Belo
JF-Expert Member
- Jun 11, 2007
- 12,914
- 10,273
Chelsea FC (The Blues) | Special Thread
Chelsea FC (The Blues) | Special Thread
- Thread starter Kunguru Mjanja
- Start date
Ntuzu
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 8, 2013
- 17,418
- 10,879
Last edited by a moderator:
Belo
JF-Expert Member
- Jun 11, 2007
- 12,914
- 10,273
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator:
Ntuzu
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 8, 2013
- 17,418
- 10,879
Last edited by a moderator:
ENZO
JF-Expert Member
- Sep 30, 2010
- 4,248
- 1,746
Huyu jamaa namkubaligi sana kitambo!' ............ Anajua.
Erick tryphone
JF-Expert Member
- May 8, 2013
- 387
- 84
Manumbu
JF-Expert Member
- Oct 28, 2009
- 1,746
- 1,283
Liverpool lazima watakuwa wamechanganyikiwa. Pound 80 Million kwa Sterling? Haiwezekani!
Chelsea reaching its limit on Sterling should send a message to other suitors
Nicholas Mendola
Jun 24, 2015, 4:31 PM EDT
4 Comments
Chelseas Spanish midfielder Cesc Fabregas (L) vies with Liverpool's English midfielder Raheem Sterling (R) during the English Premier League football match between Chelsea and Liverpool at Stamford Bridge in London on May 10, 2015. AFP PHOTO / IAN KINGTON RESTRICTED TO EDITORIAL USE. No use with unauthorized audio, video, data, fixture lists, club/league logos or live services. Online in-match use limited to 45 images, no video emulation. No use in betting, games or single club/league/player publications. (Photo credit should read IAN KINGTON/AFP/Getty Images)
Getty Images
Leave it to Chelsea to be the club to show a shred of sanity on this Raheem Sterling saga.
Yeah, we didn't expect it, either.
If you missed it, the Blues reportedly won't meet Liverpool's lunatic fringe asking price for Raheem Sterling. They see $60 million as the ceiling for the freewheeling Reds youngster, according to Sky Sports.
[ MORE: PST Extra talks Sterling ]
Liverpool wants close to $80 million for their 20-year-old Jamaican-English playmaker. The Merseyside club had already turned down a $60 million bid from Manchester City for Sterling, which means Chelsea has effectively ruled itself out of the sweepstakes.
And I applaud them.
This feels crazy to say, given that Chelsea spent close to $80 million on Fernando Torres, but its refusal to spend any more on Sterling should be a sign for City, or whoever else is interested in paying big dollars for the 20-year-old.
You see, the Blues have been pretty smart in their dealings, and spent $50 million on Diego Costa. In fact, the following players all cost Chelsea $50 million or less, and tell me you'd rather have Sterling for an $80 million fee than, in addition to Costa:
Eden Hazard (2012, ~$50 million)
Cesc Fabregas (2014, ~43 million)
Willian (2013, ~40 million)
Oscar (2012, ~39 million)
All four of those players have done well enough at Stamford Bridge. Yeah, Oscar has been frustrating at times and Willian's production is hard to quantify, but Chelsea's titles have come with those players playing big roles.
Look, it's all funny money to many of these teams - don't tell that to Parma - but suffice it to say Liverpool is going to reap the rewards of someone's insanity. And the fact that it won't be Chelsea should be a bit of a clue that Sterlingmania is a little, if not a lot, out of control.
And by the way, the guy apparently not only can't stop huffing nitrous oxide, he can't stop getting caught doing it… on camera. And his agent is nuts.
Yes, he's entitled to ask for a raise. Yes, he's young and English and that means Premier League teams are ready to load up the armored cars.
But want to risk $80 million on him? No thanks.
