Closed Aston Villa 1-0 Chelsea

[Jase 43,479]

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1hd33z_reaction-holland-matic-cahill-on-villa_sport

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1hd9pe_reaction-to-saturday-s-top-flight-clash-chelsea-vs-aston-villa-at-villa-park_sport

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Yes, we got some really bad decisions but we've also been on the other end of that this year. It happens. The issue for me is bigger. It's about us playing poorly over and over again and depending on us turning things around in the second half or even requiring some sort of horrible screw-up from the other side to win. We simply have to play better, more consistent football. We were playing a poor team and couldn't control the game or score.

[robsblubot 3,595]

Defended deep? Actually they played with a high line and it worked for them. How many offsides did we have because of that, a hundred?

Don't think you can't defend any deeper than Villa did today. The off-sides you mention took place when we played long and/or recovered the football; when we had possession anywhere Villa had 11 players in their own half and there was no space behind their defense.

Yes, had we played higher on the pitch we'd incur into more risk (spaces behind our own line), but that's the price to win. City does this better than us; they can move their defense line up and pressure these weak sides until they concede.

I guess you were right as I realize what I wrote above defines a high (ish) defense line: high in possession, deeper without.

Certainly higher than ours...

Well they got off-sides b/c Torres can't beat anyone - got no pace.

[Peppen 934]

Foy was shit, be we were equally shit. Move on.

Worked wonders last time, so if we manage to win the BPL I'll donate £50. Take my money Chelsea, and go win that fucking title!!!

[didierforever 7,349]

Were we a bit due in ref decisions. I mean villa were unfortunate to lose at sb earlier this season, and yesterday life came a full circle.

[MrExcalibur100 7,124]

Yes, we got some really bad decisions but we've also been on the other end of that this year. It happens. The issue for me is bigger. It's about us playing poorly over and over again and depending on us turning things around in the second half or even requiring some sort of horrible screw-up from the other side to win. We simply have to play better, more consistent football. We were playing a poor team and couldn't control the game or score.

Not this way. Like Mourinho said, this was a complete performance of utter bias from Foy and his assistants from minute 1. Not just about Willian's "card". The entire game was a joke.

[MrExcalibur100 7,124]

Interesting, no articles this morning on Chris Foy in the British press, but I guess it's Chelsea, so they don't give a shit. Nothing from Gallagher or Poll. We need more of our people in the media. If this was Man United or Liverpool, there would have been a riot.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Not this way. Like Mourinho said, this was a complete performance of utter bias from Foy and his assistants from minute 1. Not just about Willian's "card". The entire game was a joke.

We've had much more benefit than this. We should have lost against WBA and got a BS penalty from Ramires at the end of the game. Terry got away with a handball in the box against Villa at home which gave us 2 points. Etc...This was a poorly refereed match, but it's hardly some unprecedentedly awful refereeing. We didn't deserve to win.

[Viper22 2,418]

Kompany's suspension is only for one game as far as I am aware.

Kompany will miss only 1 game

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-city-skipper-vincent-kompany-3244771

Bollocks.

[MrExcalibur100 7,124]

We've had much more benefit than this. We should have lost against WBA and got a BS penalty from Ramires at the end of the game. Terry got away with a handball in the box against Villa at home which gave us 2 points. Etc...This was a poorly refereed match, but it's hardly some unprecedentedly awful refereeing. We didn't deserve to win.

As opposed to City with a non-existent red card for Rose against Spurs or Tiote's goal being cancelled, or the insane decisions they got against Liverpool. Stop listening to the biased cunts of other clubs that repeat this Chelsea have got decisions myth. Most of our rivals have had even MORE decisions in their favour. Jesus Christ!

[The only place to be 11,313]

As opposed to City with a non-existent red card for Rose against Spurs or Tiote's goal being cancelled, or the insane decisions they got against Liverpool. Stop listening to the biased cunts of other clubs that repeat this Chelsea have got decisions myth. Most of our rivals have had even MORE decisions in their favour. Jesus Christ!

And you're not copying Jose??

We've had more than our fair share of luck this season. That doesn't excuse Foy's performance (he shouldn't ref one of our matches for a long time) but regurgitating the same stuff about there not being enough Chelsea voices in the media is utterly pointless.

