Barbara

as a Brazilian, I don't fancy France in the WC

See why the WC needs Cris?

I'm not, I'm Portugal because well, I like them and because a WC without Cristiano Ronaldo is a crime.

I was actually trying to discuss something, not to take a jab and I felt the trolling comment was uncalled for - whether in gif form or words form. But as he didn't bother to try to discuss or say I was wrong and accused me of trolling and I was WTF?!?! The lack of quality is his answer is so ridiculous that I had to answer to it. When I said gifs and nonsense, the nonsense part was supposed to cover written answers, even if they're ridiculous as his answer. Also, my memory that while crappy isn't as selective as implied, is good enough to let me know the loan was criticized universally here, not only by Belgians. So the fact that I said as time passes I still get the idea the loan was good for both Chelsea and Lukaku, I didn't mean it was Belgians defending him because it wasn't. That's something maybe you and G. thought I meant, but I didn't because if you check the posts after the loan you'll see it was universal except for a few people who thought the loan was good (some of which Belgians too). So that's the problem, maybe people are reading too much into others' words because they expect some kind of behavior or opinion that isn't there. imo it's good for Lukaku and good for Chelsea, but I wanted Ba out of the team because I feel he never fit. But you do have a point, he would have very few matches and it wouldn't help him as much as being at Everton does. Again, I support the loan, even if he's better than Ba. @Robguima, I added a comment to my previous post, after you liked it (so maybe you didn't read it) and I really appreciate what you did, so I'm mentioning you again.

but I guess the mother of all problems was that no one wanted Ba but Arsenal and the club wouldn't loan him to Arses... I'm the first to say Lukaku >>>> Ba, but can you imagine how much game play Romelu would get if we kept the four strikers? I also agree on Eto'o being short-term, but Lukaku absence is only short-term too imo. I'm positive he'll stay with us next season and he'll be more mature, more tested, and better technically, so chances are he'll fight for his place in the team. He could be what Torres or Eto'o are right now. Alternating matches between mid-week and weekend. I think he needed to mature more to be able to handle the pressure at Stamford Bridge. A lot has been said about our striker force since Didier left and there's a huge amount of pressure that I felt like he would feel a lot. In addition to the pressure there's the technical aspect that he also needs to improve. If he had stayed (along with Ba) his situation would probably be worse than Kevin's or at most the same thing. Kevin's already disheartening as it is. and thanks for addressing the troll gif above. I really appreciate it. But maybe the pressure would affect his game, we don't know that. I treat those young talents very carefully. Why expose the boy to unnecessary pressure? Let's have Torres and Eto'o handle it, not the 20yo. He has a lot to learn even technically, the better place for him to do that is where he'll deal with less pressure.

I think in December he'll receive more of them. I feel right now he has two problems working against him: lack of match rhythm and lack of confidence. The 'trying too much' that some pointed out imo is because he's trying to show something to impress because he needs to impress, but he doesn't need something different, he just needs to go back to doing his thing. He was signed by Chelsea and he led Belgium in the qualifying doing that, he doesn't need to do something else, but I guess he feels he needs. I think he needs specific guidance from Mourinho and for Mou to reassure him, and tell him to relax from the tension and pressure and just do his usual game, help the team pressing and do his thing. imo the mental aspect influences his performance even more than the lack of match rhythm.

I didn't watch the match against Crystal, only the match against Spurs, what I meant was the last match I've watched. I also watched a couple of Belgium matches in the meanwhile, and if I'm not wrong he started in at least one of them (but I guess both). I only meant that while he was scoring this topic was very hot and bothered about how the club is stupid, or Mourinho is Maleficent or how Lukaku is Chelsea's savior. The boy is 20, he's in the middle of his learning curve, he'll score a lot, but he'll also be anonymous at some matches, more likely at Chelsea than at Everton, imo. That's the only thing I meant, that I don't think the loan was such bad business as pointed for 30 pages here while he was scoring, although the topic went suddenly mum once he didn't for two matches... I didn't question his quality, he has it, I'm just saying he's showing that he's still a bit inconsistent as he should given his age and there's nothing appalling on our part to have loaned him. Once Benteke got injured and the responsibility in Belgium was his, in the matches I've watched it seemed he felt a bit the pressure, although in his press conferences and other interviews he said he was going to win back the spot he considered his (I guess he was striker before Benteke, or something like that) and @mediator, if an actual conversation that actually require words and thinking and not only gifs and nonsense is considered trolling now, then some people posting some complaints about quality may have a point. Let me go back criticize David Luiz or Frank Lampard (although I'm not even criticizing Lukaku, just defending the loan). Haven't received this kind of answer on their threads... unsurprisingly

