Barbara

my 'nothing' was the equivalent to yours 'had no influence' when you said Cesc and Costa had no influence in some games until Hazard brought us to life. The opposite is also very much true. There were times Hazard hadn't any influence in the game yet and Costa or/and Cesc took it into their hands to turn things around for us. I meant the same as you and I think both of us used hyperboles. I agree that maybe the outstanding and never ending credit to Cesc/Costa has been overshadowing Hazard's also pivotal influence. But it doesn't mean Hazard has been carrying the team alone - which is what Daniel first post was about, disagreeing with someone that said it. Like him, I disagree with this statement, the same way I disagree with the notion that Hazard hasn't been as much influent, because he has. So far Costa and Cesc are the difference between our matches against Leicester, Burnley, Swansea compared to the likes of Stoke,Sunderland, West Ham, Palace, Villa last season. That's why they take too much credit (deserved imo, I don't think they have been given excessive credit, it's Hazard who may haven't been given enough). In some of those matches last season Hazard couldn't look more apathetic (in a couple of them I remember even cursing him for looking completely uninterested). Exactly because Hazard can't successfully carry this team yet we brought Fàbregas. Costa was brought because there's no way we could have continued to play without strikers if we had any title ambitions. I don't want anyone to - once again - say I'm blaming our lack of titles or bite last year on Hazard. I don't think it's fair for one single player to carry a whole team, especially when it's a 23yo, still under development. What I am saying though is that we brought Cesc to capitalize what Hazard does and do what Hazard can't do it himself yet. Without Cesc maybe we would look the same as last season. Hazard would be leading the league's dribbles stat, somehow the chances created stats and we would probably have lost or drew two of those matches we won this season. I don't want to even imagine what it would look like without Costa. Without Hazard - we have to do an imaginary scenario as we've never played with Cesc and Costa and without him - maybe Cesc wouldn't received the ball to create his assist or we would have looked too dull to dominate a match or be offensive enough. Good thing we have the three of them, playing great football at the moment and helping the team collectively, as they're supposed to. The main difference from last season to this one is that we actually look like a team instead 10 players being hold captive of a situation where they had to hope and wait one player's moment of brilliance to bail us out of jail. That (last season) isn't how things are supposed to be, now it is.

and there were times Hazard did nothing to influence the game and Costa and Cesc (and even Ramires and Matic) did. So what's your point exactly? Remove Cesc and Costa from the team and we're back to the football last season, proof enough that Hazard along can't carry the team yet - at least not to win and score this much. the same way one can't say only Costa and Cesc did it all, you can't say Eden did it all as if Costa and Cesc were mere supporting players to Hazard 'carrying the team'. The thing is Costa and Cesc are very objective players, whereas Hazard isn't much of it yet. So the three compliment each other in every possible way. Hazard stretches the defenses or penetrates them with his dribbling, gives the pre-assist to Cesc, who's much more objective and with much better vision, does what he has to do to allow Costa to score. Hazard's decision making process can (and will) improve exponentially, Cesc and Costa don't have the technical ability he has to dribble and that's why the three work so well together. Why do we have to have a winner? It puzzles me why one can't say Costa and Cesc aren't carrying us, but another can say Hazard does. Hazard is doing exactly what he's done last year... the difference is that he has Cesc and Costa to complete what he starts. He clearly can't consistently win us matches alone yet. He gets himself in those dangerous positions then he doesn't shoot, and sometimes he takes a little too long to make the decision to pass, he isn't always objective, etc... all aspects I'm positive he'll develop. Will we start another internal competition in the team? Offensively we've been good as a team. Those three are equally important, which was @Daniel1980 first point that was completely disregarded and transformed into Costa and Cesc doing it all by themselves... I agree with him that we can't say Hazard continues to carry us this season... Hazard hasn't been doing anything on is own like he did last season (with some difficulty btw). Cesc, Costa and Hazard had and will have days where individually neither of them is brilliant and one (or even two) among the remaining two will step up. So while I understand why you want to point out that Hazard deserves more credit, you're making his role in our success bigger than that of Costa's and Cesc's which I don't think is true at all. And again, we don't need to have a winner, we need to work well as a team and that's what the three of them have been doing, compensating the other when he comes short. I think bottom line is that Hazard continues to do with he's done last year (probably with some improvement, we need more matches to say that for sure) and that wasn't enough in many matches last year and didn't get us passed 3rd place (I'M NOT BLAMING THIS ON HAZARD). The difference to last year and this year is exactly Cesc and Costa. They made a difference, allowed us to change to a more offensive style. Demanding Hazard to do it all by himself, at age 23, still under development isn't fair or sane and that's why it wasn't enough last year.

