DaRick

He's a legend, but the idea of wheeling him out against Leicester is not an enjoyable one to contemplate (I mean, the guy's 37).

Does anyone think that Wenger resembles Judge Frollo from The Hunchback of Notre Dame? I do (they're both as villainous as each other LOL).

I disagree with Cahill - has been atrocious at times this season and Fonte IMO deserves it more for being the bedrock in a high-performing Southampton defence. Ivanovic is debatable; I would have marginally selected Clyne over him. I would have selected Azpi over Bertrand. Coutinho over Fabregas? FFS. De Gea just about deserves it, though Courtois' inclusion would have been fair too. Aguero slightly unlucky, though no problems with selecting Costa ahead of him. Costa's goals have been crucial.

Well that was almost certainly Arsenal's best chance to get back into the title race gone...and for all of the hype, Wenger's abysmal head-to-head vs Mourinho continues. Say what you like about the man, but he knows how to negotiate these big games. If it was AVB we probably would have lost 5-0.

Arsenal have been playing well lately I have to admit, but it is not unusual for modern-day Arsenal to go on great runs followed by abysmal runs (or vice versa). They are 10 points behind us, so the onus is on them to attack and get something out of the game. We don't have to do diddly-squat, but if they draw that's pretty much all she wrote, so I figure Arsene will leave his side open to counterattacks at some point during the game (possibly the entire game given the league table).

...also I call Simeone 'el comadrejo' (the weasel). I don't care if any team managed by him gets knocked out.

Benitez simply wasn't the right appointment because of who he was and his history with Chelsea. I would have kept RDM on for longer - the atmosphere during Benitez's reign was toxic and it surely had an effect on the players. The Chelsea side of 2012/13 admittedly wasn't as great as the talents of Hazard and Mata would have you believe, but we should have won more than Benitez managed. He utterly misused a club legend in JT and the losses to Corinthians, Swansea and QPR were utterly disgraceful. I have a hard time believing RDM would have done much worse. The EL win was the only silver lining in what I thought was an extremely dispiriting season in general.

The only ones I can remember are Robben and arguably Mata. However, Robben was frequently injured and Mata was marginalised, so there were caveats. I tend to think that Hazard is easily the most likely Chelsea player to go one of those two. Matic, Fabregas, Costa and Courtois are good enough to compete in/make their first XI's, but Hazard is the man here - and for good reason. However, he's shown no particular interest in leaving and probably does not wish to compete with Ronaldo, so I'm not too worried just yet.

At first glance, Cuadrado seemed like an excellent signing and a prototypical Mou transfer. At Fiorentina, he was fearless and direct, a fine crosser, a goal threat who was unafraid to shoot from distance, hard working, fast and an excellent dribbler. However, he is more lightweight than I had realised. In a less physical, more tactical league like Serie A it doesn't matter so much, but here it does. To his credit, he has tried to bulk up but in his initial appearances he's been too easy to bully. Also for the reasons I've already outlined, Serie A has a different football culture to the Premier League and so Cuadrado hasn't found it easy to adapt - something he's admitted. Schurrle would probably have done a bit better (though his form for Wolfsburg hasn't been sparkling), but Salah very much strikes me as the sort of player whom a system needs to be built around. That was never going to happen at Chelsea. I expect Cuadrado to improve next season once he's familiarised himself with the PL.

My thoughts: 1998/99: I was too young to witness this season, but having a look at Chelsea's squad, it seems solid; names like Petrescu, Zola, Desailly, Lebouf and Di Matteo are not ones to sneeze at (Vialli and Laudrup were past their best). Man U also had to compete seriously on multiple fronts. However, their squad was also clearly better while we lacked a world-class forward; I know Flo is fondly remembered for his super-sub heroics, but he wasn't a world-class forward. 2003/04: Nope. Arsenal's Invincibles were at the peak of their powers, Arsene Wenger himself was at his peak as a manager (before falling into overly ideological thinking) and our squad basically needed time to settle. Also, Claudio Ranieri was IMO too inconsistent to win titles - he could sometimes be brilliant, but he could also make braindead moves (Monaco, anyone?). 2006/07: We had a chance here, but I think injuries played a defining factor. 2007/08: Now this IMO is the one that got away. As a squad, Chelsea were still near their peak and with a better manager than Avram Grant I could easily see us winning all three trophies we missed out on. I'm not sure whether Avram was really responsible for this, but none of our signings were instant successes (if they proved successful at all; the likes of Tal Ben Haim and Claudio Pizarro were absolute flops). If just one of those signings adjusted to the PL more quickly, that could have made a difference. However, Man U were again at a peak so it still would have been really tight. 2010/11: Man U were poor, we were much worse. Carlo also didn't help himself by running the same tactics/team into the ground despite the fact that things clearly weren't working. 2013/14: With hindsight, this Chelsea squad was not really good enough to win the league. You are always going to be up against it if your best striker is an aging, half-fit Eto'o. The fact that we compiled as many points as we did was down to Jose's skill more than anything else. However, though he was underperforming Mata could have helped push us closer after Oscar faded.

