Fantastic news. Hazard next.

Another legend gone =/ This one long before his time.

edit: sounds more morbid than I intended but whatever.

It's unfortunate but Courtois needs to play and is only going to get better, it's a sacrifice we had to make

Just a quick note to say that I edited the original "Chelsea Football Club is pleased" to read "Chelsea Football Club are pleased".

Not the first time and it won't be the last.

I thought either one can be used.

I thought either one can be used.

 

It is pretty commonplace that that happens but to be strictly correct it should be 'Chelsea Football CLub is.'

 

Basically the noun and the verb in a sentence should be in agreement in terms of being singular or plural.  So a singular noun needs to be go alongside a singular verb.  Chelsea Football CLub is singular as there is only one of them. Therefore 'is' has to go after it in the sentence.

Fantastic news. Hazard next.

Agreed, we need to tie that mother down!

It is pretty commonplace that that happens but to be strictly correct it should be 'Chelsea Football CLub is.'

 

Basically the noun and the verb in a sentence should be in agreement in terms of being singular or plural.  So a singular noun needs to be go alongside a singular verb.  Chelsea Football CLub is singular as there is only one of them. Therefore 'is' has to go after it in the sentence.

Even though "Chelsea is" may be strictly correct in a grammatical sense, it doesn't feel or sound right at all. To take a couple of examples:

 

"Chelsea is the Pride Of London"

"Chelsea is back, Chelsea is back"

 

On the other hand, a phrase such as like "We are the Chelsea and we are the best", is both grammatically correct (we being plural) and sounds right. You could therefore argue that the plural inherent in "We are the Chelsea" is reflected in "Chelsea are back", or "Chelsea are the Pride Of London", the plural in the second case being the amalgum of fans, players, management, along with the various assets and so on that go to make up the entity that is Chelsea Football Club.

 

Anyway, Courtois signing a five year contract is excellent news.

Even though "Chelsea is" may be strictly correct in a grammatical sense, it doesn't feel or sound right at all. To take a couple of examples:

 

"Chelsea is the Pride Of London"

"Chelsea is back, Chelsea is back"

 

On the other hand, a phrase such as like "We are the Chelsea and we are the best", is both grammatically correct (we being plural) and sounds right. You could therefore argue that the plural inherent in "We are the Chelsea" is reflected in "Chelsea are back", or "Chelsea are the Pride Of London", the plural in the second case being the amalgum of fans, players, management, along with the various assets and so on that go to make up the entity that is Chelsea Football Club.

 

Anyway, Courtois signing a five year contract is excellent news.

 

Key to that is that you have removed 'Football Club' though.

 

Chelsea, as a word, isn't really as singular subject.  Chelsea FOotball Club is a singular subject

 

Chelsea Football Coub  is the Pride Of London"

"Chelsea Football Club is back,"

 

sounds absolutely correct whereas

 

Chelsea Football Club are the Pride Of London"

"Chelsea Football Club are back"

 

sounds incorrect.

 Ah yes

 

Key to that is that you have removed 'Football Club' though.

 

Chelsea, as a word, isn't really as singular subject.  Chelsea FOotball Club is a singular subject

 

Chelsea Football Coub  is the Pride Of London"

"Chelsea Football Club is back,"

 

sounds absolutely correct whereas

 

Chelsea Football Club are the Pride Of London"

"Chelsea Football Club are back"

 

sounds incorrect.

Ah yes but.

 

The word "Chelsea" in both of the examples I gave refers to Chelsea Football Club, or Chelsea FC, rather than Chelsea Clinton, Chelsea Handler or the Royal London Borough of Chelsea & Kensington. Granted that "Chelsea Football Club are" doesn't sound right, but then we're looking at sonics as much as grammatical semantics.

 

I'd go so far as to say that neither your viewpoint or mine is either completely right or completely wrong, because there's also the question of preference. I'd much rather club announcements to state that "Chelsea Football Club are... ", if only because it sounds that much better (to my ears) than "Chelsea Football Club is... "

Joining Alan Davies tonight on QI are or is that is?.

Joining Alan Davies tonight on QI are or is that is?.

As it happens, I'm just off to listen to a little delightfully ungrammatically correct Louis Jordan:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dt6-ArY-LcY

Joining Alan Davies tonight on QI are or is that is?.

