Samdwich

Doing it carefully and winning things is different to chucking money at every position we don't have a world class player in.

I know it's not what you mean, but what you are saying sounds a lot like "it's easier to score goals at West Brom than at Chelsea". Yes, he will be up against more deep defences here. On the flip side, he will have service from Oscar, Mata and Hazard rather than Morrison, Dorrans and Brunt. Plus Lukaku is exactly the type of player we need to help us unlock deep defences, he's an absolute beast and should be able to win balls into the box. I'm not 100% saying that we shouldn't buy Falcao, he's a fantastic player and it's not an opportunity that comes around very often, but we should also be very mindful of the long-term situation. There's a huge amount of short-termism among Chelsea fans - remember last season when half the forums thought that we got mugged by Anderlecht for Lukaku?

But it's inevitable that it won't be. When was the last time our third choice striker got more than a small handful of games?

Lukaku has the best goals to minutes ratio of any striker in the premier league with over 10 appearances. As a 19 year old at West Brom. Bear in mind that he started off as a substitute and had to ward off competition from Shane Long and Peter Odemwingie, and has been the player to single handedly win games for the club when they've been in a bad run of form. If that's not enough to get a chance in our first team, what is? He has improved at a ridiculous rate, if he continues to improve at a similar rate he will easily get 20 goals for us next season, especially since he'll actually play cup games.

There's no doubt that Ba and Lukaku won't reach Drogba's 2009/10 level next season, but that doesn't mean that we have to go out and buy a ready made replacement for him. Last time we won the league Lampard scored 27 goals. We aren't going to have a box-to-box midfielder who can score that many goals, does that mean we need to go out and buy one? That season we had Drog, Anelka, Kalou and Sturridge. Of those strikers: Kalou was a winger who could play as a striker if needed - we have that in Moses. Anelka was second choice at CF, but versatile enough to be first choice playing out wide. None of Lukaku/Falcao/Ba can do this. Sturridge played a bit-part role, and only because Ancelotti was great at playing the youngsters (eg. Josh). I don't think Lukaku should be restricted to such a role as he has earned the right to regular games. I thought this was one of the reasons we bought Moses? Because he can play up front as well as out wide, which as you say makes him ideal for third choice.

I haven't watched KDB much so can't really comment, but the impression I'd gotten from those who watch him regularly is that he is suited to a deep midfield role. Oscar has all the attributes to be a regista - he's very intelligent and has displayed fantastic tactical understanding at times (most notably vs Juventus where he wasn't just "doing a job" on Pirlo, but broke past him pretty intelligently when we were in possession). Defensive nous is something he would need to work on some more, but I honestly don't think it would take long for him adapt. The hole exists at the moment, but Oscar can be played in the role and won't take too long to adapt to it imo. As such, it's not worth buying a player who would prevent us playing Oscar/KDB/McEachran there in the next few years.

Moses would be the backup, with the youngsters there for extreme situations. To everyone saying that we need more than 2 strikers: when was the last time we used more than 2 different players in the CF position over the course of a season? This season we've used only the two first choice strikers, last season we had 5 strikers and only two of them got game time at CF, the season before we used Anelka/Drogba/Torres because Ancelotti was experimenting with having them all on at once. I suppose during the double winning season Ancelotti gave Sturridge a few games here and there whilst using Drogba/Anelka as the CF most of the time. Sturridge played what, 5-10 games as CF as a youngster? Is that what we want to relegate Lukaku to? We invest so heavily in youth, and so many of us bang on about using our youngsters but when push comes to shove, we just seem to call for world class players to be brought in and put ahead of them in the pecking order.

At what cost? Pushing our potentially world class teenager out of the club by placing someone who will take the first team position for the next 5 years in front of him? Or do you expect Lukaku to oust Falcao in 2-3 years, meaning we've spent £50m on a stop-gap? Regardless, that post wasn't talking about which strikers we need, just about how many are fine for us to have in our squad. I wasn't suggesting that we should use the youngsters regularly, but that they are there in case we hit an injury crisis.

2 strikers, neither of whom seem to be injury prone (cue someone telling me about Ba's knees) is fine for a team that plays with one striker. For backup we have Feruz/Bamford, and one of the reasons I thought we bought Moses was his versatility and ability to play up front.

very good

I'd like to see them playing together at the heart of midfield, reckon they'd make a fantastic combination for us in future years.

