The Chelsea Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ramires
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 35K
  • Views Views 3M
Well, no, Carl. Just because his name is Jose Mourinho, it doesn't mean he can't be wrong. He is wrong about a lot of things, but he's good at masking those mistakes (most of the time).

I was talking about subs and timing of these subs, on more than once occasion it has turned the match in our favor this season, i was not talking about all aspects of Jose!
 
Come on GC, you know that this is bollocks. With Sturridge it was a problem with attitude, with Mata the problem is that he can't exploit his biggest strength (finding space) if he's having to track back all the time. He can't just will himself 20 meters up the pitch again everytime we get the ball back.

That's not what Mike was saying though was it? I can totally agree with that, but Mike was saying that you're never going to fundamentally change Juan Mata when I can think of quite a few examples of footballers who have been and become better players for it.

But besides that, I think you're totally overplaying the whole tracking back thing. Mourinho isn't asking Mata to turn into Scott Parker, he's just asking him to be more defensively aware. That's the reason Oscar is starting ahead of him, and if Oscar can do it Mata can too, but he's just unwilling to do so. It's a shame, because Mata's a better attacker than Oscar, but his lack of defensive awareness and work rate is pretty unforgiveable in a side that works very hard to remain compact and minimise space for the opposition.

So what is it? Is it that Mata just isn't fit enough to track back? Is he a worse athlete than Oscar, who manages to perform the role so perfectly? Or is he just unwilling? I don't know, but either way I really don't blame Mourinho for not playing him with the gameplan that Chelsea have at the moment.
 
Mata will and still can be key in games where we will dominate possession

He's not though, because those games he still gets shunted out to the side. It made sense to play him as winger back when we were playing 4-3-3 because he's a great crosser and we had Drogba. Now it's just a waste because he's also being forced to doing the tracking back of a winger. That doesn't suit him as a player at all. He needs to be able to find space and pull defenders about, he's one of the best players in the league when it comes to doing that and why people talk about him as being in the same class as Ozil and Silva.

It's why Hazard and Willian are both shining: fast and they're tricky, they're best with the ball at their feet and space to run at a defender. When they drop deep, they can use their technical skill to create issues. Mata is a great technical player, but by using him out wide with defensive duties we waste his clever mind.

He needs to play centrally to be effective if we're going to play a system like the 4-2-3-1 where wingers have defensive duties. Instead we've been playing Oscar there. We all know about his defensive contribution, and I am definitely a fan of that but what about creating. Ignoring today's game, where Hazard was the central player, Oscar had played 17 games and had 1 assist. That came last week. There's a lot more to be said there, but he definitely hasn't been sparking us into life like Mata did for the last 2 years.
 
The way I look at it is if Chelsea are winning games why does it matter (no pun intended) so much if Juan is playing a big part or not? The way a lot of Chelsea fans are crying over Juan's bit part in our season you would think they are only fans of Juan mata and not Chelsea FC. I couldn't care less if it's Hilario, schwarzer and Blackman playing in our attacking midfield trio as long as they do the job and Chelsea win.
 
That's not what Mike was saying though was it? I can totally agree with that, but Mike was saying that you're never going to fundamentally change Juan Mata when I can think of quite a few examples of footballers who have been and become better players for it.

The fact that you can fundamentally change players doesn't mean that you should. Maybe I'm just reading this wrong, but it looks a lot like Mike is saying that Mata's playstyle is what makes him what he is, which is an excellent player. You can reinvent him as whatever sort of player you want, but it's pretty clear how to play him if you want to get his full potential out of him.

But besides that, I think you're totally overplaying the whole tracking back thing. Mourinho isn't asking Mata to turn into Scott Parker, he's just asking him to be more defensively aware. That's the reason Oscar is starting ahead of him, and if Oscar can do it Mata can too, but he's just unwilling to do so. It's a shame, because Mata's a better attacker than Oscar, but his lack of defensive awareness and work rate is pretty unforgiveable in a side that works very hard to remain compact and minimise space for the opposition.

