The Chelsea Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ramires
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 35K
  • Views Views 4M
Scouseinthehouse said:
God you guys are a hard watch.

Granted it's West Brom today and Pulisian football, but having watched you a lot lately out of interest with your rise up the table, outside of the Utd walloping I'd hate to sit through this. I know, results are all important, you're currently staying top the league for another weekend, and you were quite happy with similar through Mourinho. But as a fan, I'd hate to be paying to watch it.

Different views on what you want from football I guess.

Turgid first half but much more happy with the scoreline than I'm sure you guys are.
Click to expand...

You are almost implying that we play like this every week when in fact, this was the only 1-0 win in our entire winning streak so far. Not to mention that we have seen some of the best football that I have ever seen as a Chelsea fan in games against Everton, United and 2nd half vs Tottenham during this run.

You can't blow every team away. Especially a Pulis side that is playing away from home. If its one thing Pulis knows, its how to organize a defense to completely stifle a big team. He almost achieved that but we got away with a 1-0 win. Nothing more or less.


PS: This is the former commenter known as Alcaraz. I lost access to my old account for some reason so until I get that back, this is the account I will be using.
 
Alc said:
You are almost implying that we play like this every week when in fact, this was the only 1-0 win in our entire winning streak so far. Not to mention that we have seen some of the best football that I have ever seen as a Chelsea fan in games against Everton, United and 2nd half vs Tottenham during this run.

You can't blow every team away. Especially a Pulis side that is playing away from home. If its one thing Pulis knows, its how to organize a defense to completely stifle a big team. He almost achieved that but we got away with a 1-0 win. Nothing more or less.


PS: This is the former commenter known as Alcaraz. I lost access to my old account for some reason so until I get that back, this is the account I will be using.
Click to expand...

My observation had nottin' to do with walloping teams per se. It's how you aesthetically approach games and 9 times out of 10 you're quite happy to sit, hit, and settle for that one. If another comes on the break great. You're not committing many bodies forward for the second yourself to kill it. But you get one up and that's sound. It doesn't, take the point. I get it from Conte. He's Italian. It's just dull to watch.

Talking yesterday, which I wasn't so much referring to as it's Pullis who's an archaic dinosaur I absolutely hate. (As do most Albion fans but even he has apparently opened up more their past 6 or 7 games.). I know full well what he's like to play. So you get bodies forward, wide, and constantly move them around to unsettle his rigidity. At least have a real go. You mustered what, 2 shots at goal all game? The second the winner? Granted, it's effective and you got another vital win. But for the home team ..... You see 'Chelsea- West Brom' as a live game the fixture list and you groan as you just know it's going to be a negative affair all ways.

It's sterile, if effective, football that personally I couldn't pay to watch. I'd maybe wear it for a season to get the league. So desperate are we to end the drought. As most L'pool fans would. But after that, you'd want to open up and play attacking, entertaining football as Champions. Where as the majority of Chelsea fans have been more than happy to continue that way happy to sacrifice excitement for success from José on.

Which is fine if that's your thing. Nothing wrong with it. Football's open to all sorts of different styles and you do what fits you best to get the result. I just personally couldn't be happy paying for that. (The same way I fell out of love with the game under Houllier and Rafa and a lot of the negative, boring ***** they put us through. Even if ti did bring it's rewards to both.) .

I'm paying hard earned money for 90 minutes football I want the release and to be entertained.

All that aside, congratulations on another win. Not sure how much longer this continues as it surely has to end soon. And you do look an injury to Costa or Hazard from it all going South. But for now, you're clear top on merit off the back of a heck of run of wins so full credit to Chelsea for that.
 
Last edited:
Scouseinthehouse said:
My observation had nottin' to do with walloping teams per se. It's how you aesthetically approach games and 9 times out of 10 you're quite happy to sit, hit, and settle for that one. If another comes on the break great. You're not committing many bodies forward for the second yourself to kill it. But you get one up and that's sound. It doesn't, take the point. I get it from Conte. He's Italian. It's just dull to watch.

