Jump to content
Join Talk Chelsea and join in with the discussions! Click Here

Cesc Fàbregas


Special Juan
 Share
Followers 3

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I saw numerous comments raising the question as to how would Fabregas fit in a Mourinho's team if Juan Mata (and to a lesser extent de Bruyne) could not. It is to misunderstand what was the situation

Already has more medals for Chelsea than Arsenal.

:lol:

Posted Images

The only thing i disagree with Pearce post is about Mata cant pick up passes with his weak foot which is completely wrong. His 1st touch is amazing, world class already. Yeah his left foot is golden but his right foot is pretty good as well (for example, his goal against Australia).

The rest of his post is true, but he just stated the things that Fabregas do better than Mata which is a bit unfair. Yes his dribbling is bit worse than Fab (only a bit) but his holding is pretty good. He knows what to do with the ball under high tense game. He rarely lost the ball while he's holding it, unless he do passing, but even WC playmaker such as Xavi couldnt do a 100% complete pass in 1 game.

And the thing about him couldnt survive in league like EPL and will survive in league like LaLiga is a big, like mountain joke. (sry mam :lol:) Its like people are being hypnotized and forgot how good Mata was in EPL and he EVEN didnt need time to adapt!

He is good, world class already. He is simply not suited to Mourinho style, YES as simple as that. But some people trying their best to get inside Mourinho head and joking themselves.

But that's the thing with Mata. People so often only look what he offers and completely overlook what he costs, in that case it's very easy to say he was amazing.

He was amazing creating. And amazing exposing a whole team behind and around him when he was out-muscled, dispossessed or shoved aside by the big/strong guys that play everywhere in this league. The ideal player doesn't need to excel as much as he did creating if they don't offer the midfield to the opposition in a physical league such as English.

When I say he'd do much better in La Liga I don't mean creatively - it doesn't matter much for him in that sense - but I mean the liabilities and weaknesses of his game wouldn't be as much exposed because football in Spain still embraces the kind of player he is. But even football there is becoming more physical and more demanding. He's an endangered kind of player imo, at least in the short term I see players like him having less and less space despite his incredible ability and vision to create chances.

Nobody answered my question, so until someone does, that's my opinion. I'm willing to change it if I can be convinced otherwise. We had this conversation a thousand times in the forum since last year and I'm yet to find someone to explain how Mata didn't compromise us in the EPL with his free role if we were 6th and 14-point behind 3rd while he was here running the show. We were Mata-centered and we were a big flop, although a big flop with a maestro that created a lot.

I'm sorry, I'd rather us to have a less beautiful football if we're more competitive than have a maestro and be a big flop in what I consider the most important trophy we play for: Barclays Premier League. Of course, the perfect scenario would be a combination of both things, but if that's not possible, I'll pick 2013/14 Chelsea over the two previous seasons 15 times out of 10 and the biggest change was Mata (although one could also argue having a in-form JT also helped a lot).

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

But that's the thing with Mata. People so often only look what he offers and completely overlook what he costs, in that case it's very easy to say he was amazing.

He was amazing creating. And amazing exposing a whole team behind and around him when he was out-muscled, dispossessed or shoved aside by the big/strong guys that play everywhere in this league. The ideal player doesn't need to excel as much as he did creating if they don't offer the midfield to the opposition in a physical league such as English.

When I say he'd do much better in La Liga I don't mean creatively - it doesn't matter much for him in that sense - but I mean the liabilities and weaknesses of his game wouldn't be as much exposed because football in Spain still embraces the kind of player he is. But even football there is becoming more physical and more demanding. He's an endangered kind of player imo, at least in the short term I see players like him having less and less space despite his incredible ability and vision to create chances.

Nobody answered my question, so until someone does, that's my opinion. I'm willing to change it if I can be convinced otherwise. We had this conversation a thousand times in the forum since last year and I'm yet to find someone to explain how Mata didn't compromise us in the EPL with his free role if we were 6th and 14-point behind 3rd while he was here running the show. We were Mata-centered and we were a big flop, although a big flop with a maestro that created a lot.

