Mikel John Obi

[Joe Cool 388]

Can we all just come together to agree that our biggest issues lie in central midfield not just because of Mikel, but also because the rest of our central midfielders haven't been good enough this year and the fact that we don't have an actual playmaker. It is quite worrying, so hopefully our new manager will have a good idea of what he needs to do (in terms of this position).

[Strike 7,265]

Ramires also commits shit load of fouls, many in dangerous positions, and dives into tackles all over the place for no reason. Not to mention his disgusting passing.

Ramires will shine in a B2B role of a midfield 3. Something like this

-------DM

Ramires Oscar

But with Mata around I don't think 4-3-3 will be pursued here

[Phil Driver 503]

He didnt even make the squad today ,it is clear how the waiter rates him after managing him .

[CHOULO19 24,332]

The saying goes - "In a world of the blind, the squint rules". If Mikel is to be an out-and-out starter for Chelsea, he shouldn't be compared to our other midfielders. Compare him rather with Vidal, Fernandinho, Matuidi, Gonalons, Gundogan, Capoue etc and you see a big gulf in class.

Chelsea are 'settling' for Mikel at DM. Do DM's around the world go unnoticed? Ball-winning midfielders rarely go unnoticed and I thought Mikel was a ball-winner? How often does he actually 'win' the ball? We don't notice Mikel, not because he's doing his job unnoticed, It is because he is not influencing the game enough and by influence I mean Tackles/Interceptions

I said I'm not getting into a debate in this thread, but I'm going to answer only you because I know you can debate open-mindedly.

Mikel is NOT a ball winning midfielder, he is a holding midfielder. First of all, ball winning midfielders are a species that is nearing extinction. They just don't belong in today's game. Why? Well, take Luiz in midfield for instance, he tries to be a ball winning midfielder, always attempting to intercept, tackle and nick the ball off the opposition. Result? More often than not, he fails to win the ball and the player gets past him and can run at our back four with no one shielding them. If the opposition are a good organized team, we're likely to concede in that situation. You can still see ball winning midfielders in the championship and lower levels, but in the PL, the game is just much more dynamic and fast paced than what it used to be in the days of Roy Keane. Defenders don't tackle as much as they used to and CMs almost never go to ground anymore, in fact, tackles in midfield are so out of fashion that if you see a player go to ground and not get it 100% right, you directly think he could be off or at least get a yellow card.

Instead, ball winning midfielders have been largely replaced by holding midfielders like Mikel. The first thing they teach kids in academies about defending nowadays is "Stay on your feet" "Do NOT commit to the challenge" because when a player commits to a tackle, he's giving the attacker a chance to get past him. There is a quote by Xabi Alonso that I like to use where he says tackling is not something that, as a holding midfielder, you look or try to do, but rather something you have to resort to sometimes if your man gets away from you or to correct a certain mistake. But in normal circumstances, a central midfielder should never go to ground. Instead, what holding midfielders do, is that they stay on their feet and just block the channels and passing angles and either force the man on the ball to a less dangerous area or force him to make a mistake or at least take the difficult option.

As for the comparisons, half of the ones you mentioned are only there because they are "trending" now (Btw, Fernandinho and Vidal are more b2b; Vidal is basically a more dynamic Ramires with better technique). They had a a few good games this season and got a good reputation that they'd probably lose next season if they don't perform as they did this season. And of course, there are players that are better than Mikel. But that applies to every single position in our team bar GK and probably LB. Why doesn't anyone else say that we are "settling" for Luiz or Iva or Azpi or Rami or Oscar..etc? Because Mikel is just the 'easy' target because what he does, i.e. his role in the team, is not glamorous, it is not evident in particular incidents but rather the overall play. When you're arguing for Iva you can say: "Did you see that tackle he made in that game?" or for Rami: "Did you see that run?" but you can't say: "Did you see Mikel's 95% passing accuracy or the tactical discipline he showed to not leave gaps between himself and the back four during the whole 90 mins?" because you simply can't 'see' that in individual incidents.

Now I'm not saying that Mikel does not have his flaws, because he certainly does. For me his biggest flaw is that he is slow to react at times, and like said there are better defensive midfielders than him out there. But he also isn't an average or below average player; in fact in the league right now, bar Carrick, you can't find a holding midfielder who is better than Mikel. he is a good player who is very good at what he does. He's not world-class, but he is certainly not our biggest problem at the moment. But unfortunately, with the type of non-glamorous role he has (and with Kalou gone), he's often going to be the scapegoat for the million other problem that team is having.

