robsblubot

lol that's exactly how I remember Taison (misspelled Tyson ) from internacional... NOT for Chelsea unless he's a completely different player now. I haven't seen him play for years though.

I thought he was very poor esp in the second half; manager prob thought the same because Suarez subbed him immediately creating lots of probs to their defense. Suarez was so much better when he came on; well, he is the better player in every aspect of the game and by a wide margin. Let's agree to disagree then, because I think Sturridge is a mediocre player (as in average).

we all agree he was never given a proper chance, but the question is why? Because Chelsea coaches did not like his haircut? Or perhaps they did not like what they saw in training? Perhaps they think he just isn't good enough? Sturridge applied a nice finish against nobody and then vanished as usual. The difference in quality between Suarez and Sturridge is just astonishing...

wow! after the game Cahill had I'd say a proper CB since Chelsea supporters don't like ball playing defenders (Rio, Phil Jones, Luiz...). Gary Cahill can do no wrong. ^^ Cahill + Iva solid?! 2 games, 2 early goals one of which at home and a loss. Make no mistake, against a decent side today's defensive performance would have led to a defeat, Ba or not.

Completely agree! It's the fucking 4231 which is defensive plague assailing most top clubs in the world, especially England. Like any other formation, you need the right players for it, but because everyone wants to play like Barca and Spain, they think 4231 is the "right" formation. To me the definition of a good manager is to employ the better system, which includes the formation, for the players he's got. The fact that Benitez hasn't changed the system that much from RDM worries me. BTW, is Oscar under any special bulking up schedule? Just wondering as it is a good time to do it.

Indeed, his fitness levels may have dropped of late (top clubs test their players often), but then if he performs well where it matters... I think it was a tactical mistake (by AVB and then RDM) to make Lampard drop deep in a Gareth Berry role; it was a waste of talent. A player with his finishing should be allowed to shoot, not to mention that box-to-box players are pretty rare. Now, if he's got an offer from say LA Galaxy for a 3-4 year deal, then he should definitely go, because it's going to be great for him. He can always return to the club as a coach later on.

I guess we need David Luiz to have a great performance to beat bottom feeder QPR at home...

So you are saying Carroll is more skillful and more English than Sturridge? How much was Carroll, 25m? It's all about the number of top clubs and the available national pool, which is quite limited for English clubs.

Still, the evidence is that Chelsea (coaches and whoever the manager is) don't think Sturridge is good enough. We can either trust they have more information than we do (I tend to be in this group), or we can think they are wrong based on the little information we have. Another piece of evidence we have is the very low price of the transfer; considering his age, status, nationality, he should be in the 20m+. Also, did any club, other than Liverpool consider a move for him? Isn't that strange?

they are opinions like most others here, or elsewhere, founded by watching the freaking games. However, personal preferences aside, how many managers and coaches have not considered Sturridge good enough to start? How many managers have played him on the wing as opposed to striker position? How much more evidence does one require? I for one, have had enough of Sturridge and trust the chelsea professionals--well paid coaches and Managers who coached him for years--to have made the right decision.

^^ there wasn't worst player! When we win a tough game away from home, we have to realize, or at least consider, that all players did their job. Luiz passing was lackluster, but his aggressiveness and power were definitely something Everton struggled with. Lampard was the old Lampard (no pun intended) because he was freed (by Luiz) from the mundane midfield work to move up field and take shots at goal. That's where he shines! Make him sit back and pass sideways is a waste of a great player!

Back to the so important first touch. I've watched a few matches of Ba and don't think much of his first touch; as in, he is either scoring or he is not in the game. Torres on the other hand is a bit more difficult to describe. I've seen INCREDIBLE first touches by him, like in the WCC against Corinthians, when he takes a long ball before it hits the ground, controlling it and finally taking a shot on goal. I've also seen Torres loses control of the football in a bizarre way. Can one be cautiously optimistic about Demba Ba? One who has been on the other side of the "the grass is always greener..." saying far too many times.

Completely agree! The defensive side of his game needs a lot of work... however, being consistent now, the aspects he needs to work on are certainly workable. It is far easier to learn how to tackle than it is (learn how) to control the ball if you don't yet know how. Hazard has perfect first touch and I've played with folks with perfect first touch before, so I know. Though in games like this one, the manager wouldn't have started Hazard if Ramires weren't on the other side of the pitch offering what Hazard does not. It's all about balance. When Hazard gets some rest, and spend some time in the gym, I won't be one saying he's a flop or something like that; it's just the natural development process of a young player.

The medical will prob include a MRI on his problematic knee.

lol OK, say you are right and Torres' first touch is just as poor; don't we need a player with sublime first touch, so he can really shine in tough matches where players get very little time on the ball? I'm just not optimistic about Ba scoring as many goals for Chelsea. I guess we will see--should we sign him of course.

well, Moses has a good first touch, but Ba does not. Good player, competent goal scorer, but certainly not comparable to Torres IMO (quality on the ball that is).

Personally, I don't rate him too highly. Cole is twice the player IMO. Cole is a lot quicker and defends far better; Baines is only better in attack, and not by a huge margin.

winning and playing well, but Vila are making it so easy... no pressure on the ball whatsoever.

One question: how do you know? I for one find it hard to believe all these 4 managers asked Luiz not to "bomb" forward and still had Luiz as a first choice CB even though Luiz apparently did not do as requested... Another piece of evidence: were we any less unbalanced when Luiz did not play? Like when our defense was shit with Cahill and Iva against West Ham. Also, one player cannot make a team unbalanced. His run should either have been covered, OR the manager should've instructed him not to make the run(s). You cannot have it both ways (that David is the cause of the unbalance). If he were instructed not to make the run, and still did (according to you has been doing that through 4 different managers), then why does he still play?!? If he was instructed to make the runs (to me the only logical explanation), then why did the other players NOT cover him? Because the team is unbalanced and I have my own theories of why: something to do with math and number of players defending. Final point: David should always be making forward runs when we play a shitty side like Leeds.

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.