Michael Tucker

Root Admin
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Michael Tucker

  1. Ashley Cole

  2. Ashley Cole

    id="quote">Nilesh, you're way too bright not to see the irony in what you've just posted. And too aware not to identify the glaring discrepencies in both cases. You want to stick to the argument that everything Cole has done since being insulted in this terrible way, is justified by that one (that is, ONE) action, then fine, knock yourself out. Hopefully, if you say it often enough, you might even convince yourself.
  3. Ashley Cole

  4. Ashley Cole

    id="quote">No, Nilesh, no blind spot. Are you seriously telling me that a reduction of 5K a week (to an apparently insulting 55K-a-week) in a 'proposed' contract equates to Cole being treated badly by Arsenal? And therefore justifies everything he's done since? Sorry, but if that's the sum total of Arsenal's supposed abuse of Cole, then I remain mystified.
  5. Ashley Cole

    I really don't care one way or the other. He comes, that's fine because he's a good player. He doesn't, then that's fine too because we have Bridge and Gallas for this season. What nobody has explained though is exactly how Arsenal have "treated Cole badly". It's still a mystery to me, to be honest. Taking the Chelsea bias out of the equation for a moment - what in all this have Arsenal done to him? Cole attended a clandestine meeting with JM & PK, while still a contracted Arsenal player. Arsenal weren't best pleased at finding this out (did anyone expect them to be?). Arsenal blamed Chelsea for this (naturally enough), and were also critical of Cole's agent (naturally enough). They also indicated that they were disappointed with Cole's actions (hardly a surprise there, either). Did they back up Cole at the FA hearing? No, but why would they? Would Chelsea have backed him up if he'd been their player caught out in similar circumstances? Seriously doubt it. Then, Arsenal offered Cole a contract extension - which he signed. Rumour has it that at this time there was a verbal agreement that Arsenal would sell Cole for 16 mill, although we have no way of knowing if this is true, or not. All Arsenal have said since then is that Cole is an Arsenal player, and they weren't interested in selling him. Now, Chelsea have made an offer, and 'negotiations' are taking place. They've apparently placed a value on Cole that is more than 16 mill. Depending which papers you read, that figure is either 20 mill, 25 mill, or 30 mill. Chelsea have apparently offered less. Which is why no deal has been concluded at this time. Cole is still a contracted Arsenal player, and the club has taken the view that if they're going to lose a player they want to keep, especially to their arch rivals, then they want top dollar. Whilst naming Cole in their CL squad, they haven't actually selected him to play, which allows Chelsea to play him in Europe, if he signs. The latest comment from Wenger is that he wants the whole thing sorted out by the end of this week. Natural enough since if Cole does move, then he needs time to buy a replacement (Clichy is out injured). By comparison, Cole has 'written' a book roundly criticising Arsenal, parts of which have been conveniently 'blurbed' in the press. And (if you believe the press), he's gone to Dein to tell him that he doesn't want to play for Arsenal again Now I don't like Arsenal - and I like Wenger/Dein even less. But, I'm still perplexed as to how Arsenal have treated Cole badly in all of this. What do you think Chelsea would have done had Cole been their player, and he wanted to move to Arsenal in similar circumstances? Pretty much the same, would be my guess. And, we'd all be applauding our club for taking a hard line with the player, wouldn't we? Personally, I feel that we're prepared to run with the 'Arsenal have treated Cole badly' mantra because it makes us feel better about tapping up the player in the first place, and we want him at Chelsea. Repeating what Cole has had to say on the situation, and taking that at face value because it suits us to do so. Nothing more, nothing less, imo.
  6. Ashley Cole

    id="quote">These verbal contracts aren't worth the paper they're written on, are they?
  7. Ashley Cole

  8. Ashley Cole

  9. Ashley Cole

    id="quote">When we agree to pay them what they're asking for? Only a guess mind you.
  10. Ashley Cole

    id="quote">Chelsea are..........being awkward for the sake of it. Gallas has told them he wants to go and doesn't want to play for them. But they are treating him like crap and trying to delay and frustrate him and the club he wants to go to as much as possible. Gallas must be absolutely fuming. Sorry James, but the point should be obvious. Just because Cole has told Arsenal he wants to go is meaningless. Just like it is with Gallas. Cole is Arsenal's player, just the same as Gallas is Chelsea's player. If we're acting professionally with Gallas, then Arsenal are doing the same thing with Cole. The only thing different is the money involved.
  11. Salomon Kalou

