I remember I used to love internationals and England games, not sure what changed. 

Can't say I've sat down and watched an England game since the Euro's was on. I haven't watched one friendly since then, really don't have the patience to watch a bunch of pace merchants run with the ball and not know what to do with it. That's practically England right now. 

I'll definitely be up for the World Cup but that's about it, I'm not watching any matches before then and I'm getting sick of the international friendlies, isn't this the 3rd time we've broken up for one already? Wish they would hurry the f**k up and get this bollocks over and done with I miss the Premier League. 

Watched England last night.

Thought RLC was unlucky and had done ok until coming off - I see him going to the WC.

Tammy A. think this WC is too soon for him. 

Solanke though no longer one of ours looked talented in the few glimpses we saw. Would be surprised if he is not a big name within a couple of years.

Liked our back 3 though no CFC interest.

Encouraging to see Southgate blood these youngsters and still not lose to top opposition, will provide much needed competition within the squad.

Noticed Willian coming on late as a wide attacker, he looked lively and was having a brief yet interesting battle with Ashley Young.

 

 

 

Edited November 15, 20178 yr by Strider6003

I believe when we had Solanke and Abraham in the youth team, the general consensus was that Solanke was more talented, but Abraham had a better attitude, so will be interesting to see how their careers go.

The price of football.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41901398

The BBC Price of Football study has found that the majority of ticket prices have frozen or fallen for a third year - yet a poll of young adult football fans suggests the cost is still putting them off.

This year BBC Sport asked more than 200 clubs across the United Kingdom for information on ticket prices and found almost two thirds of price categories have been reduced or remained the same across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

In a separate poll, we asked 1,000 18 to 24-year-old fans living in Britain how they engage with football and four in five (82%) said the cost of tickets was an obstacle to them going to more matches.

The annual study found that 134 clubs out of 190 in England, Scotland and Wales offer reduced prices for teenagers and young adults - separate from any student concessions - but 55% of the fans we polled said they had stopped going completely or go to fewer games because it was too expensive.

Young adult fans can save, on average, £147.88 on season tickets in the English Premier League and Football League, while in the top four divisions in Scotland the average saving on a season ticket is £143.66.

• The young adult poll: Results in full

According to figures from the Premier League, young adult fans bought 4% of all season tickets this year, while a report in 2015 suggested the average age of an adult supporter in the Premier League was 41.

Rob Wilson, football finance expert at Sheffield Hallam University, says top clubs need to do more to attract young adults. "These fans are the next generation of season ticket holders but they have been brought up in a sanitised and expensive environment," he told BBC Sport.

"With this in mind, they are reluctant to pay so much to watch their teams play and these findings should act as a warning to the Premier League elite - they ignore this group of fans at their peril."

In a statement, the Premier League said: "Clubs engage with their fans in many ways and hugely appreciate their loyal and passionate support.

"For young fans specifically, all clubs offer concession prices, including discounted junior season tickets."

The online poll, conducted by ComRes, also showed young fans are more likely to engage with football by playing games on a console or PC (61%) than playing in a football team (37%).

More young football fans bet on football (44%) than play in a team (37%), but more fans play in a team than have a fantasy football team (33%).

Only one in four fans (26%) say they go to watch football live more than once a month.

Other findings:

• Two thirds (65%) of young football fans said the cost of travel was an obstacle to attending more football matches.
• Three quarters (74%) of young fans said they get their football news from social media - 24% from print newspapers.
• Three in five fans aged 18-24 go to a sport app or mobile site (59%) for football news while at least half access it via a TV results service (53%). 
• 70% of supporters agreed that football clubs did value their fans, but more than half of the teenagers and young adults (56%) said professional football was not run with them in mind.
• Similar numbers of football fans asked said they go to a football match at least once a week (11%), two to three times a month (15%) or five to 10 times a season (14%).
• One in six (16%) male football fans aged 18-24 said they go to a match at least once a week, compared to 7% of women in this group.

The picture across Britain

Of the top four leagues in England, 91% of clubs offer special prices for young adults, separate from any student concessions. The age ranges vary from 16-24 years old, with most targeting the 18-21 bracket.

The biggest discounts come in the Premier League, where an Arsenal member aged 16-19 can purchase a season ticket for £384 compared to the cheapest adult season ticket at £891 - a saving of £507.