That result last night was coming. For far too many matches we've simply not done enough to win and relied on luck or decisions. Last night we didn't get the luck and we certainly didn't get the decisions, and we're not a good enough team to win without one of those.

[MrExcalibur100 7,124]

And you're not copying Jose??

We've had more than our fair share of luck this season. That doesn't excuse Foy's performance (he shouldn't ref one of our matches for a long time) but regurgitating the same stuff about there not being enough Chelsea voices in the media is utterly pointless.

That result last night was coming. For far too many matches we've simply not done enough to win and relied on luck or decisions. Last night we didn't get the luck and we certainly didn't get the decisions, and we're not a good enough team to win without one of those.

Aside from the West Brom game, decisions wise, its just been like any other season. The thing is that when Chelsea get the 50/50 decisions, the press use it as an opportunity to hype it up (like Villa reverse tie, Liverpool) . When we have decisions go against us like yesterday..................silence. Nothing from the papers. This is how they influence the opinions of people who can't think for themselves. Not you in particular, but generally speaking.

Just in the previous game against Spurs, Lloris should have been sent off in the first minute, yet no paper talked about that, just the Kaboul red card. I even heard some biased pundits saying it wasn't a penalty. Two weeks ago, van Persie should have been sent off against West Brom for a CLEAR bookable offense, yet the ref didn't give the yellow. Compare that to Willian yesterday. Suarez's dive against Stoke and many more? How many penalties should Hazard have had this season? It's becoming ridiculous, it's not even funny anymore.

Man City are the team that have benefited the most this season, especially in the big games, like I pointed out above.

The thing is, the football press in England are very clever. They have the ability to twist facts and spread their anti-Chelsea agenda. Chelsea represents new money, Chelsea is managed by Mourinho (cardinal sin), bankrolled by Abramovich, Chelsea is one of the most hated clubs in England. The press give the people what they want to believe about us.

The way the press and football pundits have treated us since Mourinho's return has been very strange. And know they don't "protect" him. Remember the 19th century comment? Or the Wenger comment he was TRICKED into answering so brutally? They even have Chelsea fans turning on Mourinho............ Oh, Chelsea haven't "played well". How can we be on top of the league and not "play" well? It's a paradox. I'm just glad Mourinho didn't give the bastards something to feed on in his press conference.

Sorry for the long post, but that had to be said. Don't be deceived.

[The only place to be 11,313]

The thing is, the football press in England are very clever. They have the ability to twist facts and spread their anti-Chelsea agenda. Chelsea represents new money, Chelsea is managed by Mourinho (cardinal sin), bankrolled by Abramovich, Chelsea is one of the most hated clubs in England. The press give the people what they want to believe about us.

Mate, you're talking complete and utter bollocks. You know fuck all about the media in this country, you have no experience of the people that work in it yet you're talking as if you're an expert on it.

Every club thinks there's an anti-us policy in the media. City fans think that the media is biased in favour of United. United fans think there's a fatwa against Moyes and Cleverley, Arsenal fans think that some have it in for Wenger.

The 'football press' as you incorrectly put it is wildly diverse in it's quality and views and to throw around accusations of people being brainwashed by it is complete crap.

The way the press and football pundits have treated us since Mourinho's return has been very strange. And know they don't "protect" him. Remember the 19th century comment? Or the Wenger comment he was TRICKED into answering so brutally? They even have Chelsea fans turning on Mourinho............ Oh, Chelsea haven't "played well". How can we be on top of the league and not "play" well? It's a paradox. I'm just glad Mourinho didn't give the bastards something to feed on in his press conference.

We've played well in spots but we've also been quite lucky. If you can't see that then I don't know what to say. We were lucky to get that goal against Everton because we really didn't do enough to win that if we're being honest. Against Spurs we were poor, until individual mistakes undid them. Fulham away we started very slowly but we deserved to win that.

But the simple fact is that we have glaring deficiencies in this team which is why the title talk was always very premature. We're a team in the process of being built so that's to be expected, and Foy was beyond awful yesterday but this season we've had more than our fair share of decisions go in our favour.

