesn't provide chances. . . the chances are most times created by the strikers themselves. , What happens when the striker does not trun up? We lose one more trophy!!!! A midfield that cannot move the attack through well defined, calculated and appealing moves to attack is no midfield. Crosses, Freekicks, Cornerkicks. . . are very important to winning games. If we do not have players that can convert these chances into goals. . we have to find them.

Secondly we need mifielders that can run, dribble and pass with their eyes close. Decent on goal as well. Midfielder that do nothing but wacth the movement of players on goal and get the ball to them even in tight conditions.

Nateevs you are SOOOOOO wrong on this one. Firstly, European football writers have acknowledged that the best team lost. Secondly, Lamps and Ballack TOTALLY dominated midfield. I believe we have the best midfield in the world. BAR NONE except maybe Arsenal. Ballack created a clear chance for Lamps and Lamps created a clear chance for Malouda. I don't remember Scholes or Carrick creating ANY chances.

You seem to have this romantic idea that midfielders are there to create through balls with fancy passes. Well, the days of Carlos Valderama are over. Modern midfields are packed with no chance to play the incisive passes you are talking about. How can you play through ball when Drogba has two of the Worlds best defenders on his ass. And they are both faster than him. You also have wingers who cannot push up beyond their full back.  Infact, watch the match again and you will see that Ronaldo created all their chances with Wes Brown creating one from a cross.

Therein lies the problem. WINGERS!

For the midfield to create chances, the wingers have to pull the opponents wide, creating space for midfield to start playing passes. Unfortunately we had two wingers who offer no threat. Our midfield is SO good that we dominated the game simply because of them regardless of the fact that they had no one to pass to most of the time. I saw Ballack and Lamps playing head tennis in a very congested midfiled without losing possession once. Their ball control was impeccable and frankly, out of this world. They were reduced to playing passes amongst themselves, thats how bad it was because no one was offering for the pass. Maka was very often surrounded by two to three players and he would still wriggle out of the tight situation using his favourite skill - the Kanu underfoot drag. Man, do you have any idea how good our midfield is?

Try this -

Man Utd defence = Chelsea defence

Man Utd strikers = chelsea strikers

Man Utd winger  = 10 times better than Chelsea wingers

So who bridged the gap and kept us in the game, even to the point of dominating it? Our midfield!


OK, if this team:

                                                       Cech

Essien                      Carvalho                            Terry                Cole

                                                   Makalele

                               Lampard                        Ballack   

Cole                                                                                          Ronaldo

                                                    Drogba


plays against this team:


                                               Van Der Saar

Brown                      Ferdinand                       Vidic                          Evra

Hargreaves             Carrick                             Scholes                  Malouda

                               Tevez                               Rooney


What do you think the score will be? I bet nothing less that 2-0.

That is the difference our midfield made on wednesday. If you put Man Utd wingers with our midfield, we will conquer the world easily. That shows you where the balance of power lies - with the wingers, not the midfield.


Bleep it, bring on Robinho, even if he is expensive. Bring on another winger like Ribery or Quaresma - you will see our midfield in action.

£28million for Robinho?

Is Kenyon high? The money for Bosingwa was already too much; this is pure lunacy!

I agree with Ibime,

The problem is not the midfield, it's the wingers.

Our wingers were not just in the game and I've started considering Joe Cole's position. I think we should put our wingers on the transfer list. Lets get Riberi and Quaresma.

Hopefully we have solved the defensive problem on the right so all we need are wingers and strikers. I want something close to a total overhauling in those positions.

Again Imagine if JM had £16m and now £28m to spend on the solid squad we had then. We would have had Alves by now.

Nateevs,
You must have heard about Nasri by now, I can recall either you or Ibime had wanted the guy.

No be me o. Nasri is a weakling.

Im sure Arsene Wenger will turn him into a world beater but we no get that kind time.

I don't think this is funny

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HAi_hdTJyE&feature=related

This is good news if it is true.

Tottenham will make a straight £15m cash offer for Chelsea striker Nicolas Anelka and £10m for right-winger Shaun Wright-Phillips. (Daily Express)

Andriy Schevchenko looks set for an exit out of Chelsea and is considering playing in America's MLS League, although AC Milan are poised to take him back to the San Siro. (Daily Star)

I say sell the movaphoka. You will never get the right attitude out of him. He has already proved his disloyalty. How many times do you have to get your finger burned to know this movaphoka is not with us. He will come again next season and give you only 20 good games.