  12. Ashley Cole

  13. Ashley Cole

    id="quote">In our case James, it's just about every time. Why? Because we always pay it. That's the point that you don't seem to grasp. If we walked away occasionally, we wouldn't be considered such a soft touch, and selling clubs would need to get a grip on reality. As I've said before, when a club like Arsenal make it known that they're prepared to sell a player at one price to all other clubs, but only at a much (much) higher price to Chelsea, then they're taking the p*ss out of us. You may think that goes with the territory, but I don't believe it has to. Yes, if we desperately need a certain player, and his current club really don't want to sell (to anyone) then fine, we have to fatten the pot. But that isn't the case here - quite the opposite in fact.
  14. Ashley Cole

    To tell the absolute truth James, I'm not really sure what Cole IS worth. If he joins and is a significant contributor to us moving to another level (CL for example), then I guess whatever we pay for him will be justified to a greater degree. Forgetting Carrick for the moment (because I think that United were really screwed there), I just can't see Cole being worth 3 times what we paid for Bridge, and almost 3 times what Zambrotta went for a few week's ago. To me, the difference between Bridge and Cole is minimal, and Zambrotta better than either. I'd imagine too, that if we moved for Chivu (who as we know can play two positions effectively), the fee would be around the 12 to 15 mill mark (just going by previously quoted figures). So, 25 to 30 mill for Cole just doesn't make much sense to me, even if we are Chelsea - and especially because Wenger/Arsenal know that they've already lost the player, and to date nobody else has come in for him that we know of. I think that we hold some aces here, but are going to fall for Arsenal's bluff (been watching too much poker recently). Clearly we can afford whatever they're asking, but I still think that they're taking the p*ss, and that's really the part I don't like.
  15. Ashley Cole

    id="quote"> That's what I mean...creeping up. "Cole is not worth 20-22 mill IMO." "I think anything more than around 20 million would be over-priced though - 25 mill would be too much." But now, "25 mill for Cole is acceptable." Is the change of heart solely due to the fact that Man Utd have grossly over-paid for Carrick? Because we all know that they have - and 18 mill is still 7 mill less than we're potentially talking here for Cole (which, by strange coincidence is pretty close to what we paid in total for Bridge). Or maybe, because you get the feeling that Kenyon might just be silly enough to agree to 25? Just interested, because I'm still having trouble swallowing 16 mill.........:) I'll agree though, that Cole IS a better player than Carrick!
  16. Ashley Cole

  17. Ashley Cole

    id="quote">We certainly agree on this one, James. And if there's an insurmountable problem with Gallas, then we have to forget Cole and move for someone like Chivu, who can play both centreback and left back. It's all getting very complicated, isn't it? We could of course, still buy Cole, and keep Huth.......er, no, forget I said that.........:)
  18. Ashley Cole

    id="quote">Clear, definitive statement. And you know this how? Let's wait and see....but I notice that you've begun stretching that upper limit James - getting closer to the magical 30 mill every time you post.........:)
  19. Ashley Cole

    id="quote">As Paul's already mentioned, it sounds pretty similar to Jose's comments directed at Gallas. And just as effective it seems, since Gallas hasn't turned up at training and Chelsea are expected to issue a statement later today.
  20. Didier Drogba

    Reading The Independent today, they seem to think that it's certain that Crespo will be going to Inter - probably by the end of the week. Not unexpected of course, but a pity all the same. Assume it'll probably come down to Inter offering some sort of transfer fee, which they've been reluctant to do before. Still, as Richard says, there's plenty of goals in the rest of the team, and maybe it'll provide the chance for Kalou to shine. I suppose that we're all also assuming that Jose will play 2 up front........:)
  21. Didier Drogba

    You could be right. If he stays, I wouldn't discount Crespo/Shevchanko either - they had a pretty useful & productive partnership not all that long ago. Will be interesting.
  22. Ashley Cole

  23. Ashley Cole

  24. Ashley Cole

  25. Ashley Cole

    id="quote">Well, you'd like to think it, anyway. And even if you're right, that's still 10 -15 million LESS than we're being expected to pay for Cole. Sorry, but I still don't get it. Zambrotta is a better, more versatile player than Cole. He's arguably the best left back AND right back going around. And, he can play (and does play often) in midfield. That's a pretty decent package, and cheap at the price. That he was actually sold for under 10 mill should start the alarm bells ringing, although it obviously isn't.