Some of us appear to forget the classic Liverpool Euopean style for handling away games. First task was to slow tha game and quieten the crowd. Second task was to kill their attacks at the halfway line and leave no spaces. Now that's not too far from what Chelsea did today. You may not like it and it is the antithesis of how our present side plays football. However both Liverpool and Chelsea played a very high risk game today. Cheslea got their defence right today - almost a masterclass. However, one slip by a defender, one ball bouncing to an attacker rather than a defender, one mis-timed challenge in the area, or even one lucky shot and all of the hard work goes for naught. On the other hand, one crap corner and one fatal slip and somehow the bus has scored. So, we no longer have the title 'in our hands'. Funny, when we first did have it 'in our hands' we had to win over 7 matches on the trot. It was always unlikely but we gave it a good go. Now we have to show our true grit and win our last 2 matches - even if it ultimately isn't enough. Then we can hold or heads high and celebrate just how much we have grown over this season and that we are back where we belong in the Champions League - by right!
ts the hope that kills you. If you'd offered us 2nd or 3rd at the start of the season we would all have taken it and been happy to. This run has made us dream, and to miss out after having a great run like we have just had suddenly makes 2nd seen dissapointing. It isn't over yet though. We need to push on and get 6 points in the last 2 games. Man City could slip up, look at Chelsea vs Sunderland, we didn't see that coming. I hope after the Man City vs West Ham game we are all on here saying selling Carroll, Downing and Cole to them was as big a masterstroke as loaning Borini to Sunderland. We can still do it fellas.
I still love the last match of Chelsea and Liverpool, that was one of the best compared to the match recently (sunday)
Mourinho is an attention seeker,and once you realise that,his words become meaningless. His "19th century defending" comment was a throw away,and made me smile. Football isn't just about scoring goals. Defence is equally important. Chelsea were (presumably) set up to frustrate and stifle,and it worked a treat. The onus was on Liverpool to do something about it,but they weren't able to. The Fat Lady hasn't appeared yet,so don't give up hope. I suspect most neutrals will not want Chelsea crowned as Champions.
At the end of the day,we all watch football to support our team, and the result is what it is all about But if every team played like Chelsea did, then football would be the one to suffer. Sure everyone would still support their own team, but i for one would not watch other teams. It is an entertainment industry and the millions that are paid by TV will stop if the games are boring, the only people that would watch are supporters of the two teams playing. Killing games may have short term gains but as far as the future of football is concerned it is very short sighted I hope Chelsea score early against Athletico and they try and kill the game for 80 mins and then Athletico get an away goal late on, or they score early and give Mourinho a bit of his own medicine Teams at the bottom sometimes have no option but a team fighting for trophies should entertain I would rather watch most other teams instead of Chelsea If we don't win it, then i am glad it will be Man City, at least they entertain, although it pains me to admit, i have even enjoyed watching Everton this season.
The sad fact of life is that there is no compulsion for a team to entertain. There are no extra points available for doing so. Supporters will continue to pay good money to watch the dross that more often than not is served up in the P.L. Most supporters attend a game to see their team win,regardless of how they play.
Most top managers and big sides won't play anti football, but as Mourinho and Chelsea have proved this season in the big games, it's actually more effective to play that way. Though against the weaker sides it doesn't work so much, as they're quite happy to sit back too, so it ends up a stalemate. It isn't a tactical master plan to play the way Chelsea do, Chelsea just have good enough defensive players to do it. Chelsea basically had a back 4 which tucked in to make a back 6, with the 2 wingers going into the full back positions, meaning they had 4 centre halfs, and there 3 centre mids, Lampard, Matic and Mikel where sat infront of them closing Liverpool down, with Demba Ba as the outlet. When Chelsea won the ball the wingers would break forward, and the back 4 would go back to normal. The system works aslong as you have wingers that can run all day long which Chelsea do. It is not a case of Mourinho being smarter than any other manager, it is just no other manager would resort to using such negative tactics, as they want to try and win playing good football. As Brendan Rodgers even said, it doesn't take a lot of skill to coach players to play the system Mourinho had his team play
Sorry but that's bollox. Liverpool may win the title if City drop points against Everton but to suggest that they are favourites to win it on GD if both teams win their remaining games is very fanciful. You say Liverpool will score a shed load against the Toon and Palace. quite possibly. You say city have the harder games. Really?? If they beat Everton, both teams will have 2 games left with city at least +9 better off on GD. They then play Villa and West Ham at home!! They are really gonna struggle to score more than 1 against those 2 at home where they average 3.35 goals a game (more than anyone in the league) I'm praying for a slip-up by city but if they win all their matches it 99% done!!!
Man City are eight goals better off. Winning their last three by one goal (expect it to be more though) gives them a eleven goal advantage. Does anyone seriously see us beating Palace and Newcastle by that combined margin?
You could beat Newcastle at home by 4 or 5, but you won't get lots away at Palace, they are to well organised to concede a lot. Even when they went 2-0 down to City yesterday, they never lost there shape and tried to gamble to get back into the game. There tactics where to settle for a 2-0 loss, and not let the score line get any worse
I seem to remember Arsenal being very successful when playing extremely boring,"anti football". "One nil to the Arsenal" used to be their clarion call.
Yeah they where, along time ago though. Liverpool in the 70 and 80s weren't the easiest on the eye either. Mourinho though has taken things to a whole new level, he really couldn't care less about what the watching public think. Yet he goes mad when another team does it to him, like West Ham earlier in the season
Exactly. To win on GD, we'd need to hammer Newcastle for ten and still hope Man City only nick their three.
I haven't watched enough of Chelsea this season to offer an informed comment, but I would disagree slightly. I think Mourinho plays in the way he feels he needs to in order to win. If he was playing Newcastle (for example) with Hazard and Oscar available and no champions' league game coming up, he would play 'entertaining' football. Playing Liverpool, with half his team missing and a champions league crucial game in 3 days time, he had the choice of trying to 'entertain' against the best attacking team in the league and most likely getting stuffed, or playing the way he felt he needed to for his team to win. it really is a compliment to your team, and a challenge for you to overcome. In europe it will happen aswell. The fact that Chelsea's team is expensive has no bearing on the fact that you have luis suarez up front and he was missing/resting half his defence. He does what is best for his team and gives his team the best chance of winning, to hell with 'entertainment' and the footballing purists. And to be fair, can anybody really blame him?