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_3604910,00.html

Blues plan Drogba meeting

Drogba: Decision to be made

Chelsea chairman Bruce Buck says the club will sit down with Didier Drogba to see if the striker wants to stay at Stamford Bridge.

Drogba has been tipped to leave the Blues over the summer, with Milan confirming he is on their list of transfer targets.

The Ivory Coast ace was sent off in the UEFA Champions League final against Manchester United in midweek, and Buck admits it was a 'silly' red card for the forward to pick up.

But Buck remains hopeful that Drogba will still be in West London next season and is planning to hold talks with the former Marseille man shortly.

''Didier is a superb player generally," Buck told Chelsea TV. "There have been some comments reported to be made by Didier over the last year that maybe he would like to leave Chelsea. On most occasions he has said that he has been misquoted.

"Now that the season is over, we have to sit down with him and see what the story is and what his future is. He is a great player, I hope he stays, but that is a decision the club and Didier will have to make collectively.

"This year he has had some niggling injuries, but we know he can change the course of a game, as he nearly did in Moscow.

"As I have said, he is a superb player, but if you are a world-class player, which he is, you have to avoid the silly red cards, the ones that come about over nothing - and I think Didier will be sorry that he got that red card."

Following Chelsea's failure to win a trophy this season, there have been widespread reports of a mass exodus from Stamford Bridge over the summer.

Buck expects Avram Grant's squad to be trimmed during the off-season, but he is not predicting wholesale changes of the playing staff.

He added: "We decided several months ago that our squad size is a few players too many. It is about 28 now and it should really be 22 plus three goalkeepers.

"So there is going to be some movement just to get the squad down to the size we think is optimum. In terms of other transfers generally, every year we want to tweak the squad a bit, so there will be some changes, but I don't expect there to be massive, wholesale changes."

@Somze

It was me that wanted Nasri. .



@Ibime.


Nateevs you are SOOOOOO wrong on this one. Firstly, European football writers have acknowledged that the best team lost.

I am not one of those that believe all that the media said about the match. The best team lost with one shot on target in the whole of the first half? Check the stats. . . . I am not saying we were not better than ManU at some point in the game. . don't forget that ManU could have wrapped it up in the first with 3 exquisite chances.




Secondly, Lamps and Ballack TOTALLY dominated midfield. I believe we have the best midfield in the world. BAR NONE except maybe Arsenal. Ballack created a clear chance for Lamps and Lamps created a clear chance for Malouda. I don't remember Scholes or Carrick creating ANY chances.

Lamps was fantastic on the night but far away from TOTALLY dominating the midfield. Let's not be biased. The first half was rubbish. . . not for the goal. The second half was lifted in spirit. . . but a tad less that what I wanted. . Talking about dominating the midfield. . ,  imagine Cech allowed on of those goals in. . or Terry could not get his head on that day-saving block? There will not be any talk about Midfield dominating. . we did not have any chacne like that. .

Don't forget that ManU's midfield went dead when Scholes bumped into Maka. . . he had a problem with blurred vision and was no longer on the attack in the 2nd half.

You seem to have this romantic idea that midfielders are there to create through balls with fancy passes. Well, the days of Carlos Valderama are over. Modern midfields are packed with no chance to play the incisive passes you are talking about. How can you play through ball when Drogba has two of the Worlds best defenders on his ass. And they are both faster than him. You also have wingers who cannot push up beyond their full back.  Infact, watch the match again and you will see that Ronaldo created all their chances with Wes Brown creating one from a cross.

Therein lies the problem. WINGERS!



