Woah, woah, woah. No need for exaggeration like that.
No one said you were PL and CL contenders.
The Chelsea Thread
- Thread starter Ramires
- Start date
- Replies 35K
- Views 3M
Woah, woah, woah. No need for exaggeration like that.
No one said you were PL and CL contenders.
Woah, woah, woah. No need for exaggeration like that.
No one said you were PL and CL contenders.
With defending like that your right
If Chelsea play this highline when we come up against Man City it is not going to be a pretty site for Chelsea fans.Jack Fulham
Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2008
- Messages
- 6,850
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Will be interesting to see if AVB changes from the high line that he is playing because if he does it again Man City, we will most likely see another goal feast.
It seems AVB's tactics don't suit the players he has at his disposal, will this lead to a change in tactics or a change is personal. Will be interesting to see what happens. You'd deem AVB unsackable after Chelsea payed £13 Million for him and gave him a massive contract. I also think Mata also has a lot more to prove, looked ineffective today, he's one of those players that you really struggle to find a position for. AVB certainly has a lot of work to do to meet the expectations of Ambramovich and the fans. Chelsea losing consecutive games at Stamford Bridge has been unheard of the last 6 or 7 years.
It seems AVB's tactics don't suit the players he has at his disposal, will this lead to a change in tactics or a change is personal. Will be interesting to see what happens. You'd deem AVB unsackable after Chelsea payed £13 Million for him and gave him a massive contract. I also think Mata also has a lot more to prove, looked ineffective today, he's one of those players that you really struggle to find a position for. AVB certainly has a lot of work to do to meet the expectations of Ambramovich and the fans. Chelsea losing consecutive games at Stamford Bridge has been unheard of the last 6 or 7 years.
I'm not sure that's quite true, he looked a lot better in the second half when he was playing in the middle of the pitch. The problem is we don't have the right kind of players/mentality to best suit him atm, look at how Ivanovich played in the first half, whenever Mata gave him the ball out wide he'd whip in a cross rather than looking for the return pass which was wasteful because Mata used that time to work himself into nice positions.
I don't see why you'd struggle to find a position for him either, if anything the problem is that he's too versatile: he can play in the middle on the right and the left and as a striker.
I agree with the first bit, but Ivanovic wasn't at fault, obviously IDK, but I presume he was told by AVB to cross it in to Drogba whenever possible, usually Ivanovic will play one-twos if the other player is willing.
ohembrough747
Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2011
- Messages
- 395
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
I'm a manchester united fan and even i have to admit that AVB looks like a darn good manager. The problemfor chelsea in my opinion is that all your best players are aging at the same time and your defence isn't strong enough without "the old" John Terry". Also Lampard and Mickel aren't mobile enough to cope with "top teams" and Essien has deteriorated as a result of time out the side.
I think that Mata is a great, great buy, ramires possibly good enough, possibly not. The worst of the buys (besides torres, whom i think will do ok this year) has to be Luiz, although you can see he has some really good elements him he seems error prone and him and terry together aren't a strong partnership. They never seem to be in line and neither seems sure what the other will do..
Feel free to rip me apart lol, but it's my opinion
Hope your games are going well...
Are we back at panic stations for being joint 4th 12 games into the season?
Luiz is getting a lot of abuse at the moment, vs Valencia he proved he can defend and has the discipline. The question of him being too adventurous, without him stepping out of defence and breaking lines who was going to do that? Mikel? Ramires did whenever he had a chance to but Luiz adds to Chelsea's game he doesn't subtract. Also worth noting the defender who I believe is the one at fault for not holding the line is Ivanovic, he had a torrid game yesterday and messed up the pushing up plenty of times along with not getting tight enough. He was just as positionally off as Bosingwa had been for the past few games, I'm a big fan of Ivanovic but in my opinion out of him or Bosingwa in AVB's system I would go with Bosingwa and keep the faith.
Mikel did the same thing he did last season vs Newcastle United away, he has a track record of holding up the ball too long that's undeniable. Compare him with Fernando/Moutinho at Porto who did move the ball a lot quicker and you can see why it is hard to incorporate the system into Chelsea.
