Ilya

I do not get this metaphor. I mean, I assume you meant "Beatles", but don't get it either way. I think we should replace Elvis with AC/DC. And Guns Roses playing in domestic cups.

You had us all at "creaming their Levis over another team".

This keeps coming up everywhere - striker thread, Morata thread, etc: "where oh where will the goals come from?". We are joint 2nd for goals scored. They seem to be coming from somewhere. And the benefit of not being over-reliant for goals on a couple of players is aptly demonstrated by the fact that both Liverpool and Spurs have score fewer goals. A player's form dips a bit - and suddenly the whole team is f**ked. We may be (potentially) over-reliant on Hazard for general creativity, but specifically goals are nicely spread around. Which is not to say that I wouldn't like a striker who converts more chances. :) But we are doing alright overall.

You can just start calling him "Ruby" - no one's gonna judge.

What if a team of 11 Kovacices played a team of 11 Barkleys 38 times? What would be the total point tally?

I know Sarri has converted players before and that it does occasionally happen in general in top football, but it still has such an amusing uni football feel to it. Yesterday we were talking about trying Moses as a striker, today it's RLC. :) Giroud would make a decent center back I think. And Morata could suddenly flourish as a children's TV presenter.

How would we know? It can't tell us how it does it, can it - it's a f**king cat.

Ha-ha-ha, this is very good. Also we need to get back to playing three central defenders. Aspilicueta is so much better as a CM. Also bring back Moses. Also get Hazard to track back more. He's been ignoring his defensive responsibilities.

Sounds like perfect moment to jump in with support for his opinion. :) I'd like to see how this year plays out. But if things stay roughly how they are at the moment - it's about resource allocation. Is Kante useful to have in the squad? Of course. If you have infinite money to buy players - should you sell him? Of course not. If he is worth, as a classical defensive midfielder (protector of defence and destroyer of opposition attacks) significantly more than he is as a box-to-box "engine" (whatever that means) and we are not using him in his most valuable capacity - should we sell him for f**k load of money and buy a top player for one of the positions we actually do need to upgrade? I dunno. Kante for a top-top striker? And just play Jorginho, Kovacic and Barkley in midfield? Does it change the team for the worse so obviously that anyone who proposes this as an option is clearly a bell-end? Or Kante for a top-class different kind of a midfielder. Say, Pogba. I know I'm gonna get vitriol for this because Pogba is a dick, but football-wise - would that make the team worse?

Yes, amazing. So casual - and yet it's within a couple of inches from the post every time.

Let's just say that you could write the same article about any club bar City - not the whole manager pattern thing, which is just bollocks, but the pessimistic prognosis and overly negative assessment of the team's play. And the way he somehow had a go at the fans at the end and dragged the yoof thing in as if it as if it had anything to do with anything - I mean, was the overall subject of this article "all the bad things I can think of to say about Chelsea"? Should have finished it with: "And lets face it - blue is not a very nice colour, is it?"

As crass as it is to turn this into a conversation about money - but he would do Chelsea a huge favour by signing a deal just a tad longer than current one - even if he does want to go. There's a difference between losing Hazard for 50-60M (buys you a Morata as a replacement) and losing him for 150M - which, paired with qualification for CL, would give us some recruitment options.

I don't think it's black and white. I said "exaggerated" not "wrong". Also "magic" can mean different things to different managers. To Mourinho magic - is being 6 foot 5, 14 stone, and tracking back a lot. Also De Bruyne reportedly had some major attitude issues and Salah's last season will be his only impressive one in his career. He'd had plenty of minutes during many seasons before Chelsea and after Chelsea without showing anything spectacular. Literally no one saw last year coming.

Ordinarily I would be a bit pessimistic about our game against ManU. At a better moment in his career Mourinho would be the best guy to undo a team that is dogmatic about an attacking-posession style and a little shaky defensively. His whole managerial essence is about winning these kinds of games 1:0. But they were a mess yesterday. Even in the second half, even while scoring 3 goals - it wasn't discipline and structure, it was hysterical, desperate, send-your-goaley-up-for-a-corner, last ditch effort. It worked against Newcastle, but it won't work against a better team.

I think this idea that because a player hasn't had a lot of minutes we just don't know how amazing they could be - is somewhat exaggerated. Managers see them in training, they have a pretty decent idea. Yes, the games are the ultimate test, and some will fail under pressure - but if you are not producing magic in training, it's not going to suddenly materialize in a game.