Rekin

I know the usual argument is "It's not your money", but I can't help but feel that a transfer this gigantic would have a strong impact on future transfer windows.
Haaland is a brilliant player with heaps of potential, but do we really want to make such an enormous investment should the opportunity be there? 
For this kind of money you would expect basically the next coming of Messi, and is Haaland that? He is an amazing goalscorer, but I am personally not 100% convinced he would do well against the very packed defenses we often encounter in the league. 
I think that if the question is put as "Would you like Haaland?", it is easy to say "Yes, big time".
If the question instead was "Would you like Haaland, but then not get other players such as Varane, Rice etc" it would be a bit tougher (at least for me).  
 
A big question for me is also what this transfer would entail for how we play. What would the formation be, which of our more regular starters would become rotational players etc. 
This is even not considering the almost guaranteed drama a few years from now where the flirting with other clubs begin so that Mino can get his latest cut. 
 
 
 
 

The guy is 21 years old, moved away from his childhood team to a new one where he basically started without a pre-season. 
Yes, he was poor yesterday. Yes he looked careless with the ball, and did not create much overall. The rest of the team looked poor too however.
Werner had a horrible first touch, Pulisic got bogged down and threatened very rarely, Kante and Jorginho barely managed to maintain possession etc. 
It was a difficult game, and Frank's tactics currently are not favoring many of the players. 
He has shown more than once since his arrival though that he is very talented. He has scored, assisted and more than once created good opportunities by himself. 
We need to be patient with him, let the team gel and most importantly improve our ability to hold on to the ball so that he has time to find space.  

Havertz will never shine against decent opposition in the setup we have now, and it does not only apply to him.
Was Werner good today? How about Pulisic, Mount or Abraham? 
There is no link at all between defence and attack. Almost every single time ball to Havertz or other attacking players come via hoofed balls, or a pass that instantly invites pressure. 
We play way, way too slowly, leading to every pass and action being so predictable that the opposition can react before it happens. How often do you see us break through the middle via Kante or Jorginho? They are much happier passing back to their closest CB/FB. The only way to progress centrally is if Havertz/Werner/Pulisic breaks away from their defender and runs towards the middle to receive the ball, but then they are instantly swarmed and without any space to run into.
It is so frustrating, as it has been this way since the pre-season. No central presence, slow and safe passing combined with wingers forced to drop deep to receive the ball with their backs to the goal. 
Havertz might adapt over time, but I worry more about someone like Werner. He is excellent when he can use his speed whether directly or indirectly. In a slow system like ours he will get next to nothing to work with.
I really fear that Frank is not ready at all to coach a big team. It sucks because he is a legend, but this kind of bias should not direct footballing decisions.

Havertz will never shine against decent opposition in the setup we have now, and it does not only apply to him.
Was Werner good today? How about Pulisic, Mount or Abraham? 
There is no link at all between defence and attack. Almost every single time ball to Havertz or other attacking players come via hoofed balls, or a pass that instantly invites pressure. 
We play way, way too slowly, leading to every pass and action being so predictable that the opposition can react before it happens. How often do you see us break through the middle via Kante or Jorginho? They are much happier passing back to their closest CB/FB. The only way to progress centrally is if Havertz/Werner/Pulisic breaks away from their defender and runs towards the middle to receive the ball, but then they are instantly swarmed and without any space to run into.
It is so frustrating, as it has been this way since the pre-season. No central presence, slow and safe passing combined with wingers forced to drop deep to receive the ball with their backs to the goal. 
Havertz might adapt over time, but I worry more about someone like Werner. He is excellent when he can use his speed whether directly or indirectly. In a slow system like ours he will get next to nothing to work with.
I really fear that Frank is not ready at all to coach a big team. It sucks because he is a legend, but this kind of bias should not direct footballing decisions.

FB --> CB --> CB --> FB --> CM --> CB --> FB with the occasional Gk and CAM included for a pass or two.
This team will never become a title challenger as long as our midfield has next to no role in our build-up. If the other team is making sure to shut down our 10, we will create next to nothing. 

FB --> CB --> CB --> FB --> CM --> CB --> FB with the occasional Gk and CAM included for a pass or two.
This team will never become a title challenger as long as our midfield has next to no role in our build-up. If the other team is making sure to shut down our 10, we will create next to nothing. 

