DANGERCLOSE
Member
- Location
- London
- Country
England
England
Lets hope he is right
What about your Chelsea mates? Remember, at West Ham he replaced Kilman
England
old school Chels friend of mine really rates him.What about your Chelsea mates? Remember, at West Ham he replaced Kilman
Scotland
A cardboard cutout would've looked better than him.What about your Chelsea mates? Remember, at West Ham he replaced Kilman
England
England
Accountancy jiggery pokery of some sort I suspect.From your comments he seems an upgrade on Lacroix or else about the same.
Accordingly, what is the rationale for Chelsea?
England
England
28. How much are we paying? 30 million? And no resale value? I'm not a fan of these signings we are making for big bucks and potentially no resale.
England
Andy Jacobs on talksport used to refer to him as disaster, but he did look good for West Hamold school Chels friend of mine really rates him.
in general, he knows his stuff.
im well in favour of this.
England
Yet he was once seen as a good signing at £40 million on a very long contract.A cardboard cutout would've looked better than him.
England
Especially after he played like Bobby Moore when they won 2-0 at Selhurst the season before last!!Yet he was once seen as a good signing at £40 million on a very long contract.
England
Chelsea has had quite a number of these though, so no real guide to quality.Yet he was once seen as a good signing at £40 million on a very long contract.
It's a reasonable summary.If he wants to come then this should have been negotiated at the same time as Lacroix.
So what's the delay? Club or player?
If Chelsea are playing hard ball then why did we agree to sell Lacroix?
If the player is hoping for something better then I don't want him. The Palace model should be players who want to play for the club, not players who have decided to settle for second best. (That's Everton and West Ham) 😀
England
England