[lucio 5,418]

I said I'm not getting into a debate in this thread, but I'm going to answer only you because I know you can debate open-mindedly.

Mikel is NOT a ball winning midfielder, he is a holding midfielder. First of all, ball winning midfielders are a species that is nearing extinction. They just don't belong in today's game. Why? Well, take Luiz in midfield for instance, he tries to be a ball winning midfielder, always attempting to intercept, tackle and nick the ball off the opposition. Result? More often than not, he fails to win the ball and the player gets past him and can run at our back four with no one shielding them. If the opposition are a good organized team, we're likely to concede in that situation. You can still see ball winning midfielders in the championship and lower levels, but in the PL, the game is just much more dynamic and fast paced than what it used to be in the days of Roy Keane. Defenders don't tackle as much as they used to and CMs almost never go to ground anymore, in fact, tackles in midfield are so out of fashion that if you see a player go to ground and not get it 100% right, you directly think he could be off or at least get a yellow card.

Instead, ball winning midfielders have been largely replaced by holding midfielders like Mikel. The first thing they teach kids in academies about defending nowadays is "Stay on your feet" "Do NOT commit to the challenge" because when a player commits to a tackle, he's giving the attacker a chance to get past him. There is a quote by Xabi Alonso that I like to use where he says tackling is not something that, as a holding midfielder, you look or try to do, but rather something you have to resort to sometimes if your man gets away from you or to correct a certain mistake. But in normal circumstances, a central midfielder should never go to ground. Instead, what holding midfielders do, is that they stay on their feet and just block the channels and passing angles and either force the man on the ball to a less dangerous area or force him to make a mistake or at least take the difficult option.

As for the comparisons, half of the ones you mentioned are only there because they are "trending" now (Btw, Fernandinho and Vidal are more b2b; Vidal is basically a more dynamic Ramires with better technique). They had a a few good games this season and got a good reputation that they'd probably lose next season if they don't perform as they did this season. And of course, there are players that are better than Mikel. But that applies to every single position in our team bar GK and probably LB. Why doesn't anyone else say that we are "settling" for Luiz or Iva or Azpi or Rami or Oscar..etc? Because Mikel is just the 'easy' target because what he does, i.e. his role in the team, is not glamorous, it is not evident in particular incidents but rather the overall play. When you're arguing for Iva you can say: "Did you see that tackle he made in that game?" or for Rami: "Did you see that run?" but you can't say: "Did you see Mikel's 95% passing accuracy or the tactical discipline he showed to not leave gaps between himself and the back four during the whole 90 mins?" because you simply can't 'see' that in individual incidents.

Now I'm not saying that Mikel does not have his flaws, because he certainly does. For me his biggest flaw is that he is slow to react at times, and like said there are better defensive midfielders than him out there. But he also isn't an average or below average player; in fact in the league right now, bar Carrick, you can't find a holding midfielder who is better than Mikel. he is a good player who is very good at what he does. He's not world-class, but he is certainly not our biggest problem at the moment. But unfortunately, with the type of non-glamorous role he has (and with Kalou gone), he's often going to be the scapegoat for the million other problem that team is having.

every time he comes up against top opposition this season he has been eaten alive. city , shaktar , juve. he is not good enough to win us the midfield battle against the elite teams. he should be a squad player at best. if he is our starting dm we will always struggle.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

I said I'm not getting into a debate in this thread, but I'm going to answer only you because I know you can debate open-mindedly.

Mikel is NOT a ball winning midfielder, he is a holding midfielder. First of all, ball winning midfielders are a species that is nearing extinction. They just don't belong in today's game. Why? Well, take Luiz in midfield for instance, he tries to be a ball winning midfielder, always attempting to intercept, tackle and nick the ball off the opposition. Result? More often than not, he fails to win the ball and the player gets past him and can run at our back four with no one shielding them. If the opposition are a good organized team, we're likely to concede in that situation. You can still see ball winning midfielders in the championship and lower levels, but in the PL, the game is just much more dynamic and fast paced than what it used to be in the days of Roy Keane. Defenders don't tackle as much as they used to and CMs almost never go to ground anymore, in fact, tackles in midfield are so out of fashion that if you see a player go to ground and not get it 100% right, you directly think he could be off or at least get a yellow card.

