Closed FC Nordsjaelland 0-4 Chelsea

[NiclasCFC 2,582]

Somebody got a Highlights video with english commentary?

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Somebody got a Highlights video with english commentary?

http://www.101greatg...ger-highlights/

RDM after the match:

"We expected a difficult game and that's exactly how it turned out. We were a bit slow out of the blocks, even if we had chances to score. We scored one and had a couple of other chances.

"They had nothing to lose. When the scoreline's 1-0, it's always dangerous. They committed players forward, and that's how football is.

"So the second goal was important for us, to settle us down. Once we scored it, we knew we'd win the game.

"But it's difficult to win away in the Champions League. We hadn't done it too often recently so we're pleased.

"We got a clean sheet, another one, and scored four goals. Who knows, hopefully some more will come away from home now."

"That result in Turin just shows exactly what I thought about the group - it's difficult.

"The Ukrainian champions are a very good team, and it's going to be hard for us to qualify. For us it was important to win.

"That was the most important aspect. The scoreline shows four goals scored and none conceded, so that's pleasing. Away from home, it's not easy in this competition.

"Look at what happened with Bayern Munich, who lost in Belarus. There are no pushovers in the Champions League any more."

[NiclasCFC 2,582]

http://www.101greatg...ger-highlights/

RDM after the match:

Cheers mate

[The Rising Sun 696]

There are moments when you realise that a player doesnt really fit in anymore, and no one knew when that moment will come with Lampard.

I think that moment has finally happened. He will always be a legend, but with the team style and players we have now, he is no more a value addition as a starter.

[Spike 12,049]

I fell asleep during half time so I will not vote for a MOTM.

[Peppen 934]

In the train going back rom the game. So glad I got to see the Blues, and what a result. Some great goals, and definitely A LOT to work on. Here are my thoughts of the game, I think I'll rewatch it later just to get it all soaked in.

Our defense was quite shaky at times, especially in the first half. Credit to Nordsjælland, they played their game and had a couple of good chances, but we have amazing Pete guarding our goal. It got better in the second half, but still something to look out for.

The overall performance of the first half was not good enough. I thought it was amazing to see how many Chelsea fans actually made it to the game, and we outnumbered the FCN supporters by far. I talked to an English chap during the game, and we both thought that we were on our heels. He was bbviously a little liquidized, one might say, but cool to meet a domestic Chelsea supporter.

Torres. He is a striker. A striker scores goals. I will not go into too much details, but he didn't score. He contributed to the team, but that's the least you can expect. Not good enough.

Referee. Holy.... He was bloody poor. 4 goals annulled due to freekicks or offsides. Just.... We're not MANU or Barcelona in any way, let's put it like that shall we?

Good result, half decent performance, awesome to be there. Mata is sick, walking in the streets amongst loads of Chelsea fans (dunno the exact number, somewhere between 500-1000?) and cheering the Blues to victory.

TOP OF THE LEAGUE HAVING A LAUGH. 4-0. I love you, Chelsea!

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

There are moments when you realise that a player doesnt really fit in anymore, and no one knew when that moment will come with Lampard.

I think that moment has finally happened. He will always be a legend, but with the team style and players we have now, he is no more a value addition as a starter.

This is what's called confirmation bias. Lampard was probably our best player in the first half. Not only was his assist brilliant, but he frequently opened up play with excellent passing (including a couple of incredible passes to Moses on the left). He wasn't as instrumental to the team in the second half, but overall, he ran more than any other Chelsea player, passed well, timed his runs well, interplayed well with the attackers, drew a couple of fouls, and was solid defensively. The "moving the ball too slowly" stuff was just nonsense as well today. He moved the ball well all game. The issue with our ball movement came from not having a deep midfielder who was able to link up the play and then from Moses making a lot of poor decisions in attack The desire to see Lampard have bad games has reached an insane level. I swear, there are only like 10-15 people on here who actually seem to watch the games.

