Super Frank Thread

[killer1257 3,282]

If we had a full fit squad, would we see Gilmour yesterday? That’s the issue here. Gilmour should have been used ages ago.

Yes because he always plays the FA cup matches. Also, Billy was promoted as a first team player, so more game time was expected.
In a game like that, guys like Mou and Conte would have never used Billy as a starter

Gesendet von meinem SM-G920F mit Tapatalk

[killer1257 3,282]

Wasn’t in the squad against Nottingham Forest. Came on in the 68th minute to replace CHO against Hull.
.v Liverpool was his first game as a starter, and I still think he wouldn’t had started if we had a full fit squad like in previous occasions.

He played against United though

Gesendet von meinem SM-G920F mit Tapatalk

[Jase 43,479]

43 minutes ago, Mana said:

If we had a full fit squad, would we see Gilmour yesterday? That’s the issue here. Gilmour should have been used ages ago.

Yes, we would. Considering Jorginho is gonna miss our next 3 games through suspension, Lampard could have easily played him instead of Gilmour but he didn't. 

Our injury situation overall isn't great but we are only missing 2 players in midfield and since we have coped decently without Loftus-Cheek all season, it's pretty much only Kante that we are missing and he's a different player to Gilmour. 

[Tomo 21,681]

Dont know where else best to put this.

With Tammy going off the boil a bit and Giroud starting to pick up form when we get Callum and Pulisic back should we be playing both of them off Oli in the run in? 

While Frank shouldn't have froze out Giroud like he did it could inadvertently benefit us now as he will be pretty fresh.

[kiwi1691 255]

On 28/02/2020 at 10:03 AM, Jason said:

Should probably sack the chief scout (can't remember the name) that works with her on identifying players. 

You referring to the scouting system that picked up Kevin de bruyne for almost nothing?

 

[Jase 43,479]

15 minutes ago, Mana said:

Yes and would Lampard drop Kante in favor of Gilmour? They are different players like you said, but what I’ve seen on how Lampard treats Kante, he’ll probably shoehorn him yesterday.

Why does it have to be Gilmour? Had Kante been fit, he could have played instead of Kovacic or maybe even Barkley. 

[Jase 43,479]

1 minute ago, kiwi1691 said:

You referring to the scouting system that picked up Kevin de bruyne for almost nothing?

IIRC, that came under Emenalo's watch, no? 

And even if that came under the current scouting system, there still have been more misses than hits!

[Jase 43,479]

Just now, Mana said:

Because Gilmour barely and rarely makes the squad, let alone the starting XI.

That's because he only got promoted to the first team last month and considering he's only 18, Lampard is arguably trying to ease him rather than throw him straight into the deep end, especially when we have been under pressure to pick up results lately.

Whatever the circumstances, at least Gilmour took his chance yesterday and performed. There will be more challenges ahead but he's given himself a platform to build on. 

[Tomo 21,681]

1 hour ago, Mana said:

Yes and would Lampard drop Kante in favor of Gilmour? They are different players like you said, but what I’ve seen on how Lampard treats Kante, he’ll probably shoehorn him yesterday.

Not in the position Gilmour played, Kante would have played at the expense of Barkley most likely.

[Atomiswave 6,072]

I sat there in 87min and I got a big smile on my face, it hit me good, it was like watching old school Chelsea, you know the days when we gave the ball to opposition and just said you go ahead and control possession, cuz we are winning anyhow, knock yourself silly, cuz as soon as we get it back we will hurt you.....I fucking loved that. Full credit to FL and the boys, lovely stuff.

[communicate 2,703]

14 hours ago, Laylabelle said:

This is how we need to start being game in game out. No point winning the big games then going odd in the others. No stupid defensive moments..we didnt concede from a corner! It can be done

Who know that if you play player who are good in the air aka zouma, rudiger, alonso and Giroud you can stop conceding from set pieces. 

[ZaynChelsea 423]

Giroud bullied VVD off the pitch. He fked VVD‘s whole Surinamese fam yesterday. Great lad.

[communicate 2,703]

3 hours ago, Mana said:

Because Gilmour barely and rarely makes the squad, let alone the starting XI.

Anyway we will see in the upcoming matches what Lamps will do with Gilmour.

