Closed Chelsea 3-1 Sunderland

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Exactly what does booing some players achieve? Jose is no longer here, so you're not actually supporting anyone, while the players on the other hand will still be wearing blue shirts at least until January. So the booing is only going to damage the team.

Also, being upset because the team played well after Jose was sacked is no better than when some were upset when the team beat Porto because they wanted Jose sacked. Equally disloyal to the CLUB.

Keep The Blue Flag Flying High

[Last Sicarius 610]

For the numpties moaning about the boos:

Chelsea fans voice needs to be loud at a time like this. You've got players who play horrid football for matches on end then suddenly play well first match the manager is gone. That's a slap in the face to every fan, they've put their feelings before the club.

Fans still have one major role in football, they can affect football matches. Chelsea players should be men. Fair enough the manager lost his job over a ridiculously bad run. The players go Scott free? This was to let them know, their responsible and we know own they are responsible. Now earn the overpriced wage you get paid and show some bloody pride in the blue shirt instead of disgracing it with the worst attitude possible.

But why they boos Fabs or Costa(hazard didnt even play) if they still play bad? Why didnt boos Oscar which played amazing better then any match in this year?

[didierforever 7,349]

But wasn't similar stuff levelled at Lampardafter AVB was sacked? Certainly a fair number of Chelsea fans were angry at him, he was called a disgrace on here and even scum by a Chelsea fan on another forum. In fact the main crtisism of the squad in 10/11-11/12 is that they are well fed double winners with no motivation, until Barca and Munich made us eat our words.

10/11 - was a case of a squad over the top that lost some real quality which was replaced by ramires and yossi (i think). i mean did we really replace ballack, deco, joe cole, belleti with them? no doubt we were set back a year or 2. add to that essien's injury, that squad lacked quality. but i doubt they lacked effort. i remember us having a similar discussion about the 10/11 team so lets not digress. but suffice to say, the difference in quality of these 2 squads just makes it difficult for me to have any comparision.

i dont have one doubt that lamps led a revolt. but i think you are missing the intentions on here. avb was putting in a team that was clearly not our best just to bench the old guard. not to play lamps and ash against napoli was a disgusting decision. players actually wanted to play and make a difference. here, the players sold us off for their egos.

i am sure jose knew about the amount of unrest in the squad. yet he played the "best" team (if you can call it that) thinking (hopelessly wrongly) that the players might actually play to their potential. the players on the other hand have absolutely let the club down. it is one thing for an aging squad with some real quality problems to have some problems and totally another for players to intentionaly screw the club.

[Chelsea4 1,521]

Maybe Steve's Tactics was not "Defend for your lifes for 90 minutes"?

Check Oscar, great attacking game.

I know but thats how some Chelsea fans were saying.

[Chelsea4 1,521]

Or maybe winning meant Mourinho had his tactics found out eventually? The warning signs were there last season. Only so long you can rely on Hazard brilliance to win games.

I agree but sadly some fans don't see the truth.

[Vytis33 1,287]

No poll?

[Jase 43,479]

No poll?

Just added it.

[Chelsea4 1,521]

With Guus Hiddink we will watch more attacking football.

[xPetrCechx 13,578]

With Guus Hiddink i think we will watch more attacking football.

Sure!

He said back at 2009 that if chelsea lead 3-1 he can't tell them to defend. they want to attack all the time.

[Chelsea4 1,521]

Winning today meant players are traitors

losing meant the're shit not Jose.

Some Chelsea fans were saying this.

[empire of emotions 247]

Or maybe winning meant Mourinho had his tactics found out eventually? The warning signs were there last season. Only so long you can rely on Hazard brilliance to win games.

didnt we play in the same formation and basically the same tactic this game too? we were lucky to score early in the game.

[Stats 7,156]

Truely not fit to wear the shirt. Hope the majority of these wankers are shown the door either in January or next summer. Oscar thumping the badge after he scored? Do one.

