Vidahost - UK Web Hosting
Vidahost - UK Web Hosting


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Samdwich

  • Rank
    First Team Squad

Recent Profile Visitors

886 profile views
  1. The only reason Hazard was £32 and not £60m was because he had a buyout clause. Most top clubs in Europe were after him and without a buyout clause he would definitely have gone for a lot more. But also sums in football 5 years ago were much smaller than now. Yes, you had Ronaldo at £80 or £90m, and Torres at £50m, but those were the outliers - £30m was a HUGE sum at the time and I heard the same arguments from scousers - "you're paying £32m for potential?! He's not worth £32m!!"
  2. Hope he sends them to beat you up
  3. Would be happy with QF, am not expecting to go any further. We've been good this season, but not that good. Plus Conte's record in the CL isn't great.
  4. Probably my #1 most desired transfer this window. Fast, powerful, technical - he'd thrive here. Would die of happiness if we got Morata, Sanchez and a top class CM (as well as some lower-profile defensive reinforcements)
  5. This is all one sentence. Full stops man!
  6. This is one of the reasons I was dismayed at our sale of Mata; I felt that he facilitated Hazard's attacking play and freedom. He was the one controlling the game and the one opposition would watch most closesly, and he seemed to encourage Hazard with little passes as if to say "here you go, enjoy". Sort of like Xavi would do in Messi's early years. I know Hazard had his best seasons after we sold Mata, but he was different - he was having to do a lot more and had nobody to combine with until we got Fabregas. Edit: my favourite example of this:
  7. Judging by the way Mourinho has berated some of his players this season for not playing through injury (Jones & Smalling) I feel like Hazard was probably in the right here
  8. I think you're being overly lenient here. City were definitely the better team in the FA cup semi, no arguments there. The league cup semi - we set up very defensive and tentative (which is Benitez's style) against much weaker opposition. When things clearly weren't going our way he waited til the 80th minute to substitute a right back for a right back, and Torres for Ba - and we immediately looked dangerous. I don't think Ba needed to be rested as much as you state, as him and Torres were rotated in the league and the semi was an important game as it was one of our main chances of silverware. In terms of the league - we were 3 points off first with a game in hand when FSW took over and he reverted to ultra defensive against City, Fulham and West Ham and we were no longer in the title picture. I don't think we should have won the league that season, but I'd have liked more of a title challenge. We were actually very good that season, as shown by our record of besting Manure 3/5 times we played them, drawing one and losing to two red cards and an offside goal in the last. Benitez did quite well to get us playing as the season went on but he was far often too defensive and I feel like more could have been made of that season.
  9. When Mourinho took over they were joint favourites for the league, though. Could also be argued that his ineptitude screwed up their title challenge and put them out of the FA cup (tactical rotation fouling). Not to mention the amount of money spent. Also the EL only has so much riding on it because he failed in the main objective - which Benitez achieved.
  10. Benitez at Chelsea: 4th in the league, won EL, League cup semi, FA cup semi - regarded as a failure, or a mediocre season at best. Mourinho at Utd: 6th in the league, won EL and League cup, FA cup QF - unqualified success
  11. Azpilicueta imo. Absolute beast, on-pitch leader and example to younger lads, great bloke.
  12. @g3.7 thoughts on Luiz's season?
  13. Well this is a fun thread...
  14. Lets not be revisionist here, they crashed out in the group stages of the CL the previous season and didn't even look great in the EL. They weren't as established as they are now.