robsblubot

The problem is really with the definition of "defending." To you, it seems, it's about getting the ball away from your own box as quickly as possible. Mine is very very different because football isn't that simple. If you simplify in the back, you simplify the play; it's all connected. That's why I saw Cahill struggle defensively against better opposition, last weekend, while David Luiz had absolutely no problem stopping Corinthians' forwarders runs. That's defensive quality! How well you can turn your body and chase down a forwarder when he changes pace and/or direction (which is what the great FW do). The aspects of David Luiz game that are criticized here are the easiest to correct; perhaps even just a talk by the manager asking not to do this or that and stay deep, though I suspect the exact opposite takes place: managers (plural) specifically ask him to do exactly what people here dislike. Now other players who do not have David's first touch (notice how he needs a single touch to stop and control the ball?) won't improve that much; it's very difficult to improve the technical aspects of the game. It's utterly ridiculous to say that you cannot misplace a pass upfield against freaking Leeds otherwise you concede a goal. The team is obviously unbalanced. Concerning BPL defensive prowess, the numbers (spec number of goals conceded) seem to indicate a very different story.

It says a lot we are talking about David after a "thrilling" game against Leeds...

Should buy both Fellaini AND Shawcross... that'd make an entertaining locker room. They'd prob end up best friends though.

He's got a very very poor first touch, which is something that does not improve with age and experience. So, I'd say Chelsea could sign him as a squad player, but he will (probably) never have enough quality to become a regular starter.

Burning him up and criticize him?! lol That's what fans do... that's what we do around here... we want Chelsea to win, not Hazard or Oscar, or Moses. We all have our preferences, but it's about the team! If Hazard isn't creating or scoring what the hell is he doing? Why is he starting? Mata plays a lot better than him and regularly so (only 23 btw). So, yes, if the player is not performing he should be benched. Then he gets another chance when he shows something during practice. That's how things usually work when the club has options, which I think is one of the problems with Chelsea this season (lack of strength in depth).

How being young guarantees a spot for him? How being young allows him to not produce enough and still start for a club like Chelsea? Ever other sentence you wrote you mention his age, something I did mention myself, so don't really get the reason for your rant. So I will just comment about what I care about: that Hazard IMO has been very poor. So, in my view Hazard is already a player with deficiencies; He does not track back or defend well. He's very static when without the football, though he explodes into movement when he does get the ball. So, with the football at his feet he is very good, sometimes excellent. So, aside from his known and quite obvious deficiencies, he should've been scoring goals and creating chances all the time, but he is not. Him being young gives a reason for his lack of consistency, but does not give one for Chelsea to start him when he can't deliver. What applies to other players also applies to Hazard, regardless of age. Lukaku can't be too young and inconsistent for Chelsea, but it's OK if Hazard vanishes because he is too young. Nobody is saying sell him, but if his current form does not improve he should not be starting.

Ridiculous IMHO that JT isn't playing for England because "he is not a nice guy." You can't pick and choose the nice guys and then expect to win titles. You pick the best and handling the players is the manager's job; that's why they make the big bucks.

There are chances and chances; the sitter Torres missed against Corinthians is not acceptable. There is no excuse, because that was the wrong decision. It was clearly a tap-in and he tried to power it in. He was under no pressure from defenders either. That type of stats would indeed identify Joe Allen as a good player; the only problem is that he is shit. Or has been shit for liverpool. What's the use of all those completed side passes when the ones that count don't make it? Like I said before, pass completion would lead anyone to believe Gareth Barry is better Messi. Now, to the original point, Hazard has been poor. Teamwork is off, so most players struggle. One of the reasons I theorize that hurt Chelsea's teamwork is that we've got too much of a good thing; Mata and Hazard are the same player. They are both false nines. Considering we already have a false nine in Torres (sorry could not resist), and sometimes our manager even start with Moses, yet another not-a-midfielder wide player, we end up losing the midfield in every fucking match. Hazard at 21 will have ups and downs and it's up to the manager to manage the player. I hope we are not comparing a 28 yo who's been playing the BPL for a long time, with an attacking midfielder who's 21 and is playing in the league for the first time.

Walcott is a bit redundant with Sturridge and Moses for the right and Hazard and Mata (plus Bertrand) for the left. We need a goal scorer, and from Torres current form, perhaps 2. We need more in the center of the pitch. We've lost many center/holding mids and got no replacements. Lampard signing for another year or not.

yeah, but I remember pre-roman era, 2000-2001, the team was still weak but at least we had a striker! Hasselbaink was't a luminary but knew how to put the ball in the back of the net. Very difficult to win games without that minor detail (someone who can actually do that).