This is where you get it all wrong Ibime. That ManU created chances from the wings does not mean they always do. Check my posts, you will see that I already predited the line-up before the match. . .and I was spot on If I can predict it, then so can fergie. Fergie's tactics was to put Ronaldo stationary on the left because he knows Essien's incapacity as a defender. Also when Essien, remembers he has Ronaldo to take care of, he can't join the attack like he will do. And it worked. My point is Fergie can put Ronaldo to great effect on the left. . and make it work for a specific game. . How else can you shuffle our player. . . Can you play Lampard on the left. . .
The point is we were too predictible. . . Like we always are. Chelsea is more than likely to throw the ball to Drog. . . if not they pay along the flanks. . caught that out and you have the game . . ALL TOO PREDICTIBLE. . why? because they know we do not play the ball in the center of Midfield. . we don't have players that can do that. . . PREDICTIBLE

My fantasy about through passes?. . . if you watch the ManU versus Barca game then you will delete what you just said about their best defenders. The problem Barca had was that they could not score. They destroyed ManU's defence outrightly. You think those passes don't exist? Wait until we have a player like Kaka, Messi, Diego and former Ronaldinho. . Have you seen Gorcurff of Milan play? Then you know what I mean.    

Your third mistake is when you talk about wingers, you are effectively talking about a 4-4-2, or 4-5-1 formation. When you play a 4-3-3 like we do, your so called wingers become forwards and not wingers . That is what Ronaldo is. Not a winger. You can also have forwards in a 4-1-3-2 formation except that you wide players are more like midfielders  




For the midfield to create chances, the wingers have to pull the opponents wide, creating space for midfield to start playing passes. Unfortunately we had two wingers who offer no threat. Our midfield is SO good that we dominated the game simply because of them regardless of the fact that they had no one to pass to most of the time. I saw Ballack and Lamps playing head tennis in a very congested midfiled without losing possession once. Their ball control was impeccable and frankly, out of this world. They were reduced to playing passes amongst themselves, thats how bad it was because no one was offering for the pass. Maka was very often surrounded by two to three players and he would still wriggle out of the tight situation using his favourite skill - the Kanu underfoot drag. Man, do you have any idea how good our midfield is?

One qualities of good midefiled is the ability to invent. If your forward players are totally marked out . . you have to take responsibilty. That responsibility is running with the ball through the center of midfield. When you do and beat one or two players. . you have rendered their defensive midfield open. . and then faced with their defence. The defence then has to contract to prevent a straigh walk-through thereby freeing space on the flanks. What have you done? You have freed your players on the flanks. (Wingers). And that's aw goals are created. Not the forwards (Wingers) running around hoping the midfielders will find them. That is why we score a few goals. Only one player understands this . . and that is Essien.  Let's not be carried away by the fact that the real chances we had and the goal came when Essien bumped forwards.

Last point . . our mifield is too old and if we do not buy at least tow young midfield players for next season, we might be in trouble.
The midfield that played ManU has a combined age of 95 years. . .

Nateevs, Fashi that ting! I will come back to that later. That one na dissertation wey you type.


http://www.goal.com/en/articolo.aspx?contenutoid=708915

[center]Mourinho: I Sign For Inter On Monday[/center]

Jose Mourinho has told Michael Essien that he will sign for Inter on Monday according to La Gazzetta Dello Sport.

The former Chelsea coach has been linked with the club ever since current boss, Roberto Mancini, walked out on the club only to make a dramatic You-turn on his decision.

Mancini still hasn't confirmed his position with the Nerazzurri and he may leave in the summer. Meanwhile the Special One is currently free and waiting to pounce and, according to reports, he has claimed that he will sign for Inter on Monday.

Gazzetta claim Mourinho sent Chelsea midifielder Michael Essien a text message after the Moscow Champions League final telling him the news of his new adventure with the Nerazzurri.

The text reads: "Michael, you have all been great players regardless of the loss to Manchester United. On Monday I will sign for Inter and I hope that one day you too will come to Inter."

It seems as if Mourinho will take half of the Chelsea squad with him if he signs, as Inter are also interested in Frank Lampard and Didier Drogba.

Mancini has been linked with moves to Chelsea and Manchester City and if he does leave San Siro then the door would be wide open for Mourinho to walk in.

Inter are desperate to win the Champions League and Moratti would prefer someone who has experience of victory in the competition in the past to take the reins at San Siro.




All I can say is . . . . . . Mourinho need to stop poaching all our players. If he wants them, he has to pay the asking price.

In 120 minutes of football,Chelsea had possession for 42% of the game and they are supposed to be the best team?