when was the last time he scored? I've watched Belgium and he was harmless again (had already been the last Everton game I've watched, don't remember against who, I guess Spurs), but this topic has been so quiet lately (it was even in the second page of the current squad section). This is not a jab, just an honest question about his scoring stats (and maybe even current capabilities) that made people go crazy when he was loaned - while a few others stood by their opinion that he wasn't ready to take the responsibility in our attack (which has a lot more pressure than Everton's), as a supporting player, let alone as the leader as a few others suggested. Also, maybe the kid will learn to speak a little less because if memory doesn't fail, I guess he's scored only one goal (or no goal at all) since his legendary quote that he hoped/planned (or whatever) to score more goals than Chelsea's strikers (which should be his goal, he just could go without voicing it to the press). Funnily - or oddly enough - ever since our strikers have been scoring every other match... It's all part of his learning curve... both in the pitch and off it and I continue to believe he wasn't ready for us. And hopefully no jinx, to the kid or to our strikers (shall they all score). It's just an observation.

Luiz is a center-back, end of it. If someone else is playing better than him, he has to get his shit together and win back his position in the team as a center-back. We don't have problems in the right-back and although we do have in the pivot, Luiz isn't the answer to that and he can contribute to improving it by playing well as a CB,with his good distribution and long passes - that while are not as accurate as a DLP, he makes up for the lack of one, but as a CB, not a DM. Hopefully playing for the national team will give him some confidence and he'll come back to us fired up or at least more consistent. But imo there's only one position for him to play and one where he can offer something more and be a differential for us, and that is by Terry's side. Until his level prevents him from starting, he should be benched and Mourinho's and Luiz's efforts should be on making him a better CB.

using this thread for something else, but I'm not about to open a whole new topic for something that might take only one post to answer me. Mourinho mentioned in one of his recent interviews that having English players in the squad was important for a lot of reasons and one of them was to explain to foreigners why they play on boxing day - which is actually weird for me. Every other league (especially in countries where Christian religions are prominent) don't play around xmas time, but it's a tradition in England. I'd love to know why

1) I'm going crazy, as if the whole TC didn't know that already. I meant to quote you, so you'd see it, and use your name well, because it's weird calling you rmpr, but in the end my inability to type took over. But I'm laughing about it, . You can be a superhero though... Brazilian Batman and what's not 2) being a lazy bastard is a life style I excel on, so I can relate to that. Reason why I chose Arsenal 3) thanks for the favor retribution. Choo Choo always helps me with the match facts because he and JayJay poop eat stats (I can't find another explanation, it can't be their memory and google is always my source, so unless they have some superhero ability to use google they eat stats).

I'll do Arsenal. @Rmpr, and Rapha, don't be shy and just say you'd ask, next time if you need, do ask (not sure you were being serious or not though, but in case you were I can help)

I won't blame the defeat on him because I think every player will make a mistake like that... but I feel like he's slower this season to find his best form and I don't think his form in the attack has much to do with his overall form. His overall form is good imo, he's working hard, he's pressing, he's presenting himself and moving around to receive the ball. He does seem to be lacking a bit of confidence though and that's why I think we haven't seen him explode this season yet.