Instead, ball winning midfielders have been largely replaced by holding midfielders like Mikel. The first thing they teach kids in academies about defending nowadays is "Stay on your feet" "Do NOT commit to the challenge" because when a player commits to a tackle, he's giving the attacker a chance to get past him. There is a quote by Xabi Alonso that I like to use where he says tackling is not something that, as a holding midfielder, you look or try to do, but rather something you have to resort to sometimes if your man gets away from you or to correct a certain mistake. But in normal circumstances, a central midfielder should never go to ground. Instead, what holding midfielders do, is that they stay on their feet and just block the channels and passing angles and either force the man on the ball to a less dangerous area or force him to make a mistake or at least take the difficult option.

As for the comparisons, half of the ones you mentioned are only there because they are "trending" now (Btw, Fernandinho and Vidal are more b2b; Vidal is basically a more dynamic Ramires with better technique). They had a a few good games this season and got a good reputation that they'd probably lose next season if they don't perform as they did this season. And of course, there are players that are better than Mikel. But that applies to every single position in our team bar GK and probably LB. Why doesn't anyone else say that we are "settling" for Luiz or Iva or Azpi or Rami or Oscar..etc? Because Mikel is just the 'easy' target because what he does, i.e. his role in the team, is not glamorous, it is not evident in particular incidents but rather the overall play. When you're arguing for Iva you can say: "Did you see that tackle he made in that game?" or for Rami: "Did you see that run?" but you can't say: "Did you see Mikel's 95% passing accuracy or the tactical discipline he showed to not leave gaps between himself and the back four during the whole 90 mins?" because you simply can't 'see' that in individual incidents.

Now I'm not saying that Mikel does not have his flaws, because he certainly does. For me his biggest flaw is that he is slow to react at times, and like said there are better defensive midfielders than him out there. But he also isn't an average or below average player; in fact in the league right now, bar Carrick, you can't find a holding midfielder who is better than Mikel. he is a good player who is very good at what he does. He's not world-class, but he is certainly not our biggest problem at the moment. But unfortunately, with the type of non-glamorous role he has (and with Kalou gone), he's often going to be the scapegoat for the million other problem that team is having.

I think players like Vidal, Bender, Martinez, Capoue are all ball winning midfielders. They run through whole match, cover all midfield, track and take ball from oppositio every game. Mikel is holding mid because he just sits deep and marks, but football nowdays is very fast and with few passes, everyone goes past Mikel. Because to stop fast passing game, you have to press on opponent (something like Vidal does) while Mikel just goes fuck all.

This team is realy weak in pressing and I think that is why Mikel wont have good time here under Mou. Both Khedira/Xabi can press, Essien was engine while Cambiasso was master tackler and nothing went past him during Mou's Inter. Mikel last year or under Ancelotti was great, but thing is that he has downgraded since. He isnt shit, but he wont fit our style of play nor our needs. He is great for counter system 4:3:3 where all three mids can press/defend (Lamps-Mikel-Ballack). In this team, he gets exposed and does nothing. Our team will have only one real destructor in 4:2:3:1 and Mikel is too poor to be one. He needs other players to help him, while Vidal or Bender are much better at doing things alone. Having pair of Vidal-Strootman, Bender-Fernandinho or DeRossi-Oscar would be fine, but before we buy anything I would give Mou time in pre season to try Romeu-Oscar and then decide. If Mikel will be shit, sell him and get someone like Diame as backup with Romeu first choice. And at Chelsea 4:3:3 system wont work because of Mata, while I hope Mou wont have any ideas of selling Mata because of that.

[Kojo 4,676]

I said I'm not getting into a debate in this thread, but I'm going to answer only you because I know you can debate open-mindedly.

