🇳🇬 Mikel John Obi

[The only place to be 11,313]

Brilliant analysis mate about our managers. Too bad very few people will actually attempt to read that because it's truly a top post. Thanks for that.

What a fucking load of patronising wank.

And trippingstep is pretty much spot on. It's essentially the equivalent of a middle-management memo where trendy tossers try and cram as many buzzwords into a sentence as possible. There's a decent point about the turmoil at this club leading to problems with Mikel knowing his role.....but I don't see too many other players affected by that. It's just people once again making excuses for him because they think they have to baby him. He's a grown-ass man...He's 26 FFS....cut the reins, get him off the teet and start judging him as if he's a professional footballer who is paid a good wage to play football.

Next season he has to step up and give consistent performances. That's what most of us judge players on. We don't go by what they might have been or what they once were.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

What a fucking load of patronising wank.

And trippingstep is pretty much spot on. It's essentially the equivalent of a middle-management memo where trendy tossers try and cram as many buzzwords into a sentence as possible. There's a decent point about the turmoil at this club leading to problems with Mikel knowing his role.....but I don't see too many other players affected by that. It's just people once again making excuses for him because they think they have to baby him. He's a grown-ass man...He's 26 FFS....cut the reins, get him off the teet and start judging him as if he's a professional footballer who is paid a good wage to play football.

Next season he has to step up and give consistent performances. That's what most of us judge players on. We don't go by what they might have been or what they once were.

Very few people will read that because it is more than 5 lines. I know from experience that people around here very rarely read long posts. Sorry to disappoint you, but I was praising the analysis of the managers approaches not the part about Mikel. The brilliance about it is that I've never read anyone make a similar analysis about the styles. he offered a completely different view point and backed it with his logic. You don't have to agree with it, but at least he did something other than repeating the same things that everyone else says. Few people do that.

[The only place to be 11,313]

...because he was the only damn player having been made of a regular starter at 21 since 2008 ? That's all I want to say

The Terrys, Lampards, Ballacks, Bellettis, Carvalhos, Drogbas... were all at the peak of their career, between 26 and 32. We don't speak about improvement anymore, that's about finding the right context to express themselves

Fair enough. That point has validity. But most of that post is complete bollocks and I'm sorry to say that because I don't tend to criticise posts that people have put time and effort into.

The fact that you've got Choulo trying his best to crawl up your arse doesn't help.

[The only place to be 11,313]

Very few people will read that because it is more than 5 lines.

Give it a fucking rest you tiresome old bore. I'm fed up with the narrative that you constantly try and paint of Mikel, as if he's some type of delicacy that only football connoisseurs can properly assess and enjoy. It really is nothing more than patronising old shit and is insulting to the vast majority of Chelsea supporters both on this board and in real life who know how to evaluate footballers.

Mikel is a divisive player not because people aren't capable of understanding what his job is in the team (we loved Maka) but because he's inconsistent and there is the weird cabal of sycophants who defend him in such absurd fashion that it actually makes people dislike him more than he warrants. This whole thread is ridiculous and I'm as guilty of that as the next person but for fucks sake give it a rest.

[The only place to be 11,313]

Mikel benefited from what the three first managers (More Scolari and Ancelotti, actually) instructed him.

And two of them (AVB and Scolari) were failures.

I understand what you're saying but I simply think Mikel hasn't shown enough, especially in terms of heart and character and until he does that on a consistent basis then the vast majority of Chelsea fans will have question marks over him. Everyone seems to think he needs replacing bar a few fans of his and most would've loved to have been shot of him.

Personally I'm going to limit my discussions about Mikel in future to the West London area because there's far less bullshit involved.

[TrippingStep 336]

Remy's prime issues are mental, he struggles because he's bad advised etc...

I won't ever say Mikel, Moses are world class. I just cannot understand the why they're bashed, individually and worse: being scapegoated for collective issues.

So for you that's not possible to compare three managers who did basically the same things at Chelsea? Tactically, to rotate the squad etc... given the (similar) conditions they got the job etc ?

For Remy I'm not sure it's just mental problems. I have this opinion since he played at Nice. He has very good qualities like his pace and heading but has also big weaknesses, bad technic when running with the ball that leads to not release the ball on obvious passing lanes.

I don't know, but comparing the three just because of basic things like quick proper release from the back (ok at Lille with Garcia it never happened lol never mind), it's a bit too much.

