10 minutes ago, timetowaste said:

Well if anything this is the most together I’ve seen the Chelsea fan base in years 😂

Let's hope we have the same level of unity in the dressing room !

Said it before and I will say it again - if there is the slightest of chances of a Lukaku - Kane swap, I would instantly take it. Conte loves him, he loves Conte, now Lukaku has thrown this bombshell, let's see if Conte reacts to this. All I know is Conte would absolutely love to work with him again, just give him a call and let's find out. 

4 minutes ago, petre ispirescu said:

Said it before and I will say it again - if there is the slightest of chances of a Lukaku - Kane swap, I would instantly take it. Conte loves him, he loves Conte, now Lukaku has thrown this bombshell, let's see if Conte reacts to this. All I know is Conte would absolutely love to work with him again, just give him a call and let's find out. 

Not even Conte would do that deal.

4 hours ago, Munkworth said:

That is actually funny. This is a character / scene from a Belgian kids show. Very suitable. 😂

Pretty much what this entire thing is. 

10 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

So in others words, she was responsible for paying £98m for Lukaku, and giving him a salary of £325K a week. And also agreeing the £4.3M loan fee and £198K a week for Saul. And £71m fee for Kepa, on a 7 year contract, and £155K a week wages. And £272K a week for Timo Werner :-) 

QED !

I'm not sure how true these figures are but that's beside the point. Your initial post was critical her in relation to us scouting and identifying the right transfer targets and I don't think that's her job. As for fees/wages, it's all relative and should be hudged on case by case basis. Anyway, let's not hijack the thread.

 

Looks like he needs to flirt harder. 

 

 

Edited December 31, 20214 yr by Night-T
Link didnt link

Extremely disappointed with this. This is arguably the dumbest interview I've ever seen. Can't believe he is talking about some professionalism, while he is being as professional as an average Sunday league player. If you ask me sell him ASAP. We don't need this kind of attitude. Hopefully Thomas is going to react.

Don't forget Tammy had to leave because of this man...

Edited December 31, 20214 yr by wizardous

19 minutes ago, Night-T said:

That is actually funny. This is a character / scene from a Belgian kids show. Very suitable. 😂

Pretty much what this entire thing is. 

Yes I knew all of that and it wasn’t a complete coincidence at all…

17 minutes ago, Night-T said:

Looks like he needs to flirt harder. 

 

 

17 minutes ago, wizardous said:

Extremely disappointed with this. This is arguably the dumbest interview I've ever seen. Can't believe he is talking about some professionalism, while he is being as professional as an average Sunday league player. If you ask me sell him ASAP. We don't need this kind of attitude. Hopefully Thomas is going to react.

Don't forget Tammy had to leave because of this man...

It's not like Tammy would have been a 20 goal a season striker for us anyway. He's pretty good, but he's nowhere near world class. I don't know what options we would have honestly. Lukaku could be gone in summer if our board aren't happy and can sell for a good price. Who the hell do we buy? I would have liked Vardy, but we've missed the boat on him. 

2 minutes ago, enigma said:

It's not like Tammy would have been a 20 goal a season striker for us anyway. He's pretty good, but he's nowhere near world class. I don't know what options we would have honestly. Lukaku could be gone in summer if our board aren't happy and can sell for a good price. Who the hell do we buy? I would have liked Vardy, but we've missed the boat on him. 

Well we can't blame the board to be fair. Signing Lukaku was a sensible and logical decision at the time, no one could've predicted that it would turn out this way. Especially because he said he loved this club many times.

As for Tammy, should I mention that he is only 24, and he's managed to score 15 goals in his first full PL season under Lamps? 

1 hour ago, abramovich said:

To be fair, I don't think it's Marina's job to scout and identify our transfer targets. She's in charge of negotiating transfer deals and contracts, as far as I can tell.

If not Marina then who? The managers have a say but they come and go on a regular basis so who takes responsibility for all the poor transfer decisions in recent times? Roman?

19 minutes ago, wizardous said:

Well we can't blame the board to be fair. Signing Lukaku was a sensible and logical decision at the time, no one could've predicted that it would turn out this way. Especially because he said he loved this club many times.

As for Tammy, should I mention that he is only 24, and he's managed to score 15 goals in his first full PL season under Lamps? 

Yeah but he's not a striker who will dominate games unfortunately. 

18 minutes ago, wizardous said:

Well we can't blame the board to be fair. Signing Lukaku was a sensible and logical decision at the time, no one could've predicted that it would turn out this way. Especially because he said he loved this club many times.

As for Tammy, should I mention that he is only 24, and he's managed to score 15 goals in his first full PL season under Lamps? 

It wasn't though, anyone who's researched Lukaku's career would have seen all this coming from ghosting the big games to gobbing off once he had to start fighting for his place.

There's a reason Belgium haven't managed to get even to a final yet and there's most certainly a reason his only piece of silverware post Anderlect is a Conte orchestrated title. He's an absolute liablitly in clutch moment as we're unfortuently going to find out and then some this coming month.

13 minutes ago, forbzy said:

If not Marina then who? The managers have a say but they come and go on a regular basis so who takes responsibility for all the poor transfer decisions in recent times? Roman?

We have a committee made up of the manager, Chief Scout, Cech & a couple others. This Lukaku signing is clearly on Tuchel though, Lukaku has alluded to the fact he had conversations with him before signing. If the manager wasn’t convinced, he wouldn’t have sanctioned the move.

I think this comes with signing big players, and that is why some top managers don’t like big name, big money signings. You want to biggest voice in the dressing room, not a player who can be a poor influence on the dressing room.

