Daniel Sturridge to NUFC

Sepi wrote:Done deal with NUFC from my sources

12M + add ons.

That will do thanks

english_jewel wrote:So instead of replying to my comments and having a proper debate, you continue to post the same shit over and over again even though I keep proving you wrong. That shows that you're just being a troll. It's OK to criticize our academy or anything for that matter but when someone puts back a sensible counter argument, have some balls to reply to that instead of ignoring it and posting your comments just like they were in the beginning.

And Turnbull is our third choice goalkeeper and not a defender, shows your logic about Chelsea really. Don't talk about things that you don't know about and aren't willing to debate about.

I know full well that Turnball is a goalkeeper, not a defender. Grammatical error on my part, if anything.

Anyway, what are you crying about, Love?

The point I raised, from my initial post, was that Chelsea have minimal trust in their youngsters- therefore I'm have no faith in them keeping Sturridge when/ if you sign Lukaku.

I have since proved that, but you bizarrely continue to beat around the bush, instead of just admitting I am right. Chelsea have shown minimal to no indication YET, during the Abramovich era, that they're willing to field young players amongst their top dogs. Now answer me this- AM I RIGHT IN WHAT I JUST SAID- because historical facts (during abramovich era) agrees with me, bruh????

SUPERCARTTS wrote:

english_jewel wrote:No response

LOOOOL. Save the drivel for Shakespear bruh!

I don't understand why you fail to grasp my point. Let me repeat myself again; Chelsea sign/Signed many youngsters over the last few years. NONE have made it through. I don't intend on every kid to make it, because that would be unrealistic. BUT what so many Chelsea fans fail to see is that because of Abramovich's bottomless pocket, you don't actually need youngsters; just because you loan all of them out all over the europe that doesn't mean anything! Stoch, Bertrand, Mancienne, Di Santo, That defender who has never kicked a ball, Turnball; just admit that Chelsea are apprehensive about fielding the youngsters...

Walcott, Gibbs, Bendtner, Woj, Wilshere, Ramsey, Da Silva twins, Gibson, Hernandez, Macheda, Spearing, the 2 funny looking defenders and Liverpool, Danny Rose; please tell me you see the pattern....

Ok mate, I agree that during the early years of Abramovich we were ready to splash the cash and we still are.. but those days we splashed cash endlessly. We were building a new team and its not a video game or something where every player has a static rating and its the same rating everywhere he goes. Some players failed, some succeeded. Those succeeded are still with us. Others at great places as well. But now we are looking at youngsters, by now i mean since around 2008. Shall I tell u some good youth players? Piazon, Patrick Van Aanholt, Bertrand, McEachran, Bruma, Chalaboah... thats just a few. Just because Carlo Ancellotti didn't use them properly it doesn't mean that we have no youth policy. Yes we didnt have a good record back then but now our youth academy is one of the top academies in England.

I can understand Manchester United getting the best out of young lads... They actually use them and win titles... But you are an Arsenal fan right? And you haven't answered any of my posts either, I'm sure you might have missed them out of all the posts that is there to be read.

SUPERCARTTS wrote:No Response

lol u waited for 19 mins before saying this

and we waited for about a day before u replied.. i understand that u might probably have a life outside the forums but u r disrespecting the coffee guy by using him in lame replies.. no offense

SUPERCARTTS wrote:

english_jewel wrote:So instead of replying to my comments and having a proper debate, you continue to post the same shit over and over again even though I keep proving you wrong. That shows that you're just being a troll. It's OK to criticize our academy or anything for that matter but when someone puts back a sensible counter argument, have some balls to reply to that instead of ignoring it and posting your comments just like they were in the beginning.

And Turnbull is our third choice goalkeeper and not a defender, shows your logic about Chelsea really. Don't talk about things that you don't know about and aren't willing to debate about.

I know full well that Turnball is a goalkeeper, not a defender. Grammatical error on my part, if anything.

Anyway, what are you crying about, Love?

