Gary Cahill

[The Skipper 20,609]

Cahill has been decent for 3 games in a row or so and suddenly all of his criticism is found unwanted. Okay then.

[didierforever 7,349]

Cahill has been decent for 3 games in a row or so and suddenly all of his criticism is found unwanted. Okay then.

cahill has been "BRILLIANT" for 3 games in a row.

cahill has been very decent since the spurs final. lets be fair to him.

[The Skipper 20,609]

cahill has been "BRILLIANT" for 3 games in a row.

cahill has been very decent since the spurs final. lets be fair to him.

Cahill seems to be regaining his form from last season when we're playing more conservative football, whereas earlier in the season, when we were far more expansive, he was struggling severely. It really isn't a coincidence for me.

He had a good match on Saturday and did play very well against QPR but I wouldn't say he's been brilliant, sorry.

He's not a bad player, just isn't good enough to be our number 1 or 2 centre back, I still maintain that. My criticism of him still stands.

[iseah100 5,612]

Cahill has been decent for 3 games in a row or so and suddenly all of his criticism is found unwanted. Okay then.

He has been more than decent. Against QPR we played open and he was good. I know you don't like him, but give credit where it's due, man.

[didierforever 7,349]

Cahill seems to be regaining his form from last season when we're playing more conservative football, whereas earlier in the season, when we were far more expansive, he was struggling severely. It really isn't a coincidence for me.

He had a good match on Saturday and did play very well against QPR but I wouldn't say he's been brilliant, sorry.

He's not a bad player, just isn't good enough to be our number 1 or 2 centre back, I still maintain that. My criticism of him still stands.

????

irrespective of how we play. he HAS been brilliant. it does not matter if we are playing in a conservative way or not. in no way is it wrong to say that GC's performance has been brilliant.

GC being good enough or not for a more pro-active role next season is a completely different issue. i dont think he should be our 1st choice CB-pairing player but at the same time i can call his performances for what they have been.

[lucio 5,418]

Cahill has been decent for 3 games in a row or so and suddenly all of his criticism is found unwanted. Okay then.

none of his performances have been as good as zoumas best. his performances are exaggerated because we won , and had clean sheets. its good he isnt defending really badly like before, but he's still clearly a weak link, and limits how we defend and pass from the back.

2 impressive moments - falcao block and winning header vs austin. but im not seeing outstanding displays.

zouma should be reinstated

[The Skipper 20,609]

????

irrespective of how we play. he HAS been brilliant. it does not matter if we are playing in a conservative way or not. in no way is it wrong to say that GC's performance has been brilliant.

GC being good enough or not for a more pro-active role next season is a completely different issue. i dont think he should be our 1st choice CB-pairing player but at the same time i can call his performances for what they have been.

If you think his performances were match winning, brilliant performances then fair play to you. I'm not going to say he's been brilliant sorry. He's been good recently, but not brilliant.

[robsblubot 3,595]

It's interesting that the way our defense is setup and the characteristics of the players are not considered when we discuss the style in which we play.

It's like around here football is American football where defense and offense are literally different teams.

[didierforever 7,349]

we have played 32 games in PL this season. 32*90 = 2880 minutes

GC has played 2480 minutes of those.

in these 32 games, we have conceded 26 games.

sometimes, people need perspective.

GC is not the best suited defender out there for the way we want to play, but the guy gives his all, is a beast in the box, has a good reading of the game, has a great partnership with terry. he has his shortcomings, but people make it seem that we have done a liverpool and conceded 50 goals this season in the league. compared to this, the player who would be apparently more suited for our system has conceded 31 goals playing for a team that is heads and shoulders above the rest in their league. like i said, perspective.

GC had a very poor festive period but lets not make it sound like something obnoxious.

[Special Juan 28,099]

none of his performances have been as good as zoumas best. his performances are exaggerated because we won , and had clean sheets. its good he isnt defending really badly like before, but he's still clearly a weak link, and limits how we defend and pass from the back.

2 impressive moments - falcao block and winning header vs austin. but im not seeing outstanding displays.

zouma should be reinstated

Of course i would love to see Zouma in there, I have been a critic of Cahill and a massive Zouma fan all season, but that shouldn't get in the way of how solid Cahill has been in the last few weeks. Gary has done a really good job and I wish people would commend that ahead of what they think of Zouma starting or in comparison. I'm a fan of Chelsea, I'm a fan of who starts and I am a supporter of whoever Jose sees fit to start.

Well done Gary Cahill for doing a top job the last few weeks.

[robsblubot 3,595]

Of course i would love to see Zouma in there, I have been a critic of Cahill and a massive Zouma fan all season, but that shouldn't get in the way of how solid Cahill has been in the last few weeks. Gary has done a really good job and I wish people would commend that ahead of what they think of Zouma starting or in comparison. I'm a fan of Chelsea, I'm a fan of who starts and I am a supporter of whoever Jose sees fit to start.

