See what is coming? I'm neither a seer nor a prophet. Ivan was arsed yet made the EPL team of the year. Ramires and Mikel are back-up players unless they are sold they can't be replaced with another set of back-up players. JT looked his age last season? Are you serious?. Cesc was a Jose signing, Oscar was his preferred no10 as a better player was sold in his stead, Jose wanted it that way, surely you don't expect it to change less than a year after. Yes only a fool who believes the cheque book is the solution to everything could see that a team of champions (comfortably won the league) was badly in need of players.

The French league isn't a far weaker league as believed. Remember we and arsenal were knocked out by french teams in last year's champions league. And the french league like is serie A is known for its defensive football and ability to produce defenders.

Wince when do two teams make a league?

To write off statistics from Ligue 1 is plain foolish! And then to compare it as taking stats from a player in the championship is even more foolish. You only have to look at Utds signing of Martial to see that there is talent in the French league.

As ive said previously, its not lack of reinforcements that is the problem, its our style of play which the manager is accountable for.

To completely miss my point is idiotic, my point www stats don't tell a whole story. A player could have great stats in a team, it doesn't mean he's good enough for another.

No the club is responsible they were the ones negotiating

Wince when do two teams make a league?

Then when do City, Us, Arsenal and Utd make up ours?

Then when do City, Us, Arsenal and Utd make up ours?

They don't.

We have a far superior and stronger league than France.

Liverpool were challenging 2 seasons ago while Spurs are up there just now.

Chelsea

City

United

Arsenal

Liverpool

Spuds

All teams who have enough quality to get top 4.

The level below that you have teams like Everton who have players that bar PSG no one could afford in France.

Comparing stats from the most competitive league in European football to a two horse (well one now that Monaco have stopped spending) is laughable.

Things in here like the he's better than Cahill stuff is down right idiotic. papy has achieved nothing in football, he's been an unknown footballer at 26/7. Cahill was winning CL's and domestic trophies at that point.

Edited November 20, 201510 yr by Chelsbear

Thanks for answering that Chelsbear was better than I would have anyway.

Les Bleus seems to enjoy an argument or that's the way it seems to me.

They don't.

We have a far superior and stronger league than France.

Liverpool were challenging 2 seasons ago while Spurs are up there just now.

Chelsea

City

United

Arsenal

Liverpool

Spuds

All teams who have enough quality to get top 4.

The level below that you have teams like Everton who have players that bar PSG no one could afford in France.

Comparing stats from the most competitive league in European football to a two horse (well one now that Monaco have stopped spending) is laughable.

Things in here like the he's better than Cahill stuff is down right idiotic. papy has achieved nothing in football, he's been an unknown footballer at 26/7. Cahill was winning CL's and domestic trophies at that point.

They do. Lyon,Marseille, Bordeaux, St Etienne, Montpellier (not quite long ago did they win the league) compete in their league. Do exclude Liverpool and Spurs, there's a difference btw challenging for the title and challenging for european qualification.

Their league is a two horse just as ours is a four horse race. I don't see that as massive competition

Edited November 20, 201510 yr by lesblues

Thanks for answering that Chelsbear was better than I would have anyway.

Les Bleus seems to enjoy an argument or that's the way it seems to me.

Well its your opinion. If I disagree with a post, I object respectfully and if proven wrong I admit. Its a forum where discussions are held, isn't it? You and I have sometimes opposite ideas don't not mean I enjoy arguments (I could say you enjoy arguments also).

My stance is that Djilobodji is a bit of a nothing signing but to say signing Djilobodji and the transfer window is one of the main reasons for our poor form doesn't sit right with me. Yes we did need some reinforcements (a RB and a winger) and we also needed to replace players that were leaving, but our squad wasn't a massive issue and on paper it was one of the strongest squads in the BPL possibly behind Citys.

On the signings and replacements for outgoing members of the squad;

Begovic; A great piece of transfer business to replace a want away Cech with some one who isn't much of a downgrade was brilliant, the problem with this transfer is having to accept Cech leaving.

Baba; A positive and forward thinking move by the club as he is a very good LB at the age of 21 and could become great. So replacing a player who was barely playing, albeit top quality, shouldn't have been a risk despite how it turned out. We had a very settled back line going into this season and Baba should have had ample time to settle but the massive drop in form of Ivanovic meant we were struggle at a point were Baba was still getting up to speed, and this adds a bit of negativity to the transfer, despite being a potentially great long term signing.

 

Falcao; A punt if he returned to former glories it would have been a great bit of business however if it doesn't pay off he's 3rd choice striker and lets not romanticise Drogba he was shot at the end of the season and was barely moving on the pitch so despite Falcaos lack of involvement I would still see Falcao as an upgrade on Drogba. Also since Falcao was only brought in on a loan in a window where no really good strikers were available (Benteke, Rondon and Austin the main options) it meant we weren't financially tied down and allowing an extra seasons development for players like Bamford and Solanke to see if they become ready or giving more time for more Strikers to become available.

