e2a: Regarding Torres's remarks on the team playing a more quicker and direct attack and it suiting him, well he would say that would'nt he, so now the problem has been discovered their should be no more excuses, right ?

 

Exactly

Where have i ever said you need to agree with me? Where have i ever said that everyone who wants torres replaced (myself included if you read my post) has an agenda?

 

However, is there really a need for the character assasinations, baseless accusations and drama queen reactions of some on here? I have already pointed out the phrases i have taken exception with, and the reason for my objection. I am not saying you need to agree with me - in essence we already agree in that we have lost hope in Torres coming good and we want him replaced. I am saying that "supporters" or "fans" of Chelsea football club shouldnt resort to the twaddle and hostile abuse that you are posting as it comes across very blinkered and closed minded. I hought we had the best fans in the world that showed class, but some of the stuff on here i wouldnt even expect from the scumbags on RAWK.

 

Well you have accused me of having an agenda, and I'm not quite sure what my agenda is. I love Chelsea. That's about as far as it goes with agendas for me. If you don't want me to mention you mentioned I had an agenda I suggest you don't mention it in the first place. Seeing as you brought it up I feel I'm well within my rights to pick you up on it. Tell me exactly what the agenda is, or else don't mention it. I have my thoughts on Torres and I expressed them. Yes I think he has a poor character, I think he is a weak, sulking, selfish prima donna. If that makes me akin to a member of RAWK for expressing it so be it. I think the only person being a drama queen is you. You seem to be in the habit of throwing your knickers out the pram every time somebody express an opinion you disagree with. This appears to me to be the right platform to express our thoughts on Torres and I'm simply giving my honest opinion. Not sure why your pram has been rattled quite so much. You seem to think people can't post their opinion without hard evidence or first-hand experience or facts to back it up, which suggests to me you don't understand what this forum is all about. Its not a court of law, posts aren't deemmed inadmissable because of insufficient evidence. My view of Tores is based on what I've seen of him while with us and I haven't liked it one bit.

 

I'm going to say somehting else you won't like so I suggest you look away now, because I don't have the hard evidence and the first-hand experience and the facts of which you're so fond ..

 

I don't think Torres put in an honest shift up at West Brom, in fact, if you go back over this thread, you'll find most of the Fangirling Fratelli felt the same, and they called for him to be dropped. Now, as I have already explained, I think, during their friendly chat over the summer, the chat which persuaded Torres to stay according to him, the name Benitez kept popping up, a name with which we'd been linked the previous term. We already know that Torres felt he wasn't being used properly by the club. We know this because he said so. I had seen petulance from Torres towards Robbie on at least 3 occasions (I didn't see it from anybody else, did you?) and I believe Torres knew who was coming if Robbie was sacked and I believe Torres was up for it. Now, all opinion and hearsay, yes, well spotted, but I'm afraid I'm allowed to post it, because this is a football forum and we're here to discuss our thoughts. If that's too much for you I apologise. As I said before, I think Torres wanted Benitez here, and I think he's got what he wanted.

 

I am of the opinion that anybody that doesn't think the appointment of Benitez is inextricably linked to Torres is mad.

 

For the purposes of clarity, the above post conveys the opinion of the guy who posted it. Hope that clears that one up.

Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much!

I am of the opinion that anybody that doesn't think the appointment of Benitez is inextricably linked to Torres is mad.

 

I don’t think Benitez was appointed because of Torres, I think Benitez was appointed for the same reason Hiddink was appointed and because Benitez was the only manager of a certain experience that was available and willing to take a short term job.  Compare the two CVs and except for the Personality section, (in Benitez’ CV says “twat”), they are very similar.

 

I don’t think Torres took the penalty because he thought there wouldn’t be any consequences under Benitez if he missed.  There weren’t any consequences for the other players who missed under Di Matteo i.e. Luiz, Mata and Hazard why there would have been any consequences for Torres if he missed a penalty under Di Matteo?

 

As for the other people’s comments about Torres not having the balls under previous managers is just rubbish.  Lampard was the penalty taker and the matter was not open to debate, ever.

 

 

 

 

I found it strange that, for a vital spot-kick in a difficult fixture, a player who had never previously taken a spot-kick was allowed to that. I have never seen that before.

 

you dont watch Chelsea very often do you?  As for the "difficult fixture" one nil up against a team in the bottom three, I wouldn't call that a difficult fixture

I don’t think Benitez was appointed because of Torres, I think Benitez was appointed for the same reason Hiddink was appointed and because Benitez was the only manager of a certain experience that was available and willing to take a short term job. Compare the two CVs and except for the Personality section, (in Benitez’ CV says “twat”), they are very similar.