Between Di Matteo and Benitez, for me there was a big change. Ok it was not perfect but there was an idea on how to attack, some patterns during the matches with some adjustements to the opponent defense.

And I admit I'm a little biased by the fact that I follow Hazard to see how things evolve and I was glad that he had at least a proper coach as I feel his previous coach skipped too many basics things and was not working on some of his flaws.

I agree that too many coaches can mess the players but it's just that I don't really like the comparison between the coaches.

For me if Mikel didn't feature that much with Benitez, it's because he was not capable of doing a Ramires (btw i agree with you on one player and it's him) job by helping the fullback and winger, on the left there was often a problem there, even with the fact the winger was coming deeper with Benitez due to the fact the defensive midfielder didn't do the job asked in this system. Helping in possession of the ball and pressing, trapping with the full back, winger on top channeling the opponent to the trapzone ready to counter attack when the ball was won.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Give it a fucking rest you tiresome old bore. I'm fed up with the narrative that you constantly try and paint of Mikel, as if he's some type of delicacy that only football connoisseurs can properly assess and enjoy. It really is nothing more than patronising old shit and is insulting to the vast majority of Chelsea supporters both on this board and in real life who know how to evaluate footballers.

Mikel is a divisive player not because people aren't capable of understanding what his job is in the team (we loved Maka) but because he's inconsistent and there is the weird cabal of sycophants who defend him in such absurd fashion that it actually makes people dislike him more than he warrants. This whole thread is ridiculous and I'm as guilty of that as the next person but for fucks sake give it a rest.

Except absolutely nothing in my post has anything to do with Mikel, you idiot. :lol2:

I'm sorry you have to attack my posts in order to feel secure about your opinion and I'm sorry that you have to try to take my opinion out of context and make it seem something it is not in order for you to attack it, but I won't be posting about Mikel before the new season because I see no point in doing so. So you'll have to find someone else to attack whenever he posts something to help your pathetic ego.

[bleed_blue 136]

I know many here don't rate Mikel at all but to use misleading stats like that is just nonsensical. It's just so convenient for people to pick up stats like that to highlight the supposed rubbishness of player and at the same time, dismiss other factors that led to that stats. I'm pretty sure the low win percentage etc with Mikel comes during the mid season when we have our annual winter slump with the entire team just played like rubbish from November till about February. But of course, nobody is gonna look into these factors. And to say Mikel not playing contributes to our good end of season form is just plain nonsense for this reason posted below.

To almost blame everything that is wrong on Mikel is just pathetic. As if everything we failed to do right in a game is his fault.

The so-called annual winter slump

We played 32 games between november to February.

Mikel played in just 11 of these. So your theory falls flat on its face.

And how are those stats misleading.

Football games are won by performances of your 11 players on the field. I am not saying that Mikel is the only thing wrong with our team but he is one major problem.

If the win ration increases from 43% to 67% when Mikel does not play

If the loss ration falls from 34% to 13% when Mikel does not play

If the goals scored per game increase from 1.6 to 2.5 when Mikel does not play

If the goals conceded pre game drop from 1.53 to 0.89 when Mikel does not play

I am not sure how shameless a person has to be to argue for Mikel's effectiveness.

Honestly, the people who have liked your post should tell you how wrong you are. Choulo and Amels

[Jase 43,479]

The so-called annual winter slump

We played 32 games between november to February.

Mikel played in just 11 of these. So your theory falls flat on its face.

And how are those stats misleading.

Football games are won by performances of your 11 players on the field. I am not saying that Mikel is the only thing wrong with our team but he is one major problem.

If the win ration increases from 43% to 67% when Mikel does not play

If the loss ration falls from 34% to 13% when Mikel does not play

If the goals scored per game increase from 1.6 to 2.5 when Mikel does not play

If the goals conceded pre game drop from 1.53 to 0.89 when Mikel does not play

You just don't get it, do you? At least when others voice their views on why they rate or don't rate Mikel, they look into factors. They analyze his performances, character, style of play, team play, strengths, weaknesses and all that. But here, you are being incredibly myopic in your view on Mikel that you are just comparing our winning percentages with and without Mikel. You are being selective by just choosing and looking at stats on its surface to pass a definite judgment on a play without even bother exploring further into those why stats are like that.

