robsblubot

You and every pundit, analyst, and former player out there. It's some fans who want him to score on every chance he gets, even though our strikers don't seem to. Had a good game and his movement created lots of problems to city. Didn't Iva score from a ramires rebound?! It's a team game after all.

Just to emphasize this... David Luiz played 4 games in midfield for us and we've won them all. Liverpool (H), Hull (A), United (H), and City (A) Not easy matches either.

The system is helping him and he's been helping himself by showing excellent anticipation and being more proactive. The best defenders are the ones who either intercept, or make the tackle before the opponent has the time to control the football. That was what I disliked the most about him before - he'd wait and wait and sometimes even backtrack into our own box. Not anymore as he is been very dynamic and proactive. His passing can still be improved as it isn't at the same level of JT. The fact the system is helping him with a deep defense line is only relevant for a potential buyer (and perhaps England). For Chelsea, he's been actually better than John Terry lately. JT who btw sometimes seems to be lacking pace and mobility. I can certainly see Jose resting Terry for the big matches like yesterday (City).

Agreed. What if there is nothing to be fixed though? Remember we were a bit shaky defensively back then. Exposed defenders never look very good. To your point though, building a solid defense happens to be Jose's specialty. BTW, did we not win every game Luiz played in the midfield this season? And some most of them against top sides.

The whole team defended very well. Counters were executed to perfection until the final touch. Physically dominant midfield disrupted their play completely. Anything other than the win would've been a bad result after this display. Particularly impressed with Willian's defending.

One thing I've learned in football: there is no way to win without annoying someone. The more they complain about your team, the better, because it means you are annoying them, and are winning. Regardless of what happens in the second half, it was a perfect lineup for the job. I did complain about the starting XI against WH, but today it made sense - win, draw, or lose.

What if we had a defensively better player than Mike, like Makelele, and started with him and David Luiz in defense? Isn't it the same? I mean movement wise? When David moves forward the DM moves in defense. Now if your point is that we don't have that player... well maybe not. Mikel is certainly not him. Fair enough - City then. Well, player valuation happens to be the most tangible fact we can use around here. Esp considering football is a team sport and 11 play (10 really but you get the point). The influence of a single player in football is less than say in Basketball or hockey. "Barca want different things from their defenders than Jose does." Completely agree, but it's not just Barcelona, it's Bayern too. Teams going for possession dominance seem to think DL would suit them perfectly. It's all down to strategy and tactics, but if you don't look there you can't possibly explain DL valuation. BTW, Lucio at Inter (and under Jose) was very similar to Luiz. Anyway, we might as well be discussing the wrong player here when comparing DL to Cahill, because my impression was that Chelsea got Cahill to eventually replace Terry. The surprising fact has been Terry's superb form of late (no injuries either). BTW, I'm originally from the south of Brazil with a lot of German (my ancestors migrated in 1890 if someone wonders... ) and Italian colonization and my fav team there was serie A Gremio. Gremio are known to be a pragmatic side employing no nonsense defenders, etc. They've won a lot in the 90s with Scolari as manager. They just could not beat Ajax who played total dutch football with lots of possession. The game ended 0x0 in Japan for the WCC, but Ajax had all the possession and opportunities. Just to say I'm not completely against the pragmatic style, esp in certain areas of the pitch. However, the dominant sides of today are more like the Ajax of the 90s. Amusing fact: United's Van der Sar was Ajax's goal keeper back then!

Well, other types of teams and setup appear to have more good days (at scoring goals). Is it an accident Arsenal scores a lot of goals? Sorry but you are not making much sense now. Are you saying that if we had 10 chances like the one you described (clear cut) we wouldn't have had a better chance of scoring and winning the game? Are you saying that Mourinho couldn't possibly have picked a more attacking minded starting lineup? We started with Mikel?! He cannot do long balls and has zero assist in his PL career! So, David being a better passer on the ball (and dribbler) could not possibly have added a bit more to our attacking? Regardless of what you think of him as a defender. If he is what you think he is, an overall poor player, has the world gone mad? Is Brazil mad? Is the transfer market mad? How come Barcelona made a 21M bid for him last summer and CHelsea turned it down? Why is he so valuable if he is so poor? Do you and others here know something the *professionals* don't? I don't remember hearing about any interest for cahill - much less actual bids. Perhaps it's just down to personal preferences.

It's not about the number of chances but their quality. The fact is we did not produce enough quality chances we we didn't score - opinions aside.From top of my had remember Corinthians Guerrero taking him to dance. Aguero skipping past him as if he weren't there. Even mediocre Defoe beat him. So yes I see vast improvement in Cahill this season.

Gotta take risks to win games esp when the opponent sits back. What u 'hate' about luiz is just his way of trying to help unlock a tight defense. Even as a cb he has the ability to do just that and i reckon managers encourage that when appropriate - against a weak opponent at home. We just saw what happens when we don't take risks when we dropped points against west ham at home.It all boils down to personal preferences. To me a defender that 'doesn't do anything stupid' May or May not be good enough. For me it's about what he brings when we face the toughest of opponents. Cahill did a poor job handling skillful FWs a many times before - ppl May gave forgotten that too. Staying with English defenders I believe Phil jones will be twice the defender Cahill is and Smalling might become a better defender too, unfortunately.

