3 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Aside from it being Roman's model of success since he bought us my suspicion is him breaking our transfer record for Lukaku he will expect a successful season in return, and I dont think finishing top 4 will cut it.

I did not know that. I bet Roman does and is likely less than happy about it.

Roman maybe ruthless but he's not stupid.

Apart from Jose the first time every sacking was fully deserved.

3 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Aside from it being Roman's model of success since he bought us my suspicion is him breaking our transfer record for Lukaku he will expect a successful season in return, and I dont think finishing top 4 will cut it.

I did not know that. I bet Roman does and is likely less than happy about it.

Roman maybe ruthless but he's not stupid.

Apart from Jose the first time every sacking was fully deserved.

3 minutes ago, Argo said:

Roman maybe ruthless but he's not stupid.

Apart from Jose the first time every sacking was fully deserved.

Really? Carlo deserved it? Not in my opinion.

4 minutes ago, Argo said:

Roman maybe ruthless but he's not stupid.

Apart from Jose the first time every sacking was fully deserved.

And ancelotti.

Speaking of Roman if it comes down to a choice do we believe he keeps his 100mill striker or a manager he probably will sack in a year anyways?

8 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Really? Carlo deserved it? Not in my opinion.

 

7 minutes ago, RomansRoubles said:

And ancelotti.

For me yes for these reason's. 

1. He was appointed as a UCL specialist and didn't even match our previous managers efforts in the competition.

2. The intensity in our play was totally shot, a problem that's reared it's head in every job he's had since (Bayern players did training sessions behind his back because they weren't being stimulated enough). At first his relaxed methods combined with the muscle memory from previous regimes hits a perfect sweetspot (even more so when his predecessors are intense managers like Mou and Pep) but after a while his team's start looking off the pace.

3. He had zero track record at the rebuild we badly needed at the time, and still doesn't.

4. He asked for Torres (Wilkins confirmed it).

2 minutes ago, Argo said:

 

For me yes for these reason's. 

1. He was appointed as a UCL specialist and didn't even match our previous managers efforts in the competition.

2. The intensity in our play was totally shot, a problem that's reared it's head in every job he's had since (Bayern players did training sessions behind his back because they weren't being stimulated enough). At first his relaxed methods combined with the muscle memory from previous regimes hits a perfect sweetspot (even more so when his predecessors are intense managers like Mou and Pep) but after a while his team's start looking off the pace.

3. He had zero track record at the rebuild we badly needed at the time, and still doesn't.

4. He asked for Torres (Wilkins confirmed it).

Those are fair points. However, he had to endure a lot of injuries in his 2nd season and still managed 2nd. Personally, I think he should have been given another season and see if he could improve us with a full squad.

3 minutes ago, Argo said:

 

For me yes for these reason's. 

1. He was appointed as a UCL specialist and didn't even match our previous managers efforts in the competition.

2. The intensity in our play was totally shot, a problem that's reared it's head in every job he's had since (Bayern players did training sessions behind his back because they weren't being stimulated enough). At first his relaxed methods combined with the muscle memory from previous regimes hits a perfect sweetspot (even more so when his predecessors are intense managers like Mou and Pep) but after a while his team's start looking off the pace.

3. He had zero track record at the rebuild we badly needed at the time, and still doesn't.

4. He asked for Torres (Wilkins confirmed it).

Fair points. Still think Carlo deserved better than he got, another season and not to be sacked as he was.

While the sackings in general were justified have to remembered was Roman who appointed AVB, Big Phil and still has Marina doing a poor job imo. His judgement is not always that great.

1 hour ago, RomansRoubles said:

Those are fair points. However, he had to endure a lot of injuries in his 2nd season and still managed 2nd. Personally, I think he should have been given another season and see if he could improve us with a full squad.

Based purely on results I would agree, but in my opinion it was a 2nd place finish like Jose's second place finish at United and their fans all desperately wished in hindsight they bit the bullet that summer.

I am delighted he's maintained a successful career since though, he's the only one out of our three title winning managers who hasn't shat on the club.

1 hour ago, axman2526 said:

Fair points. Still think Carlo deserved better than he got, another season and not to be sacked as he was.

The way it's done was awful no arguments there.

57 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Speaking of Roman if it comes down to a choice do we believe he keeps his 100mill striker or a manager he probably will sack in a year anyways?

The manager he WON’T sack in a year 😉

Just now, Dean said:

The manager he WON’T sack in a year 😉

🤣 yes we will see. Is not like I want him to, I like TT. Just Roman has sacked managers I liked before.

