BumsteadCFC

That's right, my mistake - he dropped Lampard for Raul in the Newcastle game.

In reverse order of importance: I think he disrupts the chemistry of our team personally. Too frequently he just seems to take or need an extra touch of the ball when in possession - this has the effect of hindering the momentum of our attacks. Also, he's not a scorer - he's only managed 2 goals for us in 6 years. Now, the aforementioned flaws in his attacking game would be overlooked if he was rock solid in defence but he isn't. He seems too passive at times and as others have said is prone to mental errors and lapses in concentration. Furthermore his qualities and those of a 34 year old Lampard are not exactly complimentary - I truly believe the Mikel-Lampard axis (which Robbie seems to favour at the moment) is the weakest area of our team. in summary I feel he is too one dimensional and the one area in which he should excel (in order to justify his starting place) he is merely good rather than excellent. For a club like Chelsea that simply won't cut it.

I'm not sure I agree with the poster who said he thought Raul was part of Robbie's plans on the basis of his start versus Newcastle - didn't he start that game because Ramires had a mare against Reading and was not 100% fit after missing the game v Wigan? However, I would like to have retained him - he's a half decent squad player to have about the place. I'll always remember him not just for his goal versus Benfica but also for the subsequent celebration - one of the more memorable by a Chelsea player in my time following the club.

Updated playing minutes stats after 4 games: Chelsea = 360 minutes Cech - 360 (100%) Ivanovic - 360 (100%) Torres - 360 (100%) Cole - 359 (99%) Mikel - 338 (93%) Hazard - 334 (92%) Mata - 314 (87%) Lampard - 273 (75%) Cahill - 270 (75%) Luiz - 270 (75%) Bertrand - 181 (50%) Terry - 180 (50%) Ramires - 125 (34%) Oscar - 104 (28%) Mierles - 101 (28%) Sturridge - 31 (8%)

I don't give a flying fart if we did ride our luck and we did - would the detractors have sympathised with us if we were the better side and had lost? Would they f**k, they would have ridiculed us for "bottling it".

Also, Im not trying to downplay the quality of our performance - it was rank rotten in every conceivable way, terrible. Honestly it could have been 7. But once we went behind they just picked us apart clinically on the break - we were always playing catchup from early in the game and they just parked the bus and countered. Had we got to 30 mins at 0-0 (yeah I know "if my aunt had .......") who knows we could have been well in the game.

No, thats fair comment mate. Tbh (and I'm trying to spin this as positively as possible - glass half full and all that) a performance like that might do them the world of good. They won't be getting delusions of grandeur, they will be back at the drawing board trying to figure out where it all went wrong. It could be a good reality check.

People are prisoners of the moment. Look no-one likes getting a pasting but you can't put too much stock in one off results/performances. United lost 5-0 to Newcastle and us in 1996/97 and 1999/00 respectively and went on to win the title in both seasons. They have lost the Super Cup two of the three times they have played in it under Ferguson. FFS they failed to get out of an incredibly poor group in the Champions League last season and got beat 6-1 by City and still they came within seconds of winning the league title. You are going to have bad days at the office - the measure of a team is how you respond. League form is the bread and butter of any football club, that is what is of greatest importance.

Allright we know this is sh*t. How we respond to this in the league is of the greatest importance.

We beat United 5-0 at the Bridge just months after they won the Champions League in 1999. They still won the league. End of.

Its a one off showpiece ocassion. Not happy we're losing but there are no points at stake. United lost it in 1999 and 2008 but won the league those seasons, persepctive mate. Perspective.

Yeah no biggie, its as good as a friendly tbh. Not too bothered.

They are just grasping at straws. They should be concerned about their clubs descent from European power to mediocrity. Instead they are worried about whether we are giving away free flags. It just about sums up that pathetic fanbase of theirs. Sad bar stewards all round.

I know so many plastic Scousers who are just gloryhunters its embarrassing. As for their history jibes they can keep it - wouldn't swap their bloodstained history for ours.

Hard question tbh. I'd love to see Kerry in the side due to the fact that he was an absolute handful, big, strong and pacey. I agree with just that he was not in the same league as Drogba but over the last decade I've oftentimes found myself thinking "I wonder how Kerry would have done in this side, surrounded by 9 world class outfield players?". Personally I think Kerry would have done the business. Natural goalscorer, he would have found a way to contribute to the team with his all round play too.

I know I'm months late on this but tbf I don't think anyones doing that fella. With regards fv I think the best approach is a "it is what it is" or a "it was what it was" attitude I suppose. At the end of the day from the late 60s till the late 80s going to the football was a overwhelmingly male and working class pursuit and hooliganism was a natural product of that, wrongly or rightly. Football was a lot more tribal back then, there was a real feeling of togetherness and solidarity among fellow fans, us and them type attitudes against oppo fans and police. Also you've got to realise a lot of the stuff that happenned at football was exagerrated out of all proportion by the media.