Chelsea offer the biggest discount on single matchday tickets for their under 20s, who can pay £15.50 instead of £47 - a saving of £31.50.

But despite these discounts, 81% of the young adult football fans living in England who were polled say they feel the cost of tickets is stopping them from going to more matches.

In Scotland, 27 of the 42 clubs offer young adult discounts.

In the poll, 79% of fans say cost is an obstacle to them attending football matches.

A third of the clubs in the Welsh Premier League offer special discounts for young adults.

Of the young adults asked in Wales, 90% say the cost of tickets puts them off going to watch football.

Analysis and reaction

Rob Wilson, Football Finance Expert, Sheffield Hallam University:

E-sports are becoming big business and this is the next key challenge for clubs. How do you convert e-sport players into terrace-goers? Can you link the e-game to the actual one? How can mobile technologies support this at half time, for example? Moreover, the way that young fans consume information is changing - clubs need to engage fans much more effectively when it comes to social media.

We've seen big reductions in subscriptions to the pay TV platforms so it's unsurprising young people think twice about live football. There are also lots of options for young people to spend their leisure pound (the cinema, gym, university, cars etc) so football clubs need to work much harder to engage them. There is no magic bullet but they need to do more and communicate that more effectively. The long-term impact of young fans feeling priced out is yet to be truly felt.

Kevin Rowles, economics expert:

What we are seeing, especially with young people, is that incomes are being squeezed in real terms and this will lead to a decrease in demand, particularly as there are alternative leisure opportunities. The number of fans attending football will also respond to rise and fall in prices because of the price elasticity of demand for tickets.

Support for a team is often a matter of loyalty and hence lower prices may not attract many new fans. If young people find their finances are stretched, they may make a rational choice to follow a team by other means such as screened matches.

Young people tend to be in work but with the very slow growth in wages in the last 10 years, their income is lagging behind living costs. Real wages are not rising and young people are also saddled with student debt. Rent and utility bills have to be paid and they are rising faster than other prices.

Then, when you have to pay for food on top, it means things like sport and paying to watch football are not a priority.

Dr Rachel Andrew, clinical psychologist:

There are a number of different, interacting factors that play a part in young people's decision making. These factors are relevant to decisions made about leisure (and in particular football). These include factors such as: 1) temperament and personality and 2) past history - including childhood memories, parents' interests & values, and past teachers or peer influence.

However, there are some interesting trends around leisure also. Young people are drinking less. Young people are more thoughtful about what they want to do with their time and money. Superficially it looks like they have increased choice about what they may do, but in reality they also have less money and less time.

As a young person gets older, it often becomes more important to make decisions that will not alienate them from a social group of friends when compared to decisions that their parents may not like or may be unhealthy.

I am not surprised young people are engaging with football online through videos/fantasy football and probably through social media & apps too - as this is a trend we are seeing across the board with leisure.

I feel sad and disappointed that young people are playing less football as there are so many physical and mental health benefits to this. It is sad that the big drive to increase football in schools is not having a long-term effect once children leave school.

Do you still go to games?

Do you attend football matches regularly? If so, what keeps you coming back? Or if you don't, what stops you from going? Get in touch using this link.

 

Pretty much agree with everything here except for Willian, what a bizarre decision, we've had plenty of great midfielders to be put in that position, Essien, Ballack, Fabregas 

11 minutes ago, Slojo said:

 

Pretty much agree with everything here except for Willian, what a bizarre decision, we've had plenty of great midfielders to be put in that position, Essien, Ballack, Fabregas 

Must have been a typo. I don't follow the logic there unless Ray is trolling Essien or Ballack

9 minutes ago, TheChelseaBlues said:

Must have been a typo. I don't follow the logic there unless Ray is trolling Essien or Ballack

No idea, Wilkins does say some crazy next level sh*t at times though 

1 hour ago, Slojo said:

 

Pretty much agree with everything here except for Willian, what a bizarre decision, we've had plenty of great midfielders to be put in that position, Essien, Ballack, Fabregas 

Kante for me. With him and Maka we’d never concede again and Frank could concentrate on doing what Frank does...

5 hours ago, Slojo said:

 

Pretty much agree with everything here except for Willian, what a bizarre decision, we've had plenty of great midfielders to be put in that position, Essien, Ballack, Fabregas 

What's worse is that he does not even play that position. 