]

I don't think you can really put them both in the same category without offending hiddink. The problem with what you say is yes, bennitez was available but why did the club sack RDM without having a replacement lined up? They obviously sacked RDM with bennitez in mind. Now we can all point fingers of blame at various parties for me but I agree with daves baby, there are 3 key problems at CFC 1) the hiring and firing policy 2) Torres 3) we have been lumbered with a fsw. All are linked to the first but all need to be corrected to unify the fans again

Edited December 11, 201213 yr by Fearnley

you dont watch Chelsea very often do you?  As for the "difficult fixture" one nil up against a team in the bottom three, I wouldn't call that a difficult fixture

 

Luiz had scored a pen in the previous match. He'd scored his only other one this season too, and he scored from the spot in Munich. Torres had never taken one in his whole career (I'm led to believe). Torres brushed Luiz aside. I haven't got involved in whether it was right or wrong I'm just saying I found it strange. But if it's commonplace at Chelsea perhaps you can jog my memory?

 

As for Sunderland being a gimme. History would suggest otherwise. It was a vital spot-kick.

I wonder if Frank would have let him take the spot kick?

Luiz had scored a pen in the previous match. He'd scored his only other one this season too, and he scored from the spot in Munich. Torres had never taken one in his whole career (I'm led to believe). Torres brushed Luiz aside. I haven't got involved in whether it was right or wrong I'm just saying I found it strange. But if it's commonplace at Chelsea perhaps you can jog my memory?

 

As for Sunderland being a gimme. History would suggest otherwise. It was a vital spot-kick.

 

According to last night Evening Standard Torres in Spain scored 18 out of 26 penalties (average record I agree).

 

In the game that won us the title under Ancelotti when a penalty was awarded to Chelsea, Drogba started arguing with Lampard that he wanted to take the penalty (because it would have taken him one goal clear in the golden boot table).  Lampard told him to piss off in no uncertain terms and took the penalty himself.  And if I remember correctly Lampard also mentioned it in the post match interview with something along the lines that he didn’t let Drogba take the penalty because he was the penalty taker and it was more important to get the three points for the team than Drogba personal success.

Edited December 11, 201213 yr by Killbill

In the game that won us the title under Ancelotti when a penalty was awarded to Chelsea, Drogba started arguing with Lampard that he wanted to take the penalty (because it would have taken him one goal clear in the golden boot table).  Lampard told him to piss off in no uncertain terms and took the penalty himself.  And if I remember correctly Lampard also mentioned it in the post match interview with something along the lines that he didn’t let Drogba take the penalty because he was the penalty taker and it was more important to get the three points for the team than Drogba personal success.

 

So the more senior penalty-taker took the kick ?

 

You're losing an argument you're having with yourself.

As I recall we got a second penalty in that 8-0 Wigan game (albeit when the game was all but won), which Drogba did end up taking.

So the more senior penalty-taker took the kick ?

 

You're losing an argument you're having with yourself.

Sorry, I thought you meant you’d never seen done the “brushing aside” (having the cheek to demand to take the penalty over the penalty taker) which was what Drogba did to Lampard, except Lampard didn’t stand for it.  But having re-read your post I see that you were referring to the outcome of the “brushing aside”, someone taking the penalty over a senior penalty taker.  Well, one could still argue that Luiz is not a senior penalty taker, that at the moment doesn’t seem to be a designated penalty taker and everyone is having a go, so why not Torres.  And if Torres has the backing of the manger or has the manager in his pocket why didn’t he tell the manager to make him the official penalty taker so he wouldn’t have to argue with his team mates on the pitch?  And Luiz reaction to Torres scoring the penalty didn't look that he had felt undermined by Torres actions.

Edited December 11, 201213 yr by Killbill

My take on the penalty against Sunderland is that FSW has told Torres he wants him scoring and knows Torres is short on confidence, hes probably made it clear to the rest that if Nando feels up for it, then Nando takes it.

 

I would imagine his Goal and the two he got last game along with the knowledge he wasn't being told to take it made him feel 10 feet tall and bullet proof, the result was to be fair a very well taken penalty.

 

I wouldn't put money on him taking the next one if he hasn't scored for a few games and has missed a couple of sitters though.

He's a w**ker,he's a w**ker..

 

You're a w**ker, you're a w**ker.....

Sigh, if only Roman had brought RVP instead of Torres. None of this would be happening. He would have saved himself £29 million quid for starters. We would have had a quality consistent striker winner leading our line. Anyone of Ancelotti/AVB/Robbie might still be manager. Man U would be battling for a top four spot, we would be top of the league, and our little fat friend would still be down the Spanish job centre far away from SW6.

 

Perfick.

 

 

They never would have sold him to us.

 

They only sold Nasri, Clichy, etc to City because at that point Arsenal were still better than them. 

 

I think there is more residual bad blood between ourselves and Arsenal, and the rivalry between Man Utd and Arsenal has cooled off so much. Plus the last time Arsenal did a deal with us, we robbed them blind.

 it made him feel 10 feet tall and bullet proof, the result was to be fair a very well taken penalty.

Don't give him any viagra now though, or he'll end up being 14 feet tall 

Lampard missed a pen last season before the man city game and AVB made Juan Mata the penalty taker (Relieving penalty duty for one miss? Stupid). It was an important moment and Lamps just took the ball of him and said "This is mine". Netted it. 

 

Similar to what Torres did I think. Gotta applaud it. If he missed, he would of got so much sh*t. 

Lampard missed a pen last season before the man city game and AVB made Juan Mata the penalty taker (Relieving penalty duty for one miss? Stupid). It was an important moment and Lamps just took the ball of him and said "This is mine". Netted it.