@CHOULO19,@, @, that TAPA user is a transparent troller, that took it to the next level in the live match against WBA. I don't understand why he hasn't been banned yet. Some of his comments are so against-Chelsea and so obvious and his trolling ways are annoying the whole board... Just a suggestion/report/complaint though

well from the television I was shocked (and also impressed) by the noise made by Schalke supporters and how they didn't stop singing even when the team was losing 3-0... I sort of felt bad at that moment because our fans in the stadium didn't have a 'comeback' to them, even when we were winning - at least that was the impression from the TV. It's a deep problem I guess, based on the many reasons you and others who actually go there explained. As a fan overseas I'm just sad

and somehow people blame this on the defending responsibility he's assumed this season and I just can't link one thing to another... The only problem a player who isn't used to press can have once they start doing it, is getting tired faster or more than they usually did. Hazard is supposed to be one of our faster players, so if he's pressing someone in the first third, maybe he won't be where he usually was (waiting in the second as he watched the game), but he's fast, he can win the ball in the first/second half and run with it, or he can receive a pass from who intercepted it. That (and getting tired) should be the only detractors on his play because he's defending. What does defending have to do with the horrible ball control he showed in the perfect pass Oscar gave to him? I see people blaming Willian - who is short and not used to heading the ball - missing a sitter header, but I literally saw no one complaining about the ball that Hazard received that could have won us the game... but his first touch was so poor, that the only time in the match we actually had one splitting pass from our AMs was completely wasted. I agree he's facing some confidence issues. I've touched that weeks (I guess months) ago in this thread when I said I wish he was more like Neymar in that aspect: just tried the dribble, if he misses a few of them, it's part of risk and the game, he'll probably be successful in a few others. When he receives the ball and does nothing with it, but pass backwards or to the side it has nothing to do with the defending responsibility he now has. And I can't think why pressing would affect his confidence either, so I think the problem is more on Hazard than on the tactics, but lately almost everyone blame the tactics and the manager for the players poor form. I'm not exempting Mourinho, it's part of his job work with his players for them to improve their form, but it's also laughable exempt a player like Hazard from his own bad shape. He's been average at most this season and maybe, just maybe, his defensive responsibility affected that, but it's not the biggest cause imo because it makes no sense. He continues to receive a huge amount of passes in the final third. Against Newcastle no other player received more passes in the final third than Hazard did (others matches too) and except those two occasions he and Mata pretended they were playing for Barcelona, he produced nothing... how can we blame that on defending responsibilities or tactics?

Something crossed my mind earlier today when I was reading an article on Ivanovic... I feel like Mourinho is keeping Lampard, Ivanovic, Terry and Eto'o in the team because he feels like he needs the experience. While Luiz isn't any kid, he has the eventual brain fart. Our AMs are all young and susceptible to inconsistency and may crack under pressure with the exception of Mata and Willian. Players like Ramires and Cahill while not that young, don't carry any leadership gene in their DNA and while they're hard workers and always put all of their hearts for the team. So I feel like Ivanovic and Lampard, for example, may play more because José needs some sort of leadership, experience and back up in the team to handle pressure, the unfavorable moments in the matches or matches that aren't easy to find a way out of them. Out of the whole squad the only guys who are this experienced and can back him up, but also are playing well are Cech, Terry and most recently Eto'o. Maybe José is playing a bit too safe because he doesn't trust the youngsters that much (to take ownership of the match, to take it on their hands to get out of the hole) and he feels they'll crack without the stability those older guys bring... If that makes sense and that's the case, would the answer be taking some risks with the younger guys and the older guys that lack leadership such as Mikel, Azpili (who isn't even older actually) or should he back the youngsters up? Or would it be better to handle his 'eggs' with as much care and precaution as possible, waiting for them to mature at their own time, providing them a good environment for that with others supporting them even if some of those other players aren't on their best technical form?

