PeteRobbo

Members_2012
  • Content count

    1,134
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About PeteRobbo

  • Rank
    CFCnet Member
  • Birthday 11/05/1947

Previous Fields

  • Team
    Chelsea FC!

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    United Kingdom
  • Interests
    Chelsea, obviously. Other sports too - Cricket, Golf, Sports Betting/Trading
    Music, Live Theatre, Films, Literature - all kinds. Novels, Non-Fiction,
    Independent Travel, Philosophy, Cosmology, Metaphysics

Recent Profile Visitors

1,049 profile views
  1. But it is equally true of course that they get us too.
  2. Absolutely! Conte's post-match press conference was first class.
  3. Me too Rod.
  4. Still sounds wonderful to me!
  5. I believe that intention certainly used to be required in order to award a foul against the perpetrator? Wasn't/isn't that the case?
  6. There are numerous examples from Italian league history, beginning with the "catenaccio" style introduced by Hellenio Herrera with Inter Milan. George Graham's Arsenal are another example and so are teams under JM.
  7. I'm not a liar and you have no right to say so. In doing that you're simply saying that all people must agree with the view that JM teams played "free flowing football' and that certainly didn't do that in his second stint with us, even when we won the league. Also, as Kev has said, even in his first stint we played a counter-attacking game throughout his term of office.
  8. Exactly so Kev.
  9. I don't know anything of the sort and I'm certainly not lying. I'm calling it as I saw it. You can hold a different opinion, as you will, given that you have your own agenda regarding JM of course. Incidentally schoolboy, ending a post with "End of" is exactly akin to sticking your thumb in your mouth and saying "so there, yahbooh". Pretty childish I'm afraid.
  10. In fact Nobly, I had taken Dave to be referring to his first time here, when we did play some really good stuff. In the second stint, when we did win the league in the first season, our play was mostly very uninspired I think, particularly in the second half of the season when we simply shut up shop, sat back on the lead we'd accumulated in the first half of the season and dragged ourselves over the line to win the title. Yes, we won the league, but I wouldn't say our play was anything to write home about. The season which followed was just dreadful and it cost him his job. Throughout it, either by accident or design, he could/would not do anything to overcome the malaise.
  11. Yeh agreed
  12. The reverse of that would be an equally valid observation regarding your own view on JM though. His successes when he first arrived are a long time back now and last season was unremittingly dreadful.
  13. A lot of posters here have always taken the view that taking the game to the opposition and playing an attacking game is adopted because it's more entertaining. In fact it's very often, perhaps always, the better option tactically for reasons which have been stated on here for a long time now. It puts the opposition on the back foot and keeps them occupied with dealing with our threat, whereas adopting a cautious and cagey approach invites them on to us and increases the chance of them scoring whilst, at the same time, limiting the extent of the threat we offer and reducing the number of chances for us to score. It's not about playing an entertaining style, it's about which is the more effective way of playing for us and which plays to our strengths and increases our chances of winning. Too many believe that a more defensively focussed approach must aways be deemed superior, but it ain't necessarily so.
  14. No matter how small the probability though Mark, there is a possibility and each and every possible draw permutation must happen sometime.
  15. Yep, that's certainly true I agree. I don't know why he felt the need to lose it from time to time, he had no need to as you say. His insight was often very acute I thought.