Talking yesterday, which I wasn't so much referring to as it's Pullis who's an archaic dinosaur I absolutely hate. (As do most Albion fans but even he has apparently opened up more their past 6 or 7 games.). I know full well what he's like to play. So you get bodies forward, wide, and constantly move them around to unsettle his rigidity. At least have a real go. You mustered what, 2 shots at goal all game? The second the winner? Granted, it's effective and you got another vital win. But for the home team ..... You see 'Chelsea- West Brom' as a live game the fixture list and you groan as you just know it's going to be a negative affair all ways.

It's sterile, if effective, football that personally I couldn't pay to watch. I'd maybe wear it for a season to get the league. So desperate are we to end the drought. As most L'pool fans would. But after that, you'd want to open up and play attacking, entertaining football as Champions. Where as the majority of Chelsea fans have been more than happy to continue that way happy to sacrifice excitement for success from José on.

Which is fine if that's your thing. Nothing wrong with it. Football's open to all sorts of different styles and you do what fits you best to get the result. I just personally couldn't be happy paying for that. (The same way I fell out of love with the game under Houllier and Rafa and a lot of the negative, boring ***** they put us through. Even if ti did bring it's rewards to both.) .

I'm paying hard earned money for 90 minutes football I want the release and to be entertained.

All that aside, congratulations on another win. Not sure how much longer this continues as it surely has to end soon. And you do look an injury to Costa or Hazard from it all going South. But for now, you're clear top on merit off the back of a heck of run of wins so full credit to Chelsea for that.
Click to expand...

And again, the point is confusing because this was the only 1-0 win in our last 9 games. Every other game we have scored 2 or more goals. The reason Chelsea are happy to sit on the counter once we lead is because that is exactly the best way to score more goals instead of committing men forward and exposing yourself to the opposition. It seems like you are playing up old stereotypes of Italian football and Mourinho without actually having watched Chelsea these past 9 games. I repeat again, some of the best football I have ever seen from any Chelsea team has come during this run.

Also we did have a real go. If you genuinely think we were happy with a point at home to West Brom whilst leading the league then I don't know what to say. Our 2 shots on target are more a testament to how solid West Brom were rather than any perceived lack of effort on Chelsea's part.

Again you really need to go see the last 9 games. This and the Southampton one were probably the only 'boring' ones. The others all were terrific games with the Everton game being the best I have ever seen for a while from us followed closely by the United one.

In regards to injury to Costa or Hazard, every team will struggle without their best players.
 
Bujakaa said:
I dont see how or why is Conte game so bad or boring to watch? What defines then game for entertainment? Fluid football, players know what do to, defend well and work as a unit? Or lot of goals on both side?

Just looked into overall stats.
-----------------Chelsea Liverpool
Total shots -------230 -----280
Goals --------------33-------37
Set piece goals ---5 --------8 --- without penalties
Penalties-----------1---------5
Goals conc --------11-------20
Changes created --180-----227
Assist --------------25 -------28

These are rough stats I know, wont define how the game looks but still gives you some input on attacking sides.

Maybe yeah wont argue that much. Liverpool games are more entertainment by gamestyle, but still Conte style of play is also entertaining very enjoyable.
Click to expand...

Add in the fact that Conte only started managing us this season unlike Klopp and only worked out the new system 4-5 games in, the stats really tell a different narrative to the one Scouse is pushing.

No one would say we are 'boring' under Conte if they watch the last 9 games. Truly absurd.
 
Don't let's facts obscure scouse's eye. What actually has happened is irrelevant to what he just knows
 
ninjaskill said:
Don't let's facts obscure scouse's eye. What actually has happened is irrelevant to what he just knows
Click to expand...

Are you seriously trying to attest Chelsea where an attractive , exciting side to watch under Mourinho and now Conte?

Or just being facetious for the heck of it?
 