The thing that disappointed me most out of the game yesterday was the simple lack of composure and speed of thought, the ball was being moved ridiculously patiently across the backline and yet when the ball was played to the midfield area it was rushed to the forwards with a direct pass. It didn't work with Drogba and it didn't work with Torres yet they continued doing that. Mata made some very intelligent runs throughout and no one had the vision to find him they just reverted to through-the-motions shift it around side to side and then pass to Malouda to run and cross to no one.
I'll always defend AVB but what he was thinking with Malouda and playing 4-3-3 I have no idea, 4 years ago under Mourinho with the players 4 years younger it would have worked a treat but the work rate wasn't there - apart from 20 minutes in the second half when the ball was pressed well, even Drogba. Meireles when he came on was rushing 35 yard shots which is not the AVB ideals at all. Footballing intelligence, the intelligence to probe and move the ball quickly, is overlooked a lot in football but if Chelsea players had the same intelligence of Mata they would have tore Liverpool apart. I'm sure Andre Villas Boas will turn this around though, he's tried changing the system and style with the majority of Carlo's personnel and I'm sure privately he now knows that they are not cut out for it. So like I've said, judge AVB February 1st because I'm afraid until then the style will not quite be up to scratch. Also don't start worrying about AVB's job, this is a long term project to rebuild the team and the club will stick by him. It doesn't take much to realize that Terry/Lampard are not the title winning players they were 3 years ago and Drogba certainly isn't, the squad needs some players to be offloaded and some fresher personnel to be brought in like De Bruyne, Pereira and Vitor Gomes. The player who doesn't suit the high line the most out of the Chelsea team is Mikel, if Essien was holding the pressure on the ball would be there a lot more than it is with Mikel. If you replace Malouda with Pereira, Drogba with Torres, Lampard with Moutinho and Mikel with Essien suddenly the Chelsea team is capable of holding a high line and high pressure. It isn't as far away as people think...
Luiz is getting a lot of abuse at the moment, vs Valencia he proved he can defend and has the discipline. The question of him being too adventurous, without him stepping out of defence and breaking lines who was going to do that? Mikel? Ramires did whenever he had a chance to but Luiz adds to Chelsea's game he doesn't subtract. Also worth noting the defender who I believe is the one at fault for not holding the line is Ivanovic, he had a torrid game yesterday and messed up the pushing up plenty of times along with not getting tight enough. He was just as positionally off as Bosingwa had been for the past few games, I'm a big fan of Ivanovic but in my opinion out of him or Bosingwa in AVB's system I would go with Bosingwa and keep the faith.
Mikel did the same thing he did last season vs Newcastle United away, he has a track record of holding up the ball too long that's undeniable. Compare him with Fernando/Moutinho at Porto who did move the ball a lot quicker and you can see why it is hard to incorporate the system into Chelsea.
The thing that disappointed me most out of the game yesterday was the simple lack of composure and speed of thought, the ball was being moved ridiculously patiently across the backline and yet when the ball was played to the midfield area it was rushed to the forwards with a direct pass. It didn't work with Drogba and it didn't work with Torres yet they continued doing that. Mata made some very intelligent runs throughout and no one had the vision to find him they just reverted to through-the-motions shift it around side to side and then pass to Malouda to run and cross to no one.
I'll always defend AVB but what he was thinking with Malouda and playing 4-3-3 I have no idea, 4 years ago under Mourinho with the players 4 years younger it would have worked a treat but the work rate wasn't there - apart from 20 minutes in the second half when the ball was pressed well, even Drogba. Meireles when he came on was rushing 35 yard shots which is not the AVB ideals at all. Footballing intelligence, the intelligence to probe and move the ball quickly, is overlooked a lot in football but if Chelsea players had the same intelligence of Mata they would have tore Liverpool apart. I'm sure Andre Villas Boas will turn this around though, he's tried changing the system and style with the majority of Carlo's personnel and I'm sure privately he now knows that they are not cut out for it. So like I've said, judge AVB February 1st because I'm afraid until then the style will not quite be up to scratch. Also don't start worrying about AVB's job, this is a long term project to rebuild the team and the club will stick by him. It doesn't take much to realize that Terry/Lampard are not the title winning players they were 3 years ago and Drogba certainly isn't, the squad needs some players to be offloaded and some fresher personnel to be brought in like De Bruyne, Pereira and Vitor Gomes. The player who doesn't suit the high line the most out of the Chelsea team is Mikel, if Essien was holding the pressure on the ball would be there a lot more than it is with Mikel. If you replace Malouda with Pereira, Drogba with Torres, Lampard with Moutinho and Mikel with Essien suddenly the Chelsea team is capable of holding a high line and high pressure. It isn't as far away as people think...