hope not to see him taking part at all against Bolton. Want to see him against Villa.

@

Didn't know he was about to become a father again. His baby girl was born today, they named her Sara

source, mate? I want to favorite that page and have babies with it

I'm ambivalent about Iva to be honest. I was in the bandwagon when he was supporting our attack really. He continues to be useful there, but the exposition he keeps leaving behind is difficult to handle with. As I said a few pages ago it's impossible for him to be at the two places at the same time, but nothing forgives his sloppiness in the goal yesterday. If he's so essential in the set-pieces, maybe you guys defending him to replace Cahill in the CB may actually have a point. I just don't see Mourinho doing it at all. He's been a liability indeed, completely irresponsible and sloppy in the back. I'm surprised Mourinho pretends not to see it.

if Chelsea lose the league for two points it means we lost at least another five (as we are three points clear at the top of it). So why are you going to choose to blame those two points and not the other five? Why are those two points lost more meaningful or directly responsible for losing a title than those other five points? And that's supposing Southampton or Aston Villa win it, because if it's Arsenal, then it's six points and for it to be City it has to be seven more lost points. This makes no sense, mate, sorry.

There are all kind of reactions in the thread. Polarized positive, polarized negative and middle ground. Maybe I do sound in the polarized positive, but I'm actually looking at the positives and accepting the negatives. I said somewhere else that I expected us to do better when they were down to 10 men, but they were still a big team and sometimes they run the extra mile. It isn't as easy as it is on paper to dominate a team just because we have one more man in the pitch. Mourinho was labeled a few things here, the moaning is constant and sometimes extreme, if it's not about the defense, it is about the attack and those demanding balance should give time for it to happen. Maybe I'm too complacent with this, but in the big scenario of things, that's not a match I think will tell the story of our season. I'll definitely have a problem if, for example, in February, March when we play UCL playoffs, the team continues to take this coward approach. We're a big team and we should play as such, even when our opponents may be better than us or have the home advantage, but right now, in this new style, while the team is still making adjustments, I think it's too much to ask. That's the opinion I've had for weeks. I've had a discussion about it a few weeks ago when people were demanding in our 2nd or 3rd match of the season to show a smooth, silky convincing football. It's not time for that imo, it's time to get the results and keep working on improving the team and making the necessary adjustments so we look better defensively and can carry on polishing the style. I expect us to be an oil machine in a couple of months, but there are some areas I hope to be worked this month already, one of them, our midfield positioning. And I think Costa struggled with how physical both Mangala and Kompany were. More times than in any other match he lost the ball, possession, fell, asked for a foul the referee didn't call not because he was isolated, but because he couldn't get rid of either of them. He was rarely double marked at those moments. I felt he struggled to win the personal duels with both of them, but maybe it was only me.

