It's quite simple.

Give us your verdict!

Under the circumstances, Im starting with a YES.

NO...ignore the politics and keep it just to football and we have paid money to make our defence worse and our rivals stronger

I think in all honestly, both Arsenal and Chelsea are better off for this deal. It was a win-win..........

Gallas probably never would have played for Chelsea again anyway. He was bringing down team morale and would have walked away at the end of the season for nothing. At least this way we got something out of him, namely Ashley Cole, who may also be a difficult player but at least he wants to play for Chelsea. A.Cole is also a few years younger than Gallas.

Arsenal on the other also managed to berid themselves of a difficult player who also was unlikely to ever play for them again and get a quality signing in return with a few million pounds to boot.

At the end of day, i'd say at best, both clubs won and at worst, neither club lost anything.

NO...ignore the politics and keep it just to football and we have paid money to make our defence worse and our rivals stronger

Absolutely - you summed it up perfectly, Brit

We got the worse deal.

We let one of the best central defenders in the world go to our major rivals and got a full back in return (and a real c*nt of one at that). We even paid them for it.

I'm FIRMLY in the no camp.

Lets not forget that this whole saga also includes Bridge who must now be feeling pretty bad.

It's gonna take me ages to get over this saga and feel the same about the club.

Absolutely NO.

We have given our rivals our best defender (bar JT, of course!) and left ourselves with the dodgy Carvalho .

We have gained a good defender (I can admit that) but, in turn, are wasting the other brilliant England defender, Wayne Bridge.

sorry but ashley cole is probably the worlds best left back.

gallas was COVER. COVER

No, not a good deal.

This sucks for Bridge.

it doesnt suck THAT badly - we cant play in four competitions with ONE left back can we?!

sorry but ashley cole is probably the worlds best left back.

gallas was COVER. COVER

No, Gallas is the world's best centre back. He also just so happended to be able to cover at full back (left or right).

Pretty useful player to have really!!!

bloody hell its all coming out now!

gallas being the worlds best centre back is a little blue-tinted isnt it?

and you have to remember for US he was cover. he was not our starting CB. we (whether you think it was right or not) used him as a utility defender.

i voted yes. because id rather have an excellent player who wants to be here rather than an excellent player who doesnt. its as simple as that. and i agree with billyg, its a bit over the top saying hes the best cb in world. hes an excellent cb, but can be replaced.

If the deal had been done with a foreign team that was not competing with us on an equalish level than I would have been happier.....

to strengthen a main rivals team is madness and althoughAC is a great left back we only needed a covering left back as Wayne is well up to the job.

the fact Gallas never would have played for us and if he did then his heart would not have been in it makes it easier but the fault in my mind lies with Jose for playing Riccy (who I do rate) ahead of Willie far to often which started all this.

If the deal had been done with a foreign team that was not competing with us on an equalish level than I would have been happier.....

to strengthen a main rivals team is madness and althoughAC is a great left back we only needed a covering left back as Wayne is well up to the job.

I agree with all of that.

the fact Gallas never would have played for us and if he did then his heart would not have been in it makes it easier but the fault in my mind lies with Jose for playing Riccy (who I do rate) ahead of Willie far to often which started all this.

I disagree with this. I think that Jose would have played Gallas and Terry more often if it hadn't been for the fact that Bridge got injured and Del Horno turned out ot be useless. I know that he also played him at right back on occassion too but I still think that if we had had two fit and in form full backs then Gallas would have been first choice alongside Terry.

Gallas turned out to be a whinging git and I don't think playing him at centre back all day every day would have changed anything.

bloody hell its all coming out now!

gallas being the worlds best centre back is a little blue-tinted isnt it?

and you have to remember for US he was cover. he was not our starting CB. we (whether you think it was right or not) used him as a utility defender.

Perhaps I should rephrase it - getting carried away by the emotion of it all!!

Can't recall Gallas & Carvalho being paired too often so not sure of any stats. What I do know is that JT & Carvalho is nowhere near as good as JT & Gallas. JT never looks as good a defender as he does when alongside Gallas - even for England be it Rio, Campbell or Carragher.

Gallas complimented JT and vice versa so well and they were the best central pairing I've ever seen play - bar none.

