• Current Donation Goals

CFCnet Admin

Media / Press

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, bert19 said:

when he left Chelsea (arguably in what should have been his prime years)

I'd argue with that.  He was 29 the August he arrived at Arsenal.  33 when he got to Spurs for 3 more years.  He played PL football as long as JT, and yet unlike JT he had a lot of pace to lose as he aged.  For someone of his pace, his prime was certainly before 30.

10 minutes ago, bert19 said:

Longer term, Gallas suffered (won nothing after leaving) and Chelsea thrived.

Really?  We didn't win the league again till 4 years later when Gallas would have been 32 and lacking his pace.
We didn't win the prem till 2012.  We might have won it in between had Gallas stayed.  
His immediate replacements was Boulahrouz, and then Alex.  Meanwhile Ferreira faded and Cavalho was injury prone.  Only in 2008 did Ivanovic emerge to make a difference.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paulw66   
1 hour ago, bert19 said:

I think the fact Gallas played for an Arsenal team that won nothing followed by a Europa league level Spurs team when he left Chelsea (arguably in what should have been his prime years) shows the answer here.  If he'd ever got close to matching the form he had here, he'd have been at a much bigger, better club before long.  

Short-term, Chelsea suffered from the loss of Gallas because we were short at centre-half.  Longer term, Gallas suffered (won nothing after leaving) and Chelsea thrived.  With the World's best left-back in the team.  Chelsea and Ashley Cole thrived off one another.  Gallas's decline began when he left and ironically, he'd have been massively important that season had he stayed.

Agree with all of this, bar the bolded bit. For a player that had great pace, his prime was always going to be mid 20s. He got slower and worse after departing. 

But yes, in 2006/07 we needed Gallas far more than we need Cole. 

54 minutes ago, Droy was my hero said:

I'd argue with that.  He was 29 the August he arrived at Arsenal.  33 when he got to Spurs for 3 more years.  He played PL football as long as JT, and yet unlike JT he had a lot of pace to lose as he aged.  For someone of his pace, his prime was certainly before 30.

Really?  We didn't win the league again till 4 years later when Gallas would have been 32 and lacking his pace.
We didn't win the prem till 2012.  We might have won it in between had Gallas stayed.  
His immediate replacements was Boulahrouz, and then Alex.  Meanwhile Ferreira faded and Cavalho was injury prone.  Only in 2008 did Ivanovic emerge to make a difference.  

 

I have no doubt we would have won one of the league titles between 2007 and 2009 with Gallas (or another top CB) in the squad.

what is most annoying is that back in 2006, we had so much financial clout, we should have been able to keep Gallas and buy Cole, which is what we should have done.  

Share this post


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

 

Really?  We didn't win the league again till 4 years later when Gallas would have been 32 and lacking his pace.
We didn't win the prem till .....2010 or the CL till ......2012.  We might have won it in between had Gallas stayed.  
His immediate replacements was Boulahrouz, and then Alex.  Meanwhile Ferreira faded and Cavalho was injury prone.  Only in 2008 did Ivanovic emerge to make a difference.  

What I should have written.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

I'd argue with that.  He was 29 the August he arrived at Arsenal.  33 when he got to Spurs for 3 more years.  He played PL football as long as JT, and yet unlike JT he had a lot of pace to lose as he aged.  For someone of his pace, his prime was certainly before 30.

Really?  We didn't win the league again till 4 years later when Gallas would have been 32 and lacking his pace.
We didn't win the prem till 2012.  We might have won it in between had Gallas stayed.  
His immediate replacements was Boulahrouz, and then Alex.  Meanwhile Ferreira faded and Cavalho was injury prone.  Only in 2008 did Ivanovic emerge to make a difference.  

 

Ivan didn't really emerge till 2009 on that unforgettable night up at Anfield. He'd spent a year kicking his heels on the sidelines before then. He never looked back.