5 hours ago, Munkworth said:

Kante for me. With him and Maka we’d never concede again and Frank could concentrate on doing what Frank does...

I imagine Lamps would have had zero worries playing ahead of those two. 

Here's a thought, would you rather have those 3, Frank, Maka and Kante, RIGHT NOW in the center or the likes of whoever WBA, Everton and West Ham have trotting out? 

48 minutes ago, TheChelseaBlues said:

I imagine Lamps would have had zero worries playing ahead of those two. 

Here's a thought, would you rather have those 3, Frank, Maka and Kante, RIGHT NOW in the center or the likes of whoever WBA, Everton and West Ham have trotting out? 

No way, they wouldn't physically be able to cope with the demands of the PL at their age and would be overrawed by any top flight midfield even with Kante's help. Lamps was struggling a lot by the time he left us, imagine him now? Gary Neville summed up the physical decline of a footballer when talking about his own,he was best RB ever in the PL yet come the end he was getting roasted by even the worst wingers in this league, he got so bad he had to retire mid season.

3 hours ago, Argo said:

No way, they wouldn't physically be able to cope with the demands of the PL at their age and would be overrawed by any top flight midfield even with Kante's help. Lamps was struggling a lot by the time he left us, imagine him now? Gary Neville summed up the physical decline of a footballer when talking about his own,he was best RB ever in the PL yet come the end he was getting roasted by even the worst wingers in this league, he got so bad he had to retire mid season.

Agree about Lamps and Maka.

Just disagree about lamps towards the end of his chelsea career. He had to play as a DM, a totally alien role to him. Along with him we had Rambo/Mikel in a midfield 2. We sorely needed a proper DM. Judging him on his last 2 seasons is a bit unfair as the situation and the players around him were not anywhere near world class (while we are the subject, I loved rambo).

An unhappy manager.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42014099

8 hours ago, didierforever said:

Agree about Lamps and Maka.

Just disagree about lamps towards the end of his chelsea career. He had to play as a DM, a totally alien role to him. Along with him we had Rambo/Mikel in a midfield 2. We sorely needed a proper DM. Judging him on his last 2 seasons is a bit unfair as the situation and the players around him were not anywhere near world class (while we are the subject, I loved rambo).

I felt he struggled in the last four season's truth be told. He still had his moment's because of his talent but far too many games passed him by even before the move to the pivot.

Couldn't think of anywhere else to put this. An increase in the number of games to be televised starting in season 2019-2020. Looks like there will be games played on a Saturday night. A 5.30pm kick-off is bad enough. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42022871

A minimum of 190 Premier League games will be televised live in Britain from the start of the 2019-20 season.

Premier League chairmen voted unanimously for the package, with the rights set to go out to auction before Christmas.

A new package of Saturday night games is likely to be offered to broadcasters, along with more midweek and Bank Holiday matches.

There will be a minimum of 22 additional live games on offer.

The new contracts will replace the record £5.136bn deal struck with Sky and BT Sport in 2015.

That three-season agreement represented a 70% increase on the previous £3bn deal, and involved 168 games being shown each season at an average cost to the broadcasters of £10.2m per match.

Sky paid £4.176bn to show 126 matches, including the first Friday evening games and both Sunday packages, and BT paid £960m for 42 games.

Fans' group the Football Supporters' Federation said it was "firmly opposed" to any increase beyond 190 live games - half the Premier League's total fixtures.

A statement read: "Any additional broadcast games would mean even more changes to kick-off times away from 3pm on Saturdays, with an impact of both uncertainty and inconvenience to the match-going fans, especially away fans, whose passion is a huge component of the 'product' that broadcasters want to buy and sell.

"Particularly in the event of a new Saturday evening TV slot being created, we urge clubs and broadcasters to give due consideration to issues of geography and travel, and to invest some of the huge broadcast revenues into supporting the attendance and contribution of match-going fans, especially away fans."

Analysis: Strictly v Saturday night football?

The next Premier League deal will likely herald an even greater battle for the remote control in households across the country.

That's because of the looming Saturday night prime-time clash between live top-flight football and big shows such as Strictly Come Dancing and X Factor.