Another thing I'll track is minutes played (and in brackets % of minutes played). I prefer this to appearances stats since it gives a more exact indication of how long players were on the pitch. Chelsea = 270 minutes Cech - 270 (100%) Ivanovic - 270 (100%) Cole - 270 (100%) Torres - 270 (100%) Mikel - 248 (91%) Hazard - 244 (90%) Mata - 233 (86%) Lampard - 183 (67%) Terry - 180 (66%) Cahill - 180 (66%) Luiz - 180 (66%) Betrand - 180 (66%) Mierles - 101 (37%) Ramires - 80 (29%) Oscar - 59 (21%) Sturridge - 22 (8%)

Will do both. Not sure if I can edit the OP but will update the thread if not. Wigan (away) August 19th Goal 1 - Ivanovic finishes after through ball from Hazard (G - Ivanovic, a - Hazard) Goal 2 - Hazard fouled in box. Lampard penalty. (G - Lampard, a - Hazard) Reading (home) August 22nd Goal 3 - Hazard fouled in box. Lampard penalty. (G - Lampard, a - Hazard) Goal 4 - Cahill long range shot. (G - Cahill, a - Hazard) Goal 5 - Torres taps in from a square ball/cross from the left wing from Cole. (G - Torres, a - Cole) Goal 6 - Hazard runs the length of the pitch and lays it on to Ivanovic for a tap in. (G - Ivanovic, a - Hazard) Newcastle (home) August 25th Goal 7 - Torres fouled in box. Hazard scored penalty. (G- Hazard, a - Torres ) Goal 8 - Torres long range shot after backheel from Hazard. (G - Torres, a - Hazard) Goals: Torres - 2 Lampard - 2 Ivanovic - 2 Hazard - 1 Cahill - 1 Assists: Hazard - 6 Torres - 1 Cole - 1

Being a bit of an anorak myself I love a stat and when I read that Lamps is 4 goals away from Kerry's number for Chelsea it triggered me to think that we should have a stats page on the general forum. My main thought is that we can keep tabs of goals, assists, appearances and any little bits and bobs of trivia. Also, it will be useful to analyze some of the stats which might come in handy in match threads and when discussing things. It will be a collaborative effort so please put your own stats down. For my part I'm gonna keep tabs/describe goals scored, when, where, why, how etc: Goal 1 - Ivanovic finishes after through ball from Hazard (G - Ivanovic, a - Hazard) Goal 2 - Hazard fouled in box. Lampard penalty. (G - Lampard, a - Hazard) Goal 3 - Hazard fouled in box. Lampard penalty. (G - Lampard, a - Hazard) Goal 4 - Cahill long range shot. (G - Cahill, a - Hazard) Goal 5 - Torres taps in from a square ball/cross from the left wing from Cole. (G - Torres, a - Cole) Goal 6 - Hazard runs the length of the pitch and lays it on to Ivanovic for a tap in. (G - Ivanovic, a - Hazard) Goal 7 - Torres fouled in box. Hazard scored penalty. (G- Hazard, a - Torres ) Goal 8 - Torres long range shot after backheel from Hazard. (G - Torres, a - Hazard) PLEASE CORRECT ME IF IM WRONG! Goals: Torres - 2 Lampard - 2 Ivanovic - 2 Hazard - 1 Cahill - 1 Assists: Hazard - 6 Torres - 1 Cole - 1 KTBFFH

My Mum and Dad were both Chelsea fans - coincidentally. When they first started going out they used to go to the Bridge, we are talking Finniestone, Langley, Wicks, Walker era mid-late 70s. I was born in '78 and I was only ever gonna be a Chelsea fan. Now, my kids are 3 and 5 and they've already been indoctrinated.

I think Bridgey was within his right to not shake JT's hand personally, sleeping with a pals missus or ex is a no no in my humble opinion. Anyway, don't want to get into a debate on it, Bridge gave us that great goal at the Library in 2004 so lets let bygones be bygones eh?

The feeling of elation when Drogba's penalty hit the back of the net will live with me until my dying day. After screaming "yeeeessssssssss!" I was overcome with an incredible feeling of relief and calmness, of validation. I felt complete. Then I was just thinking "we did it, we f**king did it!". Like many other Blues I'm sure, I couldn't suppress the tears of joy that ran down my face, the whole experience was overwhelming. There was only one other time in my life that I've ever been so happy and so overcome with emotion in that manner and that was when my son was born. For me the glow of that moment will never, ever wear off.

Chuffed for Piazon and the fans

Much better Chels, I like the look of Herr Marin

Not at all impressed with Lukaku in either these 2 friendlies tbh, with a better touch there he would have been in. His first touch seems pretty poor. Of course I'll give him a chance to prove me wrong like all CFC players but I'm just saying my impressions of him are not that great SO FAR.