Eden Hazard | "I am signing for Chelsea"

Status
Not open for further replies.
KingMinger22 said:
Sky Sports News saying "it is our understanding that Hazard will choose United" - again.


Bold statement. I think it's interesting that Kagawa is keeping quiet and its not announced yet though its looking inevitable - both to be paraded on the same day? ;)
Click to expand...

Link?
 
Zen said:
They would probably all play, but not like that. Nani right wing, Valencia right back, Hazard on the left, you have him and Rooney centre behind Welbeck, they'll run into eachother.

3412 if you want Nani on the left though, entirely possible again since we have like 6 CB's right now.
Click to expand...

Valencia and Nani both defend well. I would put them on opposite sides, regardless of whether Valencia would be further back of not.
 
Zen said:
They would probably all play, but not like that. Nani right wing, Valencia right back, Hazard on the left, you have him and Rooney centre behind Welbeck, they'll run into eachother.

3412 if you want Nani on the left though, entirely possible again since we have like 6 CB's right now.
Click to expand...

so

Welbeck
-----Rooney

Hazard-------------------Nani
Kagawa------Carrick

Evra------Smalling-----Vidic------Valencia

De Gea​


Very un-Italien :) I like it.
 
gulli_G said:
that would be too weak in opposition counter attacks
Click to expand...

How so, because Valencia is playing RWB?

Also, lest not forget this is a muppet thread.

Why of why can't we have a Kermit smiley?
Kermit.png
 
Colin129 said:
Yesterday there was a long argument about Nani not being able to defend like Young can & thus his position would be under pressure if Hazard comes.
Click to expand...

I disagree, I think Nani can put in a shift. But I think Young is more of a United type winger that Nani, often running at high pace, where as Nani is "trickier".

Courses for horses.
 
_________________De Gea

Valencia___Thiago Silva__Vidic____Evra

Nani____Schweinsteiger___Kagawa___Hazard

__________Rooney_______Lewandowski

:drool::drool::drool:
 
gormless said:
And Premier League titles. Chelsea looked like they were going to dominate for years; how isn't that attractive to players? City, to a lot of people, look like they could do the same. Essien had the chance to go to Madrid as well if I remember, who were at the end of their ridiculous galactico period and didn't look too hot.
Click to expand...

And, amazingly, United have won more titles than Chelsea since then. Looking at your posts it sounds like United are a lost case and we won't win anything in the next decade. If anything we're more likely to keep winning major trophies than City and Chelsea.
 
Sarni said:
And, amazingly, United have won more titles than Chelsea since then. Looking at your posts it sounds like United are a lost case and we won't win anything in the next decade.
Click to expand...

Which shows that players lack foresight when making decisions. They'll choose the playground with shinier, newer, more fashionable toys.
 
Guybrush Threepwood said:
You really believe that? Essien went to Chelsea because:

a) Chelsea outbid everyone by a good margin
b) Chelsea offered him big wages.

I'd say point a) was the main factor in Essien's transfer.
Click to expand...

"Chelsea are the only team I wish to play for. I have heard the Lyon president saying other clubs from the English Premiership are interested in signing me, including Arsenal and Manchester United, but I have no desire to play for anyone else other than Chelsea.
"I will not go to another club, even Real Madrid. Chelsea want me and I want to play for them. That is why I am so disappointed with the situation.


"I have made my choice. I want to go to Chelsea." 16 july 05

Lyon President: "Essien is a bit mixed-up. Manchester United are after the player as well." 1st August 05.

So long before Chelsea had outbid anybody or discussed wages with him, he wanted to go there.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/c/chelsea/4152512.stm
 
Siorac said:
Which shows that players lack foresight when making decisions. They'll choose the playground with shinier, newer, more fashionable toys.
Click to expand...

No, it only shows that he's wrong. Players will pick City and Chelsea if they're offered significantly more money by them, which is often the case to be completely ones. When they're offered the same they'll pick United 9 times out of 10 simply because we're a better club.
 
gormless said:
"Chelsea are the only team I wish to play for. I have heard the Lyon president saying other clubs from the English Premiership are interested in signing me, including Arsenal and Manchester United, but I have no desire to play for anyone else other than Chelsea.
"I will not go to another club, even Real Madrid. Chelsea want me and I want to play for them. That is why I am so disappointed with the situation.


