Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


SydneyChelsea last won the day on September 15 2017

SydneyChelsea had the most liked content!


About SydneyChelsea

  • Rank
    A Touchable
  • Birthday 25/02/1988

Contact Methods

  • MSN

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Sydney, Australia
  • Interests
    Good music, good food, good football

Recent Profile Visitors

6,197 profile views
  1. Although from a personal ethical standpoint I am against clubs pursuing players as assets, this is the legal reality that players have to abide by in the current system. I think one thing that is fundamentally missed in a lot of the subsequent commentary is that Chelsea only commenced proceedings against Mutu when he started shopping himself to other clubs; to the club it appears a unilateral breach of contract. The legal argument is essentially that he took one of the club's assets (his footballing ability), deliberately devalued it and ended its association with Chelsea (through his own actions by taking drugs) and then moved that asset for free to another business (Serie A clubs) who initally were not required to compensate Chelsea. It means he profited from the situation and did not compensate the club. This same situation is codified in the Spanish transfer system, where players are able to buy out their contracts and have a club assist them with cost if they wish to transfer clubs (the transfer fee). Had Mutu done this properly he would have surely sought advice on the new clubs compensating Chelsea appropriately (ie paying a fee and not trying to jump on a bargain sale). It's obviously tempting to characterise Chelsea as the big bad business harrying a former employee, particularly in an age where drug law liberalisation gains increasing popularity. What has become clear during the course of these trials is that Chelsea did actually extend offers of appropriate support and the chance for Mutu to deal with the problem in-house but this was roundly ignored, hence the argument of unilateral termination. The real villains of the piece are in fact the Serie A clubs who courted Mutu, sensing a freebie but ultimately abandoning him when it was decided they actually needed to pay. Once these clubs washed their hands of the matter Mutu realises he was saddled with their debt and blame and resorts to every appeal possible. Legal stuff aside, I question whether Mutu's conduct would pass muster in the experience of an ordinary working person. Would my employer allow me to deliberately devalue one of their sensitive assets, then move it at a bargain rate to a competitor? Hell no, most working people would be in a world of legal trouble. So why should a multi-millionaire be exempt? When you add in that the club offered genuine support and he refused, instead seeking to leverage the situation to win a transfer elsewhere, and then doubling down on appeal when FIFA ruled his buying clubs needed to share the burden, it becomes a sad story with no real winners but in actual fact Chelsea have the least to blame. Chelsea could yet turn this into a huge win by reducing or excusing him the monetary debt but the clubs who exploited the situation and Mutu have gotten away scot-free.
  2. Pedro is playing in a role very familiar to him from his Barcelona days. He was such a valuable super-sub to them because of his tactical intelligence and work off the ball. While he is suited to the system, it is daft to plan a system around a 32 year old. Willian can play the same role, but he needs instruction to do so.
  3. No it really didn't, Ivanovic was targeted from 2013 onwards. Even so, Ivanovic remained an actually excellent defender, but it became increasingly clear that he couldn't do both attack and defence. Alonso is ruthlessly effective in attack and having Jorginho and Hazard in this form makes that doubly so but I think the key difference between him and Ivanovic is that currently there are more glaring issues with our defence (Luiz), whereas Ivanovic was the main issue. My hope is that having Kante in a "free" role (as opposed to sitting above the defence) will allow him to cover our fullbacks more effectively once he adjusts to the tactical changes.
  4. Squad investment isn't the answer. The consistent issue with Mourinho is that he relies on the transfer market to fix tactical problems. Football has moved on from the plucky counterattacking football of Mourinho and Benitez and the mid 00s. Mourinho has become a tactical dinosaur because of his stubborn refusal to coach organised attacking play.
  5. Problem with Alonso is the same as Ivanovic under Mourinho. A great attacking threat who doesn't have the pace to get back and defend. We found with Ivanovic that the former didn't outweigh the latter so let's hope it doesn't come to that with Alonso.
  6. He's done for as a coach at the top level. For the sake of his health and reputation he needs to take time away from the game.
  7. There is no free dataset for the time period you are looking at. WhoScored is the closest and they only have data from 2008 onwards. You will probably need to purchase the dataset from Opta.
  8. Well it's not that hard to understand the context. Sarri's Napoli were, on paper, arguably a weaker side than Walter Mazzarri's side that we beat in 2011 for example, and while Napoli were a strong team they were emblematic of a much stronger Serie A overall than that of the mid 00s.
  9. Mosquitoes are the deadliest creature in the world to humans. They kill over a million people a year due to the infections that they spread. Malaria is the most obvious killer but dengue fever, yellow fever etc are far more deadly.
  10. Players like Jorginho always bring out the worst in pundits. On one hand you have pundits who, upon Jorginho making a 5 yard backpass, condescendingly tell us that we just don't "get" Jorginho and what he offers to the team, how we just don't comprehend his tactical and technical brilliance and no one can pass a ball five yards like he can. On the other hand you have pundits who, upon seeing Jorginho doesn't run like a headless chicken, immediately dismiss him as a liability and a soft, a bit feminine even, no place in the thunderous masculinity of English football.
  11. The regal way he moves the ball when pressured, passes the ball backwards with confidence and self-assurance, the way he rarely gets forward and allows his teammates to shine in attack...I know it's early days but I can't stop seeing the resemblance in him. It's like we've finally replaced Mikel.
  12. Pedro has always been a "coach's dream" sort of player. All his managers from Guardiola to Conte have spoken one way or another about his tactical awareness and goalscoring nous. He is just the ideal squad player; he has played with the likes of Hazard, Messi, Iniesta etc and yet wins their respect as a matchwinner and teammate. Obviously his physical skills are on the decline but he can still make a contribution and set an example of professionalism few can match.
  13. One thing I really like about him is that he actually catches the ball. We haven't had that in a keeper since Cech. Courtois was so frustrating constantly parrying shots, you'd have your heart in your mouth into someone swept away the rebound.
  14. Think we dodged a bullet not signing him. Just doesn't have the pace to be a top player in his position, and a history of knee injuries doesn't bode well. Everything about him screams Mata to me, good player but just not good enough.

  • Create New...