• Current Donation Goals

Michael Tucker

Official: Chelsea Sign Tiemoue Bakayako

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Blue_In_Every_Way said:

Kind of reminds me of a much less athletic version of Ramires. Not yet entirely convinced to be honest.

Ouch. A much less athletic version of Ramires? I hope you are talking about the 2010-2013 version and not the one we saw from 2013 onwards. If that's the case then I'm surprised Baka can enter the pitch without his cane;) 

Think you are being incredibly harsh on Bakayoko. Imo he's already a much, much better player than Ramires ever was. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sleeping Dave said:

Ouch. A much less athletic version of Ramires? I hope you are talking about the 2010-2013 version and not the one we saw from 2013 onwards. If that's the case then I'm surprised Baka can enter the pitch without his cane;) 

Think you are being incredibly harsh on Bakayoko. Imo he's already a much, much better player than Ramires ever was. 

I don't know what it is about Ramires for you - a brilliant player for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Droy was my hero said:

I don't know what it is about Ramires for you - a brilliant player for us.

Let's not go there. It's been done to death over the years. 

Brilliant he wasn't though. He was acceptable for his first few seasons here but nowhere near the £25m player we paid for. 

Then he was just a liability that couldn't even succeed with basic 5 yard passes and was hardly able to cover his position in terms of running ability. For his last few seasons he added needless free-kicks and aggression which I suspect was borne out of frustration as he realised he wasn't quite good enough. 

But neither of us will change our mind on him. I've seen him live so many times and never, ever, was I impressed. He was even worse irl than when one watched him on the telly. For most players it's the opposite. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sleeping Dave said:

Let's not go there. It's been done to death over the years. 

Brilliant he wasn't though. He was acceptable for his first few seasons here but nowhere near the £25m player we paid for. 

Then he was just a liability that couldn't even succeed with basic 5 yard passes and was hardly able to cover his position in terms of running ability. For his last few seasons he added needless free-kicks and aggression which I suspect was borne out of frustration as he realised he wasn't quite good enough. 

But neither of us will change our mind on him. I've seen him live so many times and never, ever, was I impressed. He was even worse irl than when one watched him on the telly. For most players it's the opposite. 

fantasy stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Droy was my hero said:

fantasy stuff.

CFCnet's resident Tolkein writes.

Edited by Mark Kelly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mark Kelly said:

From CFCnet's resident Tolkein.

You are allowed to make a counter opinion alongside the insults.  Full marks to Dave for making it clear where he is coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sleeping Dave said:

Ouch. A much less athletic version of Ramires? I hope you are talking about the 2010-2013 version and not the one we saw from 2013 onwards. If that's the case then I'm surprised Baka can enter the pitch without his cane;) 

Think you are being incredibly harsh on Bakayoko. Imo he's already a much, much better player than Ramires ever was. 

Maybe I am a little harsh. Ramires covered a lot of ground at great speeds - it was his positioning and passing that maybe was crap overall. 

I guess I was expecting more of a Wanyama type than someone who might end up being a direct Matic replacement instead ( who wasnt my favourite midfielder I might add ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Droy was my hero said:

You are allowed to make a counter opinion alongside the insults.  Full marks to Dave for making it clear where he is coming from.

I agree with Dave . Is something only an insult when it's aimed at you or does claiming Dave's view was "fantasy" not count ?

Anyway , everyone loves Tolkien , you should be honoured .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

I agree with Dave . Is something only an insult when it's aimed at you or does claiming Dave's view was "fantasy" not count ?

Anyway , everyone loves Tolkien , you should be honoured .

I was given a copy of The Lord of the Rings in the late 60s. It remains unread to this day (and I've not seen the film/films either!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

I agree with Dave .

There - wasn't so hard - mind you I can see why you reluctant to put that on record.

51 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Is something only an insult when it's aimed at you or does claiming Dave's view was "fantasy" not count ?

Anyway , everyone loves Tolkien , you should be honoured .

I think I made my view on Ramires clear early on.
A bit like Bob, I thought Tolkien was a silly nerdy fad in the early 70s and have avoided the books and the films ever since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now