Closed Chelsea v Manchester United

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

A Classic TorontoChelsea post...

[edetarod 2,155]

win this game please Chelsea, i want to see all the players giving 100% for 90+ minutes

[Sheva. 5,373]

First of all, Spurs were down four starters including probably their two best players and their key player was lost at the last moment which meant that the teams' entire tactics were thrown out the window (can just imagine what that did to a tactical coach like AVB). That Spurs team was mid-table quality and with no preparation Second of all, we didn't dominate them at all. Spurs definitely had more opportunities to score than we did. It wasn't just that small window. Sigurdsson alone had about 4 decent chances to score but luckily for us, he's not Bale and he can't finish. We kept letting their midfielders into dangerous spots right outside the box unmolested. Even late in the game when we should have been feverishly protecting a 3-2 lead, we let Spurs have way too many chances. The ball falls a little better to Adebayor or he's a little sharper, he scores in the 90th minute. Lennon and Walker both had dangerous shots from just outside the box that were saved in the 85-90 minute period and they were allowed to just run the ball up for those shots. You can't dominate a team and be outshot 26-10. We won because Mata was brilliant and Walker and Gallas were atrocious.Luckily, we have Mata and they have Gallas and Walker so we deserved to win, but it was not some fantastic performance by any stretch of the imagination and it was a harbinger to the problems we had against Shakhtar.

And yes, you can attack and defend at the same time. It's not one or the other. We don't need to play a defensive formation, but our attacking players have to be more responsible in their defensive duties. You can't have prolonged success if your attacking players aren't helping out at all on the defensive end.

Statistics do not matter here, almost anyone that watched the game knows who the better side was, and who deserved to win. And the answer was Chelsea, if Spurs were at the Bridge with that team they would not have 26 shots, no way in hell. We were more compact at Arsenal, they did not have so many oppurtunities in our area like Spurs did, then again we had John Terry who cleared almost anything that came into our area. Arsenal only out shot us because of long rangers i can bet.

Also can you tell me a couple top teams that attack and defend at the same high level? i've been going through names in my head and can't come up with many. A lot of teams are really bad defensively

[Strike 6,971]

First of all, Spurs were down four starters including probably their two best players and their key player was lost at the last moment which meant that the teams' entire tactics were thrown out the window (can just imagine what that did to a tactical coach like AVB). That Spurs team was mid-table quality and with no preparation Second of all, we didn't dominate them at all. Spurs definitely had more opportunities to score than we did. It wasn't just that small window. Sigurdsson alone had about 4 decent chances to score but luckily for us, he's not Bale and he can't finish. We kept letting their midfielders into dangerous spots right outside the box unmolested. Even late in the game when we should have been feverishly protecting a 3-2 lead, we let Spurs have way too many chances. The ball falls a little better to Adebayor or he's a little sharper, he scores in the 90th minute. Lennon and Walker both had dangerous shots from just outside the box that were saved in the 85-90 minute period and they were allowed to just run the ball up for those shots. You can't dominate a team and be outshot 26-10. We won because Mata was brilliant and Walker and Gallas were atrocious.Luckily, we have Mata and they have Gallas and Walker so we deserved to win, but it was not some fantastic performance by any stretch of the imagination and it was a harbinger to the problems we had against Shakhtar.

And yes, you can attack and defend at the same time. It's not one or the other. We don't need to play a defensive formation, but our attacking players have to be more responsible in their defensive duties. You can't have prolonged success if your attacking players aren't helping out at all on the defensive end.

we knew going into the season with hazard mata and oscar that the defensive onus will be on the 6 guys behind them. so far i think we've handled it brilliantly. it's not wise to read too much into the tottenham game because their play is based on spreading the ball wide. what happens then is that with mikel and ramires being stuck in the middle, they have space on the wings. they can dump crosses in. we saw that in the Arsenal game as well ....lots of crosses from jenkinson, chamberlain gibbs etc. now if we give added defensive responsibilities to the 3 amigos, we will be pinned back and will be chasing the ball around like last season

this system is fine. our passing is getting better and we will only improve.. results like shakhtar and atletico are just minor hiccups.