6 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

🤣 yes we will see. Is not like I want him to, I like TT. Just Roman has sacked managers I liked before.

I think the Roman model, if there is one, is: if something isn’t working, I have no qualms about making a change or reversing a bad decision. Most of the time in our lives, something (everything even) isn’t working but most of us don’t do anything about it.  I mentioned before Roman’s a trader in essence and a good one. As you say, he’s made mistakes/poor judgment calls before but what sets him apart is he usually knows when he has; unlike most people he has zero pride staked on his decisions and can hence reverse them without hesitating. Most people find this hard to do.
 

This mindset has certainly been a factor behind Chelsea’s success. But it wouldn’t have worked if he were a bad trader - if he held the bad hands and folded the good ones, or just got rid of good managers on a whim - and indeed he never would have got where he did like that. he has a good instinct for probability. If he’s going to make a change there has to be a decent likelihood of improvement. From that angle, I just don’t see what possible rationale he could have for getting rid of tuchel or siding with Lukaku vs Tuchel just because he spent all that money on L. It’s not how I think he thinks.  

18 minutes ago, Dean said:

I think the Roman model, if there is one, is: if something isn’t working, I have no qualms about making a change or reversing a bad decision. Most of the time in our lives, something (everything even) isn’t working but most of us don’t do anything about it.  I mentioned before Roman’s a trader in essence and a good one. As you say, he’s made mistakes/poor judgment calls before but what sets him apart is he usually knows when he has; unlike most people he has zero pride staked on his decisions and can hence reverse them without hesitating. Most people find this hard to do.
 

This mindset has certainly been a factor behind Chelsea’s success. But it wouldn’t have worked if he were a bad trader - if he held the bad hands and folded the good ones, or just got rid of good managers on a whim - and indeed he never would have got where he did like that. he has a good instinct for probability. If he’s going to make a change there has to be a decent likelihood of improvement. From that angle, I just don’t see what possible rationale he could have for getting rid of tuchel or siding with Lukaku vs Tuchel just because he spent all that money on L. It’s not how I think he thinks.  

Hope you are right. Would love TT to be our Pep and have no issues being proven wrong.

1 hour ago, axman2526 said:

Fair points. Still think Carlo deserved better than he got, another season and not to be sacked as he was.

While the sackings in general were justified have to remembered was Roman who appointed AVB, Big Phil and still has Marina doing a poor job imo. His judgement is not always that great.

Agree re Carlo. 

He won the double and then we lost Ballack, Deco, Carvalho, and Joe Cole, and replaced them with Ramires, and a bunch of kids from the youth team that were well off the level needed. 

We failed to get Neymar, Torres, and David Luiz over the line in August, and by tbe time the latter 2 came through the door on deadline day in January, the damage had already been both on the pitch, and off it with Wilkins.

Just another example of us failing to build on success by strengthening whilst on top. Its the main reasons even successful managers dont survive long here, and it has probably cost us 4 titles at least.

11 hours ago, Gem said:

Just adding another decision that Tuchel got right yesterday. Apologies if this thread, about Thomas Tuchel, is exclusively to how he’s managed the Lukaku situation.

Not at all, I just misunderstood you.

Why was it the right decision to leave CHO out? If I think too hard I might end up with a headache.

42 minutes ago, big blue said:

Agree re Carlo. 

He won the double and then we lost Ballack, Deco, Carvalho, and Joe Cole, and replaced them with Ramires, and a bunch of kids from the youth team that were well off the level needed. 

We failed to get Neymar, Torres, and David Luiz over the line in August, and by tbe time the latter 2 came through the door on deadline day in January, the damage had already been both on the pitch, and off it with Wilkins.

Just another example of us failing to build on success by strengthening whilst on top. Its the main reasons even successful managers dont survive long here, and it has probably cost us 4 titles at least.

which titles?

1 hour ago, Mário César said:

which titles?

Jose 06/07

Carlo 10/11

Jose 15/16

Conte 17/18

We went into all 4 of these as the best team in the country, but didnt do enough strengthen at all, and in Carlo, and Conte's cases, we actually weakened the team.

 

16 minutes ago, big blue said:

Jose 06/07

Carlo 10/11

Jose 15/16

Conte 17/18

We went into all 4 of these as the best team in the country, but didnt do enough strengthen at all, and in Carlo, and Conte's cases, we actually weakened the team.

 

Season 06/07 was OK, but 10/11 was a shame. Our squad was very weak and United that year dropp a lot of points... Even 15/16 we can easily won the title but we all know what happened in 3rd Mou Season....