 

are (assuming its more than one guest)

 

If you have a situation where the sentence has a singular and plural subject then the plural form is used if the closest subject to it in the sentence is the plural one.

 

i.e. you would say.  Either scousers or Brendan Rogers is full of sh*t.  or would say  Either Brendan Rogers  or scousers are full of sh*t.

are (assuming its more than one guest)

 

If you have a situation where the sentence has a singular and plural subject then the plural form is used if the closest subject to it in the sentence is the plural one.

 

i.e. you would say.  Either scousers or Brendan Rogers is full of sh*t.  or would say  Either Brendan Rogers  or scousers are full of sh*t.

Scousers are full of sh*t Loz. Rogers is a colossal twat.

Great news, I feared he would walk away from us if he's not getting a start this season. As for Cech, I thin he will get games in the cups. I feel he will be happy to ride out the rest of his career with us, he has nothing else to prove at club level.

Even though "Chelsea is" may be strictly correct in a grammatical sense, it doesn't feel or sound right at all. To take a couple of examples:

 

A football club name is a discretionary plural, like army or government, so is or are are both acceptable to use. Obviously in this country, it's much more commonplace to refer to a football club as a collective, us and them, hence Chelsea is playing tomorrow or it has won the FA Cup sound a bit odd.

A football club name is a discretionary plural, like army or government, so is or are are both acceptable to use. Obviously in this country, it's much more commonplace to refer to a football club as a collective, us and them, hence Chelsea is playing tomorrow or it has won the FA Cup sound a bit odd.

A "discretionary plural", eh. I knew I should have stuck to slagging off scousers!

Great news, I feared he would walk away from us if he's not getting a start this season. As for Cech, I thin he will get games in the cups. I feel he will be happy to ride out the rest of his career with us, he has nothing else to prove at club level.

Can’t agree with that.

Cech is a born winner, he isn’t the type to sit on a bench and not take part. He has 5-6 years left at the very top and he should be doing so in the starting 11.

Leaving my own selfish wishes aside I hope he goes on to be no 1 at another top club as this is what a man of his class and character deserves.

Can’t agree with that.

Cech is a born winner, he isn’t the type to sit on a bench and not take part. He has 5-6 years left at the very top and he should be doing so in the starting 11.

Leaving my own selfish wishes aside I hope he goes on to be no 1 at another top club as this is what a man of his class and character deserves.

 

He'd be a good fit for Real Madrid. I can see him going there next summer, or maybe in Jan.

He'd be a good fit for Real Madrid. I can see him going there next summer, or maybe in Jan.

Agreed.

If this was to happen I'd like Varne to be part of any deal, may aswel try to use what ever bargaining power we have.

Agreed.

If this was to happen I'd like Varne to be part of any deal, may aswel try to use what ever bargaining power we have.

 

Zouma - Varane sure would be fun to see in a few years.

A "discretionary plural", eh. I knew I should have stuck to slagging off scousers!

I wish you had, my head hurts now,    could not stand English at school Maths & History great, most other subjects ok ish.

He'd be a good fit for Real Madrid. I can see him going there next summer, or maybe in Jan.

Madrid have absolutely no need for a new keeper. Better for Cech to look elsewhere.

Unfortunately for him, most of the keeper positions at top clubs are quite firmly occupied.

Madrid have absolutely no need for a new keeper. Better for Cech to look elsewhere.

Unfortunately for him, most of the keeper positions at top clubs are quite firmly occupied.

No there not i would hate it but Liverpool would certainly buy him. Man U and Arsenal's keepers are not even close to Cech and they could well be sniffing about come January.

No there not i would hate it but Liverpool would certainly buy him. Man U and Arsenal's keepers are not even close to Cech and they could well be sniffing about come January.

 

Or City.

No there not i would hate it but Liverpool would certainly buy him. Man U and Arsenal's keepers are not even close to Cech and they could well be sniffing about come January.

DDG not even close to Cech? Cmon. No way that Arsenal, Utd or City buy him. Not PSG either. Could maybe see a team like Valencia

DDG not even close to Cech? Cmon. No way that Arsenal, Utd or City buy him. Not PSG either. Could maybe see a team like Valencia

You think De Gea is on a par with Cech your not serious?. De Gea is a good shot stopper but that's it. I never said that City would buy him and whether or not he would go to Arsenal he's better then there keeper. I've no idea who the P.S.G. keeper is but Cech is far to good for Valencia.