GWistooshort

Bad mistake to make, although they apologised pretty quickly http://www.ynwa.tv/forum/index.php?s=&...t&p=2364519

From Sky Sports............. Lotito - Zarate going nowhere Lazio president says club will exercise their option to buy Zarate 21st April 2009 Lazio president Claudio Lotito says Liverpool have "zero chance" of signing Mauro Zarate this summer. The Argentine forward is thought to be interesting a whole host of clubs - including both Liverpool and Manchester City - after scoring 12 league goals this term. But Lotito says the former Birmingham City striker - who is on a season-long loan at Lazio from Qatari side Al Sadd - will stay in Rome. Lazio have until the end of this month to finalise a permanent deal for the player and Lotito says the club intend to do just this. Speaking about the possibility of Liverpool signing the player, Lotito said: "There is zero chance. Lazio will exercise their option to buy Zarate and they will not sell Zarate to Liverpool, full stop." His comments come after Sergio Zarate, who works as one of the agents for his brother, confirmed a number of clubs are asking about the Argentine. "I can not say which clubs, I can only say that two Italians, two Spaniards, two British and one German," he told Calciomercato. http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11669_5219010,00.html

It's something we didn't do with Degen We're learning from our mistakes, see

I'd just call them members

From Sky Sports website............... Zarate interest mounts Lazio still in pole for Argentine Last updated: 20th April 2009 Mauro Zarate's brother has confirmed that two British clubs have made contact about him. Sergio Zarate, who works as one of the agents for his brother, has confirmed a number of clubs are asking about the Argentine. Zarate is well known within England have spent the latter part of last season loan at Birmingham. Zarate is currently on a season-long loan at Lazio from Qatarian side Al Sadd and they have until the end of this month to finalise a permanent deal. The player and his agent's have insisted that he wants to stay in Rome - but a host of clubs are now looking at his situation. Both Liverpool and Manchester City are being strongly linked and Sergio Zarate admits the interest is growing. "I can not say what which clubs, I can only say that two Italians, two Spaniards, two British and one German," he told Calciomercato. "They made the first phone call, I have answered them all the same thing: 'Until April 30, I did not speak with anyone'. I gave my word to Lazio president Claudio Lotito." http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11669_5215771,00.html

I like this bit from Sammy's press conference............ Journalist: Are you surprised at what's happened since those gestures that followed the second goal against Blackburn? You know Sam Allardyce well don't you? Sammy: I thought so. I am very surprised because the gestures were directed at a member of our team. Also, nothing was said to me when I was sat down with Sam after the game. I'm sure if he felt that strongly about it he would have mentioned something to me. I can't speak for what other people think or what they read into things. All I can say is whenever we gesticulate on the line, it is to try and affect our players and game, not other teams. http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/drilldown/N...090421-0658.htm

Apologies if this has already been posted - I've been away for a few days & have had a look around, but haven't seen it Mr Burnham also told the Liverpool Echo that the barracking he received at yesterday's Anfield memorial was 'completely understandable.' The Merseyside-born Everton fan heard chants of 'Justice for the 96' rain down from the Kop in protest at the government's refusal to re-examine the tragedy. 'I fully understand the reaction of some sections of the stadium. If I hadn't gone into politics and was in the congregation at Anfield, my reaction might well have been the same. 'It was a difficult day for me but the Hillsborough families have had over 7,000 far worse days.' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/...llsborough.html

Full marks to Xavi Valero From the official site.......... Aurelio scored Liverpool's first goal on the night with an intelligent free-kick from distance that caught Chelsea goalkeeper Petr Cech off guard and the Brazilian revealed the set-piece routine had been discussed prior to kick-off. "It was mentioned before the game by our goalkeeping coach Xavi Valero that Cech positions himself early for crosses," explained Aurelio. "When I stepped-up to take the free-kick, I noticed he was already in a position to wait for a cross, as were the men in the wall, so the space was there to try a shot. "It was agreed beforehand that we would attempt it because even if the goalkeeper were to save it, he would position himself closer to the goal for the next free-kick and leave our players with more space to attack the cross inside the box. "Fortunately it came off and was part of a good beginning for us." http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/drilldown/N...090416-0812.htm

Oliver Kay in the Times today reckons Babel will be leaving in the summer http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/foo...icle6101545.ece