Djilobodji; A replacement for an outgoing youngster, so Christensen, Kalas or Ake could get some much needed loan experience rather than being held back at the club not gaining much first team experience. Signed not to be a vital cog in the squad but just there to fill up numbers in case of an injury crisis, I think he fits the bill perfectly. He isn't a replacement for the future retirement of Terry like Stones would have been but neither less he fits his role in the squad.        

Pedro; Most people were shouting out for a new winger to come in and increase the competition on the flanks and maybe even push Willian out of the side who a lot of people were underrating and some were questioning his quality. this was remedied by the signing of Pedro who was definitely an upgrade on Cuadrado and some people were so excited you would have thought we had signed Messi, however some lackluster performances and an injury have taken away the initial hype. This signing still however fits the brief.
(I see this more as a replacement for Moses in the squad rather than Cuadrado as I think Moses had taken Cuadrado's spot)

We also introduced Kenedy and Traore to the squad and Kenedy whilst young and raw has been given opportunities in the first team and is definitely adding something different, and looks a potential world beater. Traore hasn't been given much of an opportunity but adds depth i suppose.

This may not have been the massive reinforcements some people wanted and I personally thought the squad was crying out for a back up RB as I like to have 2 players for every position in the squad but with Ivanovic and Azpi both as of last season very highly rated RB's my guess is that Jose who likes small squads was content that this would be enough.

Another position people said was an area that needed quality reinforcements, was CM. With Mikel and Ramires the players in the firing line potentially needing upgrades, with people claiming players like Schneiderlin would have solved all our problems. but its a hard sell to players of that calibre who have multiple suitors to potentially come to us as a squad player, especially with a settled team and a manager that doesn't like rotating. So i don't necessarily think giving another season to these loyal players as a huge problem.

This may have not been a brilliant transfer window but it certainly hasn't a negative transfer window and definitely wasn't a transfer window that would cause a squad to implode over     
 

Edited November 20, 201510 yr by PedroMendez

They do. Lyon,Marseille, Bordeaux, St Etienne, Montpellier (not quite long ago did they win the league) compete in their league. Do exclude Liverpool and Spurs, there's a difference btw challenging for the title and challenging for european qualification.

Their league is a two horse just as ours is a four horse race. I don't see that as massive competition

If you think the French League is on par or close to the EPL then there is no point in me discussing this further as you are quite clearly not clued up on football at all.

Thanks for answering that Chelsbear was better than I would have anyway.

Les Bleus seems to enjoy an argument or that's the way it seems to me.

Yeah, I'm just going to ignore the posts from now on.

No point trying to debate with folk who are quite clearly at it and fail to use logic and reasoning in their responses.

Edited November 20, 201510 yr by Chelsbear

If you think the French League is on par or close to the EPL then there is no point in me discussing this further as you are quite clearly not clued up on football at all.

And you've all the 'clues' on football. I couldn't be arsed if you ignored my posts. If you can't come up with a decent post to object my view, that's your problem not mine.

Yeah, I'm just going to ignore the posts from now on.

No point trying to debate with folk who are quite clearly at it and fail to use logic and reasoning in their responses.

Of course you are clearly using logic and reasoning in your responses. What a bigot!

Well its your opinion. If I disagree with a post, I object respectfully and if proven wrong I admit. Its a forum where discussions are held, isn't it? You and I have sometimes opposite ideas don't not mean I enjoy arguments (I could say you enjoy arguments also).

Just seems you have an answer to everything even if it's complete bollocks. Seems like you don't like to be wrong.

Just seems you have an answer to everything even if it's complete bollocks. Seems like you don't like to be wrong.

I seem to have an answer to everything even if its complete bollocks? Well, why don't you then call me out on these bollocks?. I don't like to be wrong? Sorry but how do you know whatever I object is right? Anyways mate its your opinion. You have a right to it.

Edited November 20, 201510 yr by lesblues

I seem to have an answer to everything even if its complete bollocks? Well, why don't you then call me out on these bollocks?. I don't like to be wrong? Sorry but how do you know whatever I object is right? Anyways mate its your opinion. You have a right to it.

Like been wrong on what you said about the French League it's nowhere near the standard of the EPL. Chelsbear responded in depth and you just responded with even more bollocks.

Like been wrong on what you said about the French League it's nowhere near the standard of the EPL. Chelsbear responded in depth and you just responded with even more bollocks.

Pin-point what part of my post I said the french league is same standard as the EPL?. He said they don't compete as the league is a two horse race and highlighted 6 (with everton as an external force) teams in the EPL who challenge. I objected and said they do compete (Never said the competition is same as the EPL) and also gave examples of teams in the ligue 1 who compete. Its common knowledge the EPL is a four horse race. Yes the EPL is a richer, attracts more audience and has very rich owners who back their clubs financially doesn't mean we should dismiss other leagues as non-competitive because they don't have the might of our leading clubs.