people who wanted a different approach would be moaning here about our shaky defense (they already were before this match) that would probably have conceded more and gave City unnecessary confidence to try to catch up. But hey, let's play more offensive football. It's the same old discussion... until you're balanced there isn't the fine line in the between. We aren't ready, we aren't sharp yet, we aren't the well oiled machine I can see us being in a couple of months. There are a lot of adjustments to do. Mourinho did what he had to do, we didn't have a trustworthy defense coming to this match, release our attack players against one of the best defenses there and we could be frustrated by not scoring and also conceding a couple. Diego Costa struggled A LOT with both Mangala and Kompany. Yes, he's scored seven goals in four matches, but today he was up very physical defenders and he actually struggled. We don't know if Cesc and Hazard had been released of some of their defensive work how things would work ou. Our own defense looked better today, but that's because it was too protected. To find the balance between attack and defense to play against the big teams will take a longer while. This reminds me a lot of Mourinho's second season at Real Madrid... he's made mistakes - exclusively about DD imo - and the team was quite affected by Lampard's goal. We could have gone 2-0 if Diego's shot had not hit the post... it wasn't as bad as some are making it out to be imo. So Pellegrini called us a small team as Stoke... the smalls teams led him to drop 2 and 3 points respectively and one of them is 5 points ahead of his big team. Let's give the team and Mourinho time, I'm more than satisfied with a point away at Etihad. People seem to forget that we were City's little bitch until Mourinho came back. Of course I wanted the win and I think we should have capitalized when we were playing against 10 men, but people think we were playing Burnley or QPR down to 10 men instead of the current champions... why so quick to jump on the manager? why so quick to talk bollocks? I've read all kind of shit in this thread. Just like in the Lampard episode, I'm glad the fans that actually go to the stadiums chant Mourinho's name a few times through every match instead of the shark jumpers we have around here. Forget the amazing transfer window, forget the more attacking minded style he's putting in place, forget being top of the table with by far the best attack, forget that we have key players still reaching fitness, forget it's been only five matches and forget the season started barely a month ago. Forget everything about common sense and let's react emotionally after a draw away at the current champions. Writing this last paragraph gives me feels about stupidity. Either I am too stupid or the people forgetting all those things are. One of us has to be.

The thing is girls this age can be as bad as the guys you were describing... so would you like a loud, scandalous girl? But girls' judgment at 18 isn't the best.

Develop it further

Yep, he's been sloppy in that goal... but at least Azpili is back on form. He's made a flawless match. Iva needs to put more effort defensively... his actions in the attack can't make up for his shortcomings defensively. I admit I jumped on his bandwagon, but I think it's a matter of him fixing his positioning, putting more effort, I wouldn't call for his head yet. He just needs to balance his game more. I don't know about the CB thing. I prefer him as a FB and I've been having some problems with Cahill (I lost account of how many times he backtracked from the City players today instead of going towards them), so it could be a nice change, but Iva does seem a bit sloppy now marking. So wouldn't it be exchanging six for half a dozen? If he isn't focused on defending all the time, then he could cause problems in the center defense even worse than he one he causes in the flank. He needs to get his shit together, regardless of where he plays.

did you miss the part where I said he's that TOO, but he isn't just that as you labeled him? You can bring a lot of examples where he reacted and I can bring you a lot of examples where he took the risks and jumped at the gun. What's the point? Are we going to keep changing that? My point is that you can't label him as only that when he showed character to take matters into his team's hands many times - many of them against stronger teams - when he had to. He's a manager that will make everything he needs to win. React, be pro-active, play mind games and come up with unexpected tactics, still you reduced him to simply a 'reactive' manager. I'm not the one who's been deceived here.

our manager gets what being a Blue means: “He got a good reception and this is England and this is Chelsea. Chelsea people never forget what Chelsea people do at the club. It happened to me when I was manager of Inter. It is Chelsea’s culture and beauty.” ~ José Mourinho at Frank Lampard.

are you aware he was brought AFTER we conceded, right?

well, if you choose to feel like Frank Lampard stole us three points... go ahead, I won't stop you. We failed as a team twice: dominating properly when we had one more man in the pitch, and failing to mark Milner. Frank Lampard had a great finish. We had a great counterattack. I'm not pleased by that goal, I'm not happy for Lamps, I'm not supporting him over Chelsea. I see that goal was yet one more we conceded this season that should be credited more to our mistakes than the opposition's merits.

nah, there are some Pep' ball suckers around here. They love Pep. Pep singlehanded destroyed Bayern's amazing football, but hey, at least he won the high competitive Bundesliga. Bayern fans had had enough of him last season already. Many of them can't stand him with good reason imo. You don't destroy a team like that because of your stupid personal philosophy. He's the one pony trick manager, but somehow some people call Mourinho that... okay then.

he completed that pass, then Costa hit the wood. Then we conceded to a Lamps' goal and the whole team collapsed...