this is a team whose manager and executive have been saying that they're aiming the future first, the identity, then the rest. We finished 3rd, 14 points behind, so if we finish 8th only 10 is progress. You're treating this whole deal in such a simple and naive way... it's not just that simple because no matter who the manager is, when there's a change in command it's expected to come struggles with. Look at Pelegrini, Moyes, Ancelotti... If things were as simple as you're implying, football wouldn't be what it is. We are spoiled, it doesn't mean being spoiled is bad. That's the thing you and Raphael took from my posts. I'm not judging anyone. Anyone can support the team the way they please, I don't care and it doesn't even bother me too much). It's unusual for me to have people being so proud to be right about the bad (and that's coming from someone from a country where managers are exchanged a few times a year in many teams - a few times a year, I'll repeat) and asking for manager heads, but overall, we support our players. I read in so many posts we should get rid of Luiz, Mata, Hazard, Mourinho, Torres, Mikel, Lampard, etc. As if they didn't belong to the club, as if they were so bad (or were so deprived of chances by Mourinho) that they should all leave in January or maybe receive the Malouda treatment. It's a feeling of overreaction, I never said people don't have a right and shouldn't overreact. The only person in all my posts I come nearly to judge was you (but never implied what kind of fan you are, just your opinion about what we're facing here)... Denying we're in transition seems just like that to me, denial, as you said with all words we aren't in transition right now. Being in transition isn't an excuse to the lack of titles, but it's a very natural and valid reason for struggling. Football isn't simple like that. And said who to rebuild a new thing you don't have to take steps back? Maybe it's possible to do without it, sometimes it isn't. Our so amazing legacy from last year is a EL title we struggled more to win than the UCL title we beat Barcelona and Bayern. So what's so great from Chelsea last year that Mourinho should make sure is kept? If the best managers in world (or any manager) could always handle to just fix what's bad without affecting what's good, their lives would be much easier! Sorry if I think your view of this isn't realistic. The day football is as simple as you're making it out to be I'll lose all interest and will stick with volleyball.

there's another change in the philosophy. We're signing younger players because we want to mold the players ourselves. That's the biggest mark in Barcelona and what Bayern has been trying to emulate. This interview (actually I've watched it, not read as I said before, as now I remember it better) Bayern's president was talking how he went to Barcelona's academy and saw how it's done. It's about you having a philosophy and teaching it to your players since very young age. First we need to create the philosophy (what kind of football do we want to be known by? Possession? Counter-attack? Total football? Attacking? Defensive). Once you establish that you start working in your academy and with your young players in the main squad to make sure they think, breathe and sweat that philosophy. That's why we've changed drastically the kind of players we've been signing. We see Eto'o signings for very specific needs, but the tendency is for us to keep signing Piazons, Lukakus, Oscars, Hazards, van Ginkels until we can identify those players like we did with Traoré, when they're 15, 16 (or even younger) and we mold them in our philosophy from the beginning. I wish Roman was interviewed like other owners and presidents were so he could talk more clearly about his plans. But based on what Emenalo and Mourinho have been saying, that's the conclusion I came. Maybe I'm wrong, but there are too many evidences of that in their interviews.

I'm not pointing fingers, Raphael. I'm talking about a feeling. I have opinions, and I'm lucky a lot of them match with Mourinho's, so it's easy for me to support him. We do think the same about a lot of things. So when something goes wrong and a lot of people come yelling at the top of their lungs they were right and Chelsea is now bad, I'm shocked by it. That post initially included a Brazilian aspect to it, even your name was there along other Brazilian fans. I feel it's different here. We bitch a lot, but we don't want to be proved right when our club is losing! We bitch about our managers, players and cartolas (board members), but I'm not familiar with fans bragging about being right and the team being screwed or losing, but still being proud of being right all along. I see people upset, defeated, angry, but not proud to be right... Sorry if for me that's a foreign concept. I thought it was cultural, but I guess it's not. Also when did you ever saw me relishing on Chelsea's loss because I was proved right? Maybe the Mazacar episode? Well I bitched, before, during, after it and then I moved on. It's obvious we can't play them, but I never said Oscar, Mata or Hazard shouldn't be Chelsea players anymore (as I've read many times only in the last 24h) or that Mourinho isn't the man for the job. I said Mourinho made a mistake imo, I said it before the match and I repeated it after the match. I'm not saying he's shit, Oscar, Mata or Hazard are shit and none of them are the men for the job as I predicted months ago. Can you see the difference of what I'm saying here? Bitching is normal, but the moaning is much deeper than I'm used to. Can I have a right to be foreign to this kind of reaction? If you keep reading the post you'll see I conclude that paragraph saying that I'm not saying supporting like this is wrong, just that's it's a wild concept for me.