Have you watched him at all this season? In pretty much every game he's played in since been called out publically by Jose, the guy has run his socks off with bucket loads of enthusiasm. He doesn't have a workrate problem; forcing him to track back and playing him out position forces him to compromise the things that he's good at in order to perform duties that clearly stuggles with.



So what is it? Is it that Mata just isn't fit enough to track back? Is he a worse athlete than Oscar, who manages to perform the role so perfectly? Or is he just unwilling? I don't know, but either way I really don't blame Mourinho for not playing him with the gameplan that Chelsea have at the moment.

He is tracking back, that's not the issue. The problem is that because he's doing that, he's proving to be far less effective going forward. As a result, he ends up looking mediocre in both departments. All this might be forgiveable if we didn't look flatter that Keira Knightley's chest when Hazard isn't clicking. We're crying out for a little wizard to pick the locks and there's one sat on the bench or shunted out wide so it's frustrating.

The way I look at it is if Chelsea are winning games why does it matter (no pun intended) so much if Juan is playing a big part or not? The way a lot of Chelsea fans are crying over Juan's bit part in our season you would think they are only fans of Juan mata and not Chelsea FC. I couldn't care less if it's Hilario, schwarzer and Blackman playing in our attacking midfield trio as long as they do the job and Chelsea win.

Because like Mike has pointed out, if he was surplus to requirements we could have sold him in the summer and actually bought a ******* central midfielder. And because there's been plenty of games this season where we've been dire and barely scraped it through luck/bizarre refereeing decisions/very scrappy goals whilst a solution to this, a player who has proven himself able to consistently create magic and overcome the stodginess that we've suffered from repeatedly this season, sits unused. When you factor in the sneaking suspicion that we might also be forcing out one of our two best players because of Jose's pride as well, it's a bit annoying.
 
Last edited:
That's not what Mike was saying though was it? I can totally agree with that, but Mike was saying that you're never going to fundamentally change Juan Mata when I can think of quite a few examples of footballers who have been and become better players for it.

But besides that, I think you're totally overplaying the whole tracking back thing. Mourinho isn't asking Mata to turn into Scott Parker, he's just asking him to be more defensively aware. That's the reason Oscar is starting ahead of him, and if Oscar can do it Mata can too, but he's just unwilling to do so. It's a shame, because Mata's a better attacker than Oscar, but his lack of defensive awareness and work rate is pretty unforgiveable in a side that works very hard to remain compact and minimise space for the opposition.

So what is it? Is it that Mata just isn't fit enough to track back? Is he a worse athlete than Oscar, who manages to perform the role so perfectly? Or is he just unwilling? I don't know, but either way I really don't blame Mourinho for not playing him with the gameplan that Chelsea have at the moment.
I agree about players being able to change, but I disagree with not blaming Mourinho. When Mourinho arrived at the club, Mata was undoubtedly one of the best players at the club, and surely, as a manager, you're supposed to base your tactics on your best players; not the other way around? Otherwise, it just doesn't work - for example, you can't get Accrington Stanley to play like Barcelona however hard you try!
 
I agree about players being able to change, but I disagree with not blaming Mourinho. When Mourinho arrived at the club, Mata was undoubtedly one of the best players at the club, and surely, as a manager, you're supposed to base your tactics on your best players; not the other way around? Otherwise, it just doesn't work - for example, you can't get Accrington Stanley to play like Barcelona however hard you try!

Even if you want to impose your own 'philosophy', when you're supposedly the arch pragmatist, and you're sending sides to grind results because winning is the most important thing, not using one of your best players in the scenarios where he'd be amazing for you just because he doesn't fit said philosophy is baffling.
 
The fact that you can fundamentally change players doesn't mean that you should. Maybe I'm just reading this wrong, but it looks a lot like Mike is saying that Mata's playstyle is what makes him what he is, which is an excellent player. You can reinvent him as whatever sort of player you want, but it's pretty clear how to play him if you want to get his full potential out of him.