Chelsea reaching its limit on Sterling should send a message to other suitors | ProSoccerTalk
Chelsea reaching its limit on Sterling should send a message to other suitors
Nicholas Mendola
Jun 24, 2015, 4:31 PM EDT
4 Comments
Chelseas Spanish midfielder Cesc Fabregas (L) vies with Liverpool's English midfielder Raheem Sterling (R) during the English Premier League football match between Chelsea and Liverpool at Stamford Bridge in London on May 10, 2015. AFP PHOTO / IAN KINGTON RESTRICTED TO EDITORIAL USE. No use with unauthorized audio, video, data, fixture lists, club/league logos or live services. Online in-match use limited to 45 images, no video emulation. No use in betting, games or single club/league/player publications. (Photo credit should read IAN KINGTON/AFP/Getty Images)
Getty Images
Leave it to Chelsea to be the club to show a shred of sanity on this Raheem Sterling saga.
Yeah, we didn't expect it, either.
If you missed it, the Blues reportedly won't meet Liverpool's lunatic fringe asking price for Raheem Sterling. They see $60 million as the ceiling for the freewheeling Reds youngster, according to Sky Sports.
[ MORE: PST Extra talks Sterling ]
Liverpool wants close to $80 million for their 20-year-old Jamaican-English playmaker. The Merseyside club had already turned down a $60 million bid from Manchester City for Sterling, which means Chelsea has effectively ruled itself out of the sweepstakes.
And I applaud them.
This feels crazy to say, given that Chelsea spent close to $80 million on Fernando Torres, but its refusal to spend any more on Sterling should be a sign for City, or whoever else is interested in paying big dollars for the 20-year-old.
You see, the Blues have been pretty smart in their dealings, and spent $50 million on Diego Costa. In fact, the following players all cost Chelsea $50 million or less, and tell me you'd rather have Sterling for an $80 million fee than, in addition to Costa:
Eden Hazard (2012, ~$50 million)
Cesc Fabregas (2014, ~43 million)
Willian (2013, ~40 million)
Oscar (2012, ~39 million)
All four of those players have done well enough at Stamford Bridge. Yeah, Oscar has been frustrating at times and Willian's production is hard to quantify, but Chelsea's titles have come with those players playing big roles.
Look, it's all funny money to many of these teams - don't tell that to Parma - but suffice it to say Liverpool is going to reap the rewards of someone's insanity. And the fact that it won't be Chelsea should be a bit of a clue that Sterlingmania is a little, if not a lot, out of control.
And by the way, the guy apparently not only can't stop huffing nitrous oxide, he can't stop getting caught doing it… on camera. And his agent is nuts.
Yes, he's entitled to ask for a raise. Yes, he's young and English and that means Premier League teams are ready to load up the armored cars.
But want to risk $80 million on him? No thanks.
Chelsea reaching its limit on Sterling should send a message to other suitors | ProSoccerTalk
Manumbu
JF-Expert Member
- Oct 28, 2009
- 1,746
- 1,283
Gerrard says slip still haunts him; regrets not playing for Jose Mourinho
Joe Prince-Wright
Jun 24, 2015, 10:54 AM EDT
2 Comments
Britain Soccer Premier League
AP
Steven Gerrard‘s costly slip for Liverpool against Chelsea during the penultimate game of the 2013-14 Premier League still haunts him.
[ MORE: Di Maria to Barca? ]
With Gerrard, 35, set to join new club LA Galaxy in Major League Soccer next week, he has left hometown club Liverpool and the only major trophy to evade him during his 17-year career with the Anfield club was the PL crown they came agonizingly close to winning in 2014. That costly slip in the first half of Liverpool's 2-0 defeat to Chelsea let in Demba Ba to score the opener and the Reds' dream of winning their first league title in 24 years slipped away.
Speaking to Rio Ferdinand as the two former England internationals and current BT Sport personalities sat down to chat on a show called "Rio Meets Steven Gerrard," Gerrard had the following to say about that slip.
"The slip happened at a bad time, it was cruel for me personally," Gerrard said. "There's not a day that doesn't go by that I don't think about what if that didn't happen. Would things have been different? Would it have turned out different? Maybe it might of, I don't know."