The point I raised, from my initial post, was that Chelsea have minimal trust in their youngsters- therefore I'm have no faith in them keeping Sturridge when/ if you sign Lukaku.

I have since proved that, but you bizarrely continue to beat around the bush, instead of just admitting I am right. Chelsea have shown minimal to no indication YET, during the Abramovich era, that they're willing to field young players amongst their top dogs. Now answer me this- AM I RIGHT IN WHAT I JUST SAID- because historical facts (during abramovich era) agrees with me, bruh????

did you even read this thread??? How many times have we told u that Lukaku is for the future! He will not be a part of the starting XI but be a bench player. He himself has said that.. either u google it or if u r such a baby and cant do that.. ill even provide u with an article! Sturridge and Lukaku play two different positions as well! 2! thats DEUX! TWO man TWO positions! Sturridge has no threat from Lukaku and Lukaku has no threat from Sturridge!

Now I have to leave.. and I will respond later lol just so u have no confusions

iNFINITY9910 wrote:

SUPERCARTTS wrote:

english_jewel wrote:No response

LOOOOL. Save the drivel for Shakespear bruh!

I don't understand why you fail to grasp my point. Let me repeat myself again; Chelsea sign/Signed many youngsters over the last few years. NONE have made it through. I don't intend on every kid to make it, because that would be unrealistic. BUT what so many Chelsea fans fail to see is that because of Abramovich's bottomless pocket, you don't actually need youngsters; just because you loan all of them out all over the europe that doesn't mean anything! Stoch, Bertrand, Mancienne, Di Santo, That defender who has never kicked a ball, Turnball; just admit that Chelsea are apprehensive about fielding the youngsters...

Walcott, Gibbs, Bendtner, Woj, Wilshere, Ramsey, Da Silva twins, Gibson, Hernandez, Macheda, Spearing, the 2 funny looking defenders and Liverpool, Danny Rose; please tell me you see the pattern....

Ok mate, I agree that during the early years of Abramovich we were ready to splash the cash and we still are.. but those days we splashed cash endlessly. We were building a new team and its not a video game or something where every player has a static rating and its the same rating everywhere he goes. Some players failed, some succeeded. Those succeeded are still with us. Others at great places as well. But now we are looking at youngsters, by now i mean since around 2008. Shall I tell u some good youth players? Piazon, Patrick Van Aanholt, Bertrand, McEachran, Bruma, Chalaboah... thats just a few. Just because Carlo Ancellotti didn't use them properly it doesn't mean that we have no youth policy. Yes we didnt have a good record back then but now our youth academy is one of the top academies in England.

I can understand Manchester United getting the best out of young lads... They actually use them and win titles... But you are an Arsenal fan right? And you haven't answered any of my posts either, I'm sure you might have missed them out of all the posts that is there to be read.

NONE of your managers, since Abramovich took over, have showed any indicication of wanting to use young players. Even these players that have succeeded at Chelsea, I haven't yet seen (ease up on the ol' Football Manager- it isn't real football, Bruh).

Look at your Sahar's and Di Santos, they are now forgotten players now. The 2 kid that Chelsea fought tooth and nail for are no longer with you any more. Now you're bring up the likes of Aanholt, Betrand et al. Yes it nice to see a new batch of potential coming through, but just because you and english keep reiterating how good they are doesn't change the fact that the odds are stacked against them! Stop being so naive in thinking otherwise. When Cole busted his foot, Aanholt and Bertrand were nowhere to be seen...

I bet you £10 if Gibbs didn't have a calcium deficiency and a ridiculous skeletal structure, he'd have played many more games. Clichy did some dumb shit last season, but we had Gibbs in the treatment room and Traore in Italy.

P.s. Piazon smells of Borini, Sahar and Di Santo in one.

iNFINITY9910 wrote:

SUPERCARTTS wrote:

english_jewel wrote:So instead of replying to my comments and having a proper debate, you continue to post the same shit over and over again even though I keep proving you wrong. That shows that you're just being a troll. It's OK to criticize our academy or anything for that matter but when someone puts back a sensible counter argument, have some balls to reply to that instead of ignoring it and posting your comments just like they were in the beginning.