I don't get most of the posts here. Some people here NEVER watched Mourinho's Inter and Mourinho's Madrid. He took a lot of risks with both of those teams. He isn't just reactive manager - although he's that as well. He's a manager that tries to do everything he can to win and he makes a few mistakes in the way. I'm royally pissed at him for making me resent Didier. That's not Didier's fault. He tries and fights, and runs, and does everything he can in the matches, the problem is he can't do much, he's been shit lately, he's 36, he's a shadow of a footballer, not simply of his old self. That's Mourinho's mistake. We had a more than shaky defense for most matches so far, so he set up a team that would offer cover to that frail defense. We did a great job through and through defending. Iva/Schurrle made a mistake that cost us a goal, you can't blame Mourinho for that. I hate his insistence on playing Drogba in important matches and I hope he can let it go, otherwise I will be really, really disappointed, but other than that, I don't see what horrible mistake he did today. Costa was unlucky not to make 2-0. We played better when they were down to 10, Mourinho doesn't play in the pitch... we were only dominated with one more man in the pitch after Lamp's goal. It's a normal reaction if you ask me, that was awkward and difficult for the players to deal with. Mourinho made mistakes today, but the overreaction here is 1000x times worse than any mistake he's done. This shit, reactive manager that owned everyone in the transfer window has his team at the top of the league unbeatable and with 3 points ahead of flukes and 5 points ahead of the closest title contender. Get a grip or go support Bayern.

he didn't cost us 3 points. Our marking of Milner did... he just did what he's got to do... If we don't say Draxler cost us 2 points, but say Ramires, Cahill did, then why just because this is Frank Lampard playing for the opposition we now play this card? He didn't single handed carried City to the draw - a draw, not a win btw. We didn't win three points because we NEVER deserved them. We played bad for most of the match, we only had some resemblance of football when they were down to 10, we didn't create enough even then, we played a completely useless Drogba when we needed to score a goal. Frank Lampard cost us nothing that we weren't very willing to give anyway. A bit of perspective doesn't hurt...

Actually I meant the ones calling Lamps all names and saying fuck him. A normal reaction, in a goal that was mainly a mistake by us, is okay. We don't disregard what Lamps represent to this club because of a goal he's scored against us. Promises? He can't keep promises that don't depend on him. He's signed a contract with City - they would never accept a clause against playing for Chelsea. He follows orders, he was fit for the match, the manager played him in, he played his part as a professional footballer. What is there to be said against him as a professional and an human being? Absolutely nothing! It sucks we didn't win, it sucks Costa didn't make 2-0 and it sucks City scored, especially with Lamps, it sucks even further to see an useless Drogba being played by Mourinho's emotions when we could have tried something in the match. But we got 1 point, we're 3 points ahead of the second place flukes, 5 points ahead of the closest title contender. It's all good, although there's a little bad taste in my mouth. Not against Lamps, just against a shitty situation and a couple of stupid mistakes - none of which I would blame Lamps for.

wouldn't it be wiser to close this thread too? Those Chelsea fans at Manchester today represent the club, represent me as a fan, represent a club that is classy through and through starting with its supporters. The clowns in this thread don't represent me, the club, the support, nothing. They're just that... clowns. I'm ashamed for you. Secondhand embarrassment.

The shot by Costa on the post hurt me more than Lamps goal. Football is ironic, those things happen. If he was coming against us he would score against us. The 'football gods' don't forgive those things. You know which legend pisses me off and hurts me all much more these days? Didier fucking Drogba. What's been on Mourinho's head? Was that his attempt on fate also having something reserved for Didier. With all due respect to Didier, I love him, but he has no business playing even 30 seconds in a match like this. At least not with his current fitness. Mourinho has been trying to make me resent this signing more than I already do. I don't know what's the point of having Remy if we're playing Didier fucking Drogba when we need to score... That's the one thing that pissed me off the most in this match.

seriously... I can't watch Drogba playing for us now when we have Remy in the bench. I'm really pissed.