Chelsea Sack Andre Villas-Boas

[St Abramovich 175]

go search in the fucking forum, before accusing me of only making positive posts.

Don't worry Henrique, nobody is accusing you of that.

[termninja 5,290]

Don't worry Henrique, nobody is accusing you of that.

[Kojo 4,676]

I don't think you can blame Henrique or me or anyone on this forum for being too negative, because we're not playing good enough and new players are needed, and it's a shame that we didn't sort it out, and it doesn't look like we are sorting it out this month either, Cahill to me looks like our last signing this month.

[MGuerreiro 252]

go search in the fucking forum, before accusing me of only making positive posts.

Of never making positive posts you mean. I said I've never seen a positive post from you, and yes maybe that's because I haven't been on this forum for a long time. Or maybe it's because you just are a very critical person. Maybe both. Either way I really don't have the patience to go through every post you've made in the hope of finding some positivity, I just find it weird that (at least the way I and probably more members perceive your opinion of Chelsea) it seems like you dislike most of the things regarding you're favourite club. Maybe I'm wrong, it's just how I perceive it.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

I still don't get why he puts on Malouda when we're trying to defend a lead.

Well the answer is in your post really. Malouda actually defends pretty well (remember when carlo played him at LB for a few games?). AVB brings him on to try to stop the opostion RB and RW from joining the attack and crossing.

[nullabletype 987]

AVB didn't make the right subs in my opinion, Essien should of came on but for Meireles.

We were pushing for a second goal so why wasn't Sturridge or even Lukaku put on? How is Lukaku even going to get better if he is rotting on our bench?

Bringing Malouda on as well.. for like 10 minutes is pointless or even bringing him on full stop is pointless.

I'm always going to support the manager of this club but he didn't make the right tactical changes in my opinion

You know how many goals Lukaku has scored for our first team? Zip. Now that's not entirely his fault, he doesn't really get on so his window of opportunity is short. That being said, now is not the time to start peddling the youth. We're looking a bit precarious, and inexperienced youth players aren't going to save our necks.

The Josh McEachran attitude seems to be spilling over to Lukaku. Any time he's played he hasn't looked particularly bright (as far as I can remember), yet people are incensed when we don't get Lukaku on to change the game and score bags of goals. There is no scenario at present short of an injury crisis where Lukaku should be brought in in front of any of our forwards. He's 18 years old, he wasn't bought for immediate impact.

[zolayes 14,489]

I am satisfied with our display in the second half because we won the game. Because at this moment 3 points are more important than world class performances.

No, but overall (not only after this game) almost every post you've written that I've read is criticism.

thats just his way He is Brazillian and when faced with logic becomes deliberately obtuse

[Sheva. 5,373]

Well the answer is in your post really. Malouda actually defends pretty well (remember when carlo played him at LB for a few games?). AVB brings him on to try to stop the opostion RB and RW from joining the attack and crossing.

My point is, when has this actually worked? we still concede anyway - today one of the few times we didn't.

[manpe 10,861]

He does it every time, and very rarely has it not back fired.

Bring on a freaking defender if you want to defend, not Malouda.

Bringing on a defender is usually when you're pretty desperate and start inviting them on, while building a wall in front of the goal to repel the attacks. By bringing on Malouda (whoever the name, just a midfield player) we press higher up the pitch, giving them less time on the ball... if we brought on a defender, we would have to take away a central or a wide player, leaving us more vulnerable in those places and give away iniative in midfield. + if they DID score, we would be chasing for the winner with 5 defenders and less men upfront, against a team like Sunderland it's not worth to risk it and we would all be on AVB's neck "why the fuck were we chasing the game with 5 defenders and give away the iniative?".

[Sheva. 5,373]

Bringing on a defender is usually when you're pretty desperate and start inviting them on, while building a wall in front of the goal to repel the attacks. By bringing on Malouda (whoever the name, just a midfield player) we press higher up the pitch, giving them less time on the ball... if we brought on a defender, we would have to take away a central or a wide player, leaving us more vulnerable in those places and give away iniative in midfield. + if they DID score, we would be chasing for the winner with 5 defenders and less men upfront, against a team like Sunderland it's not worth to risk it and we would all be on AVB's neck "why the fuck were we chasing the game with 5 defenders and give away the iniative?".

There's a lesser chance of them scoring with a defender on instead of Malouda. But i do agree with your point.

[Tomo 21,733]

FFS we won and i was at The Bridge today and we were no were near as bad as some are making out, we weren't amazing but we are hardly bad, we created enough chances and should have had 3 penalties.

It was a professional performance and a good win.

[Laylabelle 9,398]

FFS we won and i was at The Bridge today and we were no were near as bad as some are making out, we weren't amazing but we are hardly bad, we created enough chances and should have had 3 penalties.

It was a professional performance and a good win.

2 clean sheets in a row as well we aint had that in a while!!

And we got all 3 points! They need to step it up big time espcially with the fixtures we have coming up but for now happy with the win!

Edited January 14, 2012 by Laylabelle

[Tomo 21,733]

The whole of the Matthew Harding Stand thought it was Torres that scored the goal

It looked like the ball hit the bar and went instead instead of falling to Lamps.

[Bir_CFC 3,455]

I am so confused. People are arguing all over these forums. I should watch the match again, cause I thought we were pretty good. Sunderland on current form was never going to be easy.

[Laylabelle 9,398]

Exactly and seeing how O'Neils changed things...before the game said be happy with a shite performance and a 1-0 win..got that so no complaints here.Never a easy game and seeing as last year we lost 3-0 against them..aint all bad!

[CHOULO19 24,332]

My point is, when has this actually worked? we still concede anyway - today one of the few times we didn't.

That's a bit of an over-simplification. We concede because our defense this season is not strong\focused enough to withstand pressure, it's not malouda's fault. I can't remember a single gaol we conceded this season from a defensive mistake by malouda.

[Henri 115]

AVB you still here?, yes he is with a new sharp haircut . Maybe my expectation are to high, but this season when/if we lead 1-0

you just beginn to getting really nervous when our opponent approach our defench the last 5-10 minutes, dont you?. Like today, we were

really lucky to win, even when we have our changes, its just to slow and so easy to read. So can i blame that on AVB?, maybe not

entirely, but am still goint to, so that he (my mind only) is getting closer to be sacked.

[Sheva. 5,373]

That's a bit of an over-simplification. We concede because our defense this season is not strong\focused enough to withstand pressure, it's not malouda's fault. I can't remember a single gaol we conceded this season from a defensive mistake by malouda.

Arsenal's 4th was because of Malouda.

And if he's not going to help our defence, i see no point in bringing him on.