I agree with those above who say we'd have won more had we held on to Gallas. He really was phenomenal for us and I can fully understand why José rates him so highly. It really annoyed me that we let him go over what appeared to be a pay issue, with Gallas feeling very undervalued in that squad, and with good reason.

But most players who leave Chelsea rarely go on to bigger and better things (KdB and Salah being notable exceptions), and I know Gallas has been open in stating his regrets. His career went downhill fast after his glory years with us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paulw66   
1 hour ago, Backbiter said:

Ivan didn't really emerge till 2009 on that unforgettable night up at Anfield. He'd spent a year kicking his heels on the sidelines before then. He never looked back.

I agree with those above who say we'd have won more had we held on to Gallas. He really was phenomenal for us and I can fully understand why José rates him so highly. It really annoyed me that we let him go over what appeared to be a pay issue, with Gallas feeling very undervalued in that squad, and with good reason.

But most players who leave Chelsea rarely go on to bigger and better things (KdB and Salah being notable exceptions), and I know Gallas has been open in stating his regrets. His career went downhill fast after his glory years with us.

and even they took a long route round to get there. 

Share this post


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

Ivan didn't really emerge till 2009 on that unforgettable night up at Anfield. He'd spent a year kicking his heels on the sidelines before then. He never looked back.

 

Yes - I was thinking the08/09 season, but wasn't sure when.
It was a weird time, we had Ferreira, Bosingwa, Belletti and Ivanovic, all of them primarily RBs.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

Yes - I was thinking the08/09 season, but wasn't sure when.
It was a weird time, we had Ferreira, Bosingwa, Belletti and Ivanovic, all of them primarily RBs.
 

Well during that time we had Grant and Scolari. With Grant there are strong suggestions he didn't have that much control on the squad and that the core players (Cech, Terry, Balack, Lampard, Drogba) were essentially picking the team. With Scolari Bane was hardly his type of player. 

One of my biggest 'what ifs' for Chelsea actually comes from Bane's exclusion. That is, what would've happened in the CL 08 final if he had played instead of Essien at RB? Personally, I don't think he would've allowed that Ronaldo to get to his header. 

Further, he would've had that surprise element he did at Anfield. I don't think  Utd would've put either Ferdinand or Vidic on him. 

Edited by King Kante

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, King Kante said:

Well during that time we had Grant and Scolari. With Grant there are strong suggestions he didn't have that much control on the squad and that the core players (Cech, Terry, Balack, Lampard, Drogba) were essentially picking the team. With Scolari Bane was hardly his type of player. 

There was always an immense amount of Bollox talked about Grant.  Why anyone would take any of it seriously I don't know.  Ditto all the other managers we have had.  Grant was competent enough, there is no common sense reason to think that player power took over running the team.  Only that there was some feedback to RA about player unease.

Share this post


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

There was always an immense amount of Bollox talked about Grant.  Why anyone would take any of it seriously I don't know.  Ditto all the other managers we have had.  Grant was competent enough, there is no common sense reason to think that player power took over running the team.  Only that there was some feedback to RA about player unease.

My impression...repeat..impression was.... not so much the players picked the team as ..with AVB as well....the senior players pretty much organised the game day approach to the games rather than following the pregame/touchline instructions......the problem of course was weak football management...or so it appears in my memory...happy to be shown to be wrong but was how I saw it back then>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, chara said:

My impression...repeat..impression was.... not so much the players picked the team as ..with AVB as well....the senior players pretty much organised the game day approach to the games rather than following the pregame/touchline instructions......the problem of course was weak football management...or so it appears in my memory...happy to be shown to be wrong but was how I saw it back then>

Yeah, I sort mispoke when saying, the players picked the team. I meant this. I mean, even Kenyon was on record saying this about Grant: 

"That season underpinned where we as an organisation had got to. I think the manager had some input; I have to say I think the organisation had a greater input."

Edited by King Kante

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