Mata's playstyle isn't set in stone. It just so happens the way Jose is trying to play is completely at odds with the type of player Mata is at the moment. If you want to get the best out of Mata, you have to build an entire team around him. That's a very risky thing to do, and I can see why Mourinho isn't subscribing to that school of thought. None of his teams really relied on a central playmaker that dominated their plans. Inter and Sneijder was the partial exception to that, but through his tenures at Porto (Deco was a central playmaker but wasn't as important to the team as, say, their wing-backs), Chelsea, Madrid and now Chelsea again, Mourinho's methods haven't relied on any one central player. It's served him well.

Have you watched him at all this season? In pretty much every game he's played in since been called out publically by Jose, the guy has run his socks off with bucket loads of enthusiasm. He doesn't have a workrate problem; forcing him to track back and playing him out position forces him to compromise the things that he's good at in order to perform duties that clearly stuggles with.

He is tracking back, that's not the issue. The problem is that because he's doing that, he's proving to be far less effective going forward. As a result, he ends up looking mediocre in both departments. All this might be forgiveable if we didn't look flatter that Keira Knightley's chest when Hazard isn't clicking. We're crying out for a little wizard to pick the locks and there's one sat on the bench or shunted out wide so it's frustrating.

So why doesn't this same thing happen to Oscar? He manages to put in shift after shift throughout the season, tracking back and stifling opposition deep midfielders. Why is Mata so much less effective, if you're certain he puts in so much effort? It's almost certainly not a technical thing - Oscar's not that much of a better tackler than him, definitely - and you reckon it isn't mental, so what is it? Oscar manages to excel defensively and offensively in this system, and partially that's because he's better suited to it because he's more direct, but that still doesn't explain Mata's hopelessness.

Thing is, you can put the little wizard in there and tell him to do what he wants and flounce around being the Number 10 he desperately wants to be. He'll play some beautiful through balls and your strikers will latch on to them. And then when your striker misses the opportunity (because of course he will, he's a Chelsea striker :P) and the opposition counterattacks, the opposition will then be faced with a huge wide open pitch. They'll bypass a disjointed midfield (because it's Lampard and Ramires playing together, so of course they will) and then be faced with a defence that is dominant when supported and utterly vulnerable when not. And then they'll score.

Mourinho knows how to win titles. All of his teams have favoured pragmatism over flair, we all know this. He's not immune to criticism, but I do think he's right in this case. If he's going to play his style - some would argue the style that wins trophies - then he's absolutely right to leave Mata out. Because Keira Knightley may be flat, but she's got more than enough to make up for it.
 
Even if you want to impose your own 'philosophy', when you're supposedly the arch pragmatist, and you're sending sides to grind results because winning is the most important thing, not using one of your best players in the scenarios where he'd be amazing for you just because he doesn't fit said philosophy is baffling.

That's an interesting point.

What is Chelsea's best style? I think it's probably the way Jose's got you playing at the moment, Mata notwithstanding, but Benitez kept everything ticking over quite well with a more progressive approach last season.

From where I stand, Jose's compact, deep defending and quick counterattacks benefit the majority of Chelsea's attacking midfielders - Hazard, Schurrle, Willian, Oscar - as well as Ramires, Lampard and probably Terry and Cahill too. A freer, higher line and a more retentive approach would probably yield better results from a different set of players: Mata, David Luiz, Mikel and perhaps the set of strikers too, since Torres and Eto'o have lost their blistering pace and Ba was never a particularly great counterattacker anyway.

So it's a tradeoff: do you play the style your (arguable) best player best suits? Or do you play the style that the majority of the team is probably more comfortable with?
 
I remember someone saying at the start of the season how Jose hates Spanish players and wi marginalized Azpilicueta and Mata... That's before Azpi evolved into probably one of our most important players behind Cech and Hazard
 
Azpilicueta was already one of best players under Rafa, but I guess this is Mourinho's famous player development at work - just bench some of the key players then bring them back half a year later and WHOOOOSH - magic of the Special One has transformed them.
 