[MrExcalibur100 7,124]

Mate, you're talking complete and utter bollocks. You know fuck all about the media in this country, you have no experience of the people that work in it yet you're talking as if you're an expert on it.

Every club thinks there's an anti-us policy in the media. City fans think that the media is biased in favour of United. United fans think there's a fatwa against Moyes and Cleverley, Arsenal fans think that some have it in for Wenger.

The 'football press' as you incorrectly put it is wildly diverse in it's quality and views and to throw around accusations of people being brainwashed by it is complete crap.

We've played well in spots but we've also been quite lucky. If you can't see that then I don't know what to say. We were lucky to get that goal against Everton because we really didn't do enough to win that if we're being honest. Against Spurs we were poor, until individual mistakes undid them. Fulham away we started very slowly but we deserved to win that.

But the simple fact is that we have glaring deficiencies in this team which is why the title talk was always very premature. We're a team in the process of being built so that's to be expected, and Foy was beyond awful yesterday but this season we've had more than our fair share of decisions go in our favour.

I lived in North London for majority of my youth, so believe me, I know what I'm talking about. If you think there hasn't been an anti-Chelsea agenda since Roman bought the club, then you need to pay more attention. Show me the article in the Telegraph, Mail, Guardian, Independent, Mirror, about Chris Foy's performance. You wouldn't find it. Remember how they hyped up the WBA penalty? (believe me, fans of other clubs still talk about it 4 months later) Many, many articles the next day in all the major papers. Or the marginal calls against Liverpool? Maybe Jose was right. We need more voices in the media. We are not a traditional big club, we represent new money and they hate it.

Many fans of other clubs also hate United too, but the difference is that that club get protection from their people in the media we don't. Can you imagine if what happened to us at Villa park happened to United? You think Daniel Taylor wouldn't have had a piece about it in the Guardian? Or if it happened to Arsenal, John Cross wouldn't have had a piece in the Mirror? And don't let me get started with the Liverpool monopoly on TV. Mourinho, despite the humour he put into it, had a point. It's unfair.

And my main point was really about us not getting any more or less decisions than our title rivals. You completely ignored that part. We have had no more or less decisions than Liverpool, Arsenal and City especially.

[Reddish-Blue 2,509]

Losing this game is technically a positive.

The players 'should' be fired up to get the wins against Galatasaray & Arsenal

[MrExcalibur100 7,124]

And for the played well in spurts part and being lucky. United were lucky last season. They were lucky at Stamford Bridge with another disastrous ref performance that went against us. Why should we care if we were lucky? It's just disgusting to see fellow Chelsea fans repeating the same rubbish that the media and rival fans say? Lucky all season with decisions? Just pure horseshit. A huge lie. Tell the same lie over and over and even our fans start to believe it. Man city have had huge decisions in the big 8 clashes (against Newcastle, Liverpool, Tottenham) Huge game changing decisions. Yet its us who have been lucky? Only against WBA, no place else.

Not playing well? Even when we do, we get no credit.. Everything is starting to feel like 2005 again.

[The only place to be 11,313]

I lived in North London for majority of my youth, so believe me, I know what I'm talking about. If you think there hasn't been an anti-Chelsea agenda since Roman bought the club, then you need to pay more attention. Show me the article in the Telegraph, Mail, Guardian, Independent, Mirror, about Chris Foy's performance. You wouldn't find it. Remember how they hyped up the WBA penalty? (believe me, fans of other clubs still talk about it 4 months later) Many, many articles the next day in all the major papers. Or the marginal calls against Liverpool? Maybe Jose was right. We need more voices in the media. We are not a traditional big club, we represent new money and they hate it.

What, you want individual stories that are pro-Chelsea? How about I just tell you to look up some of Martin Samuel's articles on FFP and what a joke it is. How about Neil Ashton and a couple of other Mail writers who have written positively about our players, most recently John Terry. How about Henry Winter who has always been fair-minded.

If you're sticking to the Custis's and even Ackfords of the world then I understand why you might think we've been harshly treated, but there's no grand conspiracy against us.