But where will fans watch? Sky and BT will without doubt be in the mix once again for the bundles of games on offer.

The other X Factor in this tender process could be the big US tech companies such as Amazon and Apple. They are increasingly showing an appetite for live sports rights, as demonstrated by Amazon's recent deal for US Open tennis.

The industry speculation is that this tender process may have come too soon for the internet giants to make any major splash. It could, however, provide a taste for what lies ahead for both the Premier League and supporters.

Ladies and gentlemen, Roman Burki.

https://streamable.com/gu0j1

16 hours ago, Boyne said:

An unhappy manager.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42014099

I don't know the context but I liked it, I can't stand the media, but sadly outbursts like that play right in their hands. 

I felt he struggled in the last four season's truth be told. He still had his moment's because of his talent but far too many games passed him by even before the move to the pivot.

Lampard is a god amongst men 10/10 commitment to the badge every game

6 hours ago, Boyne said:

Couldn't think of anywhere else to put this. An increase in the number of games to be televised starting in season 2019-2020. Looks like there will be games played on a Saturday night. A 5.30pm kick-off is bad enough. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42022871

A minimum of 190 Premier League games will be televised live in Britain from the start of the 2019-20 season.

Premier League chairmen voted unanimously for the package, with the rights set to go out to auction before Christmas.

A new package of Saturday night games is likely to be offered to broadcasters, along with more midweek and Bank Holiday matches.

There will be a minimum of 22 additional live games on offer.

The new contracts will replace the record £5.136bn deal struck with Sky and BT Sport in 2015.

That three-season agreement represented a 70% increase on the previous £3bn deal, and involved 168 games being shown each season at an average cost to the broadcasters of £10.2m per match.

Sky paid £4.176bn to show 126 matches, including the first Friday evening games and both Sunday packages, and BT paid £960m for 42 games.

Fans' group the Football Supporters' Federation said it was "firmly opposed" to any increase beyond 190 live games - half the Premier League's total fixtures.

A statement read: "Any additional broadcast games would mean even more changes to kick-off times away from 3pm on Saturdays, with an impact of both uncertainty and inconvenience to the match-going fans, especially away fans, whose passion is a huge component of the 'product' that broadcasters want to buy and sell.

"Particularly in the event of a new Saturday evening TV slot being created, we urge clubs and broadcasters to give due consideration to issues of geography and travel, and to invest some of the huge broadcast revenues into supporting the attendance and contribution of match-going fans, especially away fans."

Analysis: Strictly v Saturday night football?

The next Premier League deal will likely herald an even greater battle for the remote control in households across the country.

That's because of the looming Saturday night prime-time clash between live top-flight football and big shows such as Strictly Come Dancing and X Factor.

But where will fans watch? Sky and BT will without doubt be in the mix once again for the bundles of games on offer.

The other X Factor in this tender process could be the big US tech companies such as Amazon and Apple. They are increasingly showing an appetite for live sports rights, as demonstrated by Amazon's recent deal for US Open tennis.

The industry speculation is that this tender process may have come too soon for the internet giants to make any major splash. It could, however, provide a taste for what lies ahead for both the Premier League and supporters.

They should ask the NFL how ratings are when you saturate the market and expect fans to tune in because it's there. 

On 11/16/2017 at 20:18, Slojo said:

 

Pretty much agree with everything here except for Willian, what a bizarre decision, we've had plenty of great midfielders to be put in that position, Essien, Ballack, Fabregas 

I don't agree with Robben, Makelele, Willian and maybe even Carvalho too. If it's the decade, then it goes back to 2007. Robben wasn't even at the club at this point 10 years ago, he had already left for Real Madrid. Makelele was into his last season for the club and Carvalho wasn't quite as good from 2007 to 2010 for us, still good, but not as good as his first 3 season's.

I would pick Cahill in front of Carvalho, Cahill has been a regular for the seven season's he has been at the club and won 6 trophies, including 2 European trophies and 2 Premier League trophies. No CB other than Terry can say they have done that at the club.

Kante would be ahead of Makelele. He may have been here only one full season so far, but i think he was more impressive during that season than any other defensive midfielder has been for us in the last 10 years.