Did you watch Gilmour build. If you play him too much too early he won't survive. 

[communicate 2,703]

3 hours ago, Tomo said:

Dont know where else best to put this.

With Tammy going off the boil a bit and Giroud starting to pick up form when we get Callum and Pulisic back should we be playing both of them off Oli in the run in? 

While Frank shouldn't have froze out Giroud like he did it could inadvertently benefit us now as he will be pretty fresh.

I am not big fan of puli and CHO together. A bit too direct for my liking even with Giroud

[OneMoSalah 8,614]

3 hours ago, communicate said:

I am not big fan of puli and CHO together. A bit too direct for my liking even with Giroud

Yes too direct, because when teams havent played with 2 direct wingers who take people on at most opportunities they havent done very well..... not. I hope this is a joke.

Liverpool and Man City have direct wingers in their teams such as Mane, Sterling, Sane, Salah and they have been a big part of their success. I dont see how this would be a problem at all. All of Ferguson's United teams had wingers who would always play direct, try to beat players at every opportunity and even with Jose here we had Robben and Duff who were very direct.

Or lets just continue with this sideways passing football where everything comes infield with players who have no or little intent/willingness to run at fullbacks and be predictable. 

[Blue Armour 4,164]

You know that cliched saying, "it doesnt matter how many you concede as long as you outscore the opposition"?

I really think it holds true for the type of football Lampard is trying to play. 

We look good in Tottenham and Liverpool games because we thankfully converted our chances early on and rubber stamped out control on the match.

Can guarantee that if we had last seasons Hazard and RLC in the team, we would be far above where Leicester is in the table right now.

[communicate 2,703]

9 hours ago, OneMoSalah said:

Yes too direct, because when teams havent played with 2 direct wingers who take people on at most opportunities they havent done very well..... not. I hope this is a joke.

Liverpool and Man City have direct wingers in their teams such as Mane, Sterling, Sane, Salah and they have been a big part of their success. I dont see how this would be a problem at all. All of Ferguson's United teams had wingers who would always play direct, try to beat players at every opportunity and even with Jose here we had Robben and Duff who were very direct.

Or lets just continue with this sideways passing football where everything comes infield with players who have no or little intent/willingness to run at fullbacks and be predictable. 

 

Imagine playing direct attacker being supported by midfield and defense who is not good against transition and can't really dominate game. 

There is no point talking about Mou 1.0 team, that team was like this city team, we have wc player in almost every position. 

[OneMoSalah 8,614]

5 hours ago, communicate said:

 

Imagine playing direct attacker being supported by midfield and defense who is not good against transition and can't really dominate game. 

There is no point talking about Mou 1.0 team, that team was like this city team, we have wc player in almost every position. 

Then improve in midfield and defence so their better suited either by changing personnel, coaching on the training ground and the tactics/teams shape. Other coaches have done it, even here, no team is perfect. Not only the big teams who do it. Pochettino and Koeman did it with Southampton, Sean Dyche has done it at Burnley, Ancelotti is doing it at Everton. Wolves with Nuno. Sheffield with Chris Wilder. They did or have found ways to improve offensively or defensively as well as maintaining/improving other areas/keeping their strengths in other areas. 

Conte strengthened our shape and tactical set up to free the attackers up from their defensive duties, got the ball forward faster and had us creating overloads/scenarios where we could utilize the free men who were the wingbacks more often than not and other teams struggled to get to grips with that.

Jose, the second time around, strengthened our team shape the previous season and then added Cesc and Costa to give us control and an ability to break stubborn teams down. We were more clinical as we had a ruthless top level CF on top of that solid platform as well as someone like Cesc who could find that killer pass. 

Klopp has done it at Liverpool, instead of reigning in Salah, Mane and Firmino, he stuck to his approach and added Fabinho, Alisson and Van Dijk. Pep done it when he signed new full backs at City as opposed to changing his approach radically.

Really dont see your point at all. Why hold back an area we are struggling in as it is? The attack needs to improve, yea dont go all out gunho and capitulate every week but build that part of the team up, find a way to break teams down as well as create chances and be more clinical. We could be more solid but again it has been done before at other teams, becoming better offensively while also improving defensively. Improve on the weaknesses be it through recruitment, coaching or tactics.