Alc said:
And again, the point is confusing because this was the only 1-0 win in our last 9 games. Every other game we have scored 2 or more goals. The reason Chelsea are happy to sit on the counter once we lead is because that is exactly the best way to score more goals instead of committing men forward and exposing yourself to the opposition. It seems like you are playing up old stereotypes of Italian football and Mourinho without actually having watched Chelsea these past 9 games. I repeat again, some of the best football I have ever seen from any Chelsea team has come during this run.

Also we did have a real go. If you genuinely think we were happy with a point at home to West Brom whilst leading the league then I don't know what to say. Our 2 shots on target are more a testament to how solid West Brom were rather than any perceived lack of effort on Chelsea's part.

Again you really need to go see the last 9 games. This and the Southampton one were probably the only 'boring' ones. The others all were terrific games with the Everton game being the best I have ever seen for a while from us followed closely by the United one .....
Click to expand...

You're a counter attacking side in the main. It's how he sets out. The United game is the anomaly when you absolutely walloped them. Not in terms of the goals but the all out attacking play. Committing bodies forward and really going at them. You may have had some thrilling, incisive breaks. But in the main you sit and hit when you can. You aren't that arsed about attacking so long as you get the one. And any more above that is what it is. You're not overly pushing for the second. Which is fine. It works and fair play to you. But let's not try make out you're the opposite. People are getting hung up on goals scored. Not how they come around or the base system of play.

The fact it's some of your most attractive football for a long time shows just how putrid it had become. Just like if you think that was having a 'real go' at Albion yesterday as a home side then your definition of attacking football is wholly different to mine.

But again, it's a fruitless, pointless debate. There's nottin' wrong in what you're doing at all. It's pragmatic rather than exciting football. I just personally find it a hard watch the majority of the game.
 
Last edited:
Scouseinthehouse said:
You're a counter attacking side in the main. It's how he sets out. The United game is the anomaly when you absolutely walloped them. Not in terms of the goals but the all out attacking play. Committing bodies forward and really going at them. You may have had some thrilling, incisive breaks. But in the main you sit and hit when you can. You aren't that arsed about attacking so long as you get the one. And any more above that is what it is. You're not overly pushing for the second. Which is fine. It works and fair play to you. But let's not try make it you're the opposite. People are getting hung up on goals scored. Not how they come around or the base system of play.

The fact it's some of your most attractive football for a long time shows just how putrid it had become. Just like if you think that was having a 'real go' at Albion yesterday as a home side then you're definition of attacking football is wholly different to mine.

But again, it's a fruitless, pointless debate. There's nottin' wrong in what you're doing at all. I just personally find it a hard watch the majority of the game.
Click to expand...

I'd say what we do is sort of skewed by the fact that many teams will recklessly attack when it's not necessary. We don't do that, but we don't stop trying to score either, we just take a balanced approach to things. We want to keep going forward (and do, hence the goals) but we're not going to sacrifice defensive integrity for it. Honestly, I do think that's a big reason for our success: most clubs at the moment seem to specialise in bombing forward or sitting back and cannot adapt to the situation.
 
Subtle said:
I'd say what we do is sort of skewed by the fact that many teams will recklessly attack when it's not necessary. We don't do that, but we don't stop trying to score either, we just take a balanced approach to things. We want to keep going forward (and do, hence the goals) but we're not going to sacrifice defensive integrity for it. Honestly, I do think that's a big reason for our success: most clubs at the moment seem to specialise in bombing forward or sitting back and cannot adapt to the situation.
Click to expand...

Absolutely a big reason in Chelsea's current success. Which is sound.

Just differing views on how you like your football. But then you and a few others really like Simeone who's teams bore the living **** out of me. He's a pragmatist and it works. And I've the utmost respect for him how he's shook up La Liga and what he's achieved at Atletico. But the majority of the time it's a ***** way to go around it.
 