And Turnbull is our third choice goalkeeper and not a defender, shows your logic about Chelsea really. Don't talk about things that you don't know about and aren't willing to debate about.

I know full well that Turnball is a goalkeeper, not a defender. Grammatical error on my part, if anything.

Anyway, what are you crying about, Love?

The point I raised, from my initial post, was that Chelsea have minimal trust in their youngsters- therefore I'm have no faith in them keeping Sturridge when/ if you sign Lukaku.

I have since proved that, but you bizarrely continue to beat around the bush, instead of just admitting I am right. Chelsea have shown minimal to no indication YET, during the Abramovich era, that they're willing to field young players amongst their top dogs. Now answer me this- AM I RIGHT IN WHAT I JUST SAID- because historical facts (during abramovich era) agrees with me, bruh????

did you even read this thread??? How many times have we told u that Lukaku is for the future! He will not be a part of the starting XI but be a bench player. He himself has said that.. either u google it or if u r such a baby and cant do that.. ill even provide u with an article! Sturridge and Lukaku play two different positions as well! 2! thats DEUX! TWO man TWO positions! Sturridge has no threat from Lukaku and Lukaku has no threat from Sturridge!

Yeah I know you both keep whacking on about how the signing of Lukaku will have no bearing on Sturridge, but I find that hard to believe; so do excuse my reluctance in accepting your facts. Imho, it's more to do with the number of players you have as opposed to the positions they'll occupy on the field. Signing Lukaku or player x will result in the likes of McEachran or Sturridge going out on loan. I find it hard to believe that any other player that warranted a transfer fee will get loaned out. Do you follow what I'm saying?

Lukaku cant kick Sturridge, Sturridge is better than him.

And I dont think we can come to an agreement mate... so lets rest this case cos we are repeating the same points over n over. I rest my case I hand the thread over to Mole again

So in short, I won, then. On the basis that I prove my point to a tee. Honestly, there is absolutely no way you can tell me that I am wrong, same applies to english. It was fun though!

p.s. that sig of your touched a heart string

In a perfect world, Chelsea sign Falcao and Lukaku. This Causes Sturridge to go to Newcastle... and Real Madrid get Drogba for our 3rd choice striker slot.

Everyone's happy...

Shhhhhh, Sturridge isn't going anywhere, mate. He's here for the long run and he's going to show, all the kid who never made the grade, how it's done.

SUPERCARTTS wrote:So in short, I won, then. On the basis that I prove my point to a tee. Honestly, there is absolutely no way you can tell me that I am wrong, same applies to english. It was fun though!

p.s. that sig of your touched a heart string

If that makes you happy mate... lol. I need not say anything anymore

Yeah Sanga ROX!

iNFINITY9910 wrote:
Yeah Sanga ROX!

I read that MCC speech too lots of guts from Sanga.Really quality from him and loved the speech tbh.He certainly got a lot of cricket fans on his side for sure after that speech

BeautifulGame wrote:

iNFINITY9910 wrote:
Yeah Sanga ROX!

I read that MCC speech too lots of guts from Sanga.Really quality from him and loved the speech tbh.He certainly got a lot of cricket fans on his side for sure after that speech

Yeah mate he is a class apart. I'm proud to be from the same school as his.. I've walked those corridors But he is on hot water after that speech cos the stupid politicians have been exposed. I dont think they even understood 90% of his speech. He was being a true and passionate Sri Lankan. If something happens to him though thats the end of SL cricket.

Actually being serious and not taking the piss.

I am hearing he is likely to be included in Chelsea's latest offer for Modric

Sepi wrote:Actually being serious and not taking the piss.

I am hearing he is likely to be included in Chelsea's latest offer for Modric

I dont think we will move for Modric eventually.. McE is perfectly able to do a rotating role with Lampard this season...