To be fair GC, I was specifically talking about Mata, not a footballer.
 
Azpilicueta was already one of best players under Rafa, but I guess this is Mourinho's famous player development at work - just bench some of the key players then bring them back half a year later and WHOOOOSH - magic of the Special One has transformed them.

This x 1000
 
Azpilicueta was already one of best players under Rafa, but I guess this is Mourinho's famous player development at work - just bench some of the key players then bring them back half a year later and WHOOOOSH - magic of the Special One has transformed them.

I never said Mourinho transformed him into an all-star ... All I said was that he has become a very important player under Mourinho killing the notion that Jose hates Spanish players as some of you said on this thread earlier
 
Mata's playstyle isn't set in stone. It just so happens the way Jose is trying to play is completely at odds with the type of player Mata is at the moment. If you want to get the best out of Mata, you have to build an entire team around him. That's a very risky thing to do, and I can see why Mourinho isn't subscribing to that school of thought. None of his teams really relied on a central playmaker that dominated their plans. Inter and Sneijder was the partial exception to that, but through his tenures at Porto (Deco was a central playmaker but wasn't as important to the team as, say, their wing-backs), Chelsea, Madrid and now Chelsea again, Mourinho's methods haven't relied on any one central player. It's served him well.

It doesn't always work though. There have been numerous games where opponents have refused to be drawn out of position or have had the defensive nous to play for a draw. These are the situations that most Chelsea fans want to see Mata played centrally in. No one is saying that we should compromise ourselves every game and let Mata float around doing whatever he wants, free of all responsibility. What we are saying is that there are games where he is clearly the solution to our problems and he simply isn't brought on or is used on the wing.

So why doesn't this same thing happen to Oscar? He manages to put in shift after shift throughout the season, tracking back and stifling opposition deep midfielders. Why is Mata so much less effective, if you're certain he puts in so much effort? It's almost certainly not a technical thing - Oscar's not that much of a better tackler than him, definitely - and you reckon it isn't mental, so what is it? Oscar manages to excel defensively and offensively in this system, and partially that's because he's better suited to it because he's more direct, but that still doesn't explain Mata's hopelessness.

Because they're playing in different positions. Mata has spent the vast majority of this season on the wing. We haven't really had a lot of examples of how Mata can play in the middle because he hasn't been given the chance. The fact that he is less effective on the wing in this system is hardly surprising, for the reasons I stated earlier. However, for some who is "hopeless" it's rather interesting to note that he's putting in more tackles a game than Hazard, and yet everyone is praising the latter for his dramatically improved defensive contribution.


Thing is, you can put the little wizard in there and tell him to do what he wants and flounce around being the Number 10 he desperately wants to be. [...]

You're arguing against a strawman here. No one has, least of all me, has said: "**** tactics, let's just be dodgy in the centre of the park to make sure Mata gets to play well." What we have been saying is that when the situation is appropriate, Mata should be used. It's not a new problem: the reason that Mata has been so useful to us in the past 2 seasons is because we've been consistently bad at unpicking tight defences. Now when it happens, we basically rely on Hazard dribbling 5 players.


Mourinho knows how to win titles. All of his teams have favoured pragmatism over flair, we all know this. He's not immune to criticism, but I do think he's right in this case. If he's going to play his style - some would argue the style that wins trophies - then he's absolutely right to leave Mata out. Because Keira Knightley may be flat, but she's got more than enough to make up for it.

What is Chelsea's best style? I think it's probably the way Jose's got you playing at the moment.[...]

There's a time and a place for everything. There have been plenty of games when we've been crying out for Mata and he just hasn't been brought on for reasons that baffle everyone. You seem to think that we're ignorant fans who don't understand why our midfield lacks presence, despite the fact that this thread has spent at least 50% of the last 2 years crying out for a decent central midfielder and some solidity. We're not idiots. We of all people understand pragmatism- the CL victory and the original Jose reign showed us that- but pragmatism is by it's very nature the practice of doing what is best in the actual circumstances. That isn't what Jose is doing, if anything it's the opposite: he seems so wedded to this defensive ten idea that he refuses to drop it even when it's costing us.

