Chelsea would jump at the chance of us sending them back another full England international. This kid has that sort of potential. But does that help us in the long term?

His uncle Albert used to put on a good show.

Red and Blue Army!

For me loans are best used to fill positions that we have an opening in (ideally with purchase options in place - otherwise you get the problems of Gallagher and RLC). If we want competition for Mitchell then we should sign someone - with a loan the problem is if they compete well enough to keep Mitchell out of the team then we'll be back to square one next season - we will have developed someone elses player and Mitchell won't be any better.

I think the lad has real talent but there's no point in loaning him unless there's an option to buy. That's my opinion.

While I agree that we need two decent options at every position, I can't see why Chelsea would send Hall to us (or anyone else) unless he was guaranteed to start pretty much every game. If being a back-up was what they felt was best for him, he could do that staying where he is. Bottom line is I think this rumour has no legs. Mitchell isn't being replaced (though totally agree he does need more competition) so I doubt we could give Chelsea what they'd want were they to loan out Hall.

Sydenham by birth. Selhurst by the Grace of God.

Took me a while but very good

You're right but I suppose they have Chilwell and Cucarella on the left already whereas we only have Mitchell. And, truth be told, I'm not always convinced with him so maybe Hall would get some game time.

Could just be agent talk to get other clubs interested too.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold...