Rival watch

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Thiago Silva done ligament damage in our game and is out for about 6 weeks.

He’s been their only defender actually capable of defending this season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: remembercolinlee
Dier Hard said:
Thiago Silva done ligament damage in our game and is out for about 6 weeks.

He’s been their only defender actually capable of defending this season.
Click to expand...
They had about £100m-worth of centre-halves on the bench against us.
Chalobah, Cucurella and Azpilicueta didn't even make the squad.
A ludicrous wealth of riches that are struggling to stay in the top half.
 
  • Like
Reactions: remembercolinlee, littleDinosaurLuke and Dier Hard
PleaseNotPoll said:
They had about £100m-worth of centre-halves on the bench against us.
Chalobah, Cucurella and Azpilicueta didn't even make the squad.
A ludicrous wealth of riches that are struggling to stay in the top half.
Click to expand...
What they paid for these players may be considerably more than they are worth now. Some are unproven in the PL and at the top level generally and there are always going to be question marks against players performing in a team who are punching above their weight (like Brighton) when that level is seen as below par for Chelsea. It shows how tricky recruitment is. It’s a lot more than making an offer which can’t be refused for a player doing well for their team at a particular point in time. They bought well with Kante because he has qualities to succeed at the top level. But what did they see in Cucurella?
 
littleDinosaurLuke said:
What they paid for these players may be considerably more than they are worth now. Some are unproven in the PL and at the top level generally and there are always going to be question marks against players performing in a team who are punching above their weight (like Brighton) when that level is seen as below par for Chelsea. It shows how tricky recruitment is. It’s a lot more than making an offer which can’t be refused for a player doing well for their team at a particular point in time. They bought well with Kante because he has qualities to succeed at the top level. But what did they see in Cucurella?
Click to expand...
Cucurellla's a good player. He's versatile, good on the ball, passes well and tackles well.
I think if he had gone to City instead, then we wouldn't be questioning his ability.

Kante was a bargain due to his contract clause, but he'd have been worthwhile at virtually any price.
You're not going to find too many players that are that good, let alone that cheaply.
I do question their apparent overpaying, though. I find it suspicious, especially from American owners.
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
Cucurellla's a good player. He's versatile, good on the ball, passes well and tackles well.
I think if he had gone to City instead, then we wouldn't be questioning his ability.
Click to expand...

I must admit I really didn’t - and still don’t - see what the fuss is/ was about him and I raised some eyebrows when he was seemingly at the centre of a tug of war between City and Chelsea. Just seemed a pretty bog standard left back for me, I’d say Estupinan already looks the better player at Brighton.

I’m also not sure Chelsea fans would currently agree about the passes well aspect either. Type in “Cucurella pass” on Twitter and you’ll see what I mean <laugh>.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BobbyD and PleaseNotPoll
Dier Hard said:
I must admit I really didn’t - and still don’t - see what the fuss is/ was about him and I raised some eyebrows when he was seemingly at the centre of a tug of war between City and Chelsea. Just seemed a pretty bog standard left back for me, I’d say Estupinan already looks the better player at Brighton.

I’m also not sure Chelsea fans would currently agree about the passes well aspect either. Type in “Cucurella pass” on Twitter and you’ll see what I mean <laugh>.
Click to expand...
I Googled it and this came up:
You must log in or register to see media
That's from Brighton's 4-0 win over Utd, admittedly.

The Chelsea fans all seem to be crying that he won't pass to Mudryk.
Maybe this is why?
You must log in or register to see media

Potter might switch to a back five against Leeds and change the defence quite a lot, too.
Thiago being out forces his hand, but James doesn't look right and they need to do something.
Hopefully he'll **** it up and they'll drop more points.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dier Hard
PleaseNotPoll said:
Cucurellla's a good player. He's versatile, good on the ball, passes well and tackles well.
I think if he had gone to City instead, then we wouldn't be questioning his ability.

Kante was a bargain due to his contract clause, but he'd have been worthwhile at virtually any price.
You're not going to find too many players that are that good, let alone that cheaply.
I do question their apparent overpaying, though. I find it suspicious, especially from American owners.
Click to expand...
They all start out cheaply at their first club. the secret is to hold on to the good ones.
Skipp is going to be our Kante
 
  • Like
Reactions: PleaseNotPoll
Leicester with no Maddison or Tielemans are devoid of creativity.
They're utterly reliant on Barnes making runs and crosses and that's basically it.
They visit Southampton on Saturday and anything but a win there could be catastrophic.
They've got a relatively easy run of games, but it could be difficult without their two playmakers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back