I'm pretty sure Lukaku's interview has given the Chelsea board all the motivation needed to go all out for Haaland next season. 😁

Just now, Argo said:

It wasn't though, anyone who's researched Lukaku's career would have seen all this coming from ghosting the big games to gobbing off once he had to start fighting for his place.

There's a reason Belgium haven't managed to get even to a final yet and there's most certainly a reason his only piece of silverware post Anderlect is a Conte orchestrated title. He's an absolute liablitly in clutch moment as we're unfortuently going to find out and then some this coming month.

Surely there are people involved in the decision making process who would know these risks though? Although Tuchel spoke positively about Rom I was never convinced he was a player that would have been chosen by our manager based on his system. Rom's comments suggest that the feeling was mutual. So in fact was this more of a signing made by the board (another square peg in round hole)? If we hadn't brought in Rom I don't remember too many other great options at the time. We certainly could have convinced Tammy to stay on for another season and maybe invested the money elsewhere e.g. defensive reinforcements for the players who are coming to end of contracts.

18 minutes ago, forbzy said:

If not Marina then who? The managers have a say but they come and go on a regular basis so who takes responsibility for all the poor transfer decisions in recent times? Roman?

I think it's more of a collective effort, nowadays it's probably probably Cech, Tuchel and his staff, the board, Roman and whoever is our chief scout. Marina definitely decides what's viable and what's not financially but I doubt she is picking what players we're going after.

3 minutes ago, abramovich said:

I think it's more of a collective effort, nowadays it's probably probably Cech, Tuchel and his staff, the board, Roman and whoever is our chief scout. Marina definitely decides what's viable and what's not financially but I doubt she is picking what players we're going after.

Right. And this system would be fine if managers lasted for a decent amount of time e.g. 4-5 years or more. But when they are changing every year or 2 we are continually left with the remains of failed signings from the previous few managers. While the turnover has often resulted in short term success, perhaps that is one reason why we cannot break this cycle. For example lets say Tuchel is shown the door in the next half year, the next manager would presumably have to find a way to make Lukaku, Werner, Havertz, Pulisic etc. work (assuming we don't decide to cut our losses on some of them), and they in turn would probably want to bring in 1 or 2 players of their own. And so the cycle continues... 

12 minutes ago, forbzy said:

Surely there are people involved in the decision making process who would know these risks though? Although Tuchel spoke positively about Rom I was never convinced he was a player that would have been chosen by our manager based on his system. Rom's comments suggest that the feeling was mutual. So in fact was this more of a signing made by the board (another square peg in round hole)? If we hadn't brought in Rom I don't remember too many other great options at the time. We certainly could have convinced Tammy to stay on for another season and maybe invested the money elsewhere e.g. defensive reinforcements for the players who are coming to end of contracts.

Yep we could/should have literally kept Tammy or even Oli if we wanted a different option to the system players.

It was an unbelievably poorly thought out signing..

1 hour ago, Sexyfootball said:

Who do we replace him with if we were to sell him at the end of the season, even assuming we would have a buyer ?

Bring back Tammy, who at least has huge genuine feeling for the club ?

Put some faith in Broja ?

Not sure I have much confidence in our scouting network sourcing a suitable replacement, considering the meagre returns we have seen from the expensively assembled cohort of Pulisic, Werner, Havertz and Ziyech. Certainly seem to have been some glaring holes in our process of recruitment for Lukaku ... throwing money around like confetti obscuring any real motivation of the player to want to be here for starters ! 

Perhaps it is time for the rest of the board to properly trust Petr Cech's judgement on football matters, and quit pussying around with the job titles and make him the proper DoF ?

Far from convinced that Marina is the boardroom genius that people think she is ...

She isn't. She is an expert negotiator, probably the best. Our scouting team, whoever that is, needs to do better. 

3 minutes ago, forbzy said:

Right. And this system would be fine if managers lasted for a decent amount of time e.g. 4-5 years or more. But when they are changing every year or 2 we are continually left with the remains of failed signings from the previous few managers. While the turnover has often resulted in short term success, perhaps that is one reason why we cannot break this cycle. For example lets say Tuchel is shown the door in the next half year, the next manager would presumably have to find a way to make Lukaku, Werner, Havertz, Pulisic etc. work (assuming we don't decide to cut our losses on some of them), and they in turn would probably want to bring in 1 or 2 players of their own. And so the cycle continues... 

I can't really disagree with anything you said here.

6 minutes ago, Argo said:

Yep we could/should have literally kept Tammy or even Oli if we wanted a different option to the system players.

It was an unbelievably poorly thought out signing..

Tuchel didn't even consider Tammy and Giroud was tired of being ignored as well. I feel that if only Tuchel managed to get Hakimi that we wouldn't be in such a mess right now, sure Lukaku will score goals against smaller teams but our whole system won't last with Chilwell and James out.

6 minutes ago, forbzy said:

Right. And this system would be fine if managers lasted for a decent amount of time e.g. 4-5 years or more. But when they are changing every year or 2 we are continually left with the remains of failed signings from the previous few managers. While the turnover has often resulted in short term success, perhaps that is one reason why we cannot break this cycle. For example lets say Tuchel is shown the door in the next half year, the next manager would presumably have to find a way to make Lukaku, Werner, Havertz, Pulisic etc. work (assuming we don't decide to cut our losses on some of them), and they in turn would probably want to bring in 1 or 2 players of their own. And so the cycle continues... 

That is why most big clubs employ a football director who is responsible for these decisions. Take Bayern for example; Salihamidzic is the football director, and in his 4 year stint they have had 4 managers. Any manager coming in has to follow his vision, and work with what they are given.

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

Tuchel didn't even consider Tammy 

Exactly, which made going for a striker of a similar mould all the more baffling.