youlots

Puerile stuff indeed. However, I'm kind of glad that the press are getting behind Wenger at the moment because I really want Le Arse to keep playing the way they are at present cos I think we've got their measure at the moment and their rather thin squad and injuries means Wenger has less options. And because of our style of game I desperately want to meet Le Arse in the semis of the CL rather than the filth (just thinking about another round of games against the filth in the CL gives me the fear!). So the way I see it is that Le Arse should keep playing the football extraordinaire - beat the filth over 2 legs (as long as the filth either draw with them or beat them in the weekend PL fixture between the 2 legs) and I don't want Wenger to have more pressure on him than he has already which could translate into changing his present formation. I can't remember much that Adebayor did on the weekend much less Fabregas can you?

Certainly not fading - at the peak of his abilities (dribbling/1st touch sometimes aside) and has never looked fitter. Agree with Qaz. Irreplaceable. If he does go (when's his contract term up? Anyone?) I'll even miss his attitude and workrate and couldn't give a sh*t if he mouths off every other week (He's a bloody star after all and seems to be keeping the Chelsea Shop meeting budget singlehandely!) Agree with everyone else that it'll mean changes in our formation. Now what would be nice if he leaves would be if Guddy was 5 years younger - if he was I'd have him back in a flash.

Yeah all of the above - the 4-4-2 was the right choice since we had to go for the win and due respect to him for having the courage to do it. Even if we hadn't got the 2nd and it had ended a draw I for one would not have criticised him for his subbing and hopefully he's learnt that you can have control of a match (I thought we clearly had their measure and dictated the play and were more dangerous right up to their freakish goal which I might add I don't blame any one for - just a freakish angled glance really) but if it's not showing on the scoreboard you've got to go it and especially where Le Arse for some reason looked a lot more jaded than us on the park and especially in the final 20 minutes. Strange really given that we'd played mid-week and they hadn't.

here goes (nothing)(probably): 1. MAR30 - Middlesbrough (h) 2-0 2. APR05 - Man City (a) 1-1 3. APR14 - Wigan (h) 3-0 4. APR19 - Everton (a) 0-1 5. APR26 - Man Utd (h) 0-1 6. MAY03 - Newcastle (a) 1-2 7. MAY11 - Bolton (h) 1-0

Exactly. The bias of so called "objectivity" which can mean whatever you want it to mean depending upon definition. And I am at a loss to understand what so called notions of "fairness" have to do with it or the fact that he supposedly has less "ego" than his predeccessor. For Godsakes we all have an ego. And in the business of management an ego is paramount. All great managers have egos in spades. For most of us including our squad I'll wager, he just doesn't have what "it" takes. And it's not about "hatred" or "dislike" of the man or any so called "erotic" attachment to his predecessor. If you want to postpone your judgment that's entirely a matter for you but to say that he hasn't had a fair crack is nonsense. The man is simply not up to the task and must be shipped come May.

Exactly. Well Gallipolli at least. In fact Johhny Turk held their own for most of it except of course in Arabia.

Correction for me too. Manure of course got the goal late on. Too much wine and heat down here - it's 22 degrees celsius down here at 11.10 pm as I post. Magic.

One step/game at a time boys and girls. I agree with Butch - I think that 2nd spot given 4 draws for the Arse is definitely on (I mean a month ago who could have realistically thought that they'd draw 4 in a row and against fair to middling teams - top game by the way Marky Schwarzer). But to suggest given our run in that we can overtake Manure - I just don't get that feeling. I think some of this enthusiasm may have come about because we had a comfortable win against Derby and Manure only got the draw against them on the weekend (albeit that they had numerous other chances to convert). And I suppose if we beat spuds, the arse and manure who knows? Wishful thinking though. Time for the Panda (and the players of course ) to shine now we're at the business end. Let's see where were at come Sunday avo (well 4.00 am Monday for the likes of Qaz, Ozboy, Brian et al and me). If we've got 6 more points then, well, maybe I'll give the impossible dream more credence.

Qaz no one on here has complained about Grant's tactics for this game. Save for not playing Drogs instead of Anelka first up (and against Derby it wasn't going to make a difference and Drogs, so we are told, did have that soft tissue injury) Grant's selection for the game was our strongest team and of course after the Barnsley debacle it had to be: Grant had no choice but to do that. So no criticisms could be levelled at the selection of the starting eleven. The match was effectively over at 2-0. And Grant's choice not to sub at say 4-0 as opposed to 5-0 was I think because everyone was enjoying the moment and the rush of goals (3 in nine mintues & sweet moves) early in the 2nd half.So no criticism at the timing of the subs. The fact that we lost our shape after the tank and Maka and especially Joe were subbed was understandable. By that stage given the scoreline what did it matter. Loz is right - it was clearly Grant electing to give some players Sheva etc. some game time. Nothing wrong with that so no criticism there. So where's the criticism of Grant in respect of this game?