Mikel is NOT a ball winning midfielder, he is a holding midfielder. First of all, ball winning midfielders are a species that is nearing extinction. They just don't belong in today's game. Why? Well, take Luiz in midfield for instance, he tries to be a ball winning midfielder, always attempting to intercept, tackle and nick the ball off the opposition. Result? More often than not, he fails to win the ball and the player gets past him and can run at our back four with no one shielding them. If the opposition are a good organized team, we're likely to concede in that situation. You can still see ball winning midfielders in the championship and lower levels, but in the PL, the game is just much more dynamic and fast paced than what it used to be in the days of Roy Keane. Defenders don't tackle as much as they used to and CMs almost never go to ground anymore, in fact, tackles in midfield are so out of fashion that if you see a player go to ground and not get it 100% right, you directly think he could be off or at least get a yellow card.

Instead, ball winning midfielders have been largely replaced by holding midfielders like Mikel. The first thing they teach kids in academies about defending nowadays is "Stay on your feet" "Do NOT commit to the challenge" because when a player commits to a tackle, he's giving the attacker a chance to get past him. There is a quote by Xabi Alonso that I like to use where he says tackling is not something that, as a holding midfielder, you look or try to do, but rather something you have to resort to sometimes if your man gets away from you or to correct a certain mistake. But in normal circumstances, a central midfielder should never go to ground. Instead, what holding midfielders do, is that they stay on their feet and just block the channels and passing angles and either force the man on the ball to a less dangerous area or force him to make a mistake or at least take the difficult option.

As for the comparisons, half of the ones you mentioned are only there because they are "trending" now (Btw, Fernandinho and Vidal are more b2b; Vidal is basically a more dynamic Ramires with better technique). They had a a few good games this season and got a good reputation that they'd probably lose next season if they don't perform as they did this season. And of course, there are players that are better than Mikel. But that applies to every single position in our team bar GK and probably LB. Why doesn't anyone else say that we are "settling" for Luiz or Iva or Azpi or Rami or Oscar..etc? Because Mikel is just the 'easy' target because what he does, i.e. his role in the team, is not glamorous, it is not evident in particular incidents but rather the overall play. When you're arguing for Iva you can say: "Did you see that tackle he made in that game?" or for Rami: "Did you see that run?" but you can't say: "Did you see Mikel's 95% passing accuracy or the tactical discipline he showed to not leave gaps between himself and the back four during the whole 90 mins?" because you simply can't 'see' that in individual incidents.

Now I'm not saying that Mikel does not have his flaws, because he certainly does. For me his biggest flaw is that he is slow to react at times, and like said there are better defensive midfielders than him out there. But he also isn't an average or below average player; in fact in the league right now, bar Carrick, you can't find a holding midfielder who is better than Mikel. he is a good player who is very good at what he does. He's not world-class, but he is certainly not our biggest problem at the moment. But unfortunately, with the type of non-glamorous role he has (and with Kalou gone), he's often going to be the scapegoat for the million other problem that team is having.

Saying Mikel bar Carrick is the best at what he does is just not right at all.

Have you ever watched any other players this season? Look at players like Wilshere and Arteta, they do a much better job than Mikel, work hard to win the ball, and that's not there primary job, they keep the ball and get the game flowing. What about Yohan Cabaye? Fantastic player he really is, always gets the game going, works hard, covers, and gets the ball moving forward.

In truth most defensive midfielders are different, we can't really fit them in catagorys, like Javi Garcia who does the dirty work, doesn't seem to stay on the ball much, whereas Scott Parker chases all day and tries to win the ball back however he likes to stick on the ball a lot and look for options and switch plays.

Mikel offers very little. Nathan Ake this game showed a lot more than Mikel has ever done, and yeah sure they might have different jobs, but in the case of doing there actual job Ake actually done it with alot more than just sitting back.

You know i would actually respect Mikel a lot more if he could get the ball forward, but he's terrible at it, I mean what he does is like Javi Garcia does just passes the ball back, but at least Garcia can do the shifts whereas Mikel doesn't. That's most of all why I find Mikel useless most of the time, because he really offers very little.

[Strike 7,265]

@CHOULO19,

I understand that sometimes committing to a tackle can give the opponent an opportunity to get past but I think ball-winning or atleast interceptions count under a holding-midfielders job description. Vidal and Fernandinho get stuck into 50-50's and come away with the ball. Mikel doesn't have that ability nor the tendency to go for the ball. He's a holding midfielder - who doesn't recover possession.

