Particularly when Lukaku's coming back next season. You've got your all-round striker (Torres) and your big man option (Lukaku), so getting a tricky, quick striker makes sense.
The Chelsea Thread
- Thread starter Ramires
- Start date
- Replies 35K
- Views 3M
Particularly when Lukaku's coming back next season. You've got your all-round striker (Torres) and your big man option (Lukaku), so getting a tricky, quick striker makes sense.
Mikel is a good player but he is too inconsistent and is one of the reasons we get overrun in midfield. In a defensive system like last year under RDM he was excellent, because the team was tight and compact and the opposition was forced to go around the outside to get at the defence. In a more attacking variation of the 4-2-3-1 Mikel gets exploited far too much. He lacks the mobility needed as one of the double pivot, and his positional sense is rather questionable.
Generally if you look at other top sides in Europe they have a creative midfielder who is defensively adept and an aggressive ball winner who can chase the opposition and break up play. Mikel is not that. The more open we play the more exposed Mikel will be. Romeu however could do that job.
Generally if you look at other top sides in Europe they have a creative midfielder who is defensively adept and an aggressive ball winner who can chase the opposition and break up play. Mikel is not that. The more open we play the more exposed Mikel will be. Romeu however could do that job.
Nick Chelsea
Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Messages
- 2,038
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Wonder if there's any truth in that Llorente talk. Adebayor just signed for Spurs, permanently. So I can assume they are not the club interested in him, but then again, Defoe might leave. Hate rumours.
Here's one: "Personal terms with Hulk already agreed. Transfer still on hold; complicated by Club Atlético Rentistas who own 10% of Hulk's rights."
Quick and tricky - Schurrle. Dont think Moses can be as effective a striker as he is as a winger. Who knows. Don't even know what Chelsea want at this point. It's good that you don't want to talk about your transfer policy, but give us some hints at least.
Ooooooor, we sell both and get Zlatan!
Can't vouch for anyone else, but Vic was effective for Palace as a striker. It's just that he prefers playing deep; he, like for instance Ronaldo, prefers time and space to get on the ball and run with it.
Ha. Have some people actually been suggesting that as an alternative? Bonkers.
Nick Chelsea
Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Messages
- 2,038
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Still not convinced. But I won't be disappointed at all if we manage to sign him. What a player.
My preview for tomorrows game.
We're the North Stand - Blue Flag UK is a Chelsea supporters club evolved from the facebook group Chelsea FC Blue Flag UK
We're the North Stand - Blue Flag UK is a Chelsea supporters club evolved from the facebook group Chelsea FC Blue Flag UK
Peter Brock @Jooky85
McEachran is world class. You know what, I hate Chelsea slightly less now. Can we have a striker please? #borolive
McEachran is world class. You know what, I hate Chelsea slightly less now. Can we have a striker please? #borolive
Yes, but we had plenty of chances like those, too. And I did say their finishing was poor; all well and good creating chances, but you need to finish them too.
Yes, he did. He kicked a water bottle onto the pitch … naughty!
I remember last year, on this forum, where I (and a couple of others, tbf) was defending him, but no-one would have it that he was a very good player. I saw a lot of opinions change at the end of last season, though. It's funny, too, because most that thought Mikel was terrible, now rate him, but act like they have all along (not directed at anyone).
I think a lot of it is that people don't understand the role he plays.
Most people dont.
**** there were a lot of people who didnt see the benefit of Xavi, till stats became mainstream.
Look at Carrick, no one understood him till they realised the stats showed just how tidy he was all round the place. Mikel is the same, but to a lesser extent, though he will find himself more tested in a more attacking Chelsea this season.
This will sound ridiculous but I think it might be because Mikel looks clumsy. The way he kicks the ball, the way he tackles, the way he runs isn't that of a naturally gifted football player. I guess his technique isn't his strongest point so people look to him as a weak link.
I still don't rate him especially highly xD
TheRealMourinho
Member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2009
- Messages
- 922
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
@TransferNewsCen: Marseille and Chelsea have finally reached an agreement for the transfer of Cesar Azpilicueta. 5 year contract (La Proence)
Yeah their finishing was beyond pathetic, I was just responding to your post about they didn't create chances at all.
Well I think that you have to distinguish between the types of chances created as well. We were obviously perfectly happy to let them pump balls into our box from the flanks because: A. they had a single midget upfront B. it allowed our wingers to shirk a lot of their defensive duties and just be fluid attackers C. the wingbacks going forward to cross left space in behind for us to exploit.
It's debatable whether or not it actually worked but a lot of the chances they created weren't capitalised because they were either not suited to a player like Di Santo or they forced very quick thinking and finishing, which is ****** hard. It's how we beat Barca and, IMO, why Suarez doesn't score many goals for Liverpool.
It's debatable whether or not it actually worked but a lot of the chances they created weren't capitalised because they were either not suited to a player like Di Santo or they forced very quick thinking and finishing, which is ****** hard. It's how we beat Barca and, IMO, why Suarez doesn't score many goals for Liverpool.
Nick Chelsea
Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Messages
- 2,038
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0