FrankLampard8

1 hour ago, Morgs said:

Thats just the point. Its the Chelsea curse. 

World class, true pedigree strikers with incredible strike rates come to Chelsea and founder without trace. 

There's no rhyme or reason to it. The more highly rated they seem to be, the worse the failure is. 

The only decent strikers we've had in the last 20 years were Drogba, Costa, Crespo, Anelka and for half a season, Eto'o. 

The list is like a who's who of European strikers. Mutu, Kezman, Pizarro, Pato, Falcao, Werner, Torres, Higuain, Morata, Shevchenko, Batshuayi, Aubameyang, Felix, Havertz, Lukaku and before them Sutton, Fleck....

Woah woah woah... Eidur Gudjohnsen!

56 minutes ago, Ham said:

Not giving two £100m plus players unnecessary minutes after long haul flights and international games that would invariably lead to injury or burn -out.

He's a perfectly adequate stand in but I think you really do know that.  

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. 

1 hour ago, paulw66 said:

If you can't take a chance at home to Burnley, you never will.

My question is, why do we need to take a chance now?

1 hour ago, paulw66 said:

Level required for what? I am not asking him to start 30 league games, but he should be at the required level that he can play against one of the league's worst 2 sides. 

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.

15 hours ago, paulw66 said:

I guess it depends what you mean by that.

We're playing Burnley. At home.  I get it, probably not good enough, or ready, to play the trickier games. 

If he isn't good enough to merit even 60 minutes against them, then he may as well be sold. 

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.

3 hours ago, paulw66 said:

I expect you, like most, have barely seen Casadei play  for more than the handful of minutes he has played for us. 

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).

On 22/03/2024 at 18:45, Miguelito07 said:

Do you think he would do well at Chelsea next season or go on another loan?

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.

Just now, JaneB said:

Welcome back 😃

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

1 hour ago, chara said:

Not sure if this is the right platform for a question from me.

I left UK in 1987....even with time spent out of the country prior to then I was well in tune with the day to day economics of just living,as we all are.

From my early days of attending live games at SB and elsewhere there was never a time that I couldn't afford to attend games,,,from my first working days when 10 bob would get me to SB entrance and a programme to the later years there never was an issue even during the less than "easy" times.

I am .of course, not in tune with the UK "living" economics but looking at prices I wonder how many times I could afford to attend games..my question is how does the pricing compare to "home economics" now?

I appreciate that at the top levels it's no longer a case of just shove everyone on the terraces and let them sort themselves out (with little need to consider comfort) with a viable return for watching conditions,

Anyone?

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!

On 20/06/2023 at 17:38, Ham said:

Baby boomers = Those born between 1947 and 1964. Written off now as dinosaurs.  

Gammons = Anyone who doesn't agree with wokeism.  

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. 

8 minutes ago, Ham said:

Dangerous move to choose an Arsenal or Newcastle this year as there's a chance they won't be top 5 next year.  

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. 

1 hour ago, Michael Tucker said:

Why is asking the (fairly obvious) question 'being rattled'? I give up!

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.

29 minutes ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

You can’t say players are shit here - it triggers the ❄️❄️🤣🤪

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.

1 hour ago, ROTG said:

So we keep someone like  cucurella, yet let the likes of Mount, Kovaic, Havertz go if you believe the media. 
 

Quite Bizarre. 

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.

8 minutes ago, Miguelito07 said:

Seems like Mendy, Zyech and Koulibaly are off to S.Arabia. 

We will have done really well to offload Koulibaly - what a terrible transfer. Don't suppose they fancy Cucurella?

23 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

It's Arsenal , every year they're going to sign everyone whilst the season ticket renewals are ready and low and behold nothing happens . 

Yeah I do understand that but he does have a monstrous ego and is obviously also forgetting they can pay him what they like they've got to buy him from us first.

I doubt he's forgetting that at all. I'm sure the transfer fee would be absolutely no problem for them given that we are desperate to get shot. I get the impression terms with the player more often than not get all but wrapped up before terms with the club. Why negotiate for a player that doesn't want to come or is unobtainable?

11 minutes ago, Original 21 said:

So Ugarte hasn’t yet signed with PSG and Sporting are getting a bit impatient…

Might be cutting off our nose but he's made his decision and I don't think we should go back or up our offer if PSG mess them around.

31 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

Honestly I wish Cucurella just shaved his head - you can't do anything good in football with that hairstyle.

David Luiz won the Champions League with a very similar barnet. 

57 minutes ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

The jokes about burgers, and potential sponsorship from Cobham Doughnut Emporium and Just Eat never get old. 🤣

Beg to differ.

57 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Not if you look a the clubs balance sheet and only playing one game per week next season.

"Ampadu is fit for purpose under the club current circumstances"

The clubs balance sheet and the amount of games we play has literally no bearing on whether or not Ampadu is good enough to play for Chelsea.

49 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Nice mid table bar set there

Sorry yeah you're right, but we need someone to play back up to Ampadu. 

I am certain at this point you're just here to troll.

3 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

I know we've held long standing interest, my concern with Lavia is that would he get enough games here to continue to develop? Because as talented as he does look there's parts of his game which need quite a bit of refinement. With Caicedo potentially ahead of him, we may be better served with a slightly more established alternative. 

I think Caicedo and Edson Alvarez would do me quite nicely.

5 minutes ago, ROTG said:

No point in wasting more money, and the likes of Ampadu can do a job especially with the team playing one game a week next season

What evidence is there exactly that Ampadu can do a job? You seem awfully concerned about us being a midtable club and signing a midtable players and then want us to put Ampadu who is a relegation fodder standard player in this country and Italy in our midfield. Mind boggling.

I think Mbappe very much sees himself as a left winger and doesn't really want to do the hard yards up front - it would be interesting to see how RM would accomodate both him and Vini Jr. I think they have been quite subdued in the market by their standards in recent years so it wouldn't surpirse me if they could land Kane and Mbappe. Maybe Kane is perfect to keep the spot warm until Haaland feels he is ready for a new challenge?

At any rate, their midfield is obscene and set for years to come with Tchouemeni, Camavinga and Bellingham. Even just one of Mbappe or Kane would seem them still looking very strong . They could do with some work at fullback - let's hope they don't come knocking.

1 hour ago, ROTG said:

Bizarre how the dippers get a midfielder Brighton player for £35m and we want to give them in excess of £80m for his partner. 
One can only assume MacAllister is the Danny Drinkwater of Brighton and we are trying to buy Kante at an over inflated price?

Honestly, I think that could be exactly true.

27 minutes ago, ROTG said:

That’s the exactly what people were saying on the forum last summer when the club spent £60m on Cucurella 

You don't like imports from foreign leagues, you don't like players who are already playing in the league, what exactly do you want? We can't have an XI made entirely of academy graduates.

5 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Another over rated and priced Brighton player. Personally I would not give that club the time of day after last seasons debacle of shafting a not so bright new owner, with two bob players, coaches and recruitment staff. 

Been as good as any midfielder in the league at the age of what, 21? Care to explain why he's overrated? Overpriced you could argue but I can't believe he's overrated. The guy looks to be a phenom and I honestly think he could have Kante type impact here if we get ourselves together.