Pin-point what part of my post I said the french league is same standard as the EPL?. He said they don't compete as the league is a two horse race and highlighted 6 (with everton as an external force) teams in the EPL who challenge. I objected and said they do compete (Never said the competition is same as the EPL) and also gave examples of teams in the ligue 1 who compete. Its common knowledge the EPL is a four horse race. Yes the EPL is a richer, attracts more audience and has very rich owners who back their clubs financially doesn't mean we should dismiss other leagues as non-competitive because they don't have the might of our leading clubs.

They do. Lyon,Marseille, Bordeaux, St Etienne, Montpellier (not quite long ago did they win the league) compete in their league. Do exclude Liverpool and Spurs, there's a difference btw challenging for the title and challenging for european qualification.

Their league is a two horse just as ours is a four horse race. I don't see that as massive competition

Basically what you're saying there is there isn't much difference. We're not merely talking about who the top teams are but point is a top team in our country play 20th and they can be in for a tough old game. Every year teabs like Stoke beat us, Arsensl, City on occasions that stuff barely happens in the French league. Playing in the EPL is a lot tougher than playing in Ligue 1. If I'm putting words in your mouth you re doing the same I and Chelsbear never said they were uncompetitive just that the standard of player isn't the same.

Edited November 20, 201510 yr by Bobbywoodhogan

They do. Lyon,Marseille, Bordeaux, St Etienne, Montpellier (not quite long ago did they win the league) compete in their league. Do exclude Liverpool and Spurs, there's a difference btw challenging for the title and challenging for european qualification.

Their league is a two horse just as ours is a four horse race. I don't see that as massive competition

Basically what you're saying there is there isn't much difference.

No. That's your interpretation.

We're not merely talking about who the top teams are but point is a top team in our country play 20th and they can be in for a tough old game. Every year teabs like Stoke beat us, Arsensl, City.

So PSG, Monaco and likes don't get drop points unexpectedly? They sure dont win all games all season.

On occasions that stuff barely happens in the French league. Playing in the EPL is a lot tougher than playing in Ligue 1.

1 Paris Saint Germain 38 24 11 3 83pts

2 Lyon 38 22 9 7 75pts

3 Monaco 38 20 11 7 71pts

4 Marseille 38 21 6 11 69pts

That was the ligue 1 table for 2014/2015.

Despite their dominance over other teams in the league, PSG had less points than we did in winning the league.

Like I said the standard and quality of the EPL supersedes the Ligue1.

If I'm putting words in your mouth you re doing the same I and Chelsbear never said they were uncompetitive just that the standard of player isn't the same.

Saying a league of 20 teams is a two horse race then meant what?

I respect yours posts enough not to call them bollocks even if I don't agree with it. If you don't agree with mine kindly ignore (As previously agreed). No longer posting on this discussion. Thanks.

Could you not see this coming from the end of last season? Ivan was arse most of last season along with Ramires and Mikel, JT was looking his age and Cesc and Oscar were blowing hot and cold too. Regardless of how much the squad costs even a fool could see reinforcements were required desperately.

You had us bottom half of the table before the season started? Hats off to you

Saying a league of 20 teams is a two horse race then meant what?

I respect yours posts enough not to call them bollocks even if I don't agree with it. If you don't agree with mine kindly ignore (As previously agreed). No longer posting on this discussion. Thanks.

What does that prove? Doesn't prove the calibre of player does it?

You had us bottom half of the table before the season started? Hats off to you

No, obviously you want your team to do well but the signs were there in the the throes of last season, maybe you forget the stonkin start we had, which basically won us the league,coz the last few games were not so memororable.

No, obviously you want your team to do well but the signs were there in the the throes of last season, maybe you forget the stonkin start we had, which basically won us the league,coz the last few games were not so memororable.

We didnt play so well second half I agree and I actually agree that you could see the signs. I thought we would fix throw problems but as soon as the window happened I knew we weren't going to retain the title. I wasn't expecting us to be this poor though, it's been a big shock to see us play as bad as we have especially given were the Champions.

We didnt play so well second half I agree and I actually agree that you could see the signs. I thought we would fix throw problems but as soon as the window happened I knew we weren't going to retain the title. I wasn't expecting us to be this poor though, it's been a big shock to see us play as bad as we have especially given were the Champions.

I agree 100%

No, obviously you want your team to do well but the signs were there in the the throes of last season, maybe you forget the stonkin start we had, which basically won us the league,coz the last few games were not so memororable.

As said before, I didnt think we would win the title again but I dont think anyone saw this level of suckitude coming. The signs were there we needed to change a few things, not play 8 new players.