[ VIDEO: Watch Firmino's top 5 goals ]
Then Gerrard went on to wax lyrical about Chelsea's manager Jose Mourinho, who tried to sign the English midfielder while he was in charge of Chelsea, Inter Milan and Real Madrid.
"I love the manager, I love the man, I've had a distant relationship with him for many years but, I have regrets for not playing for the man and the coach because I know he would have made me a better player," Gerrard said. "I know he would have had more trophies to what I've already won. But looking back now I have no regrets not signing for Chelsea. I don't regret it at all."
Interesting stuff for the man who is now heading to the United States to start his adventure in MLS. Gerrard could make his debut for LA Galaxy on July 11 against Club America in an International Champions Cup game, or on July 18 against the San Jose Earthquakes in MLS play.
But should he have signed for Chelsea and is he right to have regrets about not playing for Mourinho?
Gerrard says slip haunts him; regrets not playing for Jose Mourinho | ProSoccerTalk
Joe Prince-Wright
Jun 24, 2015, 10:54 AM EDT
2 Comments
Britain Soccer Premier League
AP
Steven Gerrard‘s costly slip for Liverpool against Chelsea during the penultimate game of the 2013-14 Premier League still haunts him.
[ MORE: Di Maria to Barca? ]
With Gerrard, 35, set to join new club LA Galaxy in Major League Soccer next week, he has left hometown club Liverpool and the only major trophy to evade him during his 17-year career with the Anfield club was the PL crown they came agonizingly close to winning in 2014. That costly slip in the first half of Liverpool's 2-0 defeat to Chelsea let in Demba Ba to score the opener and the Reds' dream of winning their first league title in 24 years slipped away.
Speaking to Rio Ferdinand as the two former England internationals and current BT Sport personalities sat down to chat on a show called "Rio Meets Steven Gerrard," Gerrard had the following to say about that slip.
"The slip happened at a bad time, it was cruel for me personally," Gerrard said. "There's not a day that doesn't go by that I don't think about what if that didn't happen. Would things have been different? Would it have turned out different? Maybe it might of, I don't know."
[ VIDEO: Watch Firmino's top 5 goals ]
Then Gerrard went on to wax lyrical about Chelsea's manager Jose Mourinho, who tried to sign the English midfielder while he was in charge of Chelsea, Inter Milan and Real Madrid.
"I love the manager, I love the man, I've had a distant relationship with him for many years but, I have regrets for not playing for the man and the coach because I know he would have made me a better player," Gerrard said. "I know he would have had more trophies to what I've already won. But looking back now I have no regrets not signing for Chelsea. I don't regret it at all."
Interesting stuff for the man who is now heading to the United States to start his adventure in MLS. Gerrard could make his debut for LA Galaxy on July 11 against Club America in an International Champions Cup game, or on July 18 against the San Jose Earthquakes in MLS play.
But should he have signed for Chelsea and is he right to have regrets about not playing for Mourinho?
Gerrard says slip haunts him; regrets not playing for Jose Mourinho | ProSoccerTalk
Manumbu
JF-Expert Member
- Oct 28, 2009
- 1,746
- 1,283
Calling Chelsea "boring" is shameful and embarrasing Back Page Football
Calling Chelsea boring is hypocrisy!
The backend of last season saw Chelsea wrapping up the English Premier League at a canter, bringing the trophy back to Stamford Bridge for the first time in five years.
Though such an achievement would naturally spark envy from fans of other title challenging clubs, one would hope that ultimately the feeling across the English footballing community would be one of reverence for their new champions, and an excitement that the nation may be on the verge of producing a new European superpower.
As refreshingly reasonable as such an attitude may be, it was clearly too much to ask for the English media. In a society where negativity flows and praise is always so begrudging, the back pages of April and May filled up with column inches decrying The Blues as "boring" and somehow undeserving of their awaiting trophy.
Whilst more rationally-inclined pundits have pointed to the fact that Chelsea were the second highest scorers in the league and have made the outrageous claim that switching to a more defensive set up when you are leading a tight game with 20 minutes to go is not a war crime, the full extent of the hypocrisy of the Chelsea bashing has not yet been appreciated.