What a different proposition we look with Maka, the tank & Frank. That combo in the middle allow Kalou (much improved) and Joe to shine. We didn't look nearly as threatening after the tank and Joe were subbed (and before someone jumps down my throat I had no problems as to Grant's timing or subbing tonight) and Anelka is a bit too drifty for me although he did hit a nice 1-2 with Joe for Frank's 2nd. Frank MOM for me - when was the last time a middy scored 4 in a game at this level?

Apparently Mancini has now retracted his previous comment that he wanted to leave made on Tuesday evening after the loss to the filth and is now reported as stating that he wants to stay at Inter after all. The Mancini shuffle.

Lord Byron speaks

Qaz you seem to have a predliction for moving the goalposts. You came out with a rather sweeping allegation in your penultimate post alleging that many posters' concerns regarding Grant's fitness for his position as manager was borne out of personal dislike of Grant without providing the source. Accordingly, both Callista and I joined issue with that. Now, in your most recent post and rather than provide us with any finite source you've then "sourced" (for want of a better word) that idea out of a general impression you have gleaned from the content of this forum since Grant's appointment, proceed to then summarise, but in your words and somewhat mischievously, what you feel has been the general perception of most posters concerning Grant since his appointment and then, on that basis alone and further allege/conclude that Grant "is being judged different to how another manager would be" without providing any specific examples of which "other rmanager/s" you have in mind in respect to the comparison. Finally, you then posit a scenario which is frankly unanswerable because it calls for total specualtion in answering it and on that basis you conclude, by way of implication, that those posters that take a different position to yours regarding Grant's fitness for the position is a position that lacks "honesty". Qaz, your approach is all smoke and mirrors/shadow boxing and, again, is not really on point: being whether or not Grant has the abilities of has sufficiently shown the abilities in the matches that matter to date to keep the job come the end of the season. And I think if there is any "general conclusion" that can be adduced from this forum as a "general impression" in recent times to that question is that the nos clearly have it. And the answer to that question does not depend or have anything to do with his appointment or the circumstances of his appointment per se some 6 months ago. Only our beloved owner is answerable to us in that regard.

Prosecution Counsel: Your Honour (addressing Justice Ambramovich), with respect, the prosecution does not cavil with that decision for such an adjournment albeit that it reserves its right to present fresh evidence, if need be, when the matter is reconvened. Perhaps this would also be an appropriate time for the prosecution to submit that it has had concerns and remains somewhat troubled by certain jurisdictional issues in these proceedings in circumstances where first, and should the proceedings be recovened at some future stage and should jury find for the prosecution on the charges as levelled, it is trite that your Honour has the inherent right, among other things, to accept or reject those findings of and by yourself. Secondly, and more troubling still, is the fact that your Honour also has the inherent power to dispense with further proceedings at any future time of and by yourself and pronounce sentence on the accused regardless of whether the jury ever carries a verdict. Ambramovich J.: Yes but surely the prosecution was fully aware at all times of those jurisdictional issues and yet chose to commence this prosecution regardless. That is so is it not? Prosecution Counsel: I will not cavil with that your Honour however, the prosecution felt and still feels duty bound in this matter regardless of the ultimate outcome and regardless of your inherent jurisdiction. Ambramovich J.: Mmmmm. Yes well I thank Counsel for that. If there is nothing else. Counsel for the Defence? Defence Counsel: Nothing of any substance your Honour. Ambramovich J.: Well in that case these proceedings are adjourned to a date to be fixed but possibly never.

Qaz what's this rubbish about "the majority of fans on this forum continue to judge Grant on their personal dislike of him as opposed to the results he's achieved?" Where did that come from and who said it? I doubt anyone on here knows the Panda personally and he seems like a nice bloke for what it's worth. So no personal dislike there. But most of us have been rightfully questioning his approach and tactics (or lack thereof) in the games that really matter and his general fitness for the job overall based on theories of management and his predecessor's management abilities . And I think most of us are of the view that the Panda should (technically) stay in the position until the end of the year. And to speculate that the dressing room might be happier now than under Jose. Really. I guess that explains the "player's meetings" in recent times. That wasn't on point at all and in fact was I dare say you have a retrospective dig at Mourinho whilst at the same time implying that Grant, at least on your idea of dressing room harmony, hasn't been as abrasive as Mourinho and presumably, therefore, is a plus for Grant. Well maybe but hardly a salient point and frankly its the flipside surely of what surely must be a lack of respect for the Panda by certain players. And which is more important do you think? The players all moving in one direction and highly motivated to achieve glory etc or being worried about stepping on their toes because of their seniority. I recall that Jose ansd JT had a spat before Jose was shipped because Jose was of the view that after JT had returned from major injury and after a few games back he was underperforming and told JT of his view. And I think Jose was right - one could clearly see that JT during that period was labouring. Can't see Grant ever doing that. Can you? Have a look again at what Callistas got to say above regarding dealing with management in circumstances where you have no respect: I bet ya 9 out of 10 of us have had that experience sometime during their working lives. And its got nothing to do with "personal dislike" but everthing to do with whether one feels the person above is up to the task. Nothing more, nothing less. Moreover, if the person above is likeable or not unlikeable (like the Panda) it makes it all the harder to take that they're not up for their management job. But whether they're likeable or not and your personal opinion of their character is really irrelevant at the end of the day as to how they perform and whether they're up for it.