I'm sorry, I'd rather us to have a less beautiful football if we're more competitive than have a maestro and be a big flop in what I consider the most important trophy we play for: Barclays Premier League. Of course, the perfect scenario would be a combination of both things, but if that's not possible, I'll pick 2013/14 Chelsea over the two previous seasons 15 times out of 10 and the biggest change was Mata (although one could also argue having a in-form JT also helped a lot).

Again I disagree with the notion Mata costs the team, this was a myth created by Mourinho to justify benching Mata. In the 2 years prior to Mourinho. Mata played all our big games and we were never exposed when he played

2012/13 season Man Utd 0- Chelsea 1 Mata scored

Chelsea 2-1 Arsenal Mata scored

Chelsea 0-0 Man City

Chelsea 1-2 Man City Lampard missed a penalty

Chelsea 4-2 Spurs Mata with 2 goals

Chelsea 2-2 Liverpool Stupid Suarez scored after he was supposed to be sent off

Chelsea 2-0 Everton

Chelsea 2-1 Benfica Mata 2 assists

So I do not get this un valid reason that Mata exposed us. We just had an unbalnced team without any central midfielders and a good manager things that we clearly had last season which would likely have further improved Mata's game even further. Also just to add Mata never lost the ball in dangerous positions, he shielded the ball well, give me one example of when he lost the ball and we conceded a goal, I can give u at least 5 times when Oscar was out muscled and lost position

Link to post
Share on other sites
To sum it up:


Mata's advantages:

1) He's faster and has a better acceleration

2) he's possibly more direct

3) he's a better dribbler (alright, this is arguable)


Cesc's advantages:

1) He's better at possession. He can slow the game down if needed and dictate the tempo.

2) His passing range is much superior to Mata's(his long balls are as good as his shot ones).

3) Mata is no slouch either, but Cesc is still a better final ball provider, has a better vision and creativity. Objective fact. Despite not having his best season, he still created the most clear-cut chances in Europe last season, had the most through balls in Europe too.

4) He's physically stronger: taller and bigger--179cm to Mata's 170--so less likely to be outmuscled.

5) He's not exactly a defensive genius, but he's better than Mata at tackling, interceptions and clearances.

6) He has the experience of playing numerous positions on the pitch: DLM, CM, CAM, winger, false 9

7) He's homegrown

8) Having him at Chelsea makes Arsenal fans mad and bitter.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
To sum it up:
Mata's advantages:
1) He's faster and has a better acceleration
2) he's possibly more direct
3) he's a better dribbler (alright, this is arguable)
Cesc's advantages:
1) He's better at possession. He can slow the game down if needed and dictate the tempo.
2) His passing range is much superior to Mata's(his long balls are as good as his shot ones).
3) Mata is no slouch either, but Cesc is still a better final ball provider, has a better vision and creativity. Objective fact. Despite not having his best season, he still created the most clear-cut chances in Europe last season, had the most through balls in Europe too.
4) He's physically stronger: taller and bigger--179cm to Mata's 170--so less likely to be outmuscled.
5) He's not exactly a defensive genius, but he's better than Mata at tackling, interceptions and clearances.
6) He has the experience of playing numerous positions on the pitch: DLM, CM, CAM, winger, false 9
7) He's homegrown
8) Having him at Chelsea makes Arsenal fans mad and bitter.

There’re many differences between the players. I would argue that not only is Mata a better dribbler but he has a better fist touch, he’s better in tight spaces and his close control of the ball (I think) is better. Cesc however is an outstanding passer and that’s the fundamental difference for me. Mata’s vision and passing abilities are great but Cesc is hands down exceptional in this aspect.

But my issue with Peace’s post is that, I’m confused by it. I respect that Mata isn’t everyone’s ‘cup of tea’ and that he has many limitations that can easily make him a passenger or even a liability. But the thing is if Mata doesn’t do it for you, if you think he’s too weak and easily out-muscled then chances are Fabregas won’t do it for you either because although they have different strengths however their weaknesses are very, very much similar.

Many of the complaints about Mata in Peace's post are exactly the same complaints Barcelona fans had of Fabregas and are exactly the same complaints a lot of Arsenal fans had of him as well. So I don’t understand how one is going to recognize the value of Cesc if you don’t recognize the value of Mata.