Indeed, it is symptomatic of a self-contradictory mentality where common-sense club management and success is at once demanded and derided-to the eventual detriment of the English game.
The "boring" good sense to which Chelsea have been criticised for runs deeper than simply employing negative tactics for pivotal games. The whole squad has been assembled to fit a certain style, one which emphasises reliability and robustness over flair and individuality.
Exceptionally talented players such as Juan Mata and Kevin De Bruyne have been sacrificed to support the overall system and at one point even the league's best player Eden Hazard was touted to leave due to his overly individualistic style.
The good, the bad and the ugly: The season that was
Why "boring" Chelsea tag is hypocritical and wrong
The arrival of industrious winger Willian and short-term return of Didier Drogba in an almost exclusive front-post-defending role has further cemented the squad around this winning philosophy.
So if building a team around a balanced strategy which can deliver success is what makes Chelsea so dull, then criticisms from fans of title-rivalling clubs are rich to say the least. Take Arsenal fans, who were most vocal in their "boring boring Chelsea" chants last season, for instance.
These same fans have been crying out for Arsene Wenger to make some defensive signings and were waxing poetic about the "understated genius" of Frances Coquelin, a player about as exciting as muesli but with whom Arsenal only lost twice last season.
Similarly, the Manchester United fans who were bitter after their defeat by Chelsea in April even though they had the majority of the possession (because apparently that never happens in football) also complain when their squad contains the same amount of senior number 10s as centre backs and therefore lose 5-3 to Leicester in a game that they would almost certainly have preferred to win 1-0.
In short, with very few exceptions, highly successful teams play a pragmatic style based on a solid foundation and only allowing a few select players too much creative freedom. Jose Mourinho's success across the continent is testament to the universality of this fact.
Yes, football fans have every right to deplore this fact and try to push for winning trophies with only exciting football, but they cannot however moan when another team is successful through a pragmatic strategy and then complain about their own team employing an overly idealistic strategy.
The hypocrisy of English fans in their scorn pouring of Chelsea's successes is not just limited to jealous fans of other title contenders who lament the lack of coherency to which their club is managed. Any fan who is complaining about the lack of presence of English sides in the latter stages of European competitions dare not have joined the "boring brigade" against Mourinho's men.
Tactical naivety has been one of the biggest causes of this recent slump, most notably demonstrated by Arsenal's gung-ho style against Monaco, which led to the only time in recorded history where Dimitar Berbatov scored on the counter.
Though Chelsea did not make it much further in Europe last season, they certainly have the tactical nous to navigate tricky two legged ties where keeping a clean sheet at home is of highest importance and therefore offer England's greatest hope by a country mile of Champions League success.
Chelsea should in fact be seen as an example for other English clubs to follow. Whereas the Manchester clubs have been spending silly money creating top heavy teams packed with big names, many of whom often fail to deliver, Chelsea are gradually creating a side who although have star power, are ultimately greater than the sum of their parts and operate beyond their relative spend.
If that is seen as boring by English fans then they ought to be embarrassed.
Calling Chelsea boring is hypocrisy!
The backend of last season saw Chelsea wrapping up the English Premier League at a canter, bringing the trophy back to Stamford Bridge for the first time in five years.
Though such an achievement would naturally spark envy from fans of other title challenging clubs, one would hope that ultimately the feeling across the English footballing community would be one of reverence for their new champions, and an excitement that the nation may be on the verge of producing a new European superpower.
As refreshingly reasonable as such an attitude may be, it was clearly too much to ask for the English media. In a society where negativity flows and praise is always so begrudging, the back pages of April and May filled up with column inches decrying The Blues as "boring" and somehow undeserving of their awaiting trophy.
Whilst more rationally-inclined pundits have pointed to the fact that Chelsea were the second highest scorers in the league and have made the outrageous claim that switching to a more defensive set up when you are leading a tight game with 20 minutes to go is not a war crime, the full extent of the hypocrisy of the Chelsea bashing has not yet been appreciated.