Even if Owen was injury free & he was willing to accept a squad role (& that's 2 big ifs), I still don't think that he's necessarily a good back up for Fernando because he usually needs a run of games before he starts scoring again when he's been out for a while We need someone who can come in for Fernando & hit the ground running, which is why I'm attracted to buying someone who can be back up for Fernando, but also play in one of the wider attacking positions either side of Stevie G, so that they can get some match sharpness when Fernando is playing Ideally I would also like the back up striker to be able to play alongside Fernando if we want/need to go 2 up top & I can't see Owen & Fernando working as a partnership

I agree (although players don't necessarily need to be English to qualify eg Insua will qualify as a locally trained player next year) Barry's ability to cover as 3rd choice left back also means we that if we want to we could sell both Lucas & Dossena if we get him in bringing in extra transfer funds & freeing up some extra wages

This is the story they should be telling. The Guardian Monday 13 April 2009 Hillsborough: how stories of disaster police were altered David Conn Twenty years on, the families of the 96 fans who died in the semi-final crush are still fighting to force police to acknowledge that changing officers' statements amounted to a cover-up In a dusty library at the far end of the Houses of Parliament, among 10 boxes of documents relating to the Hillsborough disaster which were made available by the South Yorkshire police following a government order some years ago, is a statement from a police constable on duty that day. On the front page is a handwritten instruction from a more senior officer. "Last two pages require amending," it notes. "These are his own feelings. He also states that PCs were sat down crying when the fans were carrying the dead and injured. This shows they were organised and we were not. Have [the PC] rewrite the last two pages excluding points mentioned." As they prepare to mark Wednesday's 20th anniversary of the 1989 FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest, the families of the 96 people who died at Hillsborough retain, with their enduring grief, a burning sense of injustice. The discovery that the police vetted junior officers' statements, and amended many to remove criticisms of the police's own operation, seemed to confirm the families' suspicions after Hillsborough: that the police tried to cover up their own culpability for the disaster. The families are still outraged that after Lord Justice Taylor's official inquiry, a lengthy inquest, high court appeals and a judicial "scrutiny", no one has ever been held accountable, and unanswered questions remain. In his report, Taylor concluded firmly that police mismanagement of the crowd had caused the disaster. Chief Superintendent David Duckenfield, commanding his first big football match, had agreed to relieve a crush outside the ground by opening an exit gate to allow a crowd of supporters to enter together, rather than singly through the turnstiles. The central pens of the Leppings Lane terrace were full, but no officers were ordered to block the tunnel leading to those pens and direct supporters to the sides, where there was still room. "Failure to give that order," Taylor wrote, "was a blunder of the first magnitude." Taylor criticised South Yorkshire police for refusing to accept that truth. Duckenfield even said originally that supporters forced open the gate; that was condemned as a "disgraceful lie" by Lord Justice Stuart-Smith in his 1998 judicial scrutiny of new Hillsborough evidence. "It is a matter of regret," Taylor wrote, "that ... the South Yorkshire police were not prepared to concede that they were in any respect at fault. The police case was to blame the fans for being late and drunk ... It would have been more seemly and encouraging ... if responsibility had been faced." Yet at the inquest that followed, prominence was given again to police accounts of supporters being drunk and without tickets. The families were appalled by the eventual verdict of accidental death rather than unlawful killing, and felt that the police force principally responsible for so many deaths had behaved, from the day of the disaster, without humanity. It emerged that two police CCTV videos went missing from the locked control room on the night of the disaster - one showing the police opening the gate survived - and that deepened suspicion. It was amid that legacy of betrayal that evidence emerged, nine years later, that senior South Yorkshire police officers had vetted and amended their junior officers' statements, in consultation with the force's solicitors, before presenting them to Taylor and the inquest. Criticisms that senior officers failed to provide leadership on the day, and radio communication was poor, were removed from several statements. Accounts of drunken or misbehaving fans, on the other hand, were almost all left in. The junior justice minister, Maria Eagle, MP for Liverpool Garston, said questions still remained about who was involved with that process and how far it went, and she urged the force to "come clean" and make a genuine apology. "The institutional behaviour of South Yorkshire police was appalling," she said. "I stand by the comments I made in the House of Commons at the time. This was a black propaganda unit, engaged in a conspiracy to cover up." Police documents Eagle complains the documents were "dumped" in the parliamentary library after South Yorkshire police were ordered to disclose them, and she doubts if it is a comprehensive collection. The 10 boxes are in no discernible order; there is no index or explanatory letter, and it is difficult to believe it can be complete: there are no memos between senior officers, or between the police and their solicitors. Many statements have apparently not been amended, or the originals are not there. On the ones which have, there are handwritten notes on the front, setting out sections to be changed. There is a list headed Amended Reports, with 163 officers' names on it, and another, with 