Last edited:
We said it at the beginning of the season, 4-3-3 should be dead for chelsea. it should be 4-2-3-1, backed up with 4-4-2.
As an aside, i actually believe the the 4-4-2 is surpassing the 4-3-3 once again, simply because of the more fluid shape teams are using it in.
4-4-2 is dead, long live 4-4-2.
As an aside, i actually believe the the 4-4-2 is surpassing the 4-3-3 once again, simply because of the more fluid shape teams are using it in.
4-4-2 is dead, long live 4-4-2.
This is spot on. How many times did we see the midfielders chip a direct ball forward into a congested area, hoping that Drogba could somehow outpower 2/3 defenders and then break from there? It was very frustrating to watch but hopefully we'll get shot of Malouda and AVB will buy the personal we need to play across the ground.
Absolutely, you look around and the false 9 revolution at Spain/Barce has made the Mourinho era 4-3-3 useless, box to box midfielders supporting a direct lone striker is not compatible with the fluid 4-4-2/4-5-1/4-2-3-1 formations anymore. No longer is a 4-4-2 a flat midfield, you have intelligent defensive midfielders who drop off into the space and shield which stops the Drogba type striker holding up the ball for midfield runners.
People could make a case Barcelona line up 4-3-3, in reality the midfield drops into a DM/CM/AM 3 to create lines to play with and the point of that is to link the midfield to attack a lot better to keep the possession fluid.
You look at Mourinho's Chelsea and you saw direct no nonsense midfield runners off of Drogba and Didier just dominating games. With the new fluid systems and new breed of defensive midfielders you just can't bypass an opposition midfield with a pass to Drogba and expect the midfielders to run past Drogba for the pass. The 4-2-3-1 or Mourinho's era were 2 CM's who played flat and usually stayed very central but now you have people like Sahin who have freedom in defence and in attack that they can pick up a winger or pick up a striker. You simply can not 'overpower' teams with a 4-3-3 because the gap between a box to box runner like Lampard/Ramires and a striker like Drogba who does lack the movement in his later years, and is generally tight to a CB, is just astronomical. The whole point of a 4-2-3-1 is to link the lines and give fluidity, the old 4-3-3 Mourinho used is just dated now especially with Lampard/Drogba at the age they are. Let's also not forget, in relation to defensive lines, Mourinho did used to play risky lines with Carvalho and Terry the difference being both of them were in their prime and were both very quick defenders who could recover.
On the 4-4-2 reborn point, I actually see it as more of a 4-2-2-2 in possession or a 4-1-3-2 because you look at the fluidity of a United 4-4-2 and it does look more offensive than a flat 4 man midfield.
If Chelsea do go 4-2-3-1 they do need to play a Ramires/Meireles alongside a Mikel/Essien though, Lampard may have scored some goals but in an ideal world he wouldn't be my first choice. He does give a lot clearly, but not for the style AVB wants to play.
BBC - Phil McNulty: Abramovich must stand firm behind Villas-Boas
He has to really, if he was sacked it would be laughable
He has to really, if he was sacked it would be laughable
It's an interesting story actually because in reality Roman Abramovich has sacked 3 managers in his time at Chelsea - Mourinho, Ancelotti and Ranieri.
Scolari was sacked on the word of De Visser who reported back to Abramovich saying training/intensity in training was very complacent and told him Scolari had stopped English lessons. Grant was let go because De Visser and him fell out personally, De Visser essentially got Grant appointed in the first place. Hiddink was only let go because Roman had wanted Ancelotti to come in and win him the Champions League. Although Hiddink and Roman are good friends, they were only introduced due to De Visser being extremely close with Hiddink.