But, but, but...Liverpool won the moral victory! Just ask Brendan!

Ridiculously inconsistent and even at his best I'd rank him below any of Terry/Cahill/Zouma. He also struggles when placed under pressure - call him the anti-Terry.

...and I'd have a hard time disagreeing.

Most times recently...

The whole team deserves a mention, but no Hazard, no three points. Honourable mentions to JT, Oscar, Cahill, Zouma, Azpi and Matic. Those guys contributed to a thunderous defensive display.

Near impossible now, you'd think...

Ah, the rooster crows like a cock...

Although I'm 25 and therefore too young to remember those times, I know the Chelsea side of the 60's and early 70's constantly threatened, had some Chelsea legends (notably Osgood) and played some good football but fell short of being title winners (a little like today's Arsenal side). The underachievement of Chelsea during the late 70's/early 80's was quite legendary, but it seems to me that we were no worse than mediocre from 1989-onwards. From 1996-2003, we were a little like the Tottenham of today (OK, somewhat better) - usually lingering around the Top 4 but only occasionally cracking it, with the odd cup win to give us solace.

Manager. Leader. Legend. That is why he's the best manager in the league. We take him for granted sometimes.

Neil Young should rename his album 'Zuma', 'Zouma' in Kurt's honour. That said, doubt he's a massive football buff.

Both were pretty good players although admittedly not superstars. Joaquin was an important part of an occasionally overachieving Betis side and a fairly strong Valencia side. Even now he's performing respectably at Fiorentina. Simao was a star at Benfica.

WHAT A WIN! WHAT A WIN! WHAT A WIN! THE HOLY GRAIL IS SO CLOSE I CAN SMELL IT! Hyperbole aside, my thoughts: 1) Typical Mourinho masterclass, with shades of the game versus Man City early last year, not to mention countless games in the 2004-06 stretch. Let the opponent dominate possession, pick them off on the counter and then sit tight until the final whistle. The QPR game was fortuitous but it wasn't exactly a champions-defining performance. This was. IMO, the best performance since our highly professional performance against Tottenham during the League Cup final. 2) As expected, Zouma was brought in defensive midfield to fight Fellaini. A daunting task, but Zouma nullified his threat significantly. Injuries notwithstanding, he'll likely prove a truly inspired Chelsea signing. 3) I feel sorry for Remy, but in the twilight of his career Drogba seems to have found his niche as a defensive forward. Sure his pace has diminished his offensive threat greatly, but he makes up for it in endeavour and his physicality is still difficult to deal with. He did certainly disrupt United's defence and he roughed up Herrera well enough to reduce his impact. This is in contrast to Falcao, who provides relatively little beyond his ability to poach goals - and that's when he's in form! Still, I would like him to move into coaching after this season. 4) Just when talk around Oscar's future at Chelsea intensifies, he comes up with a solid performance when it was nearly needed. Nice interplay with Hazard to secure the goal. 5) Hazard, Hazard, Hazard...where would we be without him? Again he comes up with the game's defining play. Truly we are blessed to have him. 6) Props to Matic and our defense - probably their best game as a unit since the aforementioned Tottenham game. JT's leadership is crucial for games like this. The Cinderella song says that "you don't know what you got...'til it's gone." His loss will be incalculable when he finally decides to hang it up. 7) Herrera is much more effective further ahead than he is in a deeper role. The loss of Carrick hurt them as much as everyone expected. 8) Mata is a champ, but Matic/Zouma snuffed him out well. 9) 10 POINTS CLEAR!

I think the disagreement comes in how much of Barcelona's success could be attributed to Pep and how much could be attributed to Rijkaard. A bit pedantic I guess, but whatever. I would like to see Pep take over a side that isn't already great or at least doesn't have world-class potential like his 2008 Barcelona side did and elevate them to unprecedented heights. Unlike Jose (Porto) and even Simeone (Atletico Madrid), he's never really done this. He did carry on Cruyff's tradition, though Barcelona weren't a terribly impressive side for some years until Rijkaard was hired and even then he needed a season or so to rejuvenate them.

I disagree; Rijkaard constructed it and Messi was already beginning to come into his own. What Pep did was add the finishing touch by selling some underperformers/has-beens (Deco, Ronaldinho) and obviously the team became far more lethal under his stead, so for that he deserves credit. However, the nucleus of a great side was already there.

Wouldn't want him anywhere near Chelsea TBH.