248 names on it, with a column noting when the statements were vetted. The police argue they were trying only to cut emotion and opinion out of the officers' raw statements. Stuart-Smith concluded there was no cover-up, because the changes mostly involved removing comment and hearsay, although he did criticise some deletions of fact. Yet the handwritten note on the front of that PC's statement - "This shows they were organised and we were not" - appears to show there was a more sinister agenda, to undermine the fans and exonerate the police. Meredydd Hughes, the current South Yorkshire police chief constable, said the force fully accepted Taylor's findings, including the criticism that the police failed to take responsibility and sought to blame the disaster on supporters. He did not, however, accept that the amending of statements was part of that campaign. "It was not a systematic attempt to hide the truth," he said. Hughes said he would find out whether there were further documents which have not been publicly disclosed, make available any not covered by legal privilege, and issue an apology if appropriate. "We are not about trying to hide things," he said. "We are not the same force that was here in 1989. We exist to protect the public, learn lessons from Hillsborough and put them into practice." Prof Phil Scraton, author of Hillsborough: The Truth, was the first to discover the changing of statements, and he maintains it was a cover-up. "The statements were transformed after a team of officers, from the force under investigation, reviewed and altered them. If cover-up means anything, this was it." The emergence of the changed statements is not the worst lingering injustice the families feel. Many are still profoundly scarred by the inquest process, and crucial decisions made by the coroner, Dr Stefan Popper. He held "mini-inquests" while the director of public prosecutions was considering criminal charges against the police officers in command - no charges were ultimately brought. At the mini-inquests, West Midlands police officers read out summaries of evidence about where and when victims died. Witnesses were not called, let alone cross-examined. Popper then limited the main inquest, which began in Sheffield on 19 November 1990, to events up to 3.15pm on the day of the disaster. He ruled that by then, all the victims had received injuries in the Leppings Lane crush which rapidly caused irreversible brain damage. That line of reasoning was upheld when the families challenged it by judicial review in the high court in 1993. Yet the "mini-inquests," followed by the 3.15 cut-off, meant two huge areas have been closed from full investigation: the response to the disaster by the police, ambulances, fire service and local hospitals, and the individual circumstances of how each victim died. A number of witnesses, never called to the inquest, have since bitterly criticised the emergency response. Anthony Edwards, a paramedic in one of only three ambulances that made it on to the pitch out of 42 called to the ground, described the operation as "chaotic". He said that paramedics could not reach the crush, and the "basic technique" of inserting airways into casualties' mouths was barely administered. Another leading ambulanceman, John Flack, said it was "bedlam". Hillsborough was a scene of horror. Supporters were mostly laid on their backs, rather than in the recovery position, some with clothes covering their faces, even though no qualified person had determined they were dead. There were literally piles of bodies at the Leppings Lane end, and bodies left lying around elsewhere. Only 14 of those who died were taken to hospital, a fact Ann Adlington, solicitor for the Hillsborough Family Support Group, describes as "shocking". In August 2006, Anne Williams, whose 15-year-old son Kevin was killed at Hillsborough, applied to the European court of human rights, arguing that the inquest into her son's death was "insufficient" due to the 3.15 cut-off. Over years of tireless campaigning, Williams tracked down people who had helped Kevin, including Derek Bruder, an off-duty police officer, and a woman special police constable. They had testified that Kevin had signs of life up to 4pm; Bruder felt a pulse, and the SPC said Kevin had opened his eyes and said "Mum". Their statements were changed after visits from the West Midlands police, to suggest there were no signs of life. Both have since emphatically stood by their original statements. Bruder has since complained that his evidence "was not presented in its entirety or in a professional manner" at the mini-inquest, to which he was not called to give evidence in person, and he has emphatically maintained he did feel a pulse. The SPC has also stood by her original statement. Williams sought the opinions of three eminent pathologists, who all disagreed with the diagnosis by the consultant, Dr David Slater, who examined Kevin. Dr Iain West, consultant forensic pathologist at London's Guy's hospital, contested Slater's finding, which had been upheld in the high court, that Kevin had died from traumatic asphyxia. That and crush asphyxia were the causes of death ascribed to all who died at Hillsborough. West said he believed Kevin died from severe neck injuries, and could have been saved had he been treated early enough. There may have been other victims who were recoverable, he said, after 3.15. Applications to the European court have to be made within six months of exhausting the last possible domestic legal means of redress. The judges took that to be Stuart-Smith's "scrutiny", which upheld the coroner's findings in the case of Kevin Williams and rejected all requests to reopen the inquests. On 17 February this year, the ECHR dismissed Williams's case as out of time. Sitting in her home in Chester, surrounded by files and documents, Williams said: "I won't give up, not until the record is put straight. You can't grieve properly, you can't lay your children to rest, until you have established what really happened." Meredydd Hughes acknowledged that the police response to the unfolding disaster was "a picture of terrible confusion, a