[The Rising Sun 696]

This is what's called confirmation bias. Lampard was probably our best player in the first half. Not only was his assist brilliant, but he frequently opened up play with excellent passing (including a couple of incredible passes to Moses on the left). He wasn't as instrumental to the team in the second half, but overall, he ran more than any other Chelsea player, passed well, timed his runs well, interplayed well with the attackers, drew a couple of fouls, and was solid defensively. The "moving the ball too slowly" stuff was just nonsense as well today. He moved the ball well all game. The issue with our ball movement came from not having a deep midfielder who was able to link up the play and then from Moses making a lot of poor decisions in attack The desire to see Lampard have bad games has reached an insane level. I swear, there are only like 10-15 people on here who actually seem to watch the games.

Let me repeat what i said, I dont think Lampard is bad. He is still really good.

I personally feel he doesnt fit into our system in such a way that he can command a starting spot anymore, He probably even realises that. Its only natural at an age of 34 that things always dont stay the same, and new players come in and offer something completely different.

No bias against him or wanting him to be bad.

I just said he is not a confirmed starter anymore and he has also accepted this before the season began that he doesnt expect to be starting every game. This has also allowed our style to change a bit since other players have showcased different skills and gameplay since they have got the chance , the same as with Drogba leaving and now we dont just kick the ball up and wait for drogba to hold it up and set up an attack. Now we play more on the ground and fast one touch football.

Every club goes through periods of change, no one is slating lampard. I just think it is a good change and is affecting our club positively.

And lastly, i dont think he has the legs anymore, and im not implying that he slows down play, but 'off the ball' he is not able to do enough.

there is nothing negative i noticed in yesterdays gane , except this.

Then again thats my opinion, and i want him to keep playing for us, but i think it is time he took up the Scholes Giggs Role in our team.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Let me repeat what i said, I dont think Lampard is bad. He is still really good.

I personally feel he doesnt fit into our system in such a way that he can command a starting spot anymore, He probably even realises that. Its only natural at an age of 34 that things always dont stay the same, and new players come in and offer something completely different.

No bias against him or wanting him to be bad.

I just said he is not a confirmed starter anymore and he has also accepted this before the season began that he doesnt expect to be starting every game. This has also allowed our style to change a bit since other players have showcased different skills and gameplay since they have got the chance , the same as with Drogba leaving and now we dont just kick the ball up and wait for drogba to hold it up and set up an attack. Now we play more on the ground and fast one touch football.

I agree that he doesn't deserve an automatic starting spot anymore, but I don't think many people do. As far as one-touch football, Lampard can play that just fine (his pass to Mata was a gorgeous example of that as was his pass to Ramires against Barca) but I don't think you can have long-term success playing just that type of football in England anyway. It's just too easy to defend. That has actually been our biggest problem this season-the reliance on individual moments of brilliance for our goals rather than building up play into an attack. You can pass the ball around all you want, but you have to be able to break down the defence. You need to be able to switch the attack over, to have an aerial game, to be versatile to win. As far as Lampard not having any legs. He covered more distance than any other Chelsea player against Juventus and again last night. He doesn't have great speed, but the deep-lying midfielder doesn't really need to be fast. And yes, there are definitely people on here who are seriously slating Lampard. In fact, I'd say after Mikel, he's probably the most hated player on here. I'm not saying he should be starting every game, he definitely shouldn't be and I trust RDM to keep using our squad well, but if people can't acknowledge when he plays well, something is wrong.

[Thor 2,162]

I agree that he doesn't deserve an automatic starting spot anymore, but I don't think many people do. As far as one-touch football, Lampard can play that just fine (his pass to Mata was a gorgeous example of that as was his pass to Ramires against Barca) but I don't think you can have long-term success playing just that type of football in England anyway. It's just too easy to defend. That has actually been our biggest problem this season-the reliance on individual moments of brilliance for our goals rather than building up play into an attack. You can pass the ball around all you want, but you have to be able to break down the defence. You need to be able to switch the attack over, to have an aerial game, to be versatile to win. As far as Lampard not having any legs. He covered more distance than any other Chelsea player against Juventus and again last night. He doesn't have great speed, but the deep-lying midfielder doesn't really need to be fast. And yes, there are definitely people on here who are seriously slating Lampard. In fact, I'd say after Mikel, he's probably the most hated player on here. I'm not saying he should be starting every game, he definitely shouldn't be and I trust RDM to keep using our squad well, but if people can't acknowledge when he plays well, something is wrong.