17/18 no chance that we won that title. City conquer 100 points, but miss top4 was hard to the club and most of business that we made was catastrophic.

 

1 hour ago, big blue said:

Jose 06/07

Carlo 10/11

Jose 15/16

Conte 17/18

We went into all 4 of these as the best team in the country, but didnt do enough strengthen at all, and in Carlo, and Conte's cases, we actually weakened the team.

 

Not sure Jose 2006 can be put in that category. To sign Ballack, Cole and Sheva to build on back to back titles is about as big a statement of intent as is possible to make. We lost that title because Fergie had the two best young players in the world not named Messi who unfortunately had major breakthrough season's (in terms of furfilling their promise).

Regarding the others transfers they can only be an excuse to a point. If the managers are making constant and repetive tactical blunders as all three of them did then that's on them and only them.

Did the board ignore a young hungry and clearly ready Sturridge to keep playing a stagnant Anelka? Did the board keep playing Bosingwa? 

Did the board keep playing Ivanovic? Did the board flog Hazard to death despite the fact he was injured? Did the board do enough damage to justify Mou getting a free pass for a relegation battle?

Did the board keep playing a declining Cahill over Rudiger? Did the board do enough damage to justify Conte setting us up like San Marino at City? Did the board do enough damage to justify three goal defeats against all of Bournemouth, Watford and Newcastle?

It doesn't have to be one or the other, both board and manager can f**k up simultaneously.

3 hours ago, Argo said:

 

Not sure Jose 2006 can be put in that category. To sign Ballack, Cole and Sheva to build on back to back titles is about as big a statement of intent as is possible to make. We lost that title because Fergie had the two best young players in the world not named Messi who unfortunately had major breakthrough season's (in terms of furfilling their promise).

Regarding the others transfers they can only be an excuse to a point. If the managers are making constant and repetive tactical blunders as all three of them did then that's on them and only them.

Did the board ignore a young hungry and clearly ready Sturridge to keep playing a stagnant Anelka? Did the board keep playing Bosingwa? 

Did the board keep playing Ivanovic? Did the board flog Hazard to death despite the fact he was injured? Did the board do enough damage to justify Mou getting a free pass for a relegation battle?

Did the board keep playing a declining Cahill over Rudiger? Did the board do enough damage to justify Conte setting us up like San Marino at City? Did the board do enough damage to justify three goal defeats against all of Bournemouth, Watford and Newcastle?

It doesn't have to be one or the other, both board and manager can f**k up simultaneously.

In 2006-07 we also had to deal with losing Cech for most of the season due to that assault by that Reading a-hole. That had a massive effect on our season and led to us letting in a lot more goals than expected. I think with Cech we would have retained our title.

24 minutes ago, forbzy said:

In 2006-07 we also had to deal with losing Cech for most of the season due to that assault by that Reading a-hole. That had a massive effect on our season and led to us letting in a lot more goals than expected. I think with Cech we would have retained our title.

Stephen Hunt, how can I forget?

27 minutes ago, forbzy said:

In 2006-07 we also had to deal with losing Cech for most of the season due to that assault by that Reading a-hole. That had a massive effect on our season and led to us letting in a lot more goals than expected. I think with Cech we would have retained our title.

That's true but either way my main argument was it wasn't the transfer window that f**ked us on that occasion. At the time it was widely thought that secured our dominance for many more years.

Whoever expected a title in Conte's second season after we lost D.Costa and Matic was not realistic, 2 new players that need to be pretty much key players and that adapt to a new league. I don't know who expected a back to back PL title since it was known how much ups and downs our squad had back then you couldn't really say that it was going to be a good year.

Edited January 4, 20224 yr by Gol15

20 hours ago, strider6004 said:

It's been a while since we have seen both Kante and Kovacic playing together under Tuchel.

With both our FBs being injured made me wonder if this duo was chosen for their movement around the pitch in case either Alonso or Azpi got caught out being at the wrong end of the pitch.

Will be interesting to see if he persists with this pairing going forward or reverts to bringing back Jorginho.

Probably because jorgi need a break.

100% Tuchel will rotate. Kante is so important for us but he is very2 injury prone. So It is important to keep him healthy so he is ready for important matches, otherwise Kante is a nailed down starter.

10 hours ago, Gol15 said:

Whoever expected a title in Conte's second season after we lost D.Costa and Matic was not realistic, 2 new players that need to be pretty much key players and that adapt to a new league. I don't know who expected a back to back PL title since it was known how much ups and downs our squad had back then you couldn't really say that it was going to be a good year.

I don't blame him for losing the title.

Missing out on top 4 however was completely on him.