[themightyblue 443]

First of all, Spurs were down four starters including probably their two best players and their key player was lost at the last moment which meant that the teams' entire tactics were thrown out the window (can just imagine what that did to a tactical coach like AVB). That Spurs team was mid-table quality and with no preparation Second of all, we didn't dominate them at all. Spurs definitely had more opportunities to score than we did. It wasn't just that small window. Sigurdsson alone had about 4 decent chances to score but luckily for us, he's not Bale and he can't finish. We kept letting their midfielders into dangerous spots right outside the box unmolested. Even late in the game when we should have been feverishly protecting a 3-2 lead, we let Spurs have way too many chances. The ball falls a little better to Adebayor or he's a little sharper, he scores in the 90th minute. Lennon and Walker both had dangerous shots from just outside the box that were saved in the 85-90 minute period and they were allowed to just run the ball up for those shots. You can't dominate a team and be outshot 26-10. We won because Mata was brilliant and Walker and Gallas were atrocious.Luckily, we have Mata and they have Gallas and Walker so we deserved to win, but it was not some fantastic performance by any stretch of the imagination and it was a harbinger to the problems we had against Shakhtar.

And yes, you can attack and defend at the same time. It's not one or the other. We don't need to play a defensive formation, but our attacking players have to be more responsible in their defensive duties. You can't have prolonged success if your attacking players aren't helping out at all on the defensive end.

Think this a weak argument. Firstly the way this number has increased from '2 key starters' to '4'. Bar Dembele and Bale, that was the same Spurs team that beat United at Old Trafford and we also had our captain and arguably best defender missing for the game. Also having more shots, doesn't equal to having more chances to score. A shot from 25 yards that lands safely in the keepers hands counts as a shot on target and with Defoe they have a guy that shoots at any given opportunity and so that stat was always going to be high when playing Spurs. The 'ball falls a little better' argument could also be applied to us, the amount of times Hazard and Mata played balls that cut through the Spurs defence but were a yard to fast or Torres wasn't sharp enough to get too was unbelievable. We completely dominated that game against Spurs except for a 5 minute period before half time and that period after half time. A London derby is always going to be frantic with teams looking to score but we coped and as i said dominated the game, which is why Journo's, pundits and even Spurs fans have said we deserved the victory.

One thing i would agree is that our attacking players do need a lot more work defensively after the Spurs and Shakhtar game, but what we also have to remember is that they are all apart from Mata just coming back from an international break. They had minimal preparation time for Spurs and Shakhtar and so need a bit of time to re-adjust. In the Arsenal game, one of the things that impressed me was the fact that they all recovered back into positions and tracked back and so are capable of it. I have no doubt that we'll see them getting back to that level of workrate once again

[Hutcho 8,443]

Who said we need Oscar, Hazard and Mata together to attack? The 3 guys can barely help in the defensive system. I remember Spurs second goal, someone lost the ball and then none of the 3 return to help in the defence. Spurs had a lot of chance to score, and if they had better attacking players perhaps the result would be different.

Fernandinho, best Shaktar player yesterday said it:

"They have a different team from the one that played UCL final. Many times the offensive players attacked and didnt return. They were left with the 4 deffensive players and only one DM in front of them. Its a different style, the team that won the CL was more compact."

He said Shaktar players had too much space to create, and he think Chelsea were exposed to the counter attacks.

imo, this is a problem with this system. Barcelona have Busquets, Xavi and Iniesta, all players that are very good in the defence, and specially Xavi and Iniesta are superb in the attack. The 3 players are good in the attack but they still lack the defensive skills, like Malouda and Anelka had in previous years. Even Robben, Kalou and Joe Cole could help a lot in the defence. Just see Oscar, the guy run a lot when he is defending, he try to mark, to almonst never he desarm the opponent.

If we start with these 3 players against Manchester, I think we will be in trouble.

Mikel, Lampard, Ramires, Oscar, Mata; Sturridge.

