cam4blue

Members_2012
  • Content count

    1,685
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

About cam4blue

  • Rank
    CFCnet Member

Previous Fields

  • Team
    chelsea

Recent Profile Visitors

1,770 profile views
  1. I think fiddling about to justify a signing is lame. We spent £34m on a CB. We didn't have to. We had money. We spent money. We got a CB. That's it. If it looks good that David Luiz only cost us X overall, it would have looked even better if he's made us a £30m profit. Which was where we were a month ago. And the best part of that, was that PSG were the mugs, not us. Rate David Luiz, or don't. Doesn't matter. On that score, how he performs from now on is the only thing that matters. Justify your opinion with bass ackwards napkin math? Lame. We have a £34m CB. I hope he justifies the price tag. But one way or another, that is his price tag. TBF, if you had wanted to have a discussion on the topic, rather than apparently wanting a discussion on the literal definition of the word "refund"; I might be bothered. But as it is, no great loss.
  2. I apologise. I didn't realise you were autistic. I did not LITERALLY mean we gave them a refund. Well done for spotting it. What I meant was that they didn't want something they bought form us any more, so we took the something back and gave them most of their money back in return. I jokingly referred to that as a refund. We have paid £34m for David Luiz. We could have spend that money on something else, but we didn't. So "£34m on David Luiz" is a perfect picture of the business that has taken place, because it is exactly what we have done.
  3. ? We didn't have a debt owed to us. Even if we did, surely that suits PSG, and not us? It's basically a part refund on their crappy business at a point where his value is only going down.
  4. I don't know whether you can argue that Conte hasn't been fairly "negative" (as opposed to "attacking" or even "progressive"). I am surprised he is getting criticised for that. Nothing wrong with getting the fundamentals correct first. I have no problem with Plan A being a more negative (and positionally disciplined) version of what we've been doing for the last 5 years or so, with Plan B being a direct balls to the wall attacking 4-4-2 for the last 10 minutes or so. I'm surprised anyone would; especially as it has worked. If the criticism is that we should be going all-out attack from the get go; IMO it was that thinking (or the demand for that) that left us where we were last season (among other things, obviously). Similarly, I find it bizarre that people are countering that criticism by saying we've been really attacking. We haven't. TBF people were saying that before the criticism of Conte's "negativity" started; so I think it is just people seeing what they want to (or seeing what they thought they would).
  5. Unless you think you've replaced him with Pedro; who is basically Schurrle-Plus.
  6. Schurrle: he took a year off after winning the World Cup. Maybe he got a bit billy big bollox. Maybe he wanted to go home to Germany and be treated like a hero. But whatever, he didn't turn up for the 14/15 season. And he wasn't even particularly good to begin with. No-one would be talking about him if he hadn't been here. He's average. I will never understand the obsession some have with pining for old boys. It's almost like a hobby for some.
  7. I guess the first question is: do you really think that is limited to this forum? The second question is: do you really think it's an incorrect opinion?
  8. Somewhat baffled by this signing TBH. I desperately wanted to like Luiz first time round; he had so much talent, so much potential, and he's such a great character. You kept thinking he would put it all together and become a really top player, but he never did. He was the same when he left as when he arrived. The same moments of brilliance, and the same basic (and sometimes bizarre) errors. I sincerely hope he has improved during his time at PSG, but it worries me that a manager as astute as Emery has seemingly taken one look at him and said "not for me". He's in blue, he gets my support. Preconceptions go out the window and you judge him on what he does. But my instinct is that we're making a mistake, and we of all teams should know better. Genuinely hoping to be proven wrong.
  9. Certainly "better" on the ball than Ivanovic. He's clearly a failed (Beckham-esque) winger, rather than a natural defender. Crossing is incredibly low-percentage regardless though. Around 2-3 in 100 leads to a goal and around 1 in 5 find a team-mate. Even the best statistical crossers in the league last season (Arsenal) gave the ball away from around 70% of their crosses (And they have a guy who basically lives off crosses in Giroud; while we have Costa who doesn't really want that delivery at all). Ivanovic's attacking play is ugly, but it's surprisingly effective IMO. I think his attacking game is under-rated. Those that want something more aesthetically pleasing will definitely prefer Alonso, but I don't see him as a first choice starter in a back four for us. I said it before in the transfer thread, but we have probably gone for him because he's cover for other positions more so than an instant starter at LB. It's a lot of money for someone to give us "options", but it's (apparently) backing the manager; so you can't complain. Good luck to him. (Completely unrelated: Is there an active Luiz thread? The old one has been archived).
  10. Have to say I don't see Luiz as a particularly Conte type player either. He is all about positional discipline, and Luiz is very much a free-spirit. All of Conte's teams have defended "sensibly", get in front of the ball, make it hard for the attacker. Defend "properly" first and foremost. Luiz isn't that player at all. He likes a long-ball over the top, and Conte likes that too. Beyond that, I don't know. We'll have to see I guess. I think there is a reason this has been done so late. At best he was low down on the list; and TBH I doubt he was on the list at all. As for whether we have "backed" Conte; well, we have smashed our net spend of the last 3 years in one summer. Nearly doubled it. In that sense, we have backed him, and how. Whether we have given him what he needs is another matter. We've given him what we could, and you can't ask for that much more I guess. Whatever, a net spend of over £100m, our highest net spend in over a decade, expectations of him will be a lot higher now. A squad that was champions a little over a year ago, with over £100m extra spent on it? Conte will be expected to mount a genuine title challenge now. I would have liked the pressure on him to be a bit lower TBH.
  11. He may need games, but he doesn't need games in the Dutch league.
  12. He. Is. SLOW. And trust me. That's the right term.
  13. I'll remind you of this. He makes Bane look like Bolt.
  14. Kinda hope that Alonso story isn't true TBH. He may be cover for CB, CM, and possibly LW, but he'll find it hard to get games at LB; and that sorta defeats the point, especially at that price. Good on the ball (for a defender), slow as all hell, and doesn't defend particularly well. Maybe it's an improvement on Ake, Baba, etc; but I don't see clubs from other countries wasting (fairly big) money on very minor upgrades like that. I'd hate to see a left-side of defence made up of him and Terry. In fact, the most natural place in the team for him would probably be instead of Terry in games where we are going to see loads of the ball but set-up ultra-defensively anyway. I don't know. We'll see I guess. I agree. I think you just wouldn't play them together TBH. Stylistically very similar. And TBH, both have made a fan of me in a really short space of time.