Even if we ignore Mata, never letting Oscar off the leash has considerably blunted his attacking ability: he's actually been fairly poor creatively all season. If it was Rafa doing this, people would be going absolutely apeshit and calling him inflexible and idealistic but because it's Jose it's all part of some masterplan, and the game that we've won with lucky decisions and moments of brilliance from Hazard are casually ignored.
 
Azpilicueta was already one of best players under Rafa, but I guess this is Mourinho's famous player development at work - just bench some of the key players then bring them back half a year later and WHOOOOSH - magic of the Special One has transformed them.

Not really what he was saying, to be fair. And let's no knock Jose for player development: we all know he's otherworldly good at it sometimes.

It doesn't always work though. There have been numerous games where opponents have refused to be drawn out of position or have had the defensive nous to play for a draw. These are the situations that most Chelsea fans want to see Mata played centrally in. No one is saying that we should compromise ourselves every game and let Mata float around doing whatever he wants, free of all responsibility. What we are saying is that there are games where he is clearly the solution to our problems and he simply isn't brought on or is used on the wing.

Then it seems to be there's a disproportionate outcry for someone who is, essentially, a bit-part specialist in this system.

Because they're playing in different positions. Mata has spent the vast majority of this season on the wing. We haven't really had a lot of examples of how Mata can play in the middle because he hasn't been given the chance. The fact that he is less effective on the wing in this system is hardly surprising, for the reasons I stated earlier. However, for some who is "hopeless" it's rather interesting to note that he's putting in more tackles a game than Hazard, and yet everyone is praising the latter for his dramatically improved defensive contribution.

But it was the case last season, when both were regular players in the centre.

The fact that he's putting in more tackles than Hazard isn't entirely surprising, given Hazard's original defensive contribution was practically **** all. But honestly, 1.2 tackles a game isn't indicative of a good defensive attacking midfielder. Oscar's 2.7 is, definitely, but they're all contributing factors to what is a bigger picture. Positioning, speed of press and positional awareness are all more important, and all pretty unmeasurable.

You're arguing against a strawman here. No one has, least of all me, has said: "**** tactics, let's just be dodgy in the centre of the park to make sure Mata gets to play well." What we have been saying is that when the situation is appropriate, Mata should be used. It's not a new problem: the reason that Mata has been so useful to us in the past 2 seasons is because we've been consistently bad at unpicking tight defences. Now when it happens, we basically rely on Hazard dribbling 5 players.

The reason why Mata was so useful in the past two seasons was because you gradually built your entire offence around him. He thrived. Fact is, if you're arguing for a more permanent role for Mata in the centre you kind of ARE asking Mourinho to say "**** tactics" because you're breaking a critical part of his system.

There's a time and a place for everything. There have been plenty of games when we've been crying out for Mata and he just hasn't been brought on for reasons that baffle everyone. You seem to think that we're ignorant fans who don't understand why our midfield lacks presence, despite the fact that this thread has spent at least 50% of the last 2 years crying out for a decent central midfielder and some solidity. We're not idiots. We of all people understand pragmatism- the CL victory and the original Jose reign showed us that- but pragmatism is by it's very nature the practice of doing what is best in the actual circumstances. That isn't what Jose is doing, if anything it's the opposite: he seems so wedded to this defensive ten idea that he refuses to drop it even when it's costing us.

Right, now if you're arguing for Mata to be played in games where you need to break down the opposition then yeah, I can get behind that, given the right circumstances. But if people are asking for that, why is there such a massive outcry when that's essentially the role he's being used in? His last five games were Southampton away (makes sense given they'd be playing for a draw), Swansea at home (likewise), Palace at home (yeah, definitely), Stoke away (again) and Sunderland away (the most relevant of all five). I'll agree he could've been used more and Jose's perhaps being a little too negative on his return to the Prem - which in itself is quite interesting - but he is being used as the catalyst to break down teams.

