He is a safe bet in the sense that there would be no upheaval necessary if he were to be the manager, as he is already here working for us.

There are plenty of negatives going against him though that are for more worthy of consideration when the powers that be come to deciding on who the next manager should be.

Ferguson could be a right arse, at times. Didn't seem to affect the club's 'image' too much.

Exactly. It staggers me that people are still talking about him perhaps only being a success for 2 years when so far we have had a manager fired after less than a season and another only lucky to see out his second. Give me two years of success ahead of that any day and we'll cross the failure of the third season bridge when we get there with a couple of trophies in the cabinet in the meantime.

The making it all about him thing is completely meaningless as far as I can see, I don't even understand what that means.

Chelsea last season had the best youth team in all of Europe, yet how many played in that season, or the start of this one? Was it just Loftus-Cheek's one minute of action?

That sure does prove that he will play them if they are good enough doesn't it?

You may not care about the young players but there are those out there that do, and I wouldn't want our team to be totally full of players that we have just paid big fees for, I would like to see us develop some of our own.

It is why for me the Rashford goal away to City was just so extra special, you don't get those same feelings if say for example Falcao had worked out, and he had scored that goal.

Loftus Cheek is now playing in a mid table Chelsea team. Last season he couldn't get a game for the champions.

You might want to think about that for a minute.

The potential disharmony amongst the players is a worry for me as well, as we are by the looks and sound of things in a similar period with this current manager, a follow on from that would not at all be ideal.

The potential to self combust and poke the eye or do something to an opposition coach or manager, is also a bit of a concern, as we don't need negative headlines like that.

The likes of Rashford are only played because of injuries, if not for injuries these young players wouldn't have been looked at except for maybe squad fodder in the League Cup. If Chelsea had an injury crisis they'd have done the same.

Where was the time for Mourinho to try these young players? He had just won the league, and so he used the players that just won him the league, who were proven. A few months into the season after winning the title he was sacked. If he played these young players and they didn't step up his job wouldn't have been any safer. Same as with Real Madrid, at that club you don't have time to be worrying about kids because one slip up and you're fired.

Van Gaal's been playing young players yet you want him out because the results aren't matching expectations, the expectations aren't being met with these young players. If Mourinho came in and played kids and struggled to get going you'd be calling for him to get sacked. At the top level at certain clubs you don't have much room for error, so if you have a title winning side and you're always a few defeats away from being out of a job you're going to rely on your proven players rather than risk your job to satisfy some fan's desire to see kids.

How many of that awesome youth team are playing regularly under Hiddink?

Chucking in the kids when the team is struggling is a gamble that you can't afford to take, at a club like Chelsea.

Are you seriously suggesting that if we had the next Messi in our youth team, that Mourinho wouldn't play him, due to your assumption that he 'never' plays young players?

How many times has that happened?

I can only assume that you were furious when Cantona came back from his ban, and scored against Liverpool.

He kicked a fan, remember? We don't need headlines like that.

The form of Chelsea is not solely down to him, just as us being where are is not down to Mensah for example.

The point being that they at Chelsea have a fairly good bunch or crop of young players (to be crowned the best in Europe takes some doing), yet José didn't give them a fair shot to impress him, which does trouble me.

I don't mind being in the minority on this point, as if others don't care about the youth at our club, that is fine, I just want them to have a fair chance if they are good enough, and show themselves to be so, I am not asking to continually play them if like say Keane or Powell they have not taken their chances or proved that they are good enough for the first team.

Could be worse, he could've kicked a boot at a star player.

Well since most of them are out on loan at various clubs, and were so when Hiddink took charge, then he couldn't play them.
Let's see what happens under Conte next season, and what he decides to do with them when they come back to the club, send he has to make a decision over their future.

Rewarding constant failure by playing the same players who got Chelsea into the mess early on in this season was a mistake I think, playing a young, hungry player instead of one under par, and not doing his job to a high standard or the standards required, would have been much more fair, if that young player was good enough, and I think that they had some good young players there at the time.

No, the point is its easy to play the young players when you are mid table and have nothing to lose. You cant blame a manager for not playing the youngsters when the team he does pick goes on to win the title.

Much like you cant blame Sir Alex Ferguson for not signing a midfielder when the players he does sign go on to win the title.

Let's not also forget the Dr Eva situation, and the negative headlines that brought the club, so he does have a tendency to blow his top in public.

Cantona had many hot headed moments, and I was not best pleased to say the least when he did kick the fan, however much provocation there was at the time (and I do use the term "fan" in it most broadest of senses, as he certainly was not behaving in such a way), he should just have kept on walking to the dressing room.

You can give them opportunities throughout the season, play them in the FA and or League cups, give them chances from the bench, there are many ways to blood them into the first team, even when a team is doing well or poorly.

That doesn't "blood" them as has been proven by us time and time again.

It gives them a chance, and you can see how they adapt to first team football, and playing with more experienced players.
We have quite a good history in this area, whilst many young players that we have given chances to have not quite worked out, and are no longer with us, the key thing there is that we gave them chances, and the chance to impress the manager.
If they didn't do so, then that is on them for the most part, as you really need to take that chance (as Rashford for example has done recently, whilst on the other hand Keane and Powell have not).

Louis van Gaal: "We are in the race for the first four positions in the league and still in the FA Cup, so I'm very happy about that."

As you should be Louis, it's been a wonderful season...

In theory it does - in practice it doesn't. As you know what tends to happen is a pile of young players are chucked in with the squad players in cup competitions and nothing is learned.

I can't link it as I'm on my phone, but there was an excellent article that I read yesterday pretty much debunking the myth that Mourinho doesn't give youth any chance. I think it was by Sam Wallace in the Telegraph.

Here is the link for those with less time than me http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/...develop-young/

Edit: Just seen the link above.

Ta muchly!

Zouma, Varane and Cech cannot be used to prove that he plays the young players, they were all already playing in their previous clubs first teams, so hardly developing young talent there in the true sense of the term.

They can be used to prove it and they have. They were young players who he gave chances to, doesn't matter what you wish to use to discredit him, the fact is they were young players who he helped develop. Varane was 18, and he helped him become the player he is now, doesn't matter if Lens played him in their first team, he was 18, in the football world he was still a kid.

Otherwise you could argue someone like Lukaku wasn't a failure of his because he was already playing for Anderlecht when Chelsea bought him.