Droga vs Torres Take away the goals completely and analyse what they did on the pitch. Better yet, imagine if you were a defender playing for the opposition and could choose which one to play against, which one would you pick? The one that you can stop with minimal contact or the other who will prob run you over every time?! Torres clearly has a physical problem; he just isn't strong nor quick enough to play at this level, unfortunately.

I wonder whether we are approaching the tipping point with Torres. I mean, yes, it is to be expected the club will be trying to save/protect a 50 mil investment. However, Chelsea do lose money by playing him, because at the very least Chelsea did not get the 5 million which was the prise for winning the WCC. Same in Chapions League... We'd prob have qualified had we had a more competitive striker up front. I wonder what is going to take for the club to decide that enough is enough and give up on him.

So the Peruvian Paolo Gurrero is a former Bayern Munich player... somewhat ironic I guess... On Mata, it is quite obvious to me our problems go beyond a single player as they are more about team structure than individual performances, though Torres isn't doing enough on the pitch (even not scoring he should be working harder and being more physical). I said the same when Luiz was on the spotlight, and now ppl are picking on Mata. Not one player can solve our current problems. We need organization, management which should start with a concept. I don't even understand what they are trying to do there? Well I don't even know "who they are" since managers don't last long enough to really change the squad to their liking (going through enough transfer windows).

touche

Mata in my view is more of a forwarder than a midfielder. THe problem is when the manager puts Mata, Hazard, and Torres together on the pitch because then we have 3 players who don't track back, don't work hard enough. We simple don't have enough people in the midfield sometimes. I really don't understand what what Chelsea were thinking by signing these players; they are all good, but it's the case of too much of a good thing.

People usually exaggerate when they say "I wouldn't have missed that one!", but not today. That miss was legendary... It is simply inexcusable for a professional striker to miss that sitter.

TBH even though I thought Cahill had a poor game I thought he did care and gave everything. Perhaps his difficulties were just due to the different style of the players he was facing and his lack of international experience. Chelsea should have (cheekily) proposed a straight swap between Torres and Guerrero; Guerrero looked a lot better and ever stronger (physically). Anyone notice how easily Torres would go to the ground, and inadvertently so, on minimal contact? That was even more worrying to me than the sitter he missed.

Indeed they are but I (almost) wrote "one of the most..." I should have written that Corinthians are the most popular club in brazil who have organization and can actually capitalize on their huge number of followers; flamengo are incapable of that due to disorganization. Just so strange lineup... Benitez himself had been talking about upping the tempo and then he starts with Lampard and Moses and no DM... Seemed like he did not care much about losing and wanted to give Lampard some game. BTW, wasn't Benitez managing Liverpool when they lost the WCC to Sao Paulo back then?!

I thought he did well with many through balls that led to nothing with Hazard, Torres, and Moses, but he still tried. I thought Mata and Luiz played with the right intensity, Ramires did too, but he wasn't himself without the right cover I think (DM behind him). While I agree the starting lineup was questionable, especially Lamps after so long without starting, I don't really know what the conditions of the other players were; was Mickel in need of a rest perhaps? We don't have proper cover in the CM position. Moses, who I consider to be just a youngster with a lot to prove, was also a very baffling choice for a final. Corinthians as on the the most popular clubs in Brazil have been prospering along with the Brazilian economy and they've been receiving some money that would rival some mid-sized teams in Europe. Add to that some very good players who for one reason or another don't make the European move, and you end up with a good group of players. Add to that a manager that knows defending is everything in cups and you've got a tough side to crack. Benitez should've thought this though a lot better, which doesn't bide well to the other Chelsea coaches, the ones that linger there behind the manager's hot seat.

Interesting how we see football so differently as I thought Luiz was prob, along with Mata the best Chelsea player on the pitch (Cole had a good game too BTW). On the goal, it's difficult to know who's fault it was because we don't know what they should be doing in that situation, but one could question Cech too. I saw Corinthians players avoiding Luiz and going for Cahill every time. There have been articles in Brazil comparing the players which mentioned how simple Cahill's game was and even Tite (Corinthians coach) has been saying he wanted to stop David's runs somehow. Which BTW Guerrero was doing in the second half.

Ramires and Lampard were absolutely awful in the midfield; Ramires' distribution was bad and Lampard slow and static, which was to be expected due to age and lack of match fitness. Which brings the question: this wasn't the time for Lampard to regain match fitness. There is no excuse for Torres this time. Cahil should've scored too in the first half. You can't expect to win finals by missing sitters, because you aren't going to get many of them. It's great to see who rises to the occasion and who doesnt.

Corinthians don't concede many goals.... they are a physical side who know how to defend well and control tempo. Realistically we are prob done.

good defending by Corinthians... that's it... we've lost the match. There is no way we are going to score in 15 min.

Is Benitez watching the same game?! Moses is losing possession every time he gets the football.

good defending from cahill now... much better than first half.