Carragher on Oscar: http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/29327/9141946/jamie-carragher-says-oscars-midfield-tenacity-makes-him-the-key-man-for-jose-mourinho Personal preferences aside, which include preferred style and characteristics, people seem to be ignoring a lot of evidence when discussing Oscar's current and potential ability. For example, as mentioned by Barbara earlier, Oscar's age and status in the Brazil side.

Our 0x0 result playing United away looks pretty shitty now; 2 points down the drain. ^^ good lineup, but it's too late to "unbore" the team and their football. Phil Jones would be considered too adventurous CB as opposed to the no nonsense others. A great manager would have picked the best players (regardless of styles) and try creating a team with them. THen replacing one or two just to make it work. WC is just too close to do that now.

And barcelona did not even have to play Mascherano as CB to concede 3 goals - great job! There aren't many CBs that can work in their system, that's why we shouldn't let them have Luiz. United were unfortunate to be honest. Jones was having a great game as CB when picked up a knock. SHame on Moyes for not having another CB on the bench. Mata was a passenger for most of the match - nice assist for RVP goal though.

He can score for sure, but he's an overall poor footballer. Nowhere near the quality we need.

no, we gonna buy Luiz back for 40m just because that's how we roll!

Barca offered aroud 21m last year, which was certainly not high enough for Chelsea. I'd very much like them to keep on playing Mascherano as a CB...

True, but this is very relative to system and strategies. Same goes for David Luiz, as we've discussed before. Would a Terry or Cahill get into Bayern's or Barca's starting XI? I'd say they employ very different type of players even and specially in defense. Same goes for Ramires. Mourinho already said so himself that Ramires is a key player for him. BTW, I like Ramires, but wouldn't call him a key player.

Ramires is a ball-winning midfield who can do B2B, but he is a defensive player. In my mind, Ramires should've been enough for the WH match in terms of defense. The problem wasn't him, but that we had too many defensive players in the starting XI. This happens to be my pet peeve with mourinho's tactics. Others employ more of total football while mourinho is very traditional in defense and attack. This makes his teams a bit less flexible - you have to swap players to make changes.

"We played the vast majority of the game in their final third." Who are the "we"?! Mikel? Terry? Ivanovic with his amazing dribbling and crossing skills? Which players were there in their final third?! If WH had 11 players in their own half, how many did we have to beat their 11 players? perhaps not enough. Have you heard about dribbling? Quick flicks? overlaps? Talented players are talented because they can create - if they have support! Or they are more likely to pull those things in tight spaces than say Mikel or Terry. Total football and Barcelona wouldn't make sense in the way you describe football.

It seems we disagree on arithmetic, not football. So you are saying that the number of players capable of contributing in attack in the starting XI does not matter and finishing is exclusively up to the attacking players... Honestly, that's the most absurd thing I've ever heard...The players capable of contributing in attack ARE the attacking players! If you have more of them you are more attacking minded. Total football should have thought us something. Most managers repeat this: it does not matter where a player starts the game, in which position, but how he moves on the pitch and what he does. With more and better attacking players we could have created BETTER chances to score. At very least we would have made their double covers less effective. We'd have had better odds of scoring. Yes, we'd be more exposed, but that's what it takes to win against teams who sit. My point remains: neither City nor Arsenal would ever have a Mikel type of player in their starting XI against a shitty side like West Ham at home. Jose was wrong... he's human.

Don't really think parking the bus would really work against City - you gotta press them. Cech Iva Cahill Terry Cole Luiz Matic Willian/ramires Oscar Hazard Eto'o Now it's the time to play negative disruptive football. It's the time you play a CB in midfield - spec if he does OK there, which is the case for Luiz. Really it's nothing that hasn't been done before. Between Luiz and Matic (and ever ramires) reckon we could win most of the 50/50s, rebounds, and the like. Which would make the game a lot more difficult for City. Anyway, handling the big tough teams happens to be Jose's specialty and why he makes the big bucks.

One of my first signings on fm... And some Juan my first sale - to fund the signings.

yup... It's called the la la land. No physical presence was needed in midfield. Oscar could've should've played there. You only need physical presence in tight spaces where players are pressurized and can lose possession. Not in the center of the pitch where there is no opposition. Sometimes football is as simple and true as arithmetic: the number of players we committed to attacking wasn't enough. Yes, we might have scored anyway, but the odds of scoring goals would have been higher if we had more attacking players on the pitch, preferably in the starting lineup. Or perhaps we needed more rounded players who do both as opposed to specialized players like Mikel.

yup. Why both Cahill and Terry? What do they add in attack when roaming in the midfield? Luiz + one of them. Azpi on the right, Cole on the left (could even go Andre or Bertrand if not on loan there). No Mikel! *maybe Matic. I'd actually start with Lampard + Matic/Ramires. Ramires would be more focused on defense actually. Then against City you play something like this line up. The starting line up made no sense this time... none whatsoever. Number of players committed (or capable) to attacking was way off. BTW, no opportunism here as I thought the lineup was shit from the start. Again, imagine Arsenal's line up for a game like this... no DM for sure...

He's a defensive RB/CB - not a game for him today. It was time for a very adventurous starting line up and we did not get one.