Matt Law– Verified account ‏@Matt_Law_DT

yH5BAEKAAEALAAAAAANAAwAAAILjI+py+0Po5y0ngIAOw==



Exclusive: Andre Villas-Boas makes stunning £60million bid to take Chelsea midfielder Oscar to China in January #cfc [url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2016/12/13/andre-villas-boas-makes-stunning-60m-transfer-bid-bring-chelseas/ …[/URL]
 
Scouseinthehouse said:
You're a counter attacking side in the main. It's how he sets out. The United game is the anomaly when you absolutely walloped them. Not in terms of the goals but the all out attacking play. Committing bodies forward and really going at them. You may have had some thrilling, incisive breaks. But in the main you sit and hit when you can. You aren't that arsed about attacking so long as you get the one. And any more above that is what it is. You're not overly pushing for the second. Which is fine. It works and fair play to you. But let's not try make out you're the opposite. People are getting hung up on goals scored. Not how they come around or the base system of play.

The fact it's some of your most attractive football for a long time shows just how putrid it had become. Just like if you think that was having a 'real go' at Albion yesterday as a home side then your definition of attacking football is wholly different to mine.

But again, it's a fruitless, pointless debate. There's nottin' wrong in what you're doing at all. It's pragmatic rather than exciting football. I just personally find it a hard watch the majority of the game.
Click to expand...

I am not sure it has anything to do at all with differing definitions. Even neutral commenters like John Motson, who has watched over 1500 EPL games in his role as TV commentator, have come out and said that our performance vs Everton was 'the best they had ever seen'.

Yes maybe our attacking play will never be as scintinalltingly brilliant as Liverpool or Barecelona or whatever but we are a very watchable side at the moment. Far from the football we saw during the Mourinho days.

Also to say that Chelsea have always played this football is ignoring the 09/10 side under Ancelloti which banged in goals for fun.
 
So the Oscar deal is 90% done according to himself. It doesn't come as a shock (except for the £60m) tbh, this move should've happened last season. But a new CM is a must in January. Nainggolan alongside Kante...

[video=youtube;-ZxHAZChcYU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZxHAZChcYU[/video]
 
Bujakaa said:
£60m is so **** much, wonder what wages he will be on... For that reason also I think it is good that he goes then, shows he is not that interested in winning titles. He would have been top guy for several Spain or Italy teams.

You see Matic gone then? Him and Fabregas gone together in summer? Hope they wont keep mid too stacked as Loftus-Cheek deserves a chance also.

But Nainggolan and Kante, behind them Zouma Luiz and Christensen. Oh dear good they would be hard to break down.
Click to expand...

Matic was never going to leave. He has been a mainstay in the team all season. Fabregas might have left but now with Oscar gone, its unlikely. I really would not sell Fabregas under any circumstance mind. He is a proper world-class midfielder and has a brilliant attitude.
 
Bujakaa said:
£60m is so **** much, wonder what wages he will be on... For that reason also I think it is good that he goes then, shows he is not that interested in winning titles. He would have been top guy for several Spain or Italy teams.

You see Matic gone then? Him and Fabregas gone together in summer? Hope they wont keep mid too stacked as Loftus-Cheek deserves a chance also.

But Nainggolan and Kante, behind them Zouma Luiz and Christensen. Oh dear good they would be hard to break down.
Click to expand...

It's a ridiculous price and according to reports he'll be earning £350k p/w, so the move is understandable.

No, I wouldn't sell Matic or Fabregas (he offers something different) but we do need midfield reinforcements. Hence Nainggolan. As for Loftus-Cheek, he should head out on loan because he needs game time and he isn't getting that at Chelsea. Plus Chalobah is ahead of him in the 'pecking order' atm.

Bujakaa said:
Why do you want CM then? Conte plays only 2 there so benching too many of them would be bad. Fabregas isint getting any playtime, he might want to out himself.
Click to expand...

Simple, without Oscar our backups to Kante and Matic are Cesc and Chalobah which isn't good enough. We need better depth in there, so a CM in January is a must.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Back
Top