"I have made my choice. I want to go to Chelsea." 16 july 05

Lyon President: "Essien is a bit mixed-up. Manchester United are after the player as well." 1st August 05.

So long before Chelsea had outbid anybody or discussed wages with him, he wanted to go there.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/c/chelsea/4152512.stm
Click to expand...

Do you really believe that he hadn't had any discussions with Chelsea prior to that? He knew well what they could offer and picked them. Besides we were some way behind them at the time - they walked the league the season before while we finished 3rd with some disappointing performances. It's not the case anymore, we're a much better team than them and as good as City.
 
Bryan_Munich said:
I think he'll choose Chelsea.
Click to expand...

I think he won't. Out of all three clubs they have very little going for them. The pull of London might be one of those things but other than that why would anyone decide to go there over United and City who are both much better?
 
Sarni said:
No, it only shows that he's wrong. Players will pick City and Chelsea if they're offered significantly more money by them, which is often the case to be completely ones. When they're offered the same they'll pick United 9 times out of 10 simply because we're a better club.
Click to expand...

The fact that we won more titles than Chelsea does not mean that in 2005 Essien could not have believed that Chelsea were going to be a dominant force.

Even if we are a better club, a player might see that differently. If the money's the same, he'll look at where he'll have better chance of success. It's not unreasonable to think that players might gravitate towards clubs that splash the cash around like it's going out of fashion. And not just because of the wages they can earn but because they might think that the club will sign more top players to put together a really great team. The lure of star signings is probably greater for a player than history.
 
Sarni said:
Do you really believe that he hadn't had any discussions with Chelsea prior to that? He knew well what they could offer and picked them. Besides we were some way behind them at the time - they walked the league the season before while we finished 3rd with some disappointing performances. It's not the case anymore, we're a much better team than them and as good as City.
Click to expand...

I think City are better. And they have the potential to get a hell of a lot better at any given time due to the money they have. And I'm talking mainly about City here at the moment, I agree we're more attractive than Chelsea right now
 
I'd actually be astound if he goes to Chelsea. City, I can see. Chelsea don't even have a manager. If you're thinking about your progress, how can you join a club that doesn't have a manager to map out his plans for you?
 
Rooney--Welbeck
Kagawa-----Hazard-----Nani
Carrick--Jones
Young-Vidic-Smalling-Valencia​

America. feck yeah.
 
gormless said:
I think City are better. And they have the potential to get a hell of a lot better at any given time due to the money they have. And I'm talking mainly about City here at the moment, I agree we're more attractive than Chelsea right now
Click to expand...

fecking 'ell you're depressing.

And you no doubt said the same things about Chelsea a few years back.
 
What the feck do you need a goalkeeper for if you win matches by outscoring the opposition?

At any rate, you can just drop the six deepest player from that formation onto the line anyway, where they would probably be, as a unit, better than any goalkeeper alive.
 
Guybrush Threepwood said:
fecking 'ell you're depressing.

And you no doubt said the same things about Chelsea a few years back.
Click to expand...

What you have to understand is we don't say City will be the dominant force of English football - only that Hazard might think so, considering the money they have and that they've just won the Premier League.

It's not a very difficult concept.
 
Siorac said:
What you have to understand is we don't say City will be the dominant force of English football - only that Hazard might think so, considering the money they have and that they've just won the Premier League.

It's not a very difficult concept.
Click to expand...

No Siorac, what he said was:

I think City are better. And they have the potential to get a hell of a lot better at any given time due to the money they have.

So stop talking out of your bum hole.
 
Siorac said:
What you have to understand is we don't say City will be the dominant force of English football - only that Hazard might think so, considering the money they have and that they've just won the Premier League.

It's not a very difficult concept.
Click to expand...

City won it allright, but only by goaldifference. I think with our history and standards, Shitty are still way behind us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.