For you to see Cesc as an asset requires that you close your eyes to his limitations and see the good things that he does bring. If many fans couldn't do that with Mata, I don't know how they're going to do so with Cesc.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

There’re many differences between the players. I would argue that not only is Mata a better dribbler but he has a better fist touch, he’s better in tight spaces and his close control of the ball (I think) is better. Cesc however is an outstanding passer and that’s the fundamental difference for me. Mata’s vision and passing abilities are great but Cesc is hands down exceptional in this aspect.

But my issue with Peace’s post is that, I’m confused by it. I respect that Mata isn’t everyone’s ‘cup of tea’ and that he has many limitations that can easily make him a passenger or even a liability. But the thing is if Mata doesn’t do it for you, if you think he’s too weak and easily out-muscled then chances are Fabregas won’t do it for you either because although they have different strengths however their weaknesses are very, very much similar.

Many of the complaints about Mata in Peace's post are exactly the same complaints Barcelona fans had of Fabregas and are exactly the same complaints a lot of Arsenal fans had of him as well. So I don’t understand how one is going to recognize the value of Cesc if you don’t recognize the value of Mata.

For you to see Cesc as an asset requires that you close your eyes to his limitations and see the good things that he does bring. If many fans couldn't do that with Mata, I don't know how they're going to do so with Cesc.

Yes, Cesc shares some of Mata's weaknesses, but he still isn't as limited as him. He's far more versatile. I agree that the fundamental difference between them is that Cesc is an outstanding passer while Mata isn't.

As for Barcelona fans, I'll have to disagree. I live with a Barcelona fan and read their forums a lot, so I'm very familiar with the complaints they had of Fabregas. The nature of their complaints is that he can't play tiki-taka in a rapid manner and control Barcelona's midfield like Xaviniesta. Inability to dictate the tempo at Barcelona is different from inability to dictate the tempo at a team with a far more direct style. That's where the claims that Cesc was a poison to Barcelona originate--their managers wanted to fit him in, but it never really worked without completely changing the team's system. In Barcelona's system, his strengths were neutralized.

A few posts on the subject from Barcelona fans(April-May 2014):

As soon as Cesc is ripping it up for his new club you'll all be bitching to buy him back......again
A lot of fans suffer from 'shiny new thing' syndrome,myself included. Sometimes what you already have is pretty good.
He would rip it up at another club. Sanchez will too. They still don't suit Barca. Is Javi Martinez a bad player? He was bullying everyone in midfield including Iniesta in a treble winning team last season. Under Guardiola he is a bench player / part time centerback now. Similarly Cesc doesn't suit Barca's give-and-go positional play. He's best at feeding runners in quick transitions. A team that holds the ball 70 % of the time on average doesn't get many chances in transition. So he shines in bursts throughout a game.
Next season he'll struggle even more. Luis Enrique will be a lot less "direct" than Martino. Wouldn't be surprised if Rafinha outshone him within a few months after his return.

I have mixed feelings towards Cesc. While he cannot play tiki taka in a rapid manner like Xavi or Iniesta, he is much better than them in bringing goals and assists from central midfield. Our Sporting project that started with Pep in 2008 is now over. Players need a fresh approach. An approach that can benefit the future key members of the team including Cesc and Neymar.

He is amongst some of the best final ball providers in the world. It is just at Barcelona he has no one to provide the final ball on a regular basis.

Well, he'll have Costa at Chelsea. In fact, Jose probably bought Cesc with Costa in mind. Hopefully they'll have a good chemistry.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

A few posts on the subject from Barcelona fans(April-May 2014):

Well, he'll have Costa at Chelsea. In fact, Jose probably bought Cesc with Costa in mind. Hopefully they'll have a good chemistry.

Costa AND Schurrle.
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Fabregas is not a good dribbler"

Explain this then:

What that also shows is that is acceleration on the ball is very good as well. He done a similar thing against Milan where he used exceptional dribbling and acceleration of the ball to score a goal. His acceleration and dribbling on the ball is underrated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...