Where have I said you don't understand your midfield? I was clarifying, not calling you all idiots. I wouldn't be having this conversation right now if I thought you were all idiots!

but pragmatism is by it's very nature the practice of doing what is best in the actual circumstances. That isn't what Jose is doing, if anything it's the opposite: he seems so wedded to this defensive ten idea that he refuses to drop it even when it's costing us.

Very good point. It's Jose's biggest problem at the moment, finding that balance, and I suspect it's something to do with the striker problem. If he had Drogba here right now, you'd be winning games like you used to, because he would put every other chance away. Chelsea do create good chances, so the functional style works, but there's just nobody to put them away consistently. I mean ****, it speaks volumes your top three scorers are midfielders! To sum up, I don't think the problem here is the style, it's the personnel up front. Of course, then you can criticise Jose for not adapting to fit his team, which is a very valid point.

Even if we ignore Mata, never letting Oscar off the leash has considerably blunted his attacking ability: he's actually been fairly poor creatively all season. If it was Rafa doing this, people would be going absolutely apeshit and calling him inflexible and idealistic but because it's Jose it's all part of some masterplan, and the game that we've won with lucky decisions and moments of brilliance from Hazard are casually ignored.

I'm not sure what that says more about. Do Chelsea fans unconditionally hero-worship Mourinho, or were they just ridiculously unfair to Rafa? I think a little of both. In regards to Oscar, his stats are nearly identical to last season's, so I'm not certain this season is an anomaly, more an indication of the relative weaknesses in his game.
 
Then it seems to be there's a disproportionate outcry for someone who is, essentially, a bit-part specialist in this system.

How is it disproportionate? He's needed and he's not being used. There's also a lot of people basically saying that Mata is lazy because he's not working well when he's used out of position and it seems rather unfair considering the fact that he has been incredibly patient and professional.


But it was the case last season, when both were regular players in the centre.

But last season isn't really relevant if you're looking at defensive contributions in a system because the system is different. Rafa was happy to let Mata play with freedom, and valued his creative prowess over his defensive contributions. In his own words: "game intelligence: that is the key. He's very clever, he finds space and his quality is very good."


The fact that he's putting in more tackles than Hazard isn't entirely surprising, given Hazard's original defensive contribution was practically **** all. But honestly, 1.2 tackles a game isn't indicative of a good defensive attacking midfielder. Oscar's 2.7 is, definitely, but they're all contributing factors to what is a bigger picture. Positioning, speed of press and positional awareness are all more important, and all pretty unmeasurable.

Well it is, because he's on par with pretty much all of our players on the wings when it comes to putting in tackles. Obviously there are lots of factors that contribute to a good defensive presence, but if you actually watch him play he has them. He is tracking back, he is chasing the ball when out of possession, he is pressing the right players at the right time.


The reason why Mata was so useful in the past two seasons was because you gradually built your entire offence around him. He thrived. Fact is, if you're arguing for a more permanent role for Mata in the centre you kind of ARE asking Mourinho to say "**** tactics" because you're breaking a critical part of his system.

This doesn't make any sense at all and is particularly odd coming from you. It's not as if they aren't plenty of systems that we couldn't play that would give Mata the chance to shine. Yes using him in the way that would maximise his potential wouldn't work with the current system, but the sign of being a good manager is using the appropriate system at the appropriate time. Again, no one is arguing that he must play every game and we must build our system around him. What we are saying is when teams play deep against us and we look flat, maybe changing to a system that gives the 10 greater freedom might be better than just adamantly trying to grind people down or praying for Hazard to pull something out of his hat. We're asking for Jose to use the right tactics at the right time.



Right, now if you're arguing for Mata to be played in games where you need to break down the opposition then yeah, I can get behind that, given the right circumstances.

All anyone has been asking for in this thread AFAIK.

But if people are asking for that, why is there such a massive outcry when that's essentially the role he's being used in?
Because he's not being used when and where he's needed and it's a waste of an excellent player. A bit like why the Madrid fans last year were getting ****** about Ozil being shunted out to the flanks funnily enough.