It will be interesting to see how JT copes this season, as although I know Carvalho played a lot last season, more often than not, Willy was still playing at full back and he covered for their lack of pace - he always read situations so well.

We've lost a lot more than we've gained.

i voted yes, because its a great piece of buisness.. chelsea have the two best left backs in the world, there styles of play are very similar thus ensuring if one of them gets injured or suspended means chelsea dont have to shuffle arround with the formation, also we picked him up for ?5million!! and to top it all of we got rid of gallas who would of gone for free at the end of the summer.

and to sum up how great this buisness deal was.. chelsea offered ?16million which got rejected, arsenal wanted ?20million, so they must of rated a player with just 10months of his contract left at over ?14million thats a 8million profit from when we signed him 5 seasons ago!

i voted yes, because its a great piece of buisness.. chelsea have the two best left backs in the world, there styles of play are very similar thus ensuring if one of them gets injured or suspended means chelsea dont have to shuffle arround with the formation, also we picked him up for ?5million!! and to top it all of we got rid of gallas who would of gone for free at the end of the summer.

All of that is assuming Bridge stays with us, which to me seems unlikely now. And why should he stay to sit on the bench? He's too talented for that. The only uplifting part of the deal is the fact we only parted with ?5m cash in the end.

sorry but ashley cole is probably the worlds best left back.

gallas was COVER. COVER

True Le'Arse have lost their (and Englands) starting leftback while Chelsea have lost the worlds best reserve team player. What a lot of people don't seem to understand is that Willie was never going to play for Chelsea again. Our defense is better now, but so is the Arse's so it's a 1-1 draw in my book.

We got the English twat and they got the French twat.

Just glad it's over 8)

i voted yes, because its a great piece of buisness.. chelsea have the two best left backs in the world, there styles of play are very similar thus ensuring if one of them gets injured or suspended means chelsea dont have to shuffle arround with the formation

The two best left backs in the world ? Don?t you think you overrate A.Cole and especially Bridge a bit ? We got more then we gave them, that?s right because Gallas wouldn?t have played for Chelsea this season and would be off for nothing next year. BUT We solved Arsenals center back problem, and gave them a brilliant defender. Not a good deal at all, but we should look forward at all.

How can you answer a question that is giving 2 options with a 'yes' or a 'no'?

Would you like a beer or an orange juice?

Yes.

I also voted yes.

My main reasons are as follows:

1. i realy don't think Gallas was ever going to sign a new contract with the club (even if we offered ?100,000 a week, the centre half starting position every week, and an old brass every Saturday night) thus i couldn't see him playing for us again.

2. Why would we keep a player in our dressing rooms that could lower the morale of the squad.

3. Arsenal were asking for ?25mil for A Cole and wouldn't budge, (even though we supposidly offered ?20mil for him last week) so in all we got ?20mil for a 29yr player with less then a year left on his contract, and payed only ?5mil for the best left back in world football.

How can you answer a question that is giving 2 options with a 'yes' or a 'no'?

Would you like a beer or an orange juice?

Yes.

Good answer.

Back to this thread, the main question is 'Do you think it was a good bit of business?

I have suggested a yes or a no option for you, however you can add your own answers! That's the beauty of it!

Sure, the poll might not be set up perfectly Val, but surely you can grasp the idea of it?

If Bridge had already left and we only had Elmer at left back, or perhaps if Bridge was a few years younger like Glen Johnson, this deal would make a bit more sense. But lets face it Bridge will not accept being a cover player at this stage of his career when he would start at most other clubs in the premier league. I expect him to leave at the next available opportunity. We will then be forced to buy another player at left back or revert to playing Ferreira there again. We don't even have the luxury of playing Gallas there any more.

We have also just sold (in my opinion) our best center back pairing for John Terry. With Huth also leaving we now only have 1 player as cover in that position (Boularouz) before we are left with untried youngsters like Mancienne.

For a team that is supposedly going for both Premier League and Champions League this is paper thin cover and I'm amazed we are taking such a risk.

We have also just sold (in my opinion) our best center back pairing for John Terry. With Huth also leaving we now only have 1 player as cover in that position (Boularouz) before we are left with untried youngsters like Mancienne. .

Maybe Jose has alot of faith in Mancienne. I have seen the youngster on more then one occation, and i think he has all the attributes of being a very good player.