Similar to what Torres did I think. Gotta applaud it. If he missed, he would of got so much sh*t.

I remember that but I just put it down to lamps trying to undermine avb

1) Well you have accused me of having an agenda, and I'm not quite sure what my agenda is.

2) I don't think Torres put in an honest shift up at West Brom

 

3) I am of the opinion that anybody that doesn't think the appointment of Benitez is inextricably linked to Torres is mad.

 

 

1) I never said you had an agenda. I said mindless torres bashing "makes it look like you have an agenda". There is a subtle difference.  I have been posting on here long enough to realise that you are a genuine fan, not some WUM (even if you are a bit of a WUM! - in a half decent way), and that you make a lot of very valid points.  My issue in this instance was that this bashing for the sake of bashing was not needed. Anyway, i have started another thread on related issues, so better anything else on this topic is posted there. ...So, once again, just to clarify, i do not recall ever saying you had an agenda...

 

2) I would agree whole heartedly on the WBA game. Torres looked like he couldnt be arsed. We agree in principle on the issue, that Torres should be replaced. The only disagreement is how we make our points.

 

3) I think that Benitez having worked previously with Torres would have been considered, however i dont think it would have been the main reason. There are very few availabile managers who boast a better CV that the interim, even less who would be prepared  come on a short term basis.

Edited December 11, 201213 yr by nonotnowjim

It's fairly obvious Roman appointed Rafa for Torres's benefit. How is it possible to think otherwise? Roman has never shown any interest in him before and he must be well aware that Torres rates him as the only manager who could get the best out of him.

1) I never said you had an agenda. I said mindless torres bashing "makes it look like you have an agenda". There is a subtle difference.  I have been posting on here long enough to realise that you are a genuine fan, not some WUM (even if you are a bit of a WUM! - in a half decent way), and that you make a lot of very valid points.  My issue in this instance was that this bashing for the sake of bashing was not needed. Anyway, i have started another thread on related issues, so better anything else on this topic is posted there. ...So, once again, just to clarify, i do not recall ever saying you had an agenda...

 

2) I would agree whole heartedly on the WBA game. Torres looked like he couldnt be arsed. We agree in principle on the issue, that Torres should be replaced. The only disagreement is how we make our points.

 

3) I think that Benitez having worked previously with Torres would have been considered, however i dont think it would have been the main reason. There are very few availabile managers who boast a better CV that the interim, even less who would be prepared  come on a short term basis.

 

 

I gotta say about (3), that CV is not a reason as proved by us getting Grant and RdM as short term managers.  

 

I'm certainly inclined to think that Torres was a major part of the reason why we got FSW, but if that's clear it will be proven by the type of striker we bring in in January. If we bring in some "prospect" or some 30 year old back up than I can state with 99% certainty Torres coming good was the major reason. 

It's fairly obvious Roman appointed Rafa for Torres's benefit. How is it possible to think otherwise? Roman has never shown any interest in him before and he must be well aware that Torres rates him as the only manager who could get the best out of him.

Well when Avb got sacked he offered benitez the job then so he has been interested before.

1) I never said you had an agenda. I said mindless torres bashing "makes it look like you have an agenda". There is a subtle difference.  I have been posting on here long enough to realise that you are a genuine fan, not some WUM (even if you are a bit of a WUM! - in a half decent way), and that you make a lot of very valid points.  My issue in this instance was that this bashing for the sake of bashing was not needed. Anyway, i have started another thread on related issues, so better anything else on this topic is posted there. ...So, once again, just to clarify, i do not recall ever saying you had an agenda...

 

2) I would agree whole heartedly on the WBA game. Torres looked like he couldnt be arsed. We agree in principle on the issue, that Torres should be replaced. The only disagreement is how we make our points.

 

3) I think that Benitez having worked previously with Torres would have been considered, however i dont think it would have been the main reason. There are very few availabile managers who boast a better CV that the interim, even less who would be prepared  come on a short term basis.

 

Fair do's mate. We'll agree to differ on the points we differ on and agree to agree on the points we agree on.

You're a w**ker, you're a w**ker.....

Let's all love him now, he scored 2x 2 goals against 2 poor opponents...

After we hate him a full season...

 

Just like I thought, just 2 wins away or 50-70 procent of this board will forgive Benitez...

 

But hey...

 

No problem...I'm free to think what I want,and I'm not alone..just go a few times to a game and you can hear,see and feel it by your own... 

Let's all love him now, he scored 2x 2 goals against 2 poor opponents...

After we hate him a full season...

 

Just like I thought, just 2 wins away or 50-70 procent of this board will forgive Benitez...

 

But hey...

 

No problem...I'm free to think what I want,and I'm not alone..just go a few times to a game and you can hear,see and feel it by your own... 

 

 

Some of the language you're using is very offensive, I suggest you wash your mouth out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you insist on mentioning the possibility of people forgiving the FSW

Well when Avb got sacked he offered benitez the job then so he has been interested before.

Yes. But that was also when Torres was here. Roman never showed an interest in Benitez in the past.