I don't know how Ray Wilkins can include Willian as a CM, he's never even played there, it's either Ballack or Fabregas. For now, i think Ballack just edges it. If Fabregas wins one more major trophy with us playing as a regular, then he has to take the position. Essien misses out because 2007 was the point where he started picking up serious injuries. He wasn't the same for us from that point.

RW is hard to pick. We have had decent players play there but none of them have made the position their own. Willian probably get's it because he has played there more than any other player for us over the last 10 years.

25 minutes ago, Scott Harris said:

I don't agree with Robben, Makelele, Willian and maybe even Carvalho too. If it's the decade, then it goes back to 2007. Robben wasn't even at the club at this point 10 years ago, he had already left for Real Madrid. Makelele was into his last season for the club and Carvalho wasn't quite as good from 2007 to 2010 for us, still good, but not as good as his first 3 season's.

I would pick Cahill in front of Carvalho, Cahill has been a regular for the seven season's he has been at the club and won 6 trophies, including 2 European trophies and 2 Premier League trophies. No CB other than Terry can say they have done that at the club.

Kante would be ahead of Makelele. He may have been here only one full season so far, but i think he was more impressive during that season than any other defensive midfielder has been for us in the last 10 years.

I don't know how Ray Wilkins can include Willian as a CM, he's never even played there, it's either Ballack or Fabregas. For now, i think Ballack just edges it. If Fabregas wins one more major trophy with us playing as a regular, then he has to take the position. Essien misses out because 2007 was the point where he started picking up serious injuries. He wasn't the same for us from that point.

RW is hard to pick. We have had decent players play there but none of them have made the position their own. Willian probably get's it because he has played there more than any other player for us over the last 10 years.

I think it's in terms of the players they were, so Robben post-Chelsea would get into that Chelsea side. The likes of KDB wouldn't, maybe not yet but definitely has potential (sadly) 

And Scott I think you're a great poster and a good guy but Cahill ahead of Carvalho? Not a chance in my eyes. Kante arguably ahead of Makalele yes, I can't see Kante getting worse and he's not even old he's in his mid 20's. Essien was got worse with his knee injuries, he was awesome when we first signed him then after his first knee injury he was still a good player but after the one under Carlo he was a shadow of that player, never returned to his form before 2010 but still packed some great performances before-hand. 

I know what you're saying about Cahill, he's been a champion for this club and always deserves respect but he's only been consistent at a top level for one season, that was the title-winning season under Mou, although he was very good before then also. Besides that, I don't think he's been a consistent top performer, not by Carvalho & Terry standards. Don't forget we did have a big blip 2012-2013 & 2015, I wouldn't class those performances top level, we were never in the spotlight, we were under scrutiny not pressure. 

2 hours ago, TheChelseaBlues said:

They should ask the NFL how ratings are when you saturate the market and expect fans to tune in because it's there. 

I'm not 100% on American sports but hasn't NBA recently overtaken NFL? NFL was one of the largest growing sports and it has recently taken massive backlashes over the years I've been reading. 

I don't agree with Robben, Makelele, Willian and maybe even Carvalho too. If it's the decade, then it goes back to 2007. Robben wasn't even at the club at this point 10 years ago, he had already left for Real Madrid. Makelele was into his last season for the club and Carvalho wasn't quite as good from 2007 to 2010 for us, still good, but not as good as his first 3 season's.
I would pick Cahill in front of Carvalho, Cahill has been a regular for the seven season's he has been at the club and won 6 trophies, including 2 European trophies and 2 Premier League trophies. No CB other than Terry can say they have done that at the club.
Kante would be ahead of Makelele. He may have been here only one full season so far, but i think he was more impressive during that season than any other defensive midfielder has been for us in the last 10 years.
I don't know how Ray Wilkins can include Willian as a CM, he's never even played there, it's either Ballack or Fabregas. For now, i think Ballack just edges it. If Fabregas wins one more major trophy with us playing as a regular, then he has to take the position. Essien misses out because 2007 was the point where he started picking up serious injuries. He wasn't the same for us from that point.
RW is hard to pick. We have had decent players play there but none of them have made the position their own. Willian probably get's it because he has played there more than any other player for us over the last 10 years.

Bruhhhhhhh Cahill over Ricky

No


Just no!

Willian over Essien in that position is absolutely baffling.

I'd also be tempted with Kanté over Makelele. But it's a close call.