I don't think playing more defensively is the answer. 100% agree on daniel sturridge starting. Tbh, i cant see us keeping them out for 90 mins if RVP and rooney show up. I think we have to come out fast, having 4 attacking players isn't like we are going all out, we have mikel who will definately sit in and ramires who is up and down all game. We didn't have a good game against shakhtar, but then we have had good games against the majority of teams this season, with the exception being against qpr when we played a more defensive lineup. If we play that lineup then we will probably have to soak up a lot of pressure which i don't think we can handle.

If you look at the man u fans opinions on the game, who are they scared off??? Hazard mata and oscar, they are afraid that those 3 can link up together and take the game away with their speed and passing ability, not to mention mata is the most in form player in the prem right now. If they saw that lineup they will be much happier than seeing our normal lineup (except danny in for torres). Also, is playing super frankie in there gonna make us that much more defenisve... I doubt it. And i think oscar is being underestimated in the defending apartment. Yes he is not the best, but he gets back and has done well in defence in the early parts of the season.

I say we go at them from the start and go from there, rather than be cautious and let them get on the front foot.

[TrippingStep 336]

First of all, Spurs were down four starters including probably their two best players and their key player was lost at the last moment which meant that the teams' entire tactics were thrown out the window (can just imagine what that did to a tactical coach like AVB). That Spurs team was mid-table quality and with no preparation Second of all, we didn't dominate them at all. Spurs definitely had more opportunities to score than we did. It wasn't just that small window. Sigurdsson alone had about 4 decent chances to score but luckily for us, he's not Bale and he can't finish. We kept letting their midfielders into dangerous spots right outside the box unmolested. Even late in the game when we should have been feverishly protecting a 3-2 lead, we let Spurs have way too many chances. The ball falls a little better to Adebayor or he's a little sharper, he scores in the 90th minute. Lennon and Walker both had dangerous shots from just outside the box that were saved in the 85-90 minute period and they were allowed to just run the ball up for those shots. You can't dominate a team and be outshot 26-10. We won because Mata was brilliant and Walker and Gallas were atrocious.Luckily, we have Mata and they have Gallas and Walker so we deserved to win, but it was not some fantastic performance by any stretch of the imagination and it was a harbinger to the problems we had against Shakhtar.

And yes, you can attack and defend at the same time. It's not one or the other. We don't need to play a defensive formation, but our attacking players have to be more responsible in their defensive duties. You can't have prolonged success if your attacking players aren't helping out at all on the defensive end.

I agree the front 4 need to do more but even last year, the team was not very good in defense when not parking the bus.

It seems we don't have a system where the front 4 must do defensive work but not necessarly by tracking back very far everytime, cutting the passing lanes, and pressing when we could trap them in a zone.

I really think we could have a better balance if we could play Mikel in front of the defense, Ramires and Oscar in front of him, Hazard left, Mata right.

Working more the relationship between the wide back and the "wingers". But I don't think Cole and Ivanovic can run this much, Cole could when younger.

In the defensive system, in an ideal world, we should see more trap between wide back, Ramires or oscar and Mata or Hazard depending on which side it is and it would set-up conter-attacks for Hazard and Mata.

AVB idea but not necessarly with a high line defensively but he failed miserably because we don't have the pace and the runs behind.

But we can't do that because we lack players that have more pace, and can do more runs in our back 5.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Think this a weak argument. Firstly the way this number has increased from '2 key starters' to '4'. Bar Dembele and Bale, that was the same Spurs team that beat United at Old Trafford and we also had our captain and arguably best defender missing for the game. Also having more shots, doesn't equal to having more chances to score. A shot from 25 yards that lands safely in the keepers hands counts as a shot on target and with Defoe they have a guy that shoots at any given opportunity and so that stat was always going to be high when playing Spurs. The 'ball falls a little better' argument could also be applied to us, the amount of times Hazard and Mata played balls that cut through the Spurs defence but were a yard to fast or Torres wasn't sharp enough to get too was unbelievable. We completely dominated that game against Spurs except for a 5 minute period before half time and that period after half time. A London derby is always going to be frantic with teams looking to score but we coped and as i said dominated the game, which is why Journo's, pundits and even Spurs fans have said we deserved the victory.

