robsblubot

It's an interesting point as he may not be a DM after all. Baffles me that people put his performance against Newcastle (not good) and his performance against Sporting (good) in the same basket. They were completely different even in style. He was indeed good, going forward against sporting, producing his usual trademark shielding (of the ball) and possession as well. He still did not defend well IMO because frankly he's too slow to cover; once a player is past him, that's it he will be jogging back behind the line of the ball as he's done many times while were were being attacked. However, attacking wise, he was far more mobile, adventurous in his passing, and worked a lot harder against Sporting than he did against Newcastle. Prob something the manager asked him to do because he certainly did not do that against Newscastle - where his passes were very conservative. Unfortunately for Mikel, and Chelsea, he only seems to perform like he did against Sporting in very easy matches; especially when the opponent plays with a slow tempo.

Ridiculous piece of defending for messi's goal. Completely switches off and marks no one. The second goal is class but Thiago silva backs off a la Gary Cahill... Blanc is naive going for a game like this playing his usual lineup. Stick Luiz in midfield and harass them.

text from bbc made me lol "This is not a drill. I repeat this is not a drill. John Mikel Obi has scored turns home a corner from the closest of ranges. He was maybe six inches out, perhaps less."

"Mikel played just fine." Agreed and still not good enough for Chelsea. "In fact much better than just fine." completely disagree Mikel offers nothing going forward, so he IS the defense. When we concede two goals, esp when away from home, perhaps he did not protect the defense as well as he should've. I'm one who does not see Mikel mistakes, because he doesn't even try anything other than the absolutely basic short and boring passing game we've seen from him over the years. Don't think he's that great defending either because of the lack of pace to cover. Yup that's how much I rate him. Once again, there is a reason we spent 21M on Matic and that he is the starter. There is also a reason Mikel doesn't play often.

Seems like Ramires isn't quite ready yet. At least not nearly 100%.

Couldn't disagree more. This is not American football. It's all interconnected. When we employ defenders (including FBs) who cannot attack, we lose that conduit and have to attack in different ways. Same in the DLP/CM position: Matic can make a seamless and quick transition between defense and attack, while Mikel cannot. Timing is everything in football and Mikel slows the game down too much with his useless and constant short passing. Perhaps the AMs and Costa ALSO struggled because the delivery was just a bit slower than normal. Matic wasn't there to make the transition on his own, and a different player had to do it, which also slows our attack for that player has to drop back to get the ball. Matic can do some of what Fabregas does while Mikel can't.

As Torres misses go, that has to be #1. Benitez messed that up though. He played the prior match with Luiz in midfield and Tite, Corinthians' coach said he was very worried about Luiz's physicality in midfield - Corinthians was a very physical team. Sure enough Benitez decided to make things easier for Tite and Corinthians by moving Luiz back to defense, weakening the midfield.

Call me speaker for the dead. That he does. His passing seems a bit awkward though; Zouma has to adjust his posture to pass the football and that's never a good sign. Too much effort to do something that's supposed to be natural for a footballer - something so basic. It might be just his youth, and frankly nerves, but he does not seem comfortable on the ball at all.

perhaps he's just as good as we thought he was? He probably has not impressed in training. Unless there is something in contract that guarantees him some playing time, which I doubt.

but there lies the problem: the abysmal difference, not only in quality, but also characteristics. Whenever Matic doesn't play we field a completely inadequate and different type of player to sub him. Yes, Rambo not being available made things worse, but I look at City and they have better options there. Yes, Matic is at least as good as Toure, but they have Fernando and Fernandinho who are a lot closer to Toure than Mikel is to Matic. Oh well not much to be done at this point, but I'd like to get another CM/DLP.

Fair enough. Just feel there are far better options out there, even as a sub. Guys with more energy, urgency, quality, and yes pace.

There is no meltdown as some of us just don't expect wc performances from Cahill. However, I also remember a few of us warning that cahill would be more exposed if we changed our style of play, which we did with fabregas in cm. Unsurprisingly tbh, John terry looks less bothered by the additional exposure this season.