The numbers will tell us we have lost more games this past season with Mikel starting compared to when he isn't. However, look at some of those losses we suffered when he played:

vs Man City (in Community Shield) - Leading 1-0 at HT but Ivanovic got sent off and we just got pummelled in the 2nd half.

vs Atletico Madrid - Abysmal performance all around. No spark in attack and absolutely atrocious defensively

vs Man United (in PL at SB) - Conceded 2 goals that got nothing to do with Mikel. Fought back to make it 2-2 but then lost the game because of 2 RCs & to an offside goal

vs West Ham (A) - Completely bossed the first half but only led 1-0 at HT when it should have been more. Whole team just switched in the 2nd half and no one, NO ONE stood up to Diame who just ran the game

vs Southampton(A) - Lost the game because we didn't play well at all AND Benitez fielded a 2nd string side

vs Man City (in FA Cup) - Whole team played like rubbish before deciding to turn up only when we are 2-0 down

Are any of those defeats Mikel's fault? No. Those losses there came as a result because the team just didn't turn up or decided to capitulate for whatever reason. Has nothing to do whatsoever with Mikel playing or not.

And then, when you look at the stats that said we won more and lost fewer games without Mikel, you didn't even bother consider the fact that he missed out about 20 of those 37 games due to his involvement in the AFCON and his hip injury at the end of last season. You just conveniently decide to use it as it is to suit your agenda. Moreover, a fair bit of those wins without Mikel came in last 10 games or so when a major factor of it happened because the players pulled together and was focussed on achieving our target then and also because Benitez's rant after the Boro game eventually led to less negative chants/pressure from the fans, thus allowing the players to express themselves and supporting them.

I am not sure how shameless a person has to be to argue for Mikel's effectiveness.

Honestly, the people who have liked your post should tell you how wrong you are. Choulo and Amels

I am not sure how pathetic can a person be to use such poor reasons like this to argue the ineffectiveness of Mikel.

[The only place to be 11,313]

Are any of those defeats Mikel's fault? No. Those losses there came as a result because the team just didn't turn up or decided to capitulate for whatever reason. Has nothing to do whatsoever with Mikel playing or not.

Southampton away and West Ham away were utterly atrocious performances by Mikel. Diame dominated him in at Upton Park and Lambert had him in his pocket at St Marys.

I agree that bleeds blue was a little unfair in using those stats, but if you're going to just re-write history then you're not much better.

[Jase 43,479]

Southampton away and West Ham away were utterly atrocious performances by Mikel. Diame dominated him in at Upton Park and Lambert had him in his pocket at St Marys.

Performance awful yes but was Mikel the only one that played poorly? No. The whole team did and that's why we lost those games. Mikel playing didn't just magically caused us to lose when other factors led to it as well.

I agree that bleeds blue was a little unfair in using those stats, but if you're going to just re-write history then you're not much better.

Not much better? Ha. At least I'm not just tossing some stats or facts forward and just look at the surface without even bother to look further into the issue...

[The only place to be 11,313]

Performance awful yes but was Mikel the only one that played poorly? No. The whole team did and that's why we lost those games. Mikel playing didn't just magically caused us to lose when other factors led to it as well.

If you want to discuss the performances of other players then do it in their thread. You bought those performances up in reference to Mikel. He played poorly.

Not much better? Ha. At least I'm not just tossing some stats or facts forward and just look at the surface without even bother to look further into the issue...

Looking further into the issue is pointing out that other people played poorly too?

Look, I'm just pointing out what Mikel's performances were like in those games.

Remind yourself Diamé's goal. Why was Diamé left alone in the zone 14 at the edge of the penalty spot? It's because Cole was left against two on the throw-in and that Mikel was there to cover him... our two-man midfield was an absolute farce (and I'm saying that for one year) that led to a constant 2v3 in midfield, so leaving us at the mercy of any good deep midfielder: Carrick to dictate play from deep position, or Diamé able to push forward.

So yeah, basically Mikel's fault. I already know you're going to answer your usual body language nonsense, based on games nobody did care about.

I'm not going to excuse the pivot - neither Lamps, Rami or Mikel covered themselves in glory last season. But Mikel was the only person I saw who shirked responsibility in games. Lamps never did that and Rami (who I criticised and then said I had been wrong about, because I have that ability) simply isn't as consistently technically proficient as one would like.

Mikel is simply someone I'm pretty fed up with. I don't like seeing him wear this club badge anymore and I long for the day he leaves, if he's going to persist with this current level of performance.

Fortunately we've got players like Chalobah, Ake and Loftus-Cheek coming through who I actually enjoy watching and consider proper Chelsea players. They look like they give a shit and I value body language and attitude in football - as someone who coaches kids I'm amazed you disregard this so quickly.

