Chelsea is not a villain in Mason Mount’s contract situation

As for the availability point, his negotiating strategy cannot be “I hardly get injured. Some fans have pointed out that Wesley Fofana has not been available for the Blues for the majority of his time at west London, but Fofana had all the leverage when he was coming in, not least because Chelsea had lost Andreas Christensen and Antonio Rudiger on free transfers and the whole football world that knew that the Blues needed to replace at least two senior center backs.

The Blues showed they were willing to spend up to £80 million to secure the Frenchman’s signature, so Fofana’s team took advantage of that. This was also the case with Kalidou Koulibaly’s contract.

From the club’s perspective, Mount represents an asset that can only bring a profit. As an academy product, Chelsea paid no transfer fees for Mount, so if he was to be sold, whatever they sold him for would be profit, and after spending as high as 600m this year, they need to sell players.

The Blues also have many players in Mount’s position, whatever the club or the player agrees is his position. He’s a player the Blues would not need to actively replace if he’s sold. The depth in his position means that the Blues need to offload some players to trim the squad.