Once again people will say correlation does not determine causation. However, at some point one, perhaps the manager, is bound to start asking whether there is causation between our results and whether Mikel plays or not. Like I wrote on the other thread, he did his things well enough, but I just don't think much of the things he can do. When he plays we lack, tremendously, the stuff Matic can, and mikel cannot do. Mikel is never tight market because he's not a threat. They will only going to challenge him if they think they can regain possession. He doesn't contribute in the build up play and lacks movement (not enough pace); our AMs will certainly get less service with Mikel on the pitch. And because Mikel is never tight marked, that leaves more defenders to mark them. We already have a CB (Cahill) who cannot hit a long ball to save his life, and with Mikel our attackers will always struggle. Let me exemplify my point: we were chasing the game down by a goal. Mikel receives a pass from Fabregas in the center of the pitch. He has no opponent near him and instead of turning and making a run to join the attack, which is what Matic would've done, he quickly and needlessly squares it right back to Fabregas (pass completion check! ). Even the announcer was saying, "way too many touches - too slow." He plays like Cahill in possession, but Mikel is a midfielder. If you cannot see the enormous difference in quality between Mikel and Matic, then I guess we should just agree to disagree.

Mikel had a good game and that wasn't nearly enough for a team like Chelsea. It's not really about the stuff he can do - we know what they are- but the stuff he doesn't/can't do. When in possession he simply does not partipiate in The build up play like Matic does. His lack of movement makes it harder on other players. Not a player for us. Not all about mikel ,though the attack lacks help w him on the pitch, or Cahill's poor form (don't think he's that good tbh), but we've just had too many underperformers. Newcastle are powerful, intense, and play with lots of pace. They are not that great on the ball, but our energy wasn't there to match theirs. Time to regroup and rest.

right, because he is the one who is trying to find the attackers with a through ball and they are difficult to pull off. Mikel never loses possession because he never attempts through balls. Willian has been pretty bad on assists in the past few games - his job is certainly not keeping possession.

He had a good game - easy match actually - and I didn't think he was good enough. Don't mean he cannot/shouldn't play for us, but reckon we need better from a starter. What he does right now, including the much appreciated hard work, Oscar does better. Plus oscar is better at link up play. So. That right wing position is pretty much available. Esp considering salah hasn't really delivered thus far.

Drogba, Oscar, and Eden are on fire - poor spurs.... Terrible defending in both goals though.

Not a big fan of Remy, but why doesn't he start ahead of Didier?

I can see him giving a big boost to any mid table side in the PL. He needs to play.

Both our defenders have pace, or the lack thereof, as their main deficiency. That's why, yes, we always play with a low block/deep defense line regardless of which players sit in front of them. This is less of a problem in the EPL where teams play deeper, but in Europe it can indeed become a problem. The strange bit about that article is that it pinpoints John Terry who's been playing very well. I thought he was MoTM against Sunderland as I Courtois wasn't tested enough. Another excellent CB who can't play in a high defense line: Diego Godin. BTW, David Luiz is doing very well at PSG, and in defense - the team plays to his strengths. The same way our current setup play to Terry and Cahill's strengths. David Luiz is a bad example though, because he's the most unorthodox of all good defenders out there. You can find more conventional defenders who also can play in a high line - like Kompany for example - but they are expensive.

Barkley looking like the promise he is... football glued at his feet even at speed. Harry Kane also another one to keep an eye on. Was just wondering how much better Arsenal would've been had they signed Victor Wanyama; wenger used to value this type of player, like Viera, Gilberto Silva. He's lost it.

I have my restrictions to Iva as a right back, but I consider him to be very good in defending, especially when he doesn't make too many runs forward like today. So, I really can't take anything away from Connor, as I have to assume he has merit in making Iva have a defensively poor performance. What really concerns me from today is that Sunderland showed how to play against us: stick (real) wingers on both sides, blocking our fullbacks and our width is gone. Better teams with better finishers wouldn't let us walk away with a point today.

Agree that Sunderland deserved the 3 points as they had all opportunities really. We had nothing going forward. I really like Connor Wickham - he's got pace, power, and skill, which makes him one to keep an eye on. For a change, I agree with the commentators in that our fullbacks were too defensive today. Which led our wingers all alone against defenders with cover. So, we had no wing play to speak of and Sunderland contained us in the center. Well, that's the fullbacks we've got - great defensively not so much going forward. I understand the point some here are making about more rotation, but you can only rotate when the subs are (almost) as good as the starter. Every substitution we made today brought in a weaker playing to the pitch. Perhaps with the exception of Andre - actually like his style better than willian who is too much of a one trick pony for me. Good undeserved point.

translation: Messi wants another pay raise.

Yup, that's another player who would do very well in our system... not talking of Koscielny (who is indeed very good), but Mertesacker. His lack of pace wouldn't be much of a problem in our low block, though he does lack a bit of upper body strength to become truly dominant in the air. Incidentally, while I also agree that Cahill lacks in the technique (especially) and pace departments, he is a powerful player (upper body strength too) which we all know, is very important in the EPL - though not so much in Europe.