just

I was one who was more than happy when we brought Anelka. I knew he was a quality forward then and I still do. For me his touch and vision are top draw. I accept he is currently missing chances he should normally put away but that's more a confidence issue than a class issue. So no, IMO, any perceived failure in Anelka is not of his own making. It is in the way Grant and now Scolari have played him. He is not, nor has he ever been, a lone striker. From Kevin Davies to Dennis Bergkampf he has always performed at his best with another central forward right alongside him. A partner to take the pressure off and allow him to drift along the line. In fact the way we have mis-used Anelka is all very reminescent of the way we mis-used Chris Sutton. Sutton, a forward who always thrived on long balls played up to him and early crosses played into the box. Brought for a huge fee and then put in a side who didn't have a winger in the team and played a quick, passing game. It's the system not the player. Take Anelka to United and play him alongside Tevez or Berbatov and he'll be a hit. Take him to Arsenal and play him next to Van Persie or Eduardo and he'll be a hit. Take him to Liverpool and stick him alongside Torres and he'll be a hit. But take him to any of those sides and aks him to perform alone, centrally, up front and he'll struggle as badly as he has done with us.

And does that scenario depress you at all?

Why? He had rather alot to do with it!

Ok, well let's move away from the oft quoted phrase of "home grown"and look at it another way. How many of those clubs are happy to give youth/reserves a first team run-out against lesser opponents or in the more minor competitions? United? Yes. Arsenal? Most definately. That's important and, IMO, the right thing to do for several compelling reasons: 1. There is only so much you can learn from watching these youngsters in training and reserve team matches. As I said last week, there has to come a point where the top performers get the chance to prove they can cut it at the highest level. 2. In terms of a learning experience for these youngters, a taste of first team football is invaluable. 3. It gives them a realistic goal to aim for. Therefore, it is a huge motivator. 4. It would prove to the press, (and indeed the football watching public in general), that Chelsea FC don't just pay lip-service to the idea of bringing through youth players. We actually do give them a chance. 5. It would perhaps persuade other highly talented youngsters to bypass other clubs who are touting for their services and plump for us. For example, if we had any kind of track record of giving youngsters an opportunity, maybe Walcott would have choosen us rather than Le Arse

We're a buying club not a producing club. Beautifully put Tim. And so very, very true.

Football's changed alot from the 70's and 80's. Travelling away, although I don't much these days, is vastly different to then. If your that way inclined you can you take your family and wear your colours to most away grounds in the country. And generally, bar the odd comment, you'll be OK. With one glaring exception. On my last visit to sh*te Fart Lane two fellas and one very young lad, 8 or 9 I guess (who I presume was the son of one the guys), were walking down Tottenham High Road not far from the ground. They were wearing replica Chelsea shirts but minding their own business not bothering anyone. Just walking along. A crowd of Rottenham boys ran across the road and launched into them. Gave them a good wellying. Young kid was hysterical. Old Bill trundled up, rottenham legged it. Yeah, I just love Gus Poyet's lillywhite army.

That is farking superb. The funniest thing I have seen all year. The Steve McClaren comment was sheer genius.

Sunday Times went for Mikel. Must say, I thought he had a better game than Lamps.

Yeah heard what Hansen said on MOTD. Don't know what he saw that was so special. Frank had an alright game. Solid but nothing fantastic.

Stan Collymore and his mate on Talksport were going absolutely mental over the call. Publically called Ronald a cheat.

Bosingwa. Malouda did have his best ever game in a Chelsea shirt though. Who voted for Lampard? Ethical was that you?

Right. No excuses. If a good few of the youngsters/reserves don't get a run out in this one we may as well dismantle our "youth system" and save ourselves the money.

Couple of points from your post above Icecool. Firstly, if we had put six youngsters/reserves in the line-up and lost in extra-time or on penalties I personally wouldn't have been at all bothered. I would have been more interested in how those youngsters performed indvidually. If, for example, two of those players had had really good games, (in the manner that Ivanovich did), I would have thought it was an immensely worthwhile excercise. Secondly, I don't know why you are so confident that yougsters/reserves will be given an opportunity in the next round. In fact, I would have thought that the further we go in the competition the less chance they have of getting a game.

Belletti. Looked very, very comfortable in that holding role again.

Understand where you are coming from Loz. And I partially agre with you and Essien's Strike. OK, it's arguably not a good idea to start against a side like Pompey, away from home, with a team made up entirely of youngsters. And it's fair to say players such as Drogba and Ballack needed the minutes under their belts following injuires. But I firmly believe we should have started with three or four youth/reserves and had another couple occupying places on the bench. After all Pompey were not at full strength themselves. Pamarot, Hreidarsson, Mvuemba and Hughes all started and are hardly household names. As far as I'm aware none of those players have featured regularly for Harry this season. There has to come a point where we blood some of those promising youngsters in the first team. There has to be an opportunity to find out what they can do. And the CC is, IMO, the perfect opportunity. Here's one formation that we could have used last night. ......................Cech Ivanovich.....JT......Alex........Bridge Sinclair.....Lamps.....Ballack.......Stoch ............Di Santo.....Drogba Ultimately I think Roman has to take some of the blame. I think possibly there is a "fear factor" involved regarding the selection of youth. The pressure to win silverware immeditately is imposed on any Chelsea manager from day one of their reign. Even if it's only the CC. It was the same for Jose, Grant and now Scolari. Winning is all. At any price.

Here, here. Damn right. Just watched the highlights and I'm gutted. 4-0 against Pompey away, (albeit an understrength Pompey, none of whom looked remotely interested), I should be jumping for joy shouldn't I ? Sorry. Just can't go for it. Maybe it's because I've been there and brought the Tee-shirt and I don't really give a flying fart about the Carling Cup. But that dis-interest would vanish if our homegrown talent, our kids, were getting a look in. Why aren't any of our youngsters getting a chance? Sinclair, Mancienne, Stoch? Wenger has his strategy for this competion bang on in my opinion. It's not about winning. Alright perhaps it is if your ambitions are set at the level of Everton and Tottenham. But it's the Carling farking Cup for God's sake. Surely for a club of our means and goals it's about making a statement and offering a chance to young players who could possibly, (if ever they were given an opportunity), benefit from the experience and hopefully show that they have the talent and ability to be part of the future of our club. I'm a Chelsea fan till I die. I am from a Chelsea family. I was born not three miles from Stamford Bridge. I do not have a son. And yet (hypothetically), if I did, and he was a talented young footballer being offered terms by both Chelsea and Le Arse, I would without hesitation be steering him in the direction of Monsieur Wenger. Why? Because I believe he would get chances there that he simply will not get at Chelsea.

I was at the game on Sunday and given what happened pre-match, and in the first 15 minutes of the game, was reasonably content with a 1-1. Losing Deco in the warm-up and Carvalho after 10 or so minutes would have de-stabilised any team in the world playing against United. Fair play to the Mancs though. We were at sixes and sevens trying to find some shape and self-belief and they took full advantage of the situation. But, I always felt we would get back into it when we settled down and finally got 11 players on the pitch, and that happened at half-time with the substitution of Malouda and the introduction of Drogba and by God, what a difference he made. I have to say I am yet to be fully convinced by Big Phil. But I only have one doubt. Unfortunately, that lingering doubt will persist as long as he continues to put Malouda in the starting line-up. Why Felipe? He simply isn't up to it. He's a squad player at best. A Jokanovich. A Sidwell. A Dale Jasper. And that's being kind. For me Scolari preferring Malouda over Kalou, (or even, IMO, Scott Sinclair), induces the same amount of head scratching as that nice Mr Ranieri's one-eyed preference for JFH over Crespo. What I'd really like to ask Scolari, (or indeed Malouda himself), is, what exactly is his/your role? What is your position? He's patently not a winger because he drifts inside so much. He's patently not an old fashioned style inside forward either because he doesn't get forward quick enough. The number of times our central midfielders were looking for an out ball to the wing on Sunday, only to find him standing ten yards behind them was laughable. I'm actually starting to think he's kind of a second full-back because that's the position he mostly adopts. You watch him. There's Cashley, (who, by the way, had a fine, fine game on Sunday), and injubitably either three yards in front, two yards behind, or one yard sideways is his shadow Malouda. His primary function within the team seems to be to get in the way of everyone else at every given opportunity. If that is his role, then hats off to him, for he he is performing it with a wonderful consistency. In fact we could be witnessing the birth of a new playing position. Just as a quality defensive midfielder positioned in front of the back four became termed the "Makelele role". So one midfielder constantly positioned within five yards of his own full-back could eventually be dubbed the "Malouda role". Alan Hansen once famously, (and yes, I know, wrongly), said "you don't win anything with kids." Well I kind of echo that sentiment because IMO "we won't win anything with Maloudas"

Cashley for me. Hope Malouda never gets another game in the first team. Unless of course it's Tottenham's.

Ah go on then. Why not for old times sake. Might even get the gay pirate, (who I hear recently changed his name to Captain Fantastic), to turn up for this one. Favourite Jimmy moment? So many to choose. Probably one from 1. The fantastic diving header up at Newcastle. Carlo never even sniffed it. 2. JT and Marcel giving him the biggest on-pitch bollocking I ever seen against Spurts. 2. The time he spent trying to engineer a move to Barcelona. 3. Going public to the papers saying he had to play in the crucial 2nd leg against Monaco at home. And Ranieri, the plum, actually dropped Crespo and put him in !!! Of course he did nothing the whole game. Unbelievable. Wish we had more players like him. Would have died for the shirt. He's a ledge.

We should have known Malouda would be a dud. He is probably the only french player Arsene Whinger hasn't been interested in. It breaks my heart to see him in the starting line-up and Scott Sinclair isn't even in the squad. For christ's sake Phil give malouda the axe and let the kid have a go. Who knows, he might be our own version of Walcott.

Liverpool 2 United 1 Bump.

I agree with all of that. Clarkey has been a great servant to the club. I thought he would have wanted a shot at management rather than a no: 2 role, but if this is what he really wants then we shouldn't stand in his way. However, we have also done our bit by Steve in taking him back when things went tits up at the Barcodes. We should make it clear, if he leaves again, there's no way back a second time.

I know. They had a picture of it in The Liverpool Echo.

I thought Walcott played well. Three players I would have in the squad are Agbonlahor, Young and Ashton. I would have had Woodgate playing before Lescott. I would have had Downing shot.

I'll give you first shout if we have any spare Wicksy. Won't know until closer to the time though.