• Current Donation Goals

Michael Tucker

Chelsea 1 Manchester United 0

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Faramir said:

Yes. He is wrong.

So you don't think our game is built on counter-attacks? 

Very strange thing to say I must admit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asvaberg   
20 hours ago, paulw66 said:

Literally impossible now with the rearranged games. We only have 3 games to play before then, so the max we could be ahead is 19 points and there would be 7 games, 21 points to play for (including that game itself). We could win it that day, but that would take City and Spurs both losing their next three matches, whilst we win our 3. Not happening. 

 

Ah, sorry, my bad. Of course, it is very unrealistic with all these rearranged fixtures. I hadn't updated my excel-file with new matchdates.

But one can always dream............ haha :)

Edited by asvaberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StebzAno   
39 minutes ago, Sleeping Dave said:

I have said on many occasions that there's one rule for Jose and another rule for everyone else. That hasn't changed at all. 

Nonsensical is just the beginning... 

Yep, certainly feels like it.

I agree we're reliant on Hazard a lot of the time, and Kante, and Luiz, Costa... maybe it's a team thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sea foot   
3 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

Nobody has said that two footed tackles aren't dangerous - they are.  I have said that stamps rarely cause any serious injury.  This was to contradict a statement that Man U were out to take Hazard out of not just the game but the rest of the season.  But please find an example of a stamp in the Prem that caused a player to be taken off or miss the next game.

Sure Rojo should have been suspended.  I agree.

To be fair Droy, I don't think people were saying that the stamp was to "take Hazard out". It was the tackles flying into and through his legs that was the injury waiting to happen. The, obvious, stamp was mentioned in addition to the "tackles". So saying that stamping rarely causes injuries as a contradiction of taking Hazard out was irrelevant IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sea foot said:

To be fair Droy, I don't think people were saying that the stamp was to "take Hazard out". It was the tackles flying into and through his legs that was the injury waiting to happen. The, obvious, stamp was mentioned in addition to the "tackles". So saying that stamping rarely causes injuries as a contradiction of taking Hazard out was irrelevant IMO.

And my response was about the tackles, the bookings and the stamp all together - as not indicating "a vindictive attempt to injure Eden".

That was my point - and my response to a post I quoted.
All this other bollocks about me defending a stamp is the usual "lets write about something else" that this site is so full of.
 

No one is defending Man U here, just putting some context in.  

On 3/14/2017 at 10:55 AM, PeteRobbo said:

2) Agree with the first part, but to merely say that last night's Utd performance was poor doesn't cover half of it. The performance was disgraceful. It was a deliberate, calculated and vindictive attempt to injure Eden and not only put him out of last night's game, but also hopefully derail our season and that was why the fans reacted as they did I thought.

On 3/15/2017 at 8:52 AM, Droy was my hero said:

Yet strangely neither of the bookings nor the stamp were offences that could possibly have injured Robben Hazard, and he took few of the assaults that Costa did.  

Man U were sharp reacting to the counter attack, true, and  reacted poorly a few times when Hazard embarrassed them.  A few bookings would have made a hell of a difference.  But not dirty.  14 fouls they committed in the whole game.
I'm willing to bet that Stoke are a lot worse in our next game.  Spurs and City have been 5 or 6 times worse in big games in the last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xCELERYx   
8 hours ago, Sleeping Dave said:

So you don't think our game is built on counter-attacks? 

Very strange thing to say I must admit. 

It isn't. Just like it wasn't at Juventus under Conte. We're playing in more or less the exact same way, I assure you of that. He doesn't coach it, the players don't practice it (confirmed by both players and coach). If it happens, it has happened organically with however that particular moment in match has unfolded.

What we can do is play various ways, again, just like it was at Juventus under Conte. We can play on the counter, we can play with possession, we can sit back and soak up pressure, we can play higher and press sides and we can play it long and direct. The one constant is that we're always organised, irrespective of which variant of play we're involved in. We've got the ability to switch between these as required. We could spend 20 minutes playing deeper and soaking up some pressure, then the next 70 on the front foot and pushed higher up, etc etc. 

Conte certainly hasn't built us around the counter-attack. Just as we aren't a defensive team, we're defensively solid, but not defensive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's a key difference you've pointed out. There's a big difference between being defensive and being very good at defending and willing to soak up pressure (which we often do at the start of games).

That's not to say there aren't games this season where we haven't been defensive this season (there have) but I'd say we're pretty versatile.

 

I don't blame Mourinho for doing his best to defend his new club and attempt (unsuccessfully) to take subtle jabs at our style of play.

It's just a shame to see him go through the process of what Sleeping Dave accurately summarised Cech's move to Arsenal did:

He went from having a future statue of him made to instead dropping down to having a box named after him. Very sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faramir   
9 hours ago, Sleeping Dave said:

So you don't think our game is built on counter-attacks? 

Very strange thing to say I must admit. 

I was referring to his media comments as well as all the other context in Bison's post.

Do you think our game is totally built on counter-attacks? There is much more to our game as you well know.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faramir   

With Dave and Droy coming together in support of Mourinho and all the dialogue on here regarding him, I thought I would express my opinion on two clear distinctions that I make concerning our most successful manager.

1. I totally respect Mourinho the football man. His philosophy brought us instant success and changed the dynamics of the Premier League. I also hold him in high esteem for the relationships he forged with the likes of Terry and Lampard. Likewise as the current manager of United I am always wary of facing a Mourinho coached team and respect his coaching and management credentials. As a football man he has earned my respect. And his legacy at Chelsea I will always view with deep gratitude.

2. I have less regard for Mourinho the fiery competitor. His constant battles with the officials and his self centered perceptions of his football reality are becoming tedious. He constantly believes that he and his team are being unfairly treated and is not shy in venting his frustrations with annoying consistency. His agenda to take out Hazard in this game is another example of his dark side.

So Droy and Dave, you have my attention and support when speaking of Mourinho the football man, but not when it comes to trying to defend him for all the other stuff.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, StebzAno said:

Yep, certainly feels like it.

I agree we're reliant on Hazard a lot of the time, and Kante, and Luiz, Costa... maybe it's a team thing?

Yeah or maybe were just reliant on Hazard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.