I think saying we played a good first half was somewhat deluding, but someone else (sorry forgot who), raised a valid point: Mourinho already reacted negatively in the press room last week. He wouldn't (and should't) blame the players again. I think he's struggling a lot dealing with this squad because certain players are less resilient or mentally strong than he's used to or than he expected them to be. So while at first I agreed he was deluding himself believing that was a good display, I believe he wasn't being absolutely honest. Of course there were positives, but he knows certain things need to change, it's just he won't crucify his players again. It was wise and for the best he shielded the squad. I'm positive he'll be more realistic with the players, but I still feel he has a good amount of players that can't deal with pressure and he has to find a common ground between pushing and understanding. It's a hard thing to do, but people think it's an easy job... He complained exactly about being passive last week, which reinforces the idea I pointed above. He was shielding and protecting the squad. If he complained about waiting the goal to arrive last week (those were his exact words) I'm positive he didn't change his view in football in 7 days. If you compare both pressers you'll see he's saying opposite things about philosophy in both of them. He's lying to protect the players now, but I'm sure he'll be very honest with them when they meet again. 1) Still City took years to win the league with the same investment. The same can be said about other teams in other countries, but still winning in England is harder. There are barely 2 serious contenders in Bundesliga, La Liga and Serie A (sorry, I don't even talk about the rest, the other leagues aren't in the same 'league' as those major 4). Serie A is more competitive but Italian football has been in crisis for a while now (corruption does that to you), so instead of leveling it from the top, it's been leveled from the bottom. But Inter, Juve, Milan as the biggest forces and then Roma, Lazio and Napoli are rarely very strong (to their standards) in the same season. It's rarely a close championship with more than two of those fighting for the title. So having money doesn't mean automatically winning titles. Maybe in Canada and USA it does (I don't follow any leagues of any sports there, can't say), but in football - especially in those big European leagues - it isn't just as simple. Again, Chelsea fans are spoiled by the prompt results we had once money was injected, but we're the exception that proves the rule, not the rule 2) Mourinho wasn't hired to make our attack be fluid (or for the attack not to be fluid), he also wasn't hired to make those players win everything this season (those players weren't signed for that either) so if that's why he shouldn't be considered the man for the job I'm sure he'll stay for a long while because that's not even the job he was hired for. Just what I said above, as he wasn't hired to make those boys win everything this season - and he was probably the wrong guy for that job - it's okay. The problem is fans don't seem to be aligned with the club's main objectives now. We're Chelsea, we're always going to enter a competition to win it, but that's not #1 priority now. As fans is hard for us to accept or even understand that. So I say that's the problem... fans wanted a manager because their goal is to win titles this season and nothing else matters. The owner - and consequently the club - is aiming something bigger because the owner already through this phase of his life as a business man in the football business. Now that he's proved himself as a business man even in football, he's taking it to the next step, so at the end of the day it's just that our objectives and the club's objective diverge a little bit.

Sometimes I feel people are supporting more their ideas than the team. It seems like they keep waiting (and wanting) to prove themselves right and consequently that the manager is bad, players X, Z and Y are bad just to prove manager A, B and players C, D and F are better... Being from a country that breathes football just as much as England I'm appalled by this sort of supporting. Some people don't support a team. They support their ideas to said team, and they stick with those (their ideas, not the team) til the end and when CHELSEA loses and their ideas are proved right, they're somehow proud to come here and say they were right from the start. Shocking. I'm not saying supporting like this is wrong, just that's wild for me as in the culture I'm part of we rarely see that. Look few people dislike Benitez more than I do... when he was appointed I couldn't watch the first couple of matches because I was getting used to seeing that man commanding my team, but I had to work around it. I'm a Chelsea fan more than I'm a Benitez hater (if the word is even that, it seems too strong. I just disapprove of his morals as a manager and I don't like his tactics - or lack of them). I was happy to know he was only the interim and wouldn't be around longer, so maybe if he was permanent I would have a harder time supporting him. But bottom line is I had to support him. I still dislike him with a passion, what people here worship him for doing (although just go check his thread and find the same people criticizing him) is having an attacking minded football based on what I read. Still we finished 14 behind ManU when we were I guess 5-6 behind when he was appointed. We struggled against Europa League sides with much inferior squads than ours. We've got our ass kicked out of the Cups - by ManCity and Swansea and still people are here now talking about the good times when we had an attacking team under Benitez management. Talk about selective memory! When every big team gave up on Europa League we treated it as if it was Champions League (which is the right thing to do, I'm not disapproving how we dealt with it), and then it was us and a bunch of 3rd tier teams, some of which we won the same 1-0 (or 2x1) I read some people complaining was the scoreline we had in Mourinho's first spell. Against THIRD TIER FOOTBALL CLUBS! Why is that people - when it's suitable to them - make the mediocre look outstanding and also degrade something of quality? Only Chelsea fans would degrade Mourinho's first season here... I bet opposition fans who may read certain comments here will laugh their arses off or will look absolutely stunned, confused and lost.

