The Chelsea Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ramires
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 35K
  • Views Views 3M
AayushCFC said:
Anything I say on that might cross the lines so I'll stop. But yeah, you sure do. [wink]

With Ramires back, I do think we might be vulnerable to pressing as some managers seem to attack him and win the ball as he lacks control and start a quick counter. But Luiz has been immense in midfield, we can do without Matic in CL.

And any midfield would look pedestrian to what we "used to have". Ballack, Essien, Lampard all were immense, not forgetting Makelele.
Click to expand...

Actually I do, and if you're going to assume incorrectly otherwise, there isn't much point replying to my posts.
 
Mike. said:
I think you would do better vs Bayern than Atletico, I worry about their rampant pressing, and running, could make Luiz a liability (see PSG first leg). PSG really blew it against you, they didn't even come out to play, when all they needed was a goal.
Click to expand...

PSG had that one chance to get their vital away goal and Cavani fluffed it. Not to forget just moments later Ba made it 2-0 and it once again shows how important it is to take you're chances in the champions league especially away from home.
 
Mike. said:
I think you would do better vs Bayern than Atletico, I worry about their rampant pressing, and running, could make Luiz a liability (see PSG first leg). PSG really blew it against you, they didn't even come out to play, when all they needed was a goal.
Click to expand...

Luiz needs to be less on the ball, more winning the ball and quickly laying it off. Ramires role to be precise and we can all admit he's better than Ramires at holding on the ball when pressed. However I'll admit, Atleti's pressing scare me but hey, Bayern also press pretty well, although for different purpose.

We will struggle in midfield battle against all of those teams, except maybe Real. But with Luiz's inconsistency, you never know which one decides to show up. And his partner will be interesting case, Mikel hasn't played like in ages. I totally forgot we even have him.
 
Alcaraz said:
If one player doesn't make a team then I don't see why we shouldn't let Courtois play the CL semi's going by your logic
Click to expand...

I am all for him playing to be honest mate. Think he deserves to play as he has helped them to get to this stage.
 
CJACKO11 said:
I am all for him playing to be honest mate. Think he deserves to play as he has helped them to get to this stage.
Click to expand...

Cheslea should let him play, can be used in all sorts of positive ways later on
 
Its certainly a kind of choice I'm glad I don't have to make. Every argument I can think of swings both ways - if he so good and talented, you can make a solid case both for cockblocking him and for allowing him to play.
 
Let him play ... If we need to resort to such underhand methods to win games then we don't deserve to be champions of europe
 
Mike. said:
I think you would do better vs Bayern than Atletico, I worry about their rampant pressing, and running, could make Luiz a liability (see PSG first leg). PSG really blew it against you, they didn't even come out to play, when all they needed was a goal.
Click to expand...

Best thing about Atletico. They don't give you a second on the ball. They covered 4 Kms more than Barca in CL when we are so much used to Barca covering most distance. The way they pressed Madrid in the league game was just amazing and I don't think any PL team could have felt comfortable playing them.

Atletico is not just about Skill of the players, it's more than that. It's their pure passion and like I said few days back, they are exactly the mirror image of their manager.
 
It's a double edged sword. If you guys let Courtois play, waiving off the fee, and win, then it'll be tremendous publicity I guess. The likes of "We don't need to prevent them from fielding their best players in order for us to win."

On the other hand, if, after waiving the fee and letting him play, you guys lose, then there'll be a backlash. Some irate fans will be like "We are not here to do charity, we are here to win, if only they had followed the contract.." Newspapers ofcourse, will hype that as it'll likely sell papers./..
 
We should do a deal if they want to play Courtois for free.

They must take Torres away from us. MUST.

On a serious note,

I still feel people are making a big deal of it, he's a professional, he definitely knew about it when he signed the contract and so did his agent and the club. They signed it, can't whine about it now, it's the job of tabloids to give melodramatic spin to this situation.
 
Last edited:
Not sure what's wrong with the clause. It's a loan deal and as per the standard loan deals in PL, player isn't allowed to play against his parent club. At least Atletico have the chance to field him with this clause.

Adebayor didn't play against City
Lukaku didn't play against Chelsea for 2 years and there are many loan deals. This just happened to be at CL semi finals.

Also Madrid allowed Sahin to play for Dortmund as he is more or less Dortmund player with fixed fee and all that and they want him out anyways. Maybe when Dortmund signed him they put in a clause to make him play against anyone as Madrid wanted to sell him and there weren't many interested or Sahin was not interested in any.
 
So it's probably end of story methinks. He will be free to play.

"Both the UEFA Champions League and the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations contain clear provisions which strictly forbid any club to exert, or attempt to exert, any influence whatsoever over the players that another club may (or may not) field in a match.

It follows that any provision in a private contract between clubs which might function in such a way as to influence who a club fields in a match is null, void and unenforceable so far as UEFA is concerned.

Furthermore, any attempt to enforce such a provision would be a clear violation of both the UEFA Champions League and the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations and would therefore be sanctioned accordingly."

UEFA statement on integrity of competitions - UEFA.org
 
Uefa contradicting themselves there! Earlier in the season dealing with a similar incident between Celtic and Elfsborg they said it is purely between the two clubs to decide. Absolute jokes uefa are.
 
cfc12345 said:
Uefa contradicting themselves there! Earlier in the season dealing with a similar incident between Celtic and Elfsborg they said it is purely between the two clubs to decide. Absolute jokes uefa are.
Click to expand...

Why? They're saying that they have no rules preventing a player playing against his parent club and they're enforcing it both times?
 
Joel` said:
Why? They're saying that they have no rules preventing a player playing against his parent club and they're enforcing it both times?
Click to expand...

The incident earlier in the season they said it's between the two clubs to decide but on the courtois situation it seems they have pretty much said if Chelsea attempt to prevent him playing the club will be punished.
 
cfc12345 said:
The incident earlier in the season they said it's between the two clubs to decide but on the courtois situation it seems they have pretty much said if Chelsea attempt to prevent him playing the club will be punished.
Click to expand...

Celtic never put a clause in the contract that was violating their rule. It was between the clubs, but Celtic had no power to enforce them to not play Bangoura. Celtic could have asked them to not play him, but Elfsborg would only have done it out of respect rather than obligation. By forcing Atletico to pay you to play him, you're preventing them from playing him, which is against their rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Back
Top