Assou-Ekotto and Parker would also be starters if healthy. And not having Terry for one game is not really a loss. Terry, Luiz, and Cahill are all around the same ability and rotate anyway. I also think that people don't appreciate how teams game-plan. I am sure the Spurs were planning their attack (as they always do) around Bale. With a coach like AVB, that means tons of plays and diagrams drawn up. We were all thinking about how they were going to use their width to try to counter our narrow midfield and I am sure they would have.To have that go up in smoke minutes before a game starts has a major impact. Having more shots does not necessarily equal having more chances to score, but Spurs did create more chances to score as well. A team can get 15 shots and another 9 and have more chances, but Spurs had 26 shots. That means that they were getting the ball in dangerous areas a hell of a lot. They weren't taking shots from 50 yards out. We did deserve to win because we limited our mistakes and were more ruthless in finishing. "we completely dominated the game" is just nonsense.

[Rmpr 8,977]

When comparing previous games helped for the next fixture?

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

When comparing previous games helped for the next fixture?

Yeah, ManU are a very different team and my concern with them is different. Rooney and RVP are playing really well together and with Hernandez or Welbeck, they form a very dangerous triangle and Nani, Valencia, and Kagawa (who might not play due to injury) also can be dangerous in attack and they along with their fullbacks, can create some width. Their defence and central midfield are suspect so I think our passing and skill moves could work to good effect to expose them.

Here's a couple of stats that shows the difference in styles:

Total accurate crosses. Chelsea: 28, ManU: 49.

Total Successful Dribbles: Chelsea: 62, ManU: 44

[Kojo 4,676]

It's unlikely to imagine United will drop any more points, so it's not easy to imagine we will win this.

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

It's unlikely to imagine United will drop any more points, so it's not easy to imagine we will win this.

...Are you serious...?

[Kojo 4,676]

...Are you serious...?

Have you ever watched United at all?, this is Fergusons team, every year people write them off. Well i don't for one thing, Ferguson wants his team back on track, i don't care how you look at United, they will still win games. Even if it's by referee decision, I'm not comfortable playing them.

[Spike 12,049]

If Chelsea manages to score more goals than Man Utd there is a very distinct possibility that Chelsea may just scrape through with a victory and hopefully with the victory come the much needed three points but the three points aren't a certainty.

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

Have you ever watched United at all?, this is Fergusons team, every year people write them off. Well i don't for one thing, Ferguson wants his team back on track, i don't care how you look at United, they will still win games. Even if it's by referee decision, I'm not comfortable playing them.

So you believe United will win their next 30 games...This is what you are telling me?

[CFCRazor 49]

Have you ever watched United at all?, this is Fergusons team, every year people write them off. Well i don't for one thing, Ferguson wants his team back on track, i don't care how you look at United, they will still win games. Even if it's by referee decision, I'm not comfortable playing them.

Yeah you are right, it is Ferguson's team, the same team who got beat by Everton and Spurs this season, much the same as you would have said before the Everton game that United would never lose points to them, they went and lost the game.

[kellzfresh 7,226]

We need to watch out for their crossing and cornerkicks.

Manchester utd scored 2 corners against newcastle, 4 crosses against stoke, and in the champions league 2 crosses and a cornerkick goal.

It is very clear that is their main form of attack. We have to seriously up our game in defending deadballs and crosses into the box.

We will definately score two goals at least, their defence is no where safe. So if we are a little more tactically sound at the back, we can win this.

[Pizy 17,860]

Even if we were to have a 2 goal lead in the 88th minute I'd still be holding my breath against this team. They truly have been kings of the comeback recently as annoying as it is.

We have to do the same thing we did against Arse and Spuds and dominate the midfield. Cazorla and Dempsey were completely neutralized those games so we have to keep that trend going.

PLEASE Torres, you can go on a 3 game scoring drought after this one, but for the love of God PLEASE play well this game!