The media LOVES Jose Mourinho. He gives them easy copy and great headlines. They treat him with kid gloves....just look at how many of them GUSHED over him after the City game at a Mourinho Masterclass.

Literally, just google 'mourinho masterclass' and see how many media outlets you get praising him after the City game.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=mourinho+masterclass&oq=mourinho+masterclass&aqs=chrome..69i57.3127j0j1&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=119&ie=UTF-8#q=mourinho+masterclass&start=10

Many fans of other clubs also hate United too, but the difference is that that club get protection from their people in the media we don't. Can you imagine if what happened to us at Villa park happened to United? You think Daniel Taylor wouldn't have had a piece about it in the Guardian? Or if it happened to Arsenal, John Cross wouldn't have had a piece in the Mirror? And don't let me get started with the Liverpool monopoly on TV. Mourinho, despite the humour he put into it, had a point. It's unfair.

The reason that Liverpool have a lot of players in the media is because football on tv exploded in the 90s. Who were the big stars then?? Oh right, the recently retired stars of the 80s and 90s who were Liverpool and United players in the main. It's not fucking rocket science but if you want to get bent out of shape because Jody Fucking Morris doesn't have a tv show then you go right ahead.

Please ignore Pat Nevin, Craig Burley (cunt), Glenn Hoddle, Ruud Gullit, Michael Ballack, Franco Zola (did last night's game) and even old Cascarino who regularly get run-outs and even the positive discussion from the likes of Graeme Souness, Paul Merson and Matt Le Tissier.

And my main point was really about us not getting any more or less decisions than our title rivals. You completely ignored that part. We have had no more or less decisions than Liverpool, Arsenal and City especially.

I'm not going to count up the decisions that we've had, but honestly this season I've felt like we've had more than our fair share of luck especially at home.

[Barbara 15,149]

Literally the only good thing that came out of today was the fact that Kompany got sent off so City have to deal with Demichelis and Lescott at the back for 3 games.

no sweetie, you've got it wrong.

The only good thing that came out of yesterday is Ramires getting sent off and us having this blessing in disguise of not having to deal with him for three games.

I hope Luiz is fit, but if he isn't, I'm sure Lamps can cope with a couple of matches until he is and they can maybe even alternate. It's a blessing for me not having to watch Ramires.

What he did yesterday doesn't surprise me at all. I'm not even sure the FA will give him only three games... he could have broken the other guy's leg... Atrocious, just like his performance.

[MrExcalibur100 7,124]

We will continue the conversation tomorrow, I need some sleep-_-

1.You miss my point though. Chelsea have not had any more or less decisions than any of our rivals for the title.

2. Decisions that go in our favour, mostly marginal stuff, except WBA are magnified by the media to an incredible extent while those that go against us are swept under the carpet. Not a single article of it in any paper. Some might think it's irrelevant, but I think it leads to people believing false stuff. I.e. us being lucky with refs. I've watched every second. If I'm wrong give me multiple examples. It's been mostly 50/50 unlike some other teams.

And those names you mentioned are just guest hosts, not big time at all. Just watch as this game is swept under the carpet. It happens a lot to chelsea and it's because we lack power in the press.

[The only place to be 11,313]

We will continue the conversation tomorrow, I need some sleep-_-

1.You miss my point though. Chelsea have not had any more or less decisions than any of our rivals for the title.

2. Decisions that go in our favour, mostly marginal stuff, except WBA are magnified by the media to an incredible extent while those that go against us are swept under the carpet. Not a single article of it in any paper. Some might think it's irrelevant, but I think it leads to people believing false stuff. I.e. us being lucky with refs. I've watched every second. If I'm wrong give me multiple examples. It's been mostly 50/50 unlike some other teams.

And those names you mentioned are just guest hosts, not big time at all. Just watch as this game is swept under the carpet. It happens a lot to chelsea and it's because we lack power in the press.

So who exactly are these big names that the scousers and mancs have? Neville and Carragher? Do me a favour. Neville is about as fair-minded as you get. Hansen? Retiring at the end of the season. Last night MOTD went with Shearer and Savage.

Honestly this whole thing Mourinho started is utter bollocks and you're just regurgitating it. Jesus wept.