09 May 2019 23:14:02
Kepa is going to be one of the best keepers in the world in a few years. The boy is actually good. I mean like really good. Huge price tag and since the first game away at Huddersfield he hasn’t been moved by it. Won us the game against Watford and with the help of brilliant goal line clearances had the chance to take us to the final.
Top lad.
Come on Chelsea.
10 May 2019 02:04:38
Considering it’s his first season he’s been one of our best players. He’ll be even better next year 🙌🏻 And he knows how to keep his legs shut 😉.
10 May 2019 08:53:07
Suppose this makes up for the poor display against city in the final?
10 May 2019 12:09:00
That first penalty save was comedy gold haha
Funniest pen save I've seen in ages. The classic FIFA (the game) strategy of keeping.
10 May 2019 15:24:47
Kepa is a fantastic keeper, his shot stopping abilities are phenomenal and great reflexes. Future is bright.
11 May 2019 01:34:12
Won us the semi final against spurs too in the penalty shoot out in the League Cup. Feels good to go into a penalty shootout confident again. Only ever seen Courtois the snake save one penalty at west brom away and that was lucky.
11 May 2019 01:03:24
For probably the first half of the season I was unconvinced. Then he began to show glimpses of class. Now I'm very excited for his future if he keeps up his recent form. He definitely needs to improve his collecting from crosses though.
11 May 2019 10:52:57
Kepa does indeed look to be both developing and indeed settling well.
It’s easy to forget that he has had 13 clean sheets in the PL this season which even for an experienced keeper is no mean feat.
I don’t know if one of the Ed’s can answer something that has had me scratching my head.
We know that Kepa had to buy himself out of his contract and that supposedly was around £70+ million. As I understand that sum isn’t the same as a transfer fee and has to come from the player and I doubt he had that sort of cash under the matteress
If that’s correct then its the player would be getting the money from Chelsea to compensate so no amortised fees etc in the accounts but would that money be paid by way of annual sum or more likely a one off signing on fee which if that’s correct surely would see a massive jump in the clubs declared wage bill.
{Ed002's Note - The "buy out clause" is legally binding between a club and a player. The "buy out" is effectively what it says - a means for the player to buy himself out of the contract. As an example, if a player wishes to buy himself out of a contract, he pays the applicable FA (on behalf of the club) the amount of the "buy out" clause effectively becoming a free agent. The problem is that in most cases a player would need to obtain that money from the buying club - and this is fraught with issues regarding "tapping up" and, of course, taxation (as it can be seen as income for the player and would therefore be subject to income tax). There was a test case about the taxation issue in Spain about five years ago which is why they have an exception. All players in Spain and Portugal have a clause that allows the player to buy himself out of his contract without tax implications. This was to address a ruling from around 30 years ago allowing players a way out of their contracts. The other notable point about Spain and Portugal is that the clauses if invoked by a non Iberian club need to be paid in full by the player (there are local rules that stop tax being due) but by needing to put up 100% of the money upfront would end many transfers then and there. It works differently in Iberia to elsewhere as the tax implications do not make such clauses viable. All players in Iberia must have a figure set and agreed with the club. So "buy out" clauses are very rare. Related to this is the Webster Ruling but I don't intend to go in to that now.}