Rival watch

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
District Line said:
Chelsea were tired, they'd played at Old Trafford days before and played far more games than anyone else in the division.

As for Palace I thought they were pathetic tonight. I really thought they'd come out the blocks but Brighton bossed it for large periods and looked the only side interested in winning. It was a very poor game and I thought both sides were happy with a draw.

Holloway's pre-match interview suggested he's given up before the tie had started and that attitude seemed to be reflected in Palace's play.
Click to expand...

Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but Palace weren't playing for a draw. They were just outplayed. This is how they have played all year, and it has served them quite well.

They are not perfect by any means, but they still fashioned as many good chances as Brighton.

It will be tough at the amex without Murray.

As for tiredness, that is why Chelsea have spent hundreds of millions under roman building a world class squad isn't it?

Hazard didn't play vs utd, neither did torres or Cahill, and spurs were withouth Kaboul, Dembele, a fully fit lennon and most of our players were playing absolutely terribly.
 
Spursguru said:
Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but Palace weren't playing for a draw. They were just outplayed. This is how they have played all year, and it has served them quite well.

They are not perfect by any means, but they still fashioned as many good chances as Brighton.

It will be tough at the amex without Murray.

As for tiredness, that is why Chelsea have spent hundreds of millions under roman building a world class squad isn't it?

Hazard didn't play vs utd, neither did torres or Cahill, and spurs were withouth Kaboul, Dembele, a fully fit lennon and most of our players were playing absolutely terribly.
Click to expand...

I don't think the Brighton keeper had a save to make. Speroni pulled out a few good stops in the first half. When they lost Murray IMO they just set up for damage limitation and were clearly rocked by it.

Hazard didn't play against United because he was injured, and was't fully fit against Spurs. Not sure what money spent has to do with it. I'd wager Oscar, Mata and Hazard between them have played more games than your entire XI. Clearly fatigued and a break from football over the Summer will do them a world of good.
 
You're not sure what money spent has to do with it? You have a wage bill of £173m, which is more than Spurs and Everton put together. You should be able to handle a few extra games.
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
You're not sure what money spent has to do with it? You have a wage bill of £173m, which is more than Spurs and Everton put together. You should be able to handle a few extra games.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what our wage bill has to do with Oscar, Hazard and Mata playing over 230 games between them. We were inevitably going to tire later on in the game against a far fresher Spurs side.
 
District Line said:
I don't think the Brighton keeper had a save to make. Speroni pulled out a few good stops in the first half. When they lost Murray IMO they just set up for damage limitation and were clearly rocked by it.

Hazard didn't play against United because he was injured, and was't fully fit against Spurs. Not sure what money spent has to do with it. I'd wager Oscar, Mata and Hazard between them have played more games than your entire XI. Clearly fatigued and a break from football over the Summer will do them a world of good.
Click to expand...

They still had two chances cleared of the line, and a number of last ditch tackles in the pen area stopping shots.

They looked better when the game became more end to end.... from about 65mins onwards which is when they made their changes. Palace don't know how to set themselves up for Damage limitation.

I think having watched Chelsea's own brand of ****e football over the last few years has affected your judgement.
It wasn't a lack of conviction, Palace were just poor.
 
Spursguru said:
They still had two chances cleared of the line, and a number of last ditch tackles in the pen area stopping shots.

They looked better when the game became more end to end.... from about 65mins onwards which is when they made their changes. Palace don't know how to set themselves up for Damage limitation.

I think having watched Chelsea's own brand of ****e football over the last few years has affected your judgement.
It wasn't a lack of conviction, Palace were just poor.
Click to expand...

Not sure why you are getting aggressive. We both disagree but most neutrals would agree Brighton were the better side and had the better chances, this is coming from someone that would prefer Palace to progress. They had Palace completely penned in for the most part (something which even a Palace fan I know stated) and it was only the last 10 minutes Palace decided to have a go.

I've watched us play great football down the years with Zola, Drogba, Makalele, Robben and co and we've won all there is to win so I can't say I'm hurt by your comments.

Like you I'd prefer Palace to get through but I'm yet to see Palace fan (never mind a neutral) make out they were the better team, for a home side in a playoff against an arch rival they were very submissive which is probably down to the lack of confidence (1 win in 10 I think)
 
District Line said:
Not sure why you are getting aggressive. We both disagree but most neutrals would agree Brighton were the better side and had the better chances, this is coming from someone that would prefer Palace to progress. They had Palace completely penned in for the most part (something which even a Palace fan I know stated) and it was only the last 10 minutes Palace decided to have a go.

I've watched us play great football down the years with Zola, Drogba, Makalele, Robben and co and we've won all there is to win so I can't say I'm hurt by your comments.

Like you I'd prefer Palace to get through but I'm yet to see Palace fan (never mind a neutral) make out they were the better team, for a home side in a playoff against an arch rival they were very submissive which is probably down to the lack of confidence (1 win in 10 I think)
Click to expand...

Agressive? I would say that Chelsea's defensive football was ****e no matter what mood I was in?! Nothing personal. <smooch>

I agreed, they were outplayed but I disagree that they went out with the intention of Damage limitation, or as you said in the first post, that they were playing for a draw is all.
 
Ironic chants of "It's so quiet, Villa Park" from the Chelsea fans just as that move started. Not so quiet now! <laugh>
It'd be nice if they can keep this up, but it's very early in the game.
 
Bst possible start - will boost Villa and if they can keep ahead into the 2nd half then there is every chance Chelsea will tire.
 
Daveunited said:
yeah but a good run by Benteke than has the confidence to go on his weaker side with not a lot to aim at.
Click to expand...

From what I've seen of Benteke, he seems to have 2 good feet.

Very jealous of villa. We've needed someone like him for so long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back