Well done Gary Cahill for doing a top job the last few weeks.

Can't a defender be solid and still (even very) poor?

Because that's how I see him. And yet there are a number of folks here who seem to directly link solidity to quality.

Without going into extremes and verging on controversial, I deem Cahill to be more solid than Kompany but the latter is twice the player.

Kompany would make the whole team play better. Hazard would make more plays as would all other players - cascading effect from the quality in possession.

[didierforever 7,349]

if u believe a few posters on here, the only defenders worth mentioning are the ones who are pro-active. i guess basics like concentration, maintaining discipline, bossing the box, man marking, being aware of attackers and dealing with the danger are things not worth talking about.

solid but very poor (hahahahahhahaha)

[robsblubot 3,595]

if u believe a few posters on here, the only defenders worth mentioning are the ones who are pro-active. i guess basics like concentration, maintaining discipline, bossing the box, man marking, being aware of attackers and dealing with the danger are things not worth talking about.

solid but very poor (hahahahahhahaha)

Cahill being brilliant ... Lololololilolololol

Feel younger and less wise already...

recommend checking the word 'solid' in the dictionary. It describes being firm at most dependable - little to do with technique/quality. Esp going by how the word is overused around here.

Now if you think defenders don't need technique then it is indeed possible to think Cahill is a brilliant player. as good as hummels and Kompany.

And what does Cahill do with the football After he bosses the 18y box? Row Z or the player closest to him...

Btw football isn't only played inside the box...

[didierforever 7,349]

Cahill being brilliant ... Lololololilolololol

Feel younger and less wise already...

recommend checking the word 'solid' in the dictionary. It describes being firm at most dependable - little to do with technique/quality. Esp going by how the word is overused around here.

Now if you think defenders don't need technique then it is indeed possible to think Cahill is a brilliant player. as good as hummels and Kompany.

And what does Cahill do with the football After he bosses the 18y box? Row Z or the player closest to him...

Btw football isn't only played inside the box...

is it just me who is saying GC has been brilliant. no wait, actually the worst of his detractors are giving him his due.

except of course the guy who thinks luiz "the nutmegged" (who by the way was not at fault for any of the goals that psg conceded to barca ) is the best thing since sliced bread.

so suddenly clearing has become a taboo now? i guess every player defender has to get messi's skills to be considered worthy?

why we say "solid" using for a defender in footballing terms, we actually go a little farther ahead than the dictionary definition. but dont let that affect your luiz-ish opinions.

[robsblubot 3,595]

is it just me who is saying GC has been brilliant. no wait, actually the worst of his detractors are giving him his due.

except of course the guy who thinks luiz "the nutmegged" (who by the way was not at fault for any of the goals that psg conceded to barca ) is the best thing since sliced bread.

so suddenly clearing has become a taboo now? i guess every player defender has to get messi's skills to be considered worthy?

why we say "solid" using for a defender in footballing terms, we actually go a little farther ahead than the dictionary definition. but dont let that affect your luiz-ish opinions.

Please spare me of your rhetoric - either you quote me on what you claim I've said or it's just another figment of your vast imagination.

Luiz is an excellent natural player, which makes him interesting but as a defender he's at about the same level of Cahill - good but flawed. His performance in defense against us was a surprise to me (I thought he was going to play in middle) even though I do think he is a dangerous player to play with or against.

Cahill enjoys a level of protection that has made Luiz look 'solid' for long stretches of time and in a very defensive minded CL win.

I know the footballing world is not made of the sharpest tools in the shed, but do we have to be surprised every time Luiz makes a mistake? He's mistake prone... if you want to play him in defense then adequate protection must be provided. Don't let him be the last man, esp when injured as he'll be late and make a fool of himself.

Your obsession with Luiz is unhealthy...

Going back to Cahill though - It's not about his solidity - because we know he is a solid dependable defender who's going to make few mistakes. However, he can be beaten by better players. He cannot hit a long ball to save his life which slow us down when he reclaims possession. When he hits row Z we lose possession. When he is incapable of cleanly take the football and/or dribble his marker in a more proactive way, we lose possession. His lack of pace is a problem especially when we are chasing and have to move the defense line up the pitch - we become vulnerable.

He also makes a terrible partnership with Terry because they are very similar players so nobody chases and both sit back.

Zouma isn't the most technical player out there, but when someone has to play DM it's zouma not Cahill. Because zouma has more pace and s a bit more rounded even if not particularly technical.

So, again, it's not that Cahill is a a bad player, but IMO he's not good enough. The same way you think Oscar is not good enough, and some say he's 'solid' because we can depend on his hard work, I say we can do A LOT better than Cahill as a starter even though he won't be a liability. And mind you, Cahill is 29, not 23...