42% possession with only 3 shots on target,1 every 40 minutes,now makes Chelsea the best team on Wednesday.

When teams lose on penalties,people try to find a silver lining because its felt that its a cruel way to lose.The reality is that a team that managed only 3 shots on target and conceded possession for most of the game can't be described as the best team on the night

nateevs:

The midfield that played ManU has a combined age of 65 years. . .

The combined age is 95 and not 65 as u quoted

ASL33:

The combined age is 95 and not 65 as u quoted

I am sorry I actually had 95 in mind . . I don't know when I typed 65. I have edited it now. . thanks for that.

You make some good points Nateevs, but you cannot eat your cake and have it. If you want the midfield of Barcelona, then you have to be prepared for the numerous occasions when opposing teams will drive a bus through your midfield and leave your defence exposed.

The first half, we did not play well but why do you keep picking on it? A game is 90 mins long. Our poor play in the first half had to do with the collective manner with which we approached the game. The instructions were to keep it tight for the start of the game as they always are. After that, when we had to take the game to Man Utd, we did.

Unfortunately the players you are looking for to do their dribbling from central midfield are few and far between. How much would Fabregas or Iniesta cost? How many goals would they score as compared to Lamps and Ballack? Of course Lamps and Ballack are geting old. We would be looking to replace them in the next 2-3 years.

Question: How many times did you see Ballack facing up to Ronaldo? Do you think it is natural for Ballack to be marking Ronaldo? On top of that they were having to deal with Scholes and Carrick. O-boy, they put in overtime abeg.

Anyway, I struggle to recall ANY game in which our central midfield was dominated by another central midfield except for our games against Barca in CL. But that is natural for Barca to dominate games. You let them have possession then you hit them on the counter-attack.  SWOOSH!

By the way, did you see Maka dribbling two-to-three players at a time. Gangsta!

4 Play:

In 120 minutes of football,Chelsea had possession for 42% of the game and they are supposed to be the best team?

42% possession with only 3 shots on target,1 every 40 minutes,now makes Chelsea the best team on Wednesday.

When teams lose on penalties,people try to find a silver lining because its felt that its a cruel way to lose.The reality is that a team that managed only 3 shots on target and conceded possession for most of the game can't be described as the best team on the night

All the 'neutrals' I know said we were the best team so I am not going to argue semantics with you. Let the nuetrals be the judge.

We had possession in the areas that counted. Plus we had 19 shots total in the whole match. Anyway, Europe is saying that the best team lost so whatever you say its all bla bla bla. Teams have different styles of play. Would you say Barca was the best team because they swallowed you whole in the possession stakes? Abeg stop chatting shit.

End of.

Ibime:

We had possession in the areas that counted. Plus we had 19 shots total in the whole match. Anyway, Europe is saying that the best team lost so whatever you say its all bla bla bla. Teams have different styles of play. Would you say Barca was the best team because they swallowed you whole in the possession stakes? Abeg stop chatting shit.

Had possession in the areas that counted? What sort of drivel is that? You didn't dominate possession in any area of the pitch apart from your own half-unless your half is "the area that counted"-and waywardly shooting from long range doesn't make a side the better team.

If 2 teams play and one dominates possession 90/10 while the other adopts a shoot on sight policy,I guess you will claim that the latter is the better side because they had more shots.

What is 'Europe is saying'? The better team doesn't concede possession 58/42 or manage only 3 shots on target in 120 mins of football.The so-called better team hasn't won a trophy since Jose left.

Unlike Barca,you lost but at least Barca managed to dominate possession and managed more shots on target.They have a better claim to asserting that they were the better side against Utd.

I repeat:

All the 'neutrals' I know said we were the best team so I am not going to argue semantics with you. Let the nuetrals be the judge.

If Gazzetta de la Sport is saying we deserved to win, I take their opinion over yours anyday.

We did not lose, Barca did. So stop arguing out ya backside. Show me one newspaper article that says Utd deserved to win?

end of.

Ibime:

I repeat:
All the 'neutrals' I know said we were the best team so I am not going to argue semantics with you. Let the nuetrals be the judge.
end of.