Yes, if getting him means hindering Lukaku's development further and potentially losing him. I don't think we should loan him out again - he has earned a chance to lead the line here. But even if we do, and buy Falcao, what happens the next season? Do you think Lukaku will be happy to sit on the bench until Falcao is done and leaves in 5 years?

I agree that we need a regista, but think that we should be looking in our squad for one rather than purchasing a new one. Oscar has the skillset to play as one. When he gets to play as a number 10, he drops ridiculously deep to get the ball anyway, RDM intended to move him gradually into the pivot, but didn't get the time. Piazon can be his long-term replacement in the attacking midfield. From what I hear, KDB has also been playing a deep role at Bremen and also has the skill-set to play as a regista. Those two are ready already, and our most natural regista - McEachran - will be ready in a season or so.

at least 100k At least 100k? Try at least 200k mate. Plus you may not have seen him have bad games per se, but plenty of times he just looks like he can't be arsed to track back and lets his side down - something Mikel gets hammered for repeatedly on here. What I'd do: Bring back Lukaku, KDB, Chalobah, Courtois, Piazon, maybe PVA. Maybe McEachran, but only if managed properly whilst here (probably best to loan him out again though). Get rid of Torres, Benayoun and Malouda. We have 4 capable CBs, that's fine - Cahill has been in poor form but I believe the quality is still there. Terry will play regularly again once our manager is no longer a fat c**t who "rests" him for the Europa League game we play every week. PVA has supposedly impressed, and if he's the one that is supposed to step into Cole's shoes long term then he needs to be brought back and bedded in. CM - we don't need a stop gap to block the development of Chalobah, imo. He's PL quality already and is improving ridiculously fast, he's ready to be played in the first team. Between Chalobah/KDB/Ramires/Mikel/Romeu we have options for the 2-man midfield. Spending money on another player will just hinder Chalobah/Romeu. AM - sorted, really. Piazon for more depth. Apparently doing well at Malaga, should be used for rotation/depth in our squad imo as he looks ready for it. CF - Lukaku and Ba is fine for me. Bringing in another striker realistically puts Lukaku to third choice (not as "proven" as Ba, and less chance for him to prove himself). I think after what he's done at WBA he should be given the chance to lead our line. I know City and Utd each have (had) 4 strikers, but they both play with two strikers and Utd have had to shunt Welbeck out wide on occasion to give him games - none Lukaku/Ba/Falcao are effective playing wide.

I actually think that if Ramires becomes the player I think he can, he will be better than Essien. He doesn't have the power to dominate midfields like Bison did, but he has the pace and energy to do so. First half against Arsenal at the Bridge, for example, he completely dominated the midfield. Just needs a bit more consistency and up his game a little imo.

Only just seen this but it won't show anything for yesterday, looking at the past week or whatever it looks like the shares just fell Friday - today. Slightly less steeply than they were falling before! heh

Saw something about share prices falling as a result of this. Sneaky Russians trying to get back their Cyprus money by manipulating the stock market?

imo we shouldn't be buying a striker to block Lukaku's progress. He has come leaps and bounds this season, and I can see him being very good for us next season. Of course he won't be at Falcao level in September, but judging by what he's done so far, he can definitely reach it in the next 2-3 years if properly handled. It's also in our interest for him to develop alongside our other young players and gain the sort of understanding we saw between Drog and Lamps.

Will Stinson â€@TheWSNetwork24 Mar Kalas: "First, I have to make another stop. At a top club in Germany or midtable in England. The gap between Vitesse and Chelsea is too big"

Best wishes to Bobby. As some have already mentioned, a true gent by all accounts. Hope he gets well soon.

Would swap Essien and Makelele, but otherwise spot on. Wonder where Mata/Hazard/Oscar/Ramires will end up on the list by the end of their careers.

Our number 16 looks quite handy in that video, wonder if he'd be helpful in solving our midfield problems at the moment...

I think you're severely underrating his dribbling ability, tbh. As I said above, Iniesta's close control/dribbling ability is second to only messi imo. The only thing he is lacking is pace, but because of his ridiculous control over the ball he's still the second best dribbler in the world. He just has this ability to completely make a mug of out defenders in tight spaces, ridiculously talented player.

A lot of iniesta's passes are direct, though, in that he plays ridiculous balls into the box on a regular basis which is what I thought you meant. I agree that Hazard can afford to be more direct as he's incredible at running at defences. There's a balance there though as doing it every time he gets the ball will just mean losing it very often, obviously to the detriment of the team.

I think by direct many people (myself included) mean that he runs straight at the defence, whereas often you see Iniesta passing the ball in similar situations.