Come of it. Nothing is wrong with that. I think a huge majority would rather Mourinho's face was put on the shirt rather than the club crest. Maybe that would appease some people.

[Last Sicarius 610]

tbh i think Pedro and Oscar get more free hand in offensive and both wingers didnt need to play safety. Just bench Costa and it all going to better.

Better for OUR CLUB no for some units...

:blue scalf:

[xPetrCechx 13,578]

Steve Holland: "As a club man, you get close to the people you work with. It's always a sad day when that changes." [bBC]

Reply

Steve Holland: "But we had a very important game and I had a responsibility to the club and the supporters. So I'm happy for the club."

Steve Holland: "It has only been a couple of days [since Jose Mourinho's sacking] so I feel the way I feel." [bBC]

Steve Holland: "We played really well in the 1st half, the early goals boosted their confidence. We wobbled a bit in the 2nd half." [bBC]

Steve Holland: "The team is still fragile to a certain extent, they have been used to set backs in recent weeks." [bBC]

Holland: "I was involved in the poor + successful period. You have to accept equal responsibility if you're involved- I was involved." [bBC]

Holland: "That's the way everybody has to look at it. Whether you are a staff member or you are a player." [bBC]

Holland: "The fans have a right to express their opinion. I'm not a big social media guy, so I don't know what's been going on there." [bBC]

Holland: "Clearly the supporters had a view on certain things and it is their right to express their views." [bBC]

Holland: "I don't know Guus well, but I have spoken to Ray Wilkins. I tried to get a bit of an idea what kind of guy he is." [bBC]

[Laugh1ngMan 393]

so let's not have a forum, merely a space where the mods post facts and others read.

This statement is one of the dumbest and most ignorant things I've read in all my life. If we aren't supposed to have opinions about facts, let's just be machines and/or vegetate. I didn't even bother to read the rest because I certainly need time to process someone actually wrote such a statement.

I mean, the government does some thing, I shouldn't have an opinion; war erupts, I shouldn't have an opinion, attacks like Paris happen, I shouldn't have an opinion. One friend betrayals or honors me, I shouldn't have any opinion. I mean, seriously, can you even realize what a stupid thing you've said? Oh, btw, that's just my opinion about your statement.

I didn't express myself correctly i'm afraid, i meant to say you shouldn't replace facts for opinions.

Having an opinion that some players have done nothing wrong and others have without knowing for sure is wrong

[xPetrCechx 13,578]

Steve's Interview To BBC:

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/35142381

[MefiX19 1,092]

didnt we play in the same formation and basically the same tactic this game too? we were lucky to score early in the game.

Tactics were different. A lot, when we scored 1st goal we went for 2nd, after 2nd we wre going for 3rd after 3rd we were going for 4th, but we did not get it. With Mourinho in charge we ussually score a goal and sit back and hit teams on counter. Holland changed tactics and thats why our players played better, not because Jose got sacked, but because ou attackers were thinking about attack, not about defence. We played like a big team, we had 68% possesion yeah we had 68% possesion, we had 17 shots and 7 on target, remember when we didn't even had ONE shot on target when Mourinho was in charge. Performance was excellent, beautifull football, beautifull passes. Our passing was excellent IMO. Overall this game was something we haven't seen in along time, every player played well atlest 7,8/10. Imagine having Baba with soooo much freedom witch Azpi did, he would put soooooo many crosses, and atleast would get assist, i guarantee it.

C'MON YOU BLUES!! Lets show who we are against Watford, nad crash Man U like they are childs!!! #BelieveInGuus #KTBFFH

[Rhino's Skin 972]

But why they boos Fabs or Costa(hazard didnt even play) if they still play bad? Why didnt boos Oscar which played amazing better then any match in this year?

The booing was not to do with performances.....the song "where were you when we were shit"was and aimed at the whole team.