Anytime someone hasn't got a clue what they are talking,they will tell you some vague collection of folks share their opinion. Ibime has now become a polyglot who knows what the newspapers in Europe's 30+ nations think of Wednesday's match.

@Ibime,Abeg,what about the Japanese and Chinese,do they also agree with you?

Ibime:

If Gazzetta de la Sport is saying we deserved to win, I take their opinion over yours anyday.

We did not lose, Barca did. So stop arguing out ya backside. Show me one newspaper article that says Utd deserved to win?

end of.

Gazzetta de la Sport has over 10 football journalists,did they all tell you Chelsea were the better side? You did not lose?What a tit. . . .I guess Chelsea and Utd are joint European champions.

The better side can lose a game of football.When Utd lost to Pompey in the FA Cup,were Pompey the better side? Stop arguing like a schmuck even though you are one.You can't claim to be the better side when all the indicia shows you didn't dominate the game.

Next you will tell me that Japan's Asahi Shimbun said you were the better side.

4Play leave the guy, Chelsea was the better team is just consolation.
I believe if they played better than united their board won't be contemplating sacking AG.

Listen up . . . . lemme school you on something . . . . Chelsea always have low possession stats whether we play Utd, Everton or Wigan.

We play a half-pressing game, you play a full-pressing game. OK lemme explain since you are so stupid. . . . . . .we only press teams from the halfway line. You press teams starting from the two pitbulls, Rooney and Tevez. Therefore all that possession that you have when Ferdinand and Vidic are passing amongst themselves or when Paul Scholes is dropping deep to recieve the ball - that aint hurting shit. We allow you to have that possession cos that is our style.

The fact is that there were three periods in that game - first half, second half and extra-time. You dominated the first whilst we dominated the other two. Even the ITV commentators were saying it - or were you not listening?

Stop trying to revise history my friend. All my friends called me in the second half and extra-time and they said "you guys are gonna win this game, you have the upper hand."

Even till today, I haven't caught up with any of my spuds, Gunner or Kopite friends who haven't said that we deserved the win. Even Gazzetta Sport is saying it. L'Equipe is also saying it.

I am still waiting for your link to show that Man Utd deserved the game . . . . . . keep Google searching punk cos you can't remember reading it anywhere despite the fact that you have bought every newspaper since the final so you can wallow in your teams victory . . . . . . . . . .

Here we go -  Europe's football writers believe the best team lost.

Link:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2008/05/23/sfnvue123.xml

I offer my congratulations but you will never hear it out of my mouth that you deserved the victory. Congrats anyway.

Ibime:

The fact is that there were three periods in that game - first half, second half and extra-time. You dominated the first whilst we dominated the other two. Even the ITV commentators were saying it - or were you not listening?

Stop trying to revise history my friend. All my friends called me in the second half and extra-time and they said "you guys are going to win this game, you have the upper hand."

Even till today, I haven't caught up with any of my spuds, Gunner or Kopite friends who haven't said that we deserved the win. Even Gazzetta Sport is saying it. L'Equipe is also saying it.

Look at this slowpoke.You dominated extra time when you had only 35% of the possession? Your friends are you back up? This guy is a cretin.

What are the facts upon which your opinion is based.Don't tell me other people's opinion. . . what is the basis upon which you claim that Chelsea outplayed Utd on Wednesday night?

Only a monumentally idiotic fellow will support his opinion on a football game with the opinion of others.Chelsea had low possession stats against Everton and Wigan? This guy is stupid. . . .apart from brief periods when Wigan and Everton were chasing equalisers,Chelsea had the bulk of the possession at the end of the game.

@ 4 Play, your style of arguing is too abrasive. Check yourself.

Ehe - back to the issue:

Check this - http://www.goal.com/en/articolo.aspx?contenutoid=705844

and I quote:

"The game was dominated by both sides at different phases, and throughout the second half and extra-time, with Chelsea in the ascendancy after United had controlled the first period with pace and panache, the result remained  in doubt."

4 Play:

What are the facts upon which your opinion is based.Don't tell me other people's opinion. . . what is the basis upon which you claim that Chelsea outplayed Utd on Wednesday night?

You obviously don't respect my opinion so I have given you the experts opinions. Like it or lump it.