Are you serious? I mean transition doesn't mean lack of titles, just a phase between two places. This is not an excuse for the lack of titles (why we're talking about titles in November is beyond me, but okay). Of course we have a shot this year, so does Arsenal, ManCity and who knows maybe even ManUtd and Liverpool. And so does Bayern, Barcelona, RM, Dortmund among others in Europe. Transition isn't an excuse for not winning, it's just addressing the obvious no matter how in denial people can be. Mourinho was hired to deliver a job: create a football identity to this club, not only this team. He's been saying he'll chase titles the best he can while he does that, but his boss asked him something very clear, something his boss thinks the club can now work with: a style of football that will be a legacy. Of course there will be pressure to win, but I'm sure when Roman looks to the last few years when we won nearly randomly and he knows it can't get worse than that. He looks back and to when we don't win the national league or even fight for it since 2010, when we were underdogs winning UCL and struggled with weak sides to win a second tier european title and he thinks, if we're going to win things without ever being real contenders, I better at least invest into making Chelsea a powerhouse in football. It's not like we've been top dogs in England or Europe lately... Are they any doubts Roman is a smart man? You don't build an empire like he did if you aren't. He bought a club and the titles came, so he proved this team can be big in terms of title. Then he looked at teams like Bayern and Barcelona and studied their recent history to know or learn how they reached the level they're now. Barcelona isn't the biggest team in Spain and a few titles in the 2000's didn't turn them into that. RM is by a fair lead the biggest team in that country, but Barça are closing the gap. They were in a much inferior position and now they're fighting to prove they can the biggest team in history in Spain. Roman looked at how a team that while always had history never came close to be a powerhouse like Madrid, worked around and became the biggest team this century in that country. He saw a legacy being passed from manager to manager, as players came and left. Then he looked at Bayern and saw the same (except Bayern bought their way into greatness in the 70's, something very similar to what Chelsea did with Roman now in the 2000's). But he saw a philosophy that took years to be built. Last year I remember reading an interview from Bayern's president (forgot his name) where he said he looked at Barcelona and decided to copy their model (he didn't say it as straight as that, but he did say he looked at them and if I remember correctly he even said he went to Barcelona and talked to their president about the philosophy there). He decided to replicate it at Bayern and he paid the price. The team - even when facing lesser title contenders in Bundesliga - struggled and lost and I'll tell they're not done yet, they didn't reach their final goal yet. The fact that until Dortmund became a real contender, Bayern still struggled to win (and lost) titles in the Bundesliga when they had much more money should be taken into consideration. They paid a price and now they're collecting the results of a long term project. I assume based on everything we read Roman decided to do the same. We already won every title (of importance) that was there to win, we don't have to prove anything to anyone, but we could take it to the next level and that's what they're trying. Mourinho won't be fired because of results and lack of titles, he will be fired if he shows Roman he's the wrong man to create an identity, to deal with those still young eggs and their limitations and fragility. Maybe Mourinho is the wrong man to the job, I'm not saying he's the right man, but then he's wrong for creating an identity and that can only be measured a couple of years down the road, not a couple of months. He'll be fired and proved the wrong man to the job when it's possible to evaluate his job and the message is clear, the job is to create a legacy, not to win titles off the bat as we did for years now, struggling a lot, being completely inconsistent (such as winning UCL and ending 6th in the national league) and unpredictable. When was the last time we were considered favorite to win EPL and real contenders to win UCL? We won the former as contenders (not favorite and there's a difference) and the latter as underdogs. That's not what Roman wants, and as he's smart and also not deluded, he knows you don't build a team like that in a couple of seasons (let alone 4 months) because he knows he didn't become a millionaire within a couple of years. He's a business man, a very successful one, so he won't make rookie mistakes with football, now that he's familiar with the hurdles and challenges of this specific business. It's long a term investment and process and he knows it. Denying that we'll go through a transition that will last a couple of years is refusing to see what's happening and reading between the lines. Also, people who became fans during the Roman era (nothing wrong with that) only know this Chelsea, they don't know the old Chelsea. That alone has been a transition... Just look to ManCity to see how difficult it is to make a transition in your status. One year you're a mid-table team, maybe fighting relegation (after being relegated too many times) and the next you have a squad that is worth half a billion. If anything I'm very surprised we've won so much in such a short time. We were in CL SF and finals in a matter of a few years. Again, the problem is we've got spoiled... and I wonder what will happen to this club's support if we ever go through what Liverpool and Arsenal have been through the last few years and fear not, we will, every team goes a period of time when they don't win. Just look at history. Also, let's talk about titles or the lack of them either when we don't have chances of winning any or when we've already won any. No one could predict Chelsea to win the UCL in 2012 and we haven't been contenders to EPL since we won it. Not to say last year we didn't even make UCL round of 16. So I'd say the expectations about titles for Chelsea are very low for years now, and the people who need to be realistic about it, are, so I'm not worried at all and I'm sure Mourinho is much less.