Please separate the 2 issues

[DYC. 7,542]

I really think people are overlooking the effect of scoring two goals in quick succession. Early. Against a very poor team. With the worst defence in the league. Especially away. And they weren't two well-crafted goals. It was the regular set-piece goal and a golden opportunity presented to Pedro from close range after a deflection. Sunderland was broken and the hope of causing an upset was gone.

Completely different compared to a 0-0 score after 30, 40, 50 min. Or even worse when you've conceded.

It gives you so much freedom as a player. All of a sudden the flair came out and players were touching the ball just once or twice at some points. And on other side the opposition is under so much pressure. A day of commited bus parking was out of the picture. They even gave the players all the space they needed to play their game.

I did not see a team covering higher amounts of ground, chasing opposition players all over the pitch or fly into every challenge with far greater aggression. I saw a team who were quite laid back and bossed possession. Not new. The difference is the 2-0 lead led to a psychological boost, resulting in a higher ball circulation and greater risks being taken because they didn't fear losing the ball and being punished for it.

We saw the same against Porto. The own goal changed the game. The opposite happened vs Leicester. The game was quiet and they converted their first real opportunity and firmly took the upper hand afterwards. Would we have seen the same performance if Sunderland scored first? I don't think so.

It's far too early for all this motivation talk. Lose the Watford game next week, or produce a dull draw, and we're back to square one. We'd need to see how they perform for at least five games to draw conclusions. This is a game that easily could've been under Mourinho as well. And that wouldn't meant we'd witnessed the turnaround we're desperately looking for.

Edit: That moment in the first half I think when Oscar was walking with the ball at his feet. Costa I think made a run across to the left and all of sudden this gigantic gap of space opened up for Oscar. I've never seen anything like that. He moved in to the space, went past the defender who rushed to cover and shot the ball straight at their GK. That's not motivation. That's facing a weak team.

It's obvious some dark clouds were lifted. That doesn't mean the awful results were Mourinho's fault but Mourinho was a man under immense pressure and he did not hide his emotions well at all. The vibes surrounding the manager translates to his team. He got into trouble on more than one occassion and he also criticised/blamed his players in public and it backfired. The dynamic between coach and players obviously changed and it could not be fixed.

I don't think he has the personality to stay at a place for too long. Doesn't matter how much you want something to happen, it can't always work out. He loses his group at a certain point and you can't create new teams every time that happens.

Like Drogba said:

“By the start of the fourth (season) that Jose had been in charge, I think we had started to reach a point where it was sometimes harder for his message to get through.

“We wanted to hear it, we tried, but somehow we had lost a little bit of what made us special.”

And Maka:

"For two years at Chelsea we lived as a group of friends, dining together, getting drunk together, going to training together and winning matches together," Makelele writes in his autobiography Tout Simplement.

"Between 2004 and 2006 the solidarity in the Chelsea camp was amazing. Mourinho then broke all that when he banned key elements to make way for certain players who were treated as 'stars'.

"Very early on in the 2006/07 season, Mourinho took a step back from his players. In that one day, the brotherhood spirit that had united us was harmed.

"Then he had a bust-up with (club owner Roman) Abramovich. The chairman asked the players to express themselves more freely on the pitch, but Mourinho stubbornly refused to change his methods.

"A relationship at the top of the club was broken and the players began to feel it.

"During that third complete season under his control, I was stunned to see how Mourinho forgot the value of his players and claimed all the credit for for everything.

"To him, individuals didn't make the team work well, his methods did. At the end Mourinho gave the impression that he felt threatened as soon as a player was in the spotlight more than him.".

Makelele insists he still respects Mourinho and admires his coaching abilities but claims the current Inter Milan boss can also have a negative effect on his players.

"He's someone I respect, but who also made me suffer a great deal," the former France midfielder told Le Parisien. "But he is a winner.

"He knows football, he knows how to use players, how to motivate them, but also how to put them down.

"He's someone who's very calculating, vicious, ambitious."

[Rhino's Skin 972]

didnt we play in the same formation and basically the same tactic this game too? we were lucky to score early in the game.

So now its lucky to score early...great