I wasn't able to see the second half yesterday, so only saw the replay now. Yes, the defence is far from being helpful but the last two goals could have been prevented easily with a better GK. 
This whole thing reminds me of a another club I support strongly, AIK from Stockholm. In the 2009/10 season we won the league, but our GK left the following season to another club.
In his place we had a guy who was just like Kepa. Made mistakes, had no confidence, no command and in the end cost the team many points. You could see that the whole team got into a negative spiral, because even when they played well they knew that at any point any shot could go in and undo their hard work. 
This team that won the league the previous season almost got relegated. What turned things around was that we signed a new GK. A giant who instantly became a leader from the back, commanded the hell of the area and inspired the team to make a comeback.
We are exactly in this position. Not everything is coming down to Kepa, but the fact is that he is atrocious. I don't rate Caballero at all, but I still think he is the much better option. Kepa has now let in at least four goals this season where he could have done much better, and that is from the same amount of games.
He should never be in our goal again, unless literally all other options are unavailable. 

Compared to the 19/20 season we have:
The above three points do not guarantee X amount of points in the 20/21 season. Other teams have also improved, we will have up to 6 new players starting that need to find a flow with each other, injuries could take place etc.
Still, it would be extremely unambitious to plan on staying on a status quo. Personally, I expect at the very least 15 points more compared to previous season, plus a much more convincing run in the CL (its not about winning it, its about sweeping teams like Lille and Valencia out of the way, while not getting humiliated by teams of Bayern's caliber).
An acceptable allowance for Goals Against would be up to 40 imo. We should also be justified in targeting scoring around 80 goals in the league. Goal difference is not a target itself, but it is a relevant statistic. Being around +40 is what I expect for 20/21 (clear improvement from this season without being at the level of Pool or Man C just yet). 

I wonder how much patience lampard will get from the board. Its becoming more and more clear that the issue lies with the tactics and not the players.
We have had the same game plan for ages, and it's as boring as it is ineffectual. The use of the wings and area in front of the opposition defence is criminally underused. 

I wonder how much patience lampard will get from the board. Its becoming more and more clear that the issue lies with the tactics and not the players.
We have had the same game plan for ages, and it's as boring as it is ineffectual. The use of the wings and area in front of the opposition defence is criminally underused. 

I think he did very well transitioning the ball to the attack and played a bunch of smart passes, that should have led to bigger chances. Also won the ball back by pressing more times than anybody else except Kante. If losing possession is the important stat, CHO did that more often in half the game than Havertz over 90 minutes. But thats a misleading stat to look at for attacking players. Obviously Havertz isnt playing at his best yet, but imo he was easily in our top 3 players yesterday and deserves the praise he has been getting.

Or Football Manager, where you just throw everyone up and hit that 'Overload' button...

That 334 formation from Lampard after we scored the 2nd was absolutely criminal. Almost FIFA like. Clear to see the team never practiced this. 

It is crazy to me how some of the British media is so blatantly against Chelsea. I generally enjoy content from The Guardian, but reading their sport section on Chelsea just showcases how biased they are.
For this game for example, they take great pleasure in mentioning the defensive errors for the goals, the WBA awareness to react on them, how Chelsea have spent money on players that arent instantly lighting up the league, how WBA was unlucky to not win the game etc. 
Even the angle for the Chelsea goals is a negative one, that it is the increasingly marginalized academy players who had to come and save the team. 
Fair enough, WBA did the most with what opportunities they had, but the score did not even slightly reflect the game. They were the inferior team from minute one, and looking at the score only is being results-oriented. We could have scored 5-6 goals from regular play, whereas their came from a set-piece and two individual errors. 
For comparison, they were more positive on Man Utd who literally stole the three points today than a team coming back from 0-3. 
Am I reading the wrong papers, or is this a common thing?

It is crazy to me how some of the British media is so blatantly against Chelsea. I generally enjoy content from The Guardian, but reading their sport section on Chelsea just showcases how biased they are.
For this game for example, they take great pleasure in mentioning the defensive errors for the goals, the WBA awareness to react on them, how Chelsea have spent money on players that arent instantly lighting up the league, how WBA was unlucky to not win the game etc. 
Even the angle for the Chelsea goals is a negative one, that it is the increasingly marginalized academy players who had to come and save the team. 
Fair enough, WBA did the most with what opportunities they had, but the score did not even slightly reflect the game. They were the inferior team from minute one, and looking at the score only is being results-oriented. We could have scored 5-6 goals from regular play, whereas their came from a set-piece and two individual errors. 
For comparison, they were more positive on Man Utd who literally stole the three points today than a team coming back from 0-3. 
Am I reading the wrong papers, or is this a common thing?