Chelsea are settling for Mikel in DM. He's not mobile enough,(that's also a reason why he doesn't win or intercept the ball) and also, he backs off instead of cutting off the angles as you said. Very often he backs off all the way into the penalty box to slot in as a 3rd CB, which is one more reason why Chelsea lose control of the games

btw, Arteta, Lucas, Yacob, Schneiderlein, Sandro all better for me this season

[mybodyisready 155]

What this guy is still doing at Chelsea is a big mystery.

[English Freak 456]

I said I'm not getting into a debate in this thread, but I'm going to answer only you because I know you can debate open-mindedly.

Now I'm not saying that Mikel does not have his flaws, because he certainly does. For me his biggest flaw is that he is slow to react at times, and like said there are better defensive midfielders than him out there. But he also isn't an average or below average player; in fact in the league right now, bar Carrick, you can't find a holding midfielder who is better than Mikel. he is a good player who is very good at what he does. He's not world-class, but he is certainly not our biggest problem at the moment. But unfortunately, with the type of non-glamorous role he has (and with Kalou gone), he's often going to be the scapegoat for the million other problem that team is having.

He's the 2nd best DM in the EPL right now? I'm guessing you don't watch many EPL games.

As for being very good at what he does...if that was the case, we'd be struggling to win games without Mikel in the team...he's a passenger in the team.

He's part of the reason why we have so many issues in midfield...

[bleed_blue 136]

I said I'm not getting into a debate in this thread, but I'm going to answer only you because I know you can debate open-mindedly.

Mikel is NOT a ball winning midfielder, he is a holding midfielder. First of all, ball winning midfielders are a species that is nearing extinction. They just don't belong in today's game. Why? Well, take Luiz in midfield for instance, he tries to be a ball winning midfielder, always attempting to intercept, tackle and nick the ball off the opposition. Result? More often than not, he fails to win the ball and the player gets past him and can run at our back four with no one shielding them. If the opposition are a good organized team, we're likely to concede in that situation. You can still see ball winning midfielders in the championship and lower levels, but in the PL, the game is just much more dynamic and fast paced than what it used to be in the days of Roy Keane. Defenders don't tackle as much as they used to and CMs almost never go to ground anymore, in fact, tackles in midfield are so out of fashion that if you see a player go to ground and not get it 100% right, you directly think he could be off or at least get a yellow card.

Instead, ball winning midfielders have been largely replaced by holding midfielders like Mikel. The first thing they teach kids in academies about defending nowadays is "Stay on your feet" "Do NOT commit to the challenge" because when a player commits to a tackle, he's giving the attacker a chance to get past him. There is a quote by Xabi Alonso that I like to use where he says tackling is not something that, as a holding midfielder, you look or try to do, but rather something you have to resort to sometimes if your man gets away from you or to correct a certain mistake. But in normal circumstances, a central midfielder should never go to ground. Instead, what holding midfielders do, is that they stay on their feet and just block the channels and passing angles and either force the man on the ball to a less dangerous area or force him to make a mistake or at least take the difficult option.

As for the comparisons, half of the ones you mentioned are only there because they are "trending" now (Btw, Fernandinho and Vidal are more b2b; Vidal is basically a more dynamic Ramires with better technique). They had a a few good games this season and got a good reputation that they'd probably lose next season if they don't perform as they did this season. And of course, there are players that are better than Mikel. But that applies to every single position in our team bar GK and probably LB. Why doesn't anyone else say that we are "settling" for Luiz or Iva or Azpi or Rami or Oscar..etc? Because Mikel is just the 'easy' target because what he does, i.e. his role in the team, is not glamorous, it is not evident in particular incidents but rather the overall play. When you're arguing for Iva you can say: "Did you see that tackle he made in that game?" or for Rami: "Did you see that run?" but you can't say: "Did you see Mikel's 95% passing accuracy or the tactical discipline he showed to not leave gaps between himself and the back four during the whole 90 mins?" because you simply can't 'see' that in individual incidents.

Now I'm not saying that Mikel does not have his flaws, because he certainly does. For me his biggest flaw is that he is slow to react at times, and like said there are better defensive midfielders than him out there. But he also isn't an average or below average player; in fact in the league right now, bar Carrick, you can't find a holding midfielder who is better than Mikel. he is a good player who is very good at what he does. He's not world-class, but he is certainly not our biggest problem at