lack of leadership at critical times". Asked whether he could understand the families' frustration with the 3.15 cut-off, he said: "I understand it, but it is not for the police service to comment on." Margaret Aspinall, vice-chair of the Hillsborough Family Support Group, whose 18-year-old son James died at Hillsborough, said the 3.15 cut-off was "the biggest issue" for the families. "There are huge, unanswered questions. How many could have survived if they had had proper care, and oxygen? Even now, we want reopened inquests beyond 3.15." The families want answers, too, about the role of a West Midlands police officer, Detective Superintendent Stanley Beechey, whom Popper described as "the second most senior officer at the time of the main inquest". In June and July 1990, Beechey had been in a monitoring room when Duckenfield and other senior officers were interviewed about their roles at Hillsborough. Beechey was given the sealed audio tapes of the interviews and was responsible for presenting them to the inquest. The coroner said publicly that Beechey had "an awful lot to do" with preparing the evidence summaries for the mini-inquests. Beechey was a former head of West Midlands serious crime squad, which was disbanded in August 1989 after a string of collapsed cases, and amid allegations of police malpractice. A complaint about Beechey was made to the then Police Complaints Authority by George Tomkins, who alleged he had been "fitted up" by West Midlands police for an armed robbery he did not commit. Tomkins spent 17 months on remand in Birmingham's Winson Green prison before he was acquitted. The West Midlands chief constable, Geoffrey Dear, moved named West Midlands SCS officers to "non-operational duties". Beechey's transfer was to "studying technical aspects of Hillsborough". Dear said he believed this involved working on fuzzy video footage to enhance its quality. When told Beechey became involved at a senior level, Dear said: "It definitely was not what I had in mind when I transferred him. If I had been told, I would have taken him off the investigation. I wouldn't have had Beechey working on that or any other inquiry. Not because he might necessarily be doing anything wrong, but because it was not appropriate." On 20 June 1990, Beechey was formally interviewed, under caution, about Tomkins's allegations. So, at the same time Beechey had been present at the interviews of senior officers responsible at Hillsborough, he was himself under formal investigation. Detective's involvement Beechey was not disciplined following the PCA inquiry, and returned to operational duties on 30 November 1990. His period on "non-operational duties" had taken in the Hillsborough mini-inquests, the criminal inquiry for the DPP, and the first 11 days of the main inquest. In April 1993, Tomkins took out a private prosecution against Beechey, three other police officers and a DPP lawyer, accusing them of perverting the course of justice. The police officers' cases were committed to the crown court. In 1995 the DPP discontinued the prosecutions. Tomkins took out a civil claim, suing the West Midlands police for malicious prosecution. On 18 March 1996, the force agreed, without admitting any wrongdoing by any officer, to pay Tomkins £40,000 compensation, and £70,000 for his legal costs. Although there is no evidence that Beechey did anything improper in the Hillsborough investigation, Aspinall feels Beechey's involvement is another area of unease. "We want it cleared up," she argues. "What was this police officer doing on the Hillsborough investigation, what position did he occupy, and why, if he was on 'non-operational duties?'" A spokesman for West Midlands police provided a statement: "Det Supt Beechey was a later addition to the team of officers who liaised with the Hillsborough coroner, and his role was of a limited, overseeing nature. There has never been any suggestion that he carried out the support work into Hillsborough in anything other than a rigorous, thorough and professional manner. An unconnected civil action brought against DS Beechey was settled in a separate legal process, the basis of which means we cannot comment further." Hillsborough seems an age away now, a disaster caused by police mismanagement at an unsafe football ground, where the Football Association commissioned a semi-final despite the ground's safety certificate being a decade out of date. In the 20 years since, football grounds have been rebuilt, helped initially by public grants, and the top clubs have made fortunes. Yet for the families of the mostly young people who died, there has been unending grief, and a traumatic legal ordeal leaving them with questions still unanswered. "I don't like to use the word justice," says Aspinall. "I prefer to say that we want the full truth, and accountability. Even now, it would make a difference, alleviate some of the hurt and betrayal we have suffered for 20 years." Unanswered questions The cause of the Hillsborough disaster - police mismanagement of the crowd - was established by Lord Justice Taylor in his report published just four months afterwards, in August 1989. Yet 20 years on, key questions remain unanswered about the disaster's aftermath. 1 What, in detail, happened after 3:15pm on the day of the disaster? 2 Could more people have been saved if the response to the disaster had been better co-ordinated? 3 Who removed two CCTV video tapes from the locked control room at Hillsborough on the night of the disaster? 4 Why was nobody identified to have removed them, and what investigation was mounted? 5 Which South Yorkshire police officers worked in the unit that vetted police statements before they went to Taylor and the inquest? 6 Who gave the orders for them to do so and what was the stated intention of those orders? 7 Are the documents lodged by order of the government in the House of Lords library a complete archive of South Yorkshire police's Hillsborough documents? 8 What was Det Supt Stanley Beechey, a former head of the West Midlands serious crime squad, doing on the Hillsborough investigation while he had been placed on "non-operational duties"?