As for possession stats, only a fool reads anything into possession stats. As I told you, our possession stats are always low because of our half-pressing game, unless we play a team who plays the same system:

Chelsea (48%)     vs       Wigan (52%)

And that was at Stamford Bridge

http://www.wiganlatics.premiumtv.co.uk/page/MatchReport/0,,10429~38483,00.html


So please keep up your name-calling, I will keep providing you links. Lets see who is talking out their backside.

Infact, I don tire for you. Get thee behind me.

I can now see that you are very good at distorting the truth because we had 44% possession, not 42% as you claimed. I also highly doubt your claim that we had only 35% in extra time. I would like a link please so I can be rest assured that I am not dreaming.

I also wonder how you know how many football journalists Gazzetta have - or are you just good at plucking figures out of the air. Lawyer by trade, lawyer by nature.

@4play

Please Chill out with the tension. Let's talk sports.

@Ibime.

There are two sides to midfield. Attacking and Defensive. We are mainly the later. I was not trying to say they did not give in overtime. . . except that if that was overtime, then we don't have any midfield.
That our midfield is the best in the world is not true. If you say that our  defensive side of midfield is one of the best, I agree.

What exactly makes our midfield the best? We scored the least number of goals of the big four. Only 17 more than Everton in fifth place. The main objectives of midfield is to create, start attacks, retain possesion, create first line of defence for the Defenders and above all create scoring chances . . .

1. We don't start attack, we counter attack.
2. We don't retain possession, we conceed possession and defend.
3. We don't create enough scoring chances. . We create a few, score one or two goals and then go back to defend.
4. One thing we do is that we provide more defence in midfield than attack.


Now our mifield is such that only a striker like Drogba can fit in the team. . . bocs he is a do-it-alone kind of striker that does not need any sort of midfield prowress in the team to score goals. That covers for long the inadequacies of our midfield and we think it's the best. No it is not. what is the main reason all these players have not suceeded at Chelsea?

1. Kezman
2. Mutu
3. Crespo
4. Sheva
5. now Anelka

All world class strikers with amazing scoring records before they arrived at Chelsea. . . the answer is simple. . . Bad Midfield. We do not create many scoring chances because we don't have midfielders that free attackers, rather the midfielders are the highest goal scorers themselves. So it does not mata who comes, Gomez, Aguero, Torres, Eto'o, KJH, anyone. . . with the same midfield they will all go the same way as their predecessors. . except they are a DRGOBA. . which they are clearly not.  

It is not a good structure. I am not slating, I am just identifying that we have inadequacies and we should correct them this season. . if not then next season will be the same. perhaps even worse.

@ Ibime,

Telling us the better team lost on wednesday is quite preposterous. Man United dominated the first half. Chelsea's goal in the 1st half was clearly against the run of play. After the restart, Chelsea upped the ante but not as much as United did in the 1st half. The extra time period was even so how can u conclude Chelsea played better? The possession and the shots on goal favoured United. Chelsea were so much against it that they only depended at taking poke shots from a distance. I cannot remember Van Der Sar making any daring saves apart from Rio's header!!! It was Petr Cech that was called into action so u need to forget what Euro journalists are saying.

Nateevs,
seems like you're trying too hard to prove your points

cresspo and shevy were below their best in form before joining chelsea.
mutu was on drugs.
Anelka had failed in other top epl teams before his comeback with bolton

that leaves out just kezman.

your evidence lacks solidity

meanwhile which midfielder plays this role in ManU?

@Somze,

Mutu's drugs had nothing to do with his lack of goals. . . He's scored 51 goals for Juve and Fiorentina since he left Chelsea. .

Shevchenko was 29 when he joined.  Fine. . bad age to join the premiership. Alright. I am telling you that it cannot be as bad as scoring only 10 goals in two seasons.

Crespo's form has depeened as at the time he joined Chelsea but he's scored 28 goals for Milan and Inter since he left Chelsea.

Anelka scored 10 goals in the premiership before he joined Chelsea half way into the season, but only managed 1 goal since he joined. .

Do all these not look like a trend. . . ? Of course it's a trend. .


When we have another striker next season and we don't have new midfeild players he will flop and then we will say he was not all that good before he joined us. 


Do you still think it lacks solidity?