FrankLampard8

Woah woah woah... Eidur Gudjohnsen!

How do we know he's a perfectly adequate stand in? We've never really seen him play at this level and we don't see him train. This Enzo and Caicedo thing needs to be worked out at some point - International breaks happen too often for us to miss them both after every one when they are our starting pair. You can't have £200m of midfielders missing what 4 or 5 games a season each before you even consider injuries or suspension. Something that probably should have been considered when signing them both but alas here we are and we need to work around it.

My question is, why do we need to take a chance now? To actually contribute to a midtable Premier League team, or hopefully better - I would have thought that's obvious. Why should he be at that level? He has started what, like 10 senior men's games total at a lower level? He is almost definitely still honing his craft and that's ok. He may never be good enough but it doesn't need to be now or never for a 21 year old playing his first senior season and Chelsea are doing poorly enough as it is without taking that risk.

I disagree personally. Maybe you can take those chances with a well oiled machine that is performing well and where everyone knows their roles - you can replace one part even if it ends up being not at quite the same level and the team keeps ticking over. The player is put in less difficult situations and may even brought up to the level of the others. That isn't this team though. The guys is 21 and has had 6 months senior football. I'm not sure why he has to be at the level required right now? For me, the sensible thing would have been to leave him playing minutes for a pretty dominant Leicester team in a good league. Give him another good loan next year and then see what he's up to. The last thing this team needs is another inexperienced head who has played even less football than our current lot.

I have watched more Championship football than Premier League this season and feel very happy saying Casadei isn't good enough to play for Chelsea (even this iteration) at the moment. I think it was a good loan for him and he was doing well. However, let's be honest he wasn't a nailed on starter there and he was very hit or miss (as one would expect from someone playing their first senior season).

Gosh, it is so hard to answer that just because I feel like we still don't really know what half of the Chelsea squad are or what level they are actually at. I think a loan suits both his development and Chelsea whilst they figure out what to do with Mudryk, Madueke, Chukwuemeka etc. I think he would benefit from another loan but you just hope it is the right loan, you know? Obviously the expectation will be that the next one would be in the Premier League and I don't think there's much to be gained by parking him with some clogger manager and a team that just parks everyone behind the ball for 90 minutes. He has astounded me with how much his work off the ball has improved in less than a season and he isn't afraid to get stuck in. So much so, that he's trusted to play as a 10 as often as he does out wide now. So no concerns there. His finishing and decision making has come on leaps and bounds too. He's a real player - everyone is saying he's the best loan singing in Ipswich history alongside Giovani Dos Santos which is high praise. My main concern is he isn't the biggest guy. He's very slight and I do think the extra athleticism could be a shock to the system when he steps up again. Other than that he just needs to keep adding to his experience and I think he could do without the pressure cooker of Chelsea at this stage. My gut says he won't be top 4 quality but if he keeps improving at this rate the sky is the limit.

Thanks! I've been lurking for a while - couldn't stay away could I?!

Put it this way. I live in Suffolk now. I have a toddler and my wife works part time as a result. Your typical young family starting out I would say. I make a decent chunk more than the reported average UK household income and my wife is obviously contributing on top of that too. I haven't been to the Bridge since before covid now for various reasons however, my nearest team are Ipswich who could make an argument for being the most exciting team/club in the country right now. My in-laws started taking me down there around 3 seasons ago. I've really come to love going and was starting to go more and more. However, even with tickets cheaper than Chelsea at around £30.00 a pop and an exciting historic season unfolding here, there came a point where I totalled up how much i'd spent on football this season and looked at my bank balance and had to take a step back from it. It really does seem like a far cry from days gone by and I have no idea how clubs will sustain fanbases in the future on this basis. I suppose people always find the money somehow because we love it. P.S. Omari is some player - what i'd give to have him in Suffolk again next season!

Woke is an adjective derived from African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) meaning "alert to prejudice and discrimination" so you'd have to be a pretty bad person to be opposed to it. That's my last post.

Who would you pick on this basis? Short of City I can't feel confident of anyone being in the top 4 every year at the moment.

I think you probably should because you're very sensitive. My point is ultimately, as long as it is blue with white socks I can't believe anyone is bothered if it has some gold on it.

It's ultimately going to have white socks i'm sure, so I can't believe it has people that rattled. Sometimes we have yellow on the kit and i'm sure this was just seen as a stylised version of that.

I actually think there is a difference between that and the nonsense you were sputing when you "triggered" people. I also think calling people snowflakes makes you sound like an ignorant boomer gammon. but each to their own.

Not particularly as the circumstances almost couldn't be more different. They all want to go which is the biggest factor but they also have less time left on their contracts and are worth considerably bigger fees. Cucurella wouldn't be the first player to have a considerably better season which at the very least would mean we get more of our money back even if he isn't ultimately good enough for the long term. I would keep Mount if I could personally - doesn't seem that straightforward.

If the alternative is to take a huge financial loss then yes we should absolutely give Cucurella another season. Losing a huge amount on him will still be an option next year.