For a 'deep-lying midfielder' as you are saying about Lampard, he sure was playing far too high and leaving a huge hole for the opposition to attack. Go back and watch the match, and you'll see how hard Ramires had to work to get back on a few of those opposition transitions and counter attacks. All the while Lampard is straggling back at a mediocre pace. If he is going to play that role he should sit a little deeper like Mikel does. Ramires is the one we benefit from bursting forward.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

For a 'deep-lying midfielder' as you are saying about Lampard, he sure was playing far too high and leaving a huge hole for the opposition to attack. Go back and watch the match, and you'll see how hard Ramires had to work to get back on a few of those opposition transitions and counter attacks. All the while Lampard is straggling back at a mediocre pace. If he is going to play that role he should sit a little deeper like Mikel does. Ramires is the one we benefit from bursting forward.

I watched the match and broke down every one of the opposition attacks. None of them were the fault of Lampard playing too far upfield and there is no way in hell he should be playing in Mikel's spot. Of the two midfielders, Ramires is the more defensive in the pivot and rightly played a deeper role (And HE, not Lampard, made two awful defensive mistakes which led to chances). As far as us benefiting more from Ramires attacks, I am very dubious about that. Ramires is definitely better defensively than Lampard but he is vastly inferior offensively.He is a much poorer passer, has worse vision, doesn't create opportunities, and is a worse finisher. It's not even remotely close. (And the statistics bear this out. Lampard was one of the most creative midfielders in the premier league last season and Ramires was one of the least). He does create space, but only if we have natural width and in this current set-up, Ramires' counter-attack offensive game is mostly wasted. RDM has been using Ramires in the centre to provide defensive solidity and speed in the middle of the park and it's worked. Ramires is not in there for his offensive game which is very limited.

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

I watched the match and broke down every one of the opposition attacks. None of them were the fault of Lampard playing too far upfield and there is no way in hell he should be playing in Mikel's spot. Of the two midfielders, Ramires is the more defensive in the pivot and rightly played a deeper role (And HE, not Lampard, made two awful defensive mistakes which led to chances). As far as us benefiting more from Ramires attacks, I am very dubious about that. Ramires is definitely better defensively than Lampard but he is vastly inferior offensively.He is a much poorer passer, has worse vision, doesn't create opportunities, and is a worse finisher. It's not even remotely close. (And the statistics bear this out. Lampard was one of the most creative midfielders in the premier league last season and Ramires was one of the least). He does create space, but only if we have natural width and in this current set-up, Ramires' counter-attack offensive game is mostly wasted. RDM has been using Ramires in the centre to provide defensive solidity and speed in the middle of the park and it's worked. Ramires is not in there for his offensive game which is very limited.

You fail to mention what Rambo lacks in passing penetration, he practically makes up for with his Yaya Toure-esque runs and surges through the middle. Very nimble yet deceptively strong. Much better than Lampard in that role, as RDM is now figuring that out.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

You fail to mention what Rambo lacks in passing penetration, he practically makes up for with his Yaya Toure-esque runs and surges through the middle. Very nimble yet deceptively strong. Much better than Lampard in that role, as RDM is now figuring that out.