I'll skip commentating in the biggest lie known in football stats which is called 'chances created' stats. Anyone should really bother to go to Squawka and check the time of the chances created (all you have to do is click on the little circle to show the minute the chance created happened to see that there isn't any bigger lie or BS than this stat, it's ridic that no matter where or who the pass is done, whoever touched the ball before someone decided to shoot on goal is counted as a chance created, even if both things - the assist and the pass - happened in the midway line). But well, people won't look at that, will they? Now on Oscar though... if Mourinho really wants him to tackle and nothing more he has two things to do. Play him as the most advanced guy in the pivot (something I'd hate) or play him like Felipão in Brazil did a few times as the third midfielder in the 4-3-3 We can't afford Oscar in the wing (I think playing there too much to accommodate other AMs or to rotate with them during the matches destroyed his momentum), we can't afford to have a CAM that has one splitting pass per game like Oscar now because most of our games are against good defenses or teams parking the bus. So Mourinho has to start to reinforce a few aspects of his AMs if he wants this team to start having consistency. We can't play in a 4-2-3-1 when our AMs are ineffective and don't do any service to our strikers - especially now that we finally have strikers in form. If Mourinho doesn't fix that, sooner or later Torres and Eto'o will be affected by it, the same way I think Oscar was affected by going to the wings. It breaks momentum, it's very simple logic imo. If you have one player playing really well (Oscar back then, Eto'o now) you have to make sure those guys receive service and you don't change what you have them doing. So Oscar is shy, he does play with his head down a lot and he isn't as nearly creative as Mata. So if Mourinho wants to keep Oscar as an untouchable in the squad, he has to move him to a midfield position instead of an attacking midfield position. The difference though is that when playing 4-3-3 he has different kind of guys ahead of him (I do think playing Oscar as a CM in 4-2-3-1 is a waste, but I'm sure he can execute Lamps' ridiculous role better than him as he defends better, and has a good long pass, so if we want to keep the bad pivot with that style of player, at least use someone that will fill the midfield better. I still think Oscar will be only slightly less counter-productive than Lamps there because none of them are DLPs, just my opinion though). So Mourinho has to make choices about Oscar because right now his choices are actually un-building what was built when the season started. Of course other factors must have influenced Oscar's lack of form, but I don't want my CAM to be the guy with more tackles than the rest all midfielders (pivot and attack) combined. replace Lamps with him and improve those stats, but don't waste him in a position with clear directions for him to defend and go deep instead of trying to improve his vision, creative and do stuff in the front as he should. Oscar can help make a brilliant line of 3 men behind the striker if he has two wingers by his side playing very well. He can't carry an AM line like Mata did (but neither can Mata if he isn't 100% free to roam as he pleases, which means, Mata wouldn't under Mourinho either. Now if the problem is the tactics, it's another discussion), and he won't do that right now, so either benches him for Mata (which imo is the same difference as instead of Mata growing and equalizing his level to Oscar by improving, they were equalized by Oscar worsening) and takes a risk defensively, and wait until Mata starts delivering again, or moves Oscar and the system in a way it's Oscar role to play deeper instead of having Oscar playing as a CAM in theory, but being too deep to impact anything. Also Oscar isn't ready to be the CAM that will solve all our problems. He can be excellent like he was earlier this season, but it was more a collective thing than him shining on his own. He - like Hazard - isn't on his peak and while I think Hazard is (or should be) a step or two ahead of him in the development curve, Oscar alone can't be the guy to lead us now. So Mourinho has a choice to make by either changing Oscar's position or bringing Mata to the team - unless the two wingers, whoever they are, start playing well again and Oscar can form with them a good line of three. edit: rewriting the last part because I guess it was confusing, . What I mean Oscar can be brilliant, but not carry a team, he needs others to help him. Right now he isn't brilliant and therefore we'd need both wingers playing better than him, so he can be a third guy with one or two good passes a match. As none of those seem attainable now, I'd change the system to 4-3-3 or I'd play in the role Mourinho insists on Lamps playing - only to improve the team slightly collectively because Oscar isn't a DLP and he won't be much better there, but I guess he'll be better than Lamps at least or I'd just give Mata a chance.

