If West Brom were capable of coming to the KC and playing like that they wouldn't be sitting 14th in the table...[/QUOTE] Chelsea really weren't that great ... Defensively very solid but created little. Their passing wasn't slick or precise, not the quality movement you'd come to expect. Fair enough if they'd played like they did in the first 30 on the first game of the season, but they didn't. Hazard was the only one who looked a top player.
You're lacking perspective again. What if Chelsea were just good? People need to remember we're a small club punching above our weight. The fact we've kept all the top teams down to just 2-0 defeats at worst is something to be proud of. We've got no right to win PL games.
I think some people have lost a bit of perspective. Saying Chelsea weren't that good is just ****ing bizarre. Good performances start at the back; how many opportunities did they allow us to create over 90 minutes? It was a classic away performance. Cast iron defence and the ability to break forward and score to kill the game (and in Hazard's case, not just a goal, but a world class goal). I'd love someone to tell me which visiting team has looked better this season.
Chelsea played the type of performance away from home that you'd expect from one of the very top sides in this country. They didn't have to do anything extravagant, just bide their time and wait for their time to strike. Maybe Mourinhio's game plan was to keep the game tight given how we'd played against Liverpool and Man United at home. As soon as we went 1 down we were always going to be up against, especially given how difficult Chelsea are to play against once they go ahead. It's disappointing that we didn't give them the scare we gave Liverpool or Man United, but we have to look at what we were up against today and not give ourselves too much of a disservice.
I agree it was a solid performance from chelski but i was surprised how often they play long balls and don't build from the keeper using the full backs. Also thought that why luis defensive work was solid some of his passing was woeful and he's a full Brazilian international.
Agreed. Chelsea are streets ahead of Liverpool and ManU. It's them and Man City battling it out for the title, with Arsenal close behind. Liverpool and Man United are simply not in the same class.
I think they mix it up a bit. Nowt wrong with going direct now and again. Especially when you're aiming those long passes at players with exquisite touch, like Hazard, who can bring it down on a sixpence and suddenly present you with a world of problems 20 yards out.
Who says they weren't. Where's the lack of perspective in any of my comments. I've already said that our performance over all was very good and holding them to one goal through 85 minutes was something to be proud of. I'm entitled to post as I see it and don't need the likes of you to "tutor me" in my analysis. But I'm sure you'll keep reminding me of how obtuse I am. Get off my back you pompous prick.
I was talking today to my mate about a match against Chelsea years ago. My memorys **** but it was late 80's i think. A night match maybe a Cup game? There was a pitch invasion by City bu then a load of Chelsea came out of the West Stand and all the young City kids bricked it and ran back. Cant even remember the result. Anyone shed some light on it for me? Ta.
You posted something along the lines of 'we needed to use our subs earlier'. As if it's that simple. Bruce obviously knows these basic things and if it was that easy we'd have just done it and won. But obviously for everything we try Chelsea can do something better so you need all sorts of things to go your way to win against them. I take no pleasure in criticising, I just don't like reading negative stuff about players and managerial decisions which aren't warranted.
Maybe mid 80s Chelsea banned from away games. Cup replay Clive "****y" Walker scores a 2nd couple of minutes from time Chelsea go off in bunkers seats, drop down into bunkers. I innocently smack a couple & get pulled. Told I'm lucky because the cells are already full so I'm getting ejected. Frog marched down the old cinder track parallel to Kempton. Got the piss ripped out of me for years for getting outed by a wpc. Not bitter in any way about being 18 & marched out of the ground for no other reason than protecting myself by a woman.
Then I suggest you start using your pompous "lack of perspective" lecture in response to other posts such as this one (Summer #39 MOM thread) which are far more critical than mine but made exactly the same point re running out of steam in the second half. I think you'll find several in a similar vein. "A bit similar to the game at Anfield last week in that we competed pretty well first half but seemed to run out of steam at the beginning of the second. I wonder if us trying to press hard all over the pitch from the off is taking it's toll on a lot of the players, then the energy levels aren't there to keep it going, the game gets stretched and it only takes a couple of lax moments to finish us off. It's a shame that we've acquitted ourselves so well against so many of the top sides and Liverpool at home aside, haven't got anything out of those games. I suppose on the positive side we haven't lost any of them by more than two goals (not counting Southampton). Figueroa has been poor for the last 4/5 games and really needs dropping, hopefully Brady will be back for Norwich or very soon after. I really don't get what people see in Sagbo, ignoring the miss, I can see he has some technical ability but beyond that I really can't see it. He doesn't seem to hardly get off the ground to jump for headers, doesn't seem to have a clue where he is on the pitch half the time, lazily hangs a leg out rather than moving to the ball and doesn't seem to try to get in behind or look for a ball over the top. I know he's often playing as a lone striker, which is a big ask of any player but he just doesn't offer anything in the role in my opinion. As for the suggestion that he's good at holding the ball up, he doesn't do it when it's played up to him with his back to goal either in the air or on the floor, the only time you see him do it is when the ball is played down the wing for him to run onto and then he turns back and holds onto it for a bit before playing it back to someone else."
Chelsea don't try to look good. They try to win games and only step it up when they need to against a top team.
I'm not sure what you're getting at. I'm not under the impression you're the only person sporting a lack of perspective. I know loads of people do it. I do at times and if someone pointed that out to me when I'm criticising Figueroa or someone I wouldn't go off on one like this. I'm sorry if you feel there's been an injustice or something, your post was just one that stood out to me as one which lacked perspective and attempted to over simplify the task of winning PL football matches.
Probably because you are in Canada and don't go to the games, the ball he played through to Koren for his goal against Fulham, and his hold up play yesterday and the ball which resulted in Livermore the chance of scoring, would probably change your mind.
The comment about Sagbo is not my quote. I'm actually quite impressed with Sagbo so I have no criticism of him. Actually I've seen all our games on big screen TV in Canada so I'm aware of all those plays you mention.
