Chelsea FA Cup semi-final and Premier League victories over Manchester City mean their tails are up when it comes to taking on Pep Guardiola and Co
But I fancy those last two victories will be made to feel hollow over the summer with City winning their battles for two far greater prizes in the days and weeks ahead.
Firstly, in the Champions League final on Saturday, I’m going for a City win simply because needs must.
Their whole structure has been set up to win the Champions League and become accepted at the top table of European football in much the same way as Chelsea back in 2012.
The fact they are the better team and the fact that, having won the title a couple of weeks ago, Guardiola has been able to get some rest into his men will count as well.
And a victory in Porto will show those last two meetings at Wembley and the Etihad to be nothing more than the red herrings that they were.
Chelsea boss Thomas Tuchel won’t think that way, of course — he will think he has the methodology to keep City at bay.
But City’s need is just greater and, as Liverpool finally clinched their first Premier League title after focusing on it, I see the Guardiola's men winning by two clear goals to get their hands on the trophy that has eluded them at long last.
Chelsea fans will be disappointed to finish runner-ups in the Champions League final having done so in the FA Cup final.
But, once the dust settles, I’d hope most would see it as a very good season and one for which they’d have bitten off your hands back in September given they were a work in progress.
The second battle over the summer will be the one to land Harry Kane and we know Chelsea have the money.
Roman Abramovich would happily bankroll a move for a player of that calibre and he’d fit Chelsea’s style of play and fit in with the players around him at Stamford Bridge better than he would in Manchester.
That’s because, with Bernardo Silva, Kevin De Bruyne, Raheem Sterling, Phil Foden, Riyad Mahrez and Ferran Torres, City only need a player who operates in the box.
They don’t need the icing-on-the-cake stuff Kane brings with his passing, hold-up play and assists.
That’s why I said a couple of days ago they’d be better off going for Danny Ings at a fraction of the £100million to £150m it would cost to land Kane.
I also look at a move for Kane from Spurs to City similarly to the one I made from Nottingham Forest to Liverpool.
Frank Clarke set everything up at Forest to get the best out of me, whereas at Liverpool it wasn’t like that.
My debut was against Sheffield Wednesday, a game in which I didn’t see the ball for 60-odd minutes before popping up to score, and I left the pitch then wondering if I’d made an error going there.
None of that will stop City going for Kane and I don’t expect it to stop him going there.
Because while signing for either club would guarantee his wages, only one of them guarantees him trophies.