So essentially De Visser is the kingpin maker at Chelsea, not Abramovich, he can make or break coaches. The key thing for me has been Bruce Buck coming in and in many ways taking powers from De Visser. Emenalo being appointed over De Visser in the summer showed that Buck does have a level of power because he essentially wanted a yes man - yes to the manager - in that position.
The only reason Guus Hiddink came close to the Chelsea job in the summer was because of De Visser pushing for him, for me De Visser represents the old era at Chelsea now. He's the one who's calling for new contracts for Anelka/Malouda, he opposed the Torres and Luiz buys and attempted to push the club to sign Suarez, Forlan and Godin in January instead.
It appears to me that AVB coming in signalled the change of emphasis and philosophy at Chelsea going forward. It was more significant than any Ancelotti/Scolari/Hiddink appointment ever was for the football club and Roman knows this. I'm just saying that despite popular opinion Roman is a smart guy and his ideal manager is Guardiola not Mourinho and he may want the Champions League trophy but he wants more... He wants what Barcelona have from academy; to philosophy; to type of grass their U-14's use.
Mourinho lasted 3 years, Ranieri 4 years and Ancelotti 2. He does give managers time, as long as they do know what they're doing and give 100% to the club.
Scolari was sacked on the word of De Visser who reported back to Abramovich saying training/intensity in training was very complacent and told him Scolari had stopped English lessons. Grant was let go because De Visser and him fell out personally, De Visser essentially got Grant appointed in the first place. Hiddink was only let go because Roman had wanted Ancelotti to come in and win him the Champions League. Although Hiddink and Roman are good friends, they were only introduced due to De Visser being extremely close with Hiddink.
So essentially De Visser is the kingpin maker at Chelsea, not Abramovich, he can make or break coaches. The key thing for me has been Bruce Buck coming in and in many ways taking powers from De Visser. Emenalo being appointed over De Visser in the summer showed that Buck does have a level of power because he essentially wanted a yes man - yes to the manager - in that position.
The only reason Guus Hiddink came close to the Chelsea job in the summer was because of De Visser pushing for him, for me De Visser represents the old era at Chelsea now. He's the one who's calling for new contracts for Anelka/Malouda, he opposed the Torres and Luiz buys and attempted to push the club to sign Suarez, Forlan and Godin in January instead.
It appears to me that AVB coming in signalled the change of emphasis and philosophy at Chelsea going forward. It was more significant than any Ancelotti/Scolari/Hiddink appointment ever was for the football club and Roman knows this. I'm just saying that despite popular opinion Roman is a smart guy and his ideal manager is Guardiola not Mourinho and he may want the Champions League trophy but he wants more... He wants what Barcelona have from academy; to philosophy; to type of grass their U-14's use.
Mourinho lasted 3 years, Ranieri 4 years and Ancelotti 2. He does give managers time, as long as they do know what they're doing and give 100% to the club.
2 years isn't time to me imo
2 years is time enough, you have to look at the direction the team was heading/is at. It needed a fresh philosophy to come in with the confidence to drop big names and bleed in youth.
Ancelotti would have stuck through with Malouda/Anelka/Lampard and continued to miss out Sturridge, as much as everyone likes Carlo youngsters was never his biggest asset from Abate at Milan being overlooked by a 35 year old to Sturridge missing out due to Kalou. If it was up to Carlo he'd play Lampard and co until they reached 35...
Ancelotti would have stuck through with Malouda/Anelka/Lampard and continued to miss out Sturridge, as much as everyone likes Carlo youngsters was never his biggest asset from Abate at Milan being overlooked by a 35 year old to Sturridge missing out due to Kalou. If it was up to Carlo he'd play Lampard and co until they reached 35...
Is it my blind optimism or long winded assessments?Jamie is the new Curtis.
That is all.
I'll take it's the 1st and take that Curtis is a fellow optimist.
Remarkable that I can defend Chelsea and yet have no defence for the money grabbing fraud...I mean Fabio 'compensation specialist' Capello.