robsblubot

GKs are different beasts. you cannot rotate them bc they lose confidnce not to mention timing aka match fitness. he's also one of the most dependent players on the pitch. When the defensive system is sound, the opponent's shot will be weaker and more predictable - fewer potencial paths to get to the goal. the way we've been playing no wonder courtois is struggling just like begovic was struggling before but nobody remembers. Massive overeaction with one of the very few world class players we got.

Only one of the players you listed above has been a sure starter with all managers forever... Even today, the others you mention have not Been able to contribute coming off the bench or starting. Psg beats us because they can afford having a cavani coming off the bench, while we have remys and mikels, or oscars who for different reasons, have not been effective. although i agree with you about having some strength in depth, these players have proven over and over again that they just arent good enough. Perhaps cahill and iva can still play a part but the others need to move on.

Heh it's the second time in a row they beat us and soundly. Looks like a trend. So we need to do something so it doesn't become routine/status quo. a good example of high block defensive side was Corinthians who beat us after we won CL. benitez rotated too much though.

Always thought Jose was criticized for always using a low block, not for being defensive. reckon you can play very high on the pitch and still employ defensive minded players like Ramires for ex. it is not about hitting us on the break or not - that's about high block. I refer to the type of players in the starting xi and their characteristics - not very defensive. imo bad strategy

That was good anticipation - dunno how they count interceptions... They may have counted that as a bad pass from the back for ex. not much disagreement from me aside from very specific points, but we've been there before and much of our disagreement comes down to personal preference in style of play.

Don't disagree with much there and agree that Mikel is a good short passer - numbers show that too (not only eyeballs). For me though, that's so very little... so not enough. His defensive numbers are not great. Don't even have to look at a particular game, but his overall defensive numbers are poor for a DM. And his attacking numbers are very low for a CM. So, perhaps the scores are reflecting that he's only good at one thing and missing some attributes that the position demands in their view (and mine)? But yes, arbitrary scores aren't that important. Even though I did not watch the game, I'd prob pick a few players ahead of him as best player - wild guess. And I'd say the majority of people would at the very least pick Costa ahead of Mikel? prob not a wild guess.

Either Hiddink's strategy was correct and PSG are not that great, or PSG is a superior side and our strategy was the wrong one. Because there is ONLY one way to play against a better team and that was NOT what Hiddink did. You don't play against a better team with kennedy as LB and with two CMs who can't tackle to save their lives. That's just crazy. I am talking about solidity... about stopping the opponent and disrupting their play constantly. About not conceding when you know your chance is to score a goal without conceding. It sucks playing that way, but it does increase your chances against better opponents. I digress though - Hiddink is obviously a genius who has turned pub players into PL champions... no wait that's Leicester.

world goes around... a few pages back and it is you quoting stats from these same sites... pass completion. But fair enough. My apparently too subtle point is that perhaps your opinion of Mikel is the extravagant one. He doesn't seem to be the most popular player out there - fans, pundits, sites, and former players. I think this site has very peculiar opinions about certain players - some too favorable and some too negative. Very easy to determine which is which. I personally think Mikel will be forgotten the same month he leaves the club. I'm just choosing to ignore him sooner *. * I barely watch Chelsea play these days - not something I enjoy doing so I just don't. Perhaps next season... cheers

This has literally nothing to do with what I wrote. You seem to be disagreeing with your imaginary friend again. Did he make a mistake? Couldn't care less... did not know.

Mikel got a 6.2 from whoscored for psg game. About the same on squawka. Along with courtois and Oscar our worst players according to them. had zero interceptions, 30% of his tackles worked. not my opinion, just what i read and saw out there and to contrast with the vocal minority here.

There is one thng working for us which is Blanc. he's the french wenger... No wait...

that took me a while... It as a good one - my bad for missing it.

How so? W don't have a single rounded midfielder in the squad. the closest one is Matic, but also more of a DM. Fabregas is extremely attacking minded which calls for a more defensive minded parter, but thats the type of stuff the new manager will have to figure out. it he does want to have 2-3 rounded midfielders, he will need to buy and replace players - no choice.

A bit self-serving, but fair enough. Oscar is still only 24, so I feel that despite his lack of progress, it may be premature to proclaim he's done for. Only one of us can be 100% wrong on this one.

BTW, I suspect you haven't really read and heard everything Trump said. Because, IMO, while Hilary is part of establishment, and also part of the problem especially according to the right wingers who hate government *, Trump is the problem according to the left wingers and pretty much anyone who can add and divide. * without the government the power goes (exclusively) to who controls the capital. The distribution of wealth is skewed and Trump is the face of the useless wealthy, who inherit everything, produce very little and have little success. It's very hard to lose wealth once you have it: money begets money. Like Mitt said recently, Trump is really not that great a businessman, but he sure likes to make people believe that. You can really say the most absurd things as long as you do so confidently. Capitalism only works if all players have chips to play. Think about this a bit: a poor guy will spend 100% of all the money he makes or is given, but it's still not much money (not much moves). Middle class will spend a very high percentage of what they acquire and it is a meaningful chunk. The wealthy will spend very small percentage of what they have parked. So, from an economic POV, you really want a large middle class and if you can follow any prosperous times, even here in the US, you will see a very large middle class with a lot of purchasing power. That's really not what republicans want. In the end none of this really matters that much as money casts a much stronger vote than the actual electoral votes. Do you want to understand politics in the US? It's really easy: follow the money. Now, the actual following demands a bit of an effort, because money exerts so much influence that laws are created to help who have it and don't want to be tracked - btw corporations are people too! NPR's marketplace addressed this a bunch times (good show). BTW, once you do (follow the money) both parties become somewhat similar. As a independent who usually votes democrat, I find that the republicans usually lose me, ironically, when they offer fewer freedoms: when they try to force religious ideas down my throat, their prejudices, gun craziness (I am not against ownership), and their ideas on the trickle down economics: how they work more for the wealthy and in consequence against the majority. And if you don't mind being depressed, read Republic Lost by Lessig: http://republic.lessig.org/ (free pdf download) While some of his ideas, especially on the solutions part, may seem controversial, the parts (2/3 of the book) about the influence of money and how congress works are spot on - hard to disagree with any of that. If money had no influence in politics, why there is so much money, and increasingly so, in politics?

Seems like a good player, but I'd take his performance against us with a grain of salt. Our midfield struggles often against anyone. this will go in the preferences of the manager and how he wants to setup his team. Will he employ an enforcer, or multiple rounded players? For example

https://www.whoscored.com/Matches/959842/LiveStatistics/England-Premier-League-2015-2016-Chelsea-Stoke is this somewhat accurate? Haven't watched the game, so won't comment.

Supporters have a tendency to focus on team selections, which in a squad like we have (small) is really not that important. This is especially true today because our key players from last season have been in poor form and look average - which brings them to the same level with the rest of the squad. @Muzchap agreed on tactics. Now, of course we cannot value what we don't see and the info we don't get. Hiddink has obviously improved the team tactically short/med term, and there is merit in that. However, I stick to my idea that the players have only now, this far in the season, gotten proper fit. Fabregas is the obvious example. This was based on a number of pundits' opinions, some gossip on papers, and my own eyeballs: several chubby players at the start of the season. OK, Diego actually admitted being out of shape at some point, so it's hard not to take that into account. These type of managers (temps) never play the youngsters because there is no incentive for them to do so. They would incur into risk without any real benefit for them. Unless they are part of the staff, in which case they can get recognized, internally, if they develop or find the right players. Not the case for Hiddink just yet.

depends on the forwards... Cavani doesn't score that many goals playing second striker, neither does Rooney, the same with a number of other strikers who don't lead the attack for one reason or another. You could play with 2 cavanis on the sides as wingers/2nd strikers and still be somewhat solid, but difficult to imagine we could do the same with Rooneys. In the end they are just labels. Some teams don't even play with a centralized attacker/striker. The characteristics and quality of the players is what really matters.

We already play with 2 forwards: Diego and hazard. many second forwards out there defend better and track back more than Eden does. Honestly don't see much of a difference.

No hazard is more than just a dribbler... He has exquisite tight control of the football and is able to translate that into assists to help his side. Although oscar has indeed stagnated, he's also not the dud he appears to be today. He also has done interesting things in the past, albeit not at the same level that hazard has. the danger with Eden is that his style is very entertaining and people will overvalue him even when he's not producing anything for the team, like in this season. i am torn with Hazard: he is not irreplaceable but it is obviously very difficult to replace a player of his quality. However, if he wants to leave, he should be allowed to leave as the club is always bigger than any player. a not 100% focused hazard is not worth keeping.

1. Ok now we are discussing again. However, perhaps I fully understand your opinion, after all we are not discussing anything difficult, but disagree with it? 2. You did that first buddy... I just responded. I do call everyone who calls me out on Mikel and go on and on dissing other players (brana, Iva, Oscar, Diego, Cahill) hypocrites. Is it ok for others, but not for me? 3. Again I disagree. I doesn't matter why Mikel plays regularly, but he does. The other top top teams don't have a Mikel. Only the not so top have the flaminis, youngs, and mikels who end up starting. That's why these folks don't compete, imo. of course we should better ourselves, but to me it is silly to look for a single player, which ironically is what I do with Mikel. The difference, however, is that I get called out for criticizing Mikel, by you for example, but people on here and brana thread, never are. its absolute fine if they agree with you on that, but I disagree with them on their singling out of Oscar the same way I disagree with you; even if I agree Oscar himself has stagnated. Oscar imo is one of the least problems we have esp because we have options there.

1. I was not the one who said I wont deal with someone because I don't Like his opinions... So if some is playing the victim here, it is you. Otherwise man up and reply to me not behind my back. 2. I was not playing the victim, but rather blatantly accusing you and pretty much all who liked your post of being hypocrites. 3. Why is it fine?! Why do you think playing Mikel is less detrimental to out chances of acquiring any meaningful silverware?! bit part role?! It's the other way around: Oscar is the bit part player and Mikel is the starter or are we going to discuss that too?! I don't know if it is an English way of seeing football - that defenders are defenders and attackers are attackers, but it is oh so fucking wrong. the top teams ooze talent everyfuckingwhere on the pitch! They don't have an Isco, or a Modric, they have quality players in all areas. Let me make my point abundantly clear once again: say we replace Oscar with Messi... We will still be a worse team than Barcelona, Real, and Bayern (and possibly City next season). And I am talking about Messi not Isco....

He's a good player and still so very young... Been watching him closely in CL and still stick with my original assessment: he does have tight control and pace, which is rare. However, his demeanor on the pitch is all wrong and reckon that's what Jose saw and did not like. Once again, I don't know what the manager asked him to do, but he would run 10 yards to press... his body language was weird too esp for a CL match.

I'm so very sorry to have polluted the... hmm... very pristine hatred towards Oscar, with my hatred towards Mikel. Moderators should definitely warn people if they misplace hatred... hatred should be contained in their designated threads so to be better ... found. We shall not make comparisons and point out discrepancies, otherwise we'd have nothing to write about, since most of the time we are wrong. Now that the the experts have declared who shall take Oscar's place here, all you have to do is convince the manager - any manager will do. Maybe even any member of the coaching staff might do the trick. Don't mind if I take it with a grain of salt and wait until summer to see what happens: I'd put a lot of money in that none of the aforementioned scoped geniuses will be it. Either we buy someone ready and old enough to replace Oscar or Oscar will be here another season. The rest is dreamland... * btw, I don't really hate Mikel just don't really enjoy watching him play.