I'd love to see us score early & rather than celebrate much just run & pick the ball out of the back of the net & straight back to the centre circle like let's get on with this so we can score the next one

Just as much of a surprise & less likely to get Rafa in trouble with the police

Which is about the best possible time for them to be playing before us because it means they are playing only 2½ days after their game against Wigan & it is what should be their hardest remaining league game as well

I think it's worth posting cos it's Bascombe given his previous role at the Echo

DANIEL AGGER WAITS ON DEAL Liverpool defender stalls as Juventus and AC Milan wait By CHRIS BASCOMBE, 11/04/2009 DANIEL AGGER says he is no nearer to securing his Liverpool future, despite holding contract talks with boss Rafa Benitez. The defender, 24, says the ball is still firmly in the club's court if they want to keep him amid interest from AC Milan and Juventus. Negotiations have begun to extend Agger's current deal, which runs out in 18 months, and double his £30,000-a-week salary. Benitez is anxious for a swift resolution but Agger still has some issues. The Danish international said: "In my heart I hope I will still be at Liverpool next season but I don't know. We are talking and I've said I want to stay but there are two parts to this. You will have to ask the club what the issue is. "It's wrong to say my agent met any other clubs. There were a lot of people guessing about my future. It's annoying - but I've confidence in myself, so I look at the talks with positive eyes. It's important that the manager says good things about me but the most important things he tells me are when I look into his eyes, not when he says things in the newspapers." Agger, who got a rare start and scored in yesterday's win over Blackburn, added: "I'm at the stage where I need to play. It's been frustrating but I relish the challenge of forcing my way back into the side" Jamie Carragher and Martin Skrtel are ahead of Agger in the centre-half pecking order. But the Dane's attacking qualities may tempt Benitez to thrust him into Tuesday's Champions League quarter- final second leg at Stamford Bridge. Agger said: "Have we given up on the Champions League? Don't be stupid. If they can win 3-1 at Liverpool we can do the same at Chelsea - but we'll need some early goals." http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/sport/2600...TS-ON-DEAL.html