That's an absurd comparison. Ya Ya Toure is a beast. He is also an excellent passer and a very smart offensive player. Ramires is not. (Ya Ya Toure created a chance once every 49 minutes last season. Ramires created one once every 124 minutes which is one of the worst rates among box to box midfielders in the Premier league.) He is also a terrible crosser. Ramires is excellent for a counter-attack system because his speed is incredible, but he is not a good player with the ball at his feet. Ramires has specific strengths. He's an aggressive tackler with a high success rate, he is a great dribbler, he can slot in at a number of positions, he's incredibly fast, and he has wonderful stamina but he also has severe drawbacks as a player . This is a good statistical analysis of last season. http://www.eplindex.com/14737/premier-league-team-year-1112-opta-stats-part-2-midfield.html

[Las7 951]

Problem with Lampard is the position he is being played, but obviously with Oscar Mata and Hazard there is no way Lampard can start in his most effective position(even at this age he would still be a starting attacking midfielder in most clubs in the EPL); but after being moved in a more central position he is asked and expected to do a lot more covering and defensive work which he has never really excelled in. I still think he is on the needed level for this position when we have someone faster than Mikel next to him to do most of the running in the midfield when teams attack us on the break.

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

That's an absurd comparison.

No, its not. I compared their ability to break through the middle with powerful runs. Not their technical abilities...

[NishC300 1,865]

Well I just joined the topic. A good, generally solid performance. Biggest issue for me was how our defensive line got exposed when Okore delivered that cross which Beckmann headed away. Not going to say Chelsea were lucky because our rivals UTD feed off solely luck and refs. Good going forward. Moses wasn't too bad but he simply didn't play to the standards our current Chelsea attack is playing. Lamps is gr8. He just needs to sit deeper. He can defend just need to sort out his positioning. A guy of his vision is needed at the midfield or else Oscar can play at Lamps' position. Oscar can defend so don't see why he shouldn't play there. If Oscar plays there it allows us to play someone like Marin or Moses alongside Hazard, Mata. While Oscar can be behind them. Torres though still isn't showing ferocious goal scoring ability as he was very wasteful in front of goal and he is certainly not even living up to anywhere close to the 50m. Your opinion will be appreciated :blue scalf: :blue scalf: :blue scalf: :blue scalf: :blue scalf: #KTBFFH!

[Thor 2,162]

I watched the match and broke down every one of the opposition attacks. None of them were the fault of Lampard playing too far upfield and there is no way in hell he should be playing in Mikel's spot. Of the two midfielders, Ramires is the more defensive in the pivot and rightly played a deeper role (And HE, not Lampard, made two awful defensive mistakes which led to chances). As far as us benefiting more from Ramires attacks, I am very dubious about that. Ramires is definitely better defensively than Lampard but he is vastly inferior offensively.He is a much poorer passer, has worse vision, doesn't create opportunities, and is a worse finisher. It's not even remotely close. (And the statistics bear this out. Lampard was one of the most creative midfielders in the premier league last season and Ramires was one of the least). He does create space, but only if we have natural width and in this current set-up, Ramires' counter-attack offensive game is mostly wasted. RDM has been using Ramires in the centre to provide defensive solidity and speed in the middle of the park and it's worked. Ramires is not in there for his offensive game which is very limited.

We have great passers in the team. You have Mata, Hazard, Oscar, Torres, etc. How many more great passers do you need?

Rambo's offense, which is surging runs and picking the pockets of opposing players and then striding forward is far more valuable than anything Lampard can provide, since we have players that can do everything he does already. Yes, Ramires is a terrible passer, there were several times yesterday where he could have played a through ball right on goal, but at least hes in position to create something. He covers ground far quicker than Lampard, and he provides the opportunity for instant offense.

[Jase 43,479]

Have to say the referee - Marijo Strahonja - was absolutely terrible in the second half yesterday. Almost every challenges we made on the Nordsjaelland's players, he immediately blew his whistle for a foul. Must have received phone calls from Platini at HT. Some of the decisions were just shocking and they hardly looked like a foul. Take the Mata's first goal and the Moses that was ruled out for instance. Torres brushed off that player and got the ball in the buildup for Mata's goal. Strahonja didn't see it as a foul. And then for the Moses one, he went toe-to-toe with Okore(IIRC) and then he suddenly fell onto the ground when Moses barely even touched him and the referee deemed that as a foul and his goal was ruled out. Utterly pathetic!!