why I'm not surprised the only thing discussed here is Oscar vs Mata when both have been useless for us in the last few games? Now it's the moment a lot of fans have been waiting and I dare say wishing for - Oscar isn't playing well enough, so their man can have a chance and take back his position. I do hope your plans included Mata killing the games for us because right now the only thing it warranted was both being useless. Mata had chances and never made good use of them and all sort of excuses have been given to him. Even Hazard is being brought to the conversation now because bring only Oscar isn't enough. Why don't you bring Willian too? I said it before the match, I'll say it again, right now our AM selection should be Willian + 2. All other guys deserve stick for their presentations and can we for the love of gosh stop with 'he needs to start matches' bullshit? Do you know how Willian guaranteed two consecutive starts? By doing something out of the 10-20 minutes he was getting in October and in matches like the one against Newcastle. And that's a guy who had no match rhythm, had to adapt to a very physical league and arrived way after everyone else in the group. He had much more reason to struggle than Mata does and still he made better use of those few minutes at the end of the matches to show he can be useful. He isn't close to his best, he isn't close to Mata's best, but he showed us that you can use those few minutes to turn around a situation. Mata didn't and I can't understand why he's given all sort of excuses in the world. Most matches he played with Oscar he spent around 60% of the time playing as the CAM while Oscar was in the LW (way to destroy our best player's momentum then, but no word is going to be said about it). I even did a measurement about that in one of their matches... it's there with all the data to back it up. So not only Mata did nothing as a CAM to regain his position, but Oscar was moved to the wing, lost his momentum and now we have two out of shape players. Well done. Now I'll go to Oscar's thread criticize him because that's where he should be criticized, not at the expense of Mata - who's got nothing on his corner except past glorious days, and reading all those posts that's all I can conclude from that. Because Bale - who I don't think is anywhere as good as Mata - just went throught the same thing at RM playing minutes, dealing with an injury (in addition to adapting to a new team and league) and he found a way to capitalize it, and is now winning matches for Madrid, assisting and scoring. But those normal situations in football teams don't apply to Mata when it comes to Chelsea fans because people think he should be assured starting at all matches because he's been POY twice, because he's creative and smart even if didn't deliver anything this season. The same example with Bale could be said about many others... just look at Arsenal, but Mata can't. He's special. He's the really Special One here... And before I get a bunch of posts about defending Oscar, etc... go to his thread in 10 minutes when I'm done talking about him.