Your thread title says it all Brian. Loved the bit about his mother - have you been fighting? That's probably how she starts all conversations with him. Oh and the bit about coming to Chels for peace! Classic.

Never underestimate the power of denial eh Qaz? Oh and mate references to Perth Glory are pretty lame. Next you'll be comparing Butcher's reign at Sydney FC with Jose's in terms of mentality!

Nice answer

Yeah but Chippy what are you going to do about those lazy internationals. The ones that you say were good enough on paper?

Qaz You don't believe that the players don't respect Grant. I guess that's why after the CC result the players had a meeting and when Grant cam by they told him to go and have a cup of tea. What does that tell you. I guess that's why the owner has also been spending a lot more time at Cobham in the last few month as well. What does that tell you. I guess that's why the owner, Buck et al have started to tal to Jose again. What does that tell you. And why quite a few players are eager to leave. What does that tell you. Expect another player's meeting this week.

Oh and who are we playing on Wednesday. Derby for christsakes! If it had been against anyone of quality on Wednesday then I would have thought that your argument would have some merit as to rotation. Look the point is Barnsley having been doing well, very well, for the last few months in their neck of the woods. And Derby during the same period? This was underestimation pure and simple. The homework wasn't done. But hey blame those lazy internationals if you like. What then? What do you do about the lazy internationals? Answers welcome.

And Chippy there lies the problem. Grant et al seriously underestimated Barnsley on the basis of reputation alone. And you don't judge a player as to whether or not they'e in the mix to be picked for a game based on whether or not they're internationals for christ sakes. You pick em on form and in respect to the game plan you think by way of reasoned analysis the opposition will adopt. And, you never forget that if you're playing away from home you're playing away from home - regardless of the reputation of the opposition. These are fundamentals. If you go into a game thinking that these players "are good enough for the job" now anyone for a cup of tea sort of mentality then you get what you deserve.

So if you were picking the team against Barnsley (knowing how they'd played against the filth and knowing how that result must have galanized them) you would have picked Belletti? Sweepy? Anelka? Essien. And I'm sorry if player selection for today's match adds another complication for you - choose to believe what you want to believe as to the reasons for today's result but saying that it all boils down to lack of passion is (IMO) naive and frankly, is the dead end of any reasoned analysis.

Surely after that result no one can can seriously argue that Grant should be given more time. Good managers are above all, and at this level of football, motivators of professional footballers and have the respect of the players. In hand with that goes pre-match plannning, strategy and dissection of the opposition whoever they may be whether it be Manure, the Arse, Barca or .... lower division teams and, finally, your match day tactics as a match unfolds in respect of substitutes and changeable methods if the adopted strategy against the opposition is proving ineffective. With all three you have to find what works. And ironic as it may be, big scores against teams at this level of football only prove that the opposition either didn't have the requisite abilities and/or failed in their strategy/tactics to contain you unless, of course, you have a team that consistently kicks 3, 4 or say 5 goals week in week out whilst only conceding the odd goal and against any opposition whether they be at you club's level or otherwsie - ie. the great teams. Great Managers like Clough, Ferguson, Wenger and Mourinho had/have the above managerial qualties in spades. Grant is not a great motivator, few could argue with that. And he is obviously a poor strategist (look no further than the team picked as against Spuds in the final or the team today). By that I mean it was rather obvious that Barnsley were going to play exactly the sort of game that they did against the filth and if you were them why wouldn't you. And to their credit they did and they did it well. Given that was expected, I would of thought it would have been reasonbale for Grant et al to feel that coming away with a draw with the prospect of a re-match at our place would be a good result. And to top it all off, Grant simply doesn't read the game well as it is unfolding as there are numerous times during games that we've played in the last 3 to 4 months where your watching and thinking that player is not effective or ineffective or being taken advantage of and that formation is not working etc and it is difficult to remember any examples where a game has been tight or we've become stuck where Grant has substituted wisely and quickly enough. So what happens next. Its pretty obvious that our owner made a huge mistake in letting Jose go in September. Some of us said it then and now it has become apparent to all. If it was the case that great managers were a dime a dozen in respect of having all the above qualites in unison then none of us would be that concerned. In reality though there's probably only about ten top drawer managers plying their trade in the football world right now, perhaps less. And very few are available and of the ones who are available given what happened to Jose would they want to be here. Probably not unless they just want the money. And surely a return of Jose is no longer an option because of the owner's pride and Jose's pride (albeit that I personally wish that wasn't so). I think we've all got to take stock come the summer and obviously prior to that look at who we're going to let go or sell and also start sounding out our senior players (being the ones who are staying) as to whom they respect and can work with. You know given what's happenning at the moment I wouldn't even mind having Claudio back for what is surely going to be a transistional period for us for the next year or so - at least he had the player's respect. And all this behind the scene stuff has to be happening now. Sure keep Grant till the end of the season but as soon as its finished the new plan (if the owner indeed has a plan) must take effect.