Indeed, it is symptomatic of a self-contradictory mentality where common-sense club management and success is at once demanded and derided-to the eventual detriment of the English game.
The "boring" good sense to which Chelsea have been criticised for runs deeper than simply employing negative tactics for pivotal games. The whole squad has been assembled to fit a certain style, one which emphasises reliability and robustness over flair and individuality.
Exceptionally talented players such as Juan Mata and Kevin De Bruyne have been sacrificed to support the overall system and at one point even the league's best player Eden Hazard was touted to leave due to his overly individualistic style.
The good, the bad and the ugly: The season that was
Why "boring" Chelsea tag is hypocritical and wrong
The arrival of industrious winger Willian and short-term return of Didier Drogba in an almost exclusive front-post-defending role has further cemented the squad around this winning philosophy.
So if building a team around a balanced strategy which can deliver success is what makes Chelsea so dull, then criticisms from fans of title-rivalling clubs are rich to say the least. Take Arsenal fans, who were most vocal in their "boring boring Chelsea" chants last season, for instance.
These same fans have been crying out for Arsene Wenger to make some defensive signings and were waxing poetic about the "understated genius" of Frances Coquelin, a player about as exciting as muesli but with whom Arsenal only lost twice last season.
Similarly, the Manchester United fans who were bitter after their defeat by Chelsea in April even though they had the majority of the possession (because apparently that never happens in football) also complain when their squad contains the same amount of senior number 10s as centre backs and therefore lose 5-3 to Leicester in a game that they would almost certainly have preferred to win 1-0.
In short, with very few exceptions, highly successful teams play a pragmatic style based on a solid foundation and only allowing a few select players too much creative freedom. Jose Mourinho's success across the continent is testament to the universality of this fact.
Yes, football fans have every right to deplore this fact and try to push for winning trophies with only exciting football, but they cannot however moan when another team is successful through a pragmatic strategy and then complain about their own team employing an overly idealistic strategy.
The hypocrisy of English fans in their scorn pouring of Chelsea's successes is not just limited to jealous fans of other title contenders who lament the lack of coherency to which their club is managed. Any fan who is complaining about the lack of presence of English sides in the latter stages of European competitions dare not have joined the "boring brigade" against Mourinho's men.
Tactical naivety has been one of the biggest causes of this recent slump, most notably demonstrated by Arsenal's gung-ho style against Monaco, which led to the only time in recorded history where Dimitar Berbatov scored on the counter.
Though Chelsea did not make it much further in Europe last season, they certainly have the tactical nous to navigate tricky two legged ties where keeping a clean sheet at home is of highest importance and therefore offer England's greatest hope by a country mile of Champions League success.
Chelsea should in fact be seen as an example for other English clubs to follow. Whereas the Manchester clubs have been spending silly money creating top heavy teams packed with big names, many of whom often fail to deliver, Chelsea are gradually creating a side who although have star power, are ultimately greater than the sum of their parts and operate beyond their relative spend.
If that is seen as boring by English fans then they ought to be embarrassed.
everlenk
JF-Expert Member
- Oct 5, 2012
- 11,628
- 15,037
Pyeeeeeeeeee!!!! Mtaisikilizia bombani !!!!..........Mcharo nakusalimu......
Similar Discussions
-
THE END OF AN ERA: Cristiano Ronaldo's Portugal Story Ends with an Emotional Farewell
- Started by Da Dona
- Replies: 4
-
Mohamed Salah asaini Mkataba mpya wa miaka miwili na Liverpool- Started by DogoWaNjombe
- Replies: 9
-
Pep Guardiola mbioni kuongeza mkataba mpya Man City
- Started by DogoWaNjombe
- Replies: 15
-
CAS: Tutatoa uamuzi wa rufaa ya Senegal "haraka iwezekanavyo"- Started by Waufukweni
- Replies: 24
-