GEORGE GILLETT IN NEW KOP BID Co-owner believes Canadiens sale will allow him to oust Tom Hicks By CHRIS BASCOMBE, 11/04/2009 GEORGE GILLETT is to make a last-ditch attempt to oust co-owner Tom Hicks from Liverpool. The Anfield war betwen the two Americans is entering its final stages as the pair have three months to raise their share of a £350million debt to keep the club. Both are desperately trying to get funds by selling shares in their other sporting franchises, while also keeping the door open to potential partnerships with Arab businessmen. After looking the most financially vulnerable of the duo, Gillett is now increasingly confident the imminent £272m sale of his Montreal Canadiens hockey side will allow him to to pile the pressure on Hicks. Gillett, who attended the Champions League clash with Chelsea at Anfield and is due in London for the second leg on Tuesday, believes Hicks has debts of £350-400m in the United States. The Texan is trying to offload shares in the Texas Rangers baseball team and ice hockey's Dallas Stars. Despite that, Hicks has been pushing ahead with ambitious plans for Liverpool's future and has done nothing to suggest he's about to walk away. Gillett made it clear earlier this season he'd leave Liverpool if Hicks went with him. That stance appeared to soften after he became the prime target of criticism from some Kop fans and he took a back seat as Hicks played the pivotal role in securing manager Rafa Benitez's future. There were fears Gillett was prepared to step aside and allow Hicks to pursue his own bid for power. But the picture will change with the sale of the Montreal Canadiens. Now the duo are effectively embroiled in a high stakes race to see who can raise finance first and force the other out, ending what's been a tiresome and damaging power struggle. Security Sources close to Gillett insist he's still ready to explore all options - either cutting his ties completely, taking a joint-ownership role with a new partner or remaining as a minority shareholder under a new board. It's understood the only scenario Gillett won't accept is remaining at Anfield with Hicks. Waiting in the wings are Dubai and Kuwaiti investors, who think the Americans are more vulnerable by the week. They are sure to make fresh bids at the end of the season. Recent new deals for Benitez, Steven Gerrard and Dirk Kuyt, and the forthcoming securing of Fernando Torres on a five-year, £120,000-a-week contract, are designed to reassure the banks and potential investors of the long-term security of the club. http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/sport/2607...-Tom-Hicks.html

The Express & the Guardian are the only 2 papers carrying the story so far

From today's Guardian............... Benítez faces a difficult decision as to whether Gerrard should feature. The adductor muscle the midfielder strained against Chelsea is not a serious injury and the Liverpool manager said his captain has an "80% chance of playing [against Blackburn]". However, he is also aware that playing two games in the space of four days could aggravate the problem and, in the worst-case scenario, cause him to miss the Champions League quarter-final second leg at Stamford Bridge on Tuesday. With that in mind, it seems likely Gerrard will be used as an emergency substitute today. "The decision I have to make is whether I use him against Blackburn or Chelsea," said Benítez, who refuses to concede that Liverpool's hopes of progressing in the Champions League have disappeared despite a 3-1 first-leg deficit. "If we do play him against Blackburn, it does not mean we are writing off the Champions League. If he feels he can play, then he will and we will assess the situation afterwards." http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/ap...-premier-league

From the official site.............. GERRARD IN SQUAD FOR BLACKBURN Jimmy Rice and Steve Hunter 10 April 2009 Rafa Benitez will make a late decision on whether to start Steven Gerrard against Blackburn - though the skipper will be in the squad for Saturday's lunchtime kick off. Gerrard picked up a thigh strain in the 3-1 defeat to Chelsea on Wednesday. Benitez told Liverpoolfc.tv: "Steven has some problems with his adductor. He will be in the squad but we still have to decide whether he will start. "It is not very serious but we need to analyse the risk for the future as well. We know it's a very important game, so we'll decide tomorrow. "We have to think about the best for Stevie and the team - both things together. "This is a very important game, so we know it will be really good if he can play. But if we were to lose him for the next few weeks it could be a big risk. "I will talk with him and the doctor on Saturday morning before deciding." http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/drilldown/N...090410-1245.htm

Most of the papers this morning are saying the same - tests have shown a slight strain & Gerrard will probably be able to play in either tomorrow's League match v Blackburn or Tuesday's CL 2nd leg against Chelsea, but not both, although some papers think he will be unavailable for both matches

Arbeloa & Dossena for us Chelsea - Terry, Ashley Cole, Anelka