It is crazy to me how some of the British media is so blatantly against Chelsea. I generally enjoy content from The Guardian, but reading their sport section on Chelsea just showcases how biased they are.
For this game for example, they take great pleasure in mentioning the defensive errors for the goals, the WBA awareness to react on them, how Chelsea have spent money on players that arent instantly lighting up the league, how WBA was unlucky to not win the game etc. 
Even the angle for the Chelsea goals is a negative one, that it is the increasingly marginalized academy players who had to come and save the team. 
Fair enough, WBA did the most with what opportunities they had, but the score did not even slightly reflect the game. They were the inferior team from minute one, and looking at the score only is being results-oriented. We could have scored 5-6 goals from regular play, whereas their came from a set-piece and two individual errors. 
For comparison, they were more positive on Man Utd who literally stole the three points today than a team coming back from 0-3. 
Am I reading the wrong papers, or is this a common thing?

Despite the result, I really enjoyed his movement and action on the field today. By far the best PL game from him in a Chelsea shirt, and it is obvious that the 10-position suits him the best. 

It is crazy to me how some of the British media is so blatantly against Chelsea. I generally enjoy content from The Guardian, but reading their sport section on Chelsea just showcases how biased they are.
For this game for example, they take great pleasure in mentioning the defensive errors for the goals, the WBA awareness to react on them, how Chelsea have spent money on players that arent instantly lighting up the league, how WBA was unlucky to not win the game etc. 
Even the angle for the Chelsea goals is a negative one, that it is the increasingly marginalized academy players who had to come and save the team. 
Fair enough, WBA did the most with what opportunities they had, but the score did not even slightly reflect the game. They were the inferior team from minute one, and looking at the score only is being results-oriented. We could have scored 5-6 goals from regular play, whereas their came from a set-piece and two individual errors. 
For comparison, they were more positive on Man Utd who literally stole the three points today than a team coming back from 0-3. 
Am I reading the wrong papers, or is this a common thing?

Lol, Lampard told Alonso to head the ball to the opponent and Lampard also told Silva to gift the opponent a goal. Classic TC. Give all the fault to the coach, but not to the players



Gesendet von meinem VOG-L29 mit Tapatalk

On paper 3-3 is a shitty result for us. Leaky defence, only 1 point etc.
Coming back from 0-3 to draw is however always a really good result. This game looked completely lost at half-time. The team deserves some respect for clawing back until the very end. 
It might also be the last game for a while with the temporary defense lineup. Mendy will be ready for the next game, Chilwell will replace Alonso and Silva will be more fit. 

Exactly 👍👍👍

On paper 3-3 is a shitty result for us. Leaky defence, only 1 point etc.
Coming back from 0-3 to draw is however always a really good result. This game looked completely lost at half-time. The team deserves some respect for clawing back until the very end. 
It might also be the last game for a while with the temporary defense lineup. Mendy will be ready for the next game, Chilwell will replace Alonso and Silva will be more fit. 

While the scoreline is a disgrace, are we really getting mauled? I don't think there is a person watching this game who could say 0-3 is a fair score currently. 
It sucks balls now, but these games will happen every season. Nothing works for us while the other team seems to score by accident every 10 minutes. We need to rinse of the emotion and analyze whether the score is a result of the gameplan, individual performances or just plan bad luck. 

Another point, Kante is never going to work under FL. He is extremely wasted in a system that plays with slow possession and playing from the back.
It is a disfavor to both him and us to have him start in these type of games. It is not even that he is bad, it is just that there is next to nothing he can do here other than win some balls back. We arent the counter-attacking team. 

Another point, Kante is never going to work under FL. He is extremely wasted in a system that plays with slow possession and playing from the back.
It is a disfavor to both him and us to have him start in these type of games. It is not even that he is bad, it is just that there is next to nothing he can do here other than win some balls back. We arent the counter-attacking team.