His last five games were Southampton away (makes sense given they'd be playing for a draw),
Played on the wing.

Swansea at home (likewise)
Played on the wing.


Palace at home (yeah, definitely),
Stoke away (again)


Was average going forward, although he was again being asked to track back a lot against a team we should be beating at home, aka the exact situation we want to see more freedom for the 10. We've already talked about why Mata's greatest attribute is his ability to find space.

Sunderland away (the most relevant of all five).
Played on the wing.

I'll agree he could've been used more and Jose's perhaps being a little too negative on his return to the Prem - which in itself is quite interesting - but he is being used as the catalyst to break down teams.
No he's not, apart from those games he's only been played centrally twice.


Where have I said you don't understand your midfield? I was clarifying, not calling you all idiots. I wouldn't be having this conversation right now if I thought you were all idiots!
You talked about it as if we were typical, clueless fans who want to moan about things without understanding the consequences. We understand that Oscar in the middle adds much needed stability, **** I was one of the people who was most for it when we first started doing it, and I still think it's an excellent tactical ploy. Maybe I read too much into it, I am tired and irritable so my apologies if that is the case.

Very good point. It's Jose's biggest problem at the moment, finding that balance, and I suspect it's something to do with the striker problem. If he had Drogba here right now, you'd be winning games like you used to, because he would put every other chance away. Chelsea do create good chances, so the functional style works, but there's just nobody to put them away consistently. I mean ****, it speaks volumes your top three scorers are midfielders!To sum up, I don't think the problem here is the style, it's the personnel up front. Of course, then you can criticise Jose for not adapting to fit his team, which is a very valid point.
Totally agree, if we had a well rounded, physical striker upfront, the system would make a lot more sense. It does raise an interesting question though, which is will Mata be needed if we are going to play in this way. If we don't, our decision not to sell him and buy a top class centre forward in the summer seems baffling. You could argue the opposite though, and say that once we get a great central midfielder in, Mata will be able to be granted the additional freedom he needs to actually influence games whilst still working defensively.

I'm not sure what that says more about. Do Chelsea fans unconditionally hero-worship Mourinho, or were they just ridiculously unfair to Rafa? I think a little of both.

Definitely both.

In regards to Oscar, his stats are nearly identical to last season's, so I'm not certain this season is an anomaly, more an indication of the relative weaknesses in his game.

He was definitely creating more though. His creative stats are down a little bit, but yeah point taken.
 
It's pretty stupid to blame Mourinho for not selling mata and buying that star forward because none were available in the market last summer aside from the usual Cavani and Falcao both of whom would are not perfect fits for our system and would command astronomical wages and transfer fee's. We did chase the one striker who would be perfect fit ... Wayne Rooney. If he was wearing blue now, we would be 10 points clear
 
Mourinho should really rotate more. I am 100% sure lack of rotation caused Iva's injury. I can understand the importance of Iva, Mourinho loves starting him so that we can switch to a 3-5-2 mid-way through games but I reckon Iva has played nearly every game. Doesn't have to be made to feel like he is untouchable ... Ditto for Hazard
 
It's pretty stupid to blame Mourinho for not selling mata and buying that star forward because none were available in the market last summer aside from the usual Cavani and Falcao both of whom would are not perfect fits for our system and would command astronomical wages and transfer fee's. We did chase the one striker who would be perfect fit ... Wayne Rooney. If he was wearing blue now, we would be 10 points clear
What do you mean they aren't perfect fits for your system? They're both good target men, like Drogba was, and Falcao especially is a Mourinho-esque forward - strong, powerful and clinical. And plus, they'd both fit the system more than Mata, it seems, so even if they don't fit into the system as you say, they would probably still be better options than keeping Mata. As for the transfer fees and wages, I'm sure selling Mata would pretty much cover that. Basically, if Mourinho wasn't willing to use Mata effectively, he really should have sold him at the start of the season to sign a better striker than Eto'o!
 
Back
Top