[Phil Driver 503]

The stats are only used as a back up to confirm what I see from him on the pitch and that is a series of poor performances ,he has no ability ,what is he good at? ,what the stats do not tell you is he is poor in the games we win as well ,for instance in the second half at White Hart Lane he was awful as well ,only for our magic men to turn it on .

He cant run ,he cant tackle,his passing is pedestrian,he doesnt read the game (picking up runners) ,he lacks stamina (fades in games),cant tackle (fouls a lot and is not hard,agressive),he is not inspirational,bad attitude (Europa League),shoooting ,heading ,marking on set plays he does nothing, ,have a look at Frank Lampards win /play stats and Ramires,Luiz when in the two midfield pair ,he makes everyone who he partners look bad .

[Jase 43,479]

If you want to discuss the performances of other players then do it in their thread. You bought those performances up in reference to Mikel. He played poorly.

Looking further into the issue is pointing out that other people played poorly too?

Look, I'm just pointing out what Mikel's performances were like in those games.

The point here is that bleedsblue threw out that comparison stats to highlight the supposed uselessness of Mikel when he plays and doesn't play without context. He tried to make it sound as if Mikel was a major factor in those difference when it isn't at all and there were other factors dictating them. Hence, why I brought up those factors which partly includes the team's performances that led to those defeats. Mikel didn't play well yes but to mainly him as an excuse for the difference in those winning percentages is nonsense.

[The only place to be 11,313]

The stats are only used as a back up to confirm what I see from him on the pitch and that is a series of poor performances ,he has no ability ,what is he good at? ,what the stats do not tell you is he is poor in the games we win as well ,for instance in the second half at White Hart Lane he was awful as well ,only for our magic men to turn it on .

He cant run ,he cant tackle,his passing is pedestrian,he doesnt read the game (picking up runners) ,he lacks stamina (fades in games),cant tackle (fouls a lot and is not hard,agressive),he is not inspirational,bad attitude (Europa League),shoooting ,heading ,marking on set plays he does nothing, ,have a look at Frank Lampards win /play stats and Ramires,Luiz when in the two midfield pair ,he makes everyone who he partners look bad .

Annoyingly I don't think much of that is true. I think he's got a ton of ability and fantastic physical tools.

For me it's all mental. He was a 19 year old with attitude issues and sometimes people don't change from that. Stick him alongside good players and he'll look good but I don't think he's the type of person who will put teams on his back and make the person next to him look better (the usual argument against this is something to do with us winning the CL - luck had more to do with that).

It's why I don't think the fans have ever really taken to him. People like Maka, Wisey, Spackers etc. all gave their all and left everything on that pitch. They tried to realise their potential.

It's why I love Lukaku - he is all about football. Look at what he said about the Champions League, how he felt like he hadn't earned it himself.

Now look at Mikel

after what he said, after that performance against Rubin Kazan....just unbelievable.

[Amblève. 4,995]

Remind yourself Diamé's goal. Why was Diamé left alone in the zone 14 at the edge of the penalty spot? It's because Cole was left against two on the throw-in and that Mikel was there to cover him... our two-man midfield was an absolute farce (and I'm saying that for one year) that led to a constant 2v3 in midfield, so leaving us at the mercy of any good deep midfielder: Carrick to dictate play from deep position, or Diamé able to push forward.

So yeah, basically Mikel's fault. I already know you're going to answer your usual body language nonsense, based on games nobody did care about.

Don't even try to discuss with him mate. It's pointless. You'll only get to hear the same "Chalobah and Ake are better than Mikel, Mikel doesn't give a shit about Chelsea"-BS all over again. He's not even gonna try to react to the points you raise.

[Phil Driver 503]

Ah I missed another point out ,his left foot ,he has not got one ,it is for standing on ,he cant play off of it .

[Phil Driver 503]

Annoyingly I don't think much of that is true. I think he's got a ton of ability and fantastic physical tools.

Really ,take every point apart then and tell me what he does ,forget the stats . Being 6ft 3 ins and 14 stone does not make you a footballer.

[Phil Driver 503]

Fair enough ,another who knows little or nothing about the game ,forget his awful stats and stop trying to be clever ,you tell me what his attributes are?

What is he good at? and rolling slow passes behind full backs slowing our counter attacks down is not a plus .

[Leif 6,006]

When I see Mikel play I get the image in my head of a slightly retarded dog who's trying to impress his owner during a game of frisby but can't find the frisby disk right in front of him.