They've got to be able to play football though. Never underestimate Hughton's ability to destroy everyone's game.
I'd imagine that some of you lot might like to revise your predictions in the CPL after this... You lot are definitely up against it on Saturday, PL got it absolutely right on the night, The Vile played like you played last season, players streaming forward, looking for the next goal... Well done the Vile, I enjoyed that!
I'm a bit worried about you JWM. First it is "cum on Villa". Now you want a Bent striker to put his icing on the cake. Peter Tatchell instead of Maggie now I suppose.
Did you watch tonight Carrabuh? That is the most entertainment I have seen at CR for ages? Good tactics against a very good Chelsea side and yes we rode our luck a bit, but have pace up front caused problems and there was attacking intent.
It was a great match and perfect tactics against a vastly technically superior Chelsea team. However, I still got the hint of Hughton about the team. Quite a few long balls, 4-5–1, a big striker up top.
Can we please put Kamara on for the last 20 minutes for impact and go back to the team that put the run together? Possible Holt and Beccio?
I'm of the opinion that results should not mean anything in youth football. Whats important is the players, we have probably 3 who have a bit of a chance of making it. I cannot really support the way we played because I don't believe its the best way to create the best players. So whilst the tactics were correct to win, I don't think its to the benefit of the players.
I disagree with that, yes Chelsea probably have better players and a lot of those Chelsea youngsters will perhaps be playing Premier League football in the future. I think a lot of out players matched them today. Wyatt, Toffolo, McFadden, McGeehan, Murphy twins and Morris I think all have a chance of making it . They are technically good players but our lethal weapon is the Murphy's pace and skill. We play a good counter attacking game in the fact we have very talented wingers to lead our attacks. It's not just hammering the ball into the box, they're beating players, playing off Morris etc. I think it's the right way to play counter attacking football, rather than looking for Holt or Kamara's head and banging the ball in the box.
We're talking tactics not predictions here, can't say I'm super confident about Saturday but you never know. Unfortunately Lambert already knows the majority of our squad very well.
Don't think it was that bad. Chelsea looked comfortable on the ball and we did at times although yes there was a solid defence, with long cross field ball to pacy wingers.... Hang on a minute! Just kidding, tactics were the difference tonight.Not sure Hughton has any of those for whatever opposition we are playing
I agree that results shouldn't mean anything, and from what I've read (maybe here?), things are beginning to change at grass-roots level. At a young age games aren't competitive, and I was pleased to hear that when it first gets competitive, from goal kicks the opposition players have to start in their own half to encourage playing out from the back. It was clear tonight though that whilst our players played well, they have nowhere near the calmness in possession that the Chelsea lads did, and that's a key attribute for players at the very top. I know in the last leg we played 4-4-2 diamond, which isn't quite as set-up for the predominately counter-attacking football we played tonight, so perhaps this was a case of Neil Adams adjusting tactics to suit the game (hey, that's a novelty!). I'm curious to know which 3 you'd pick out, but I'm guessing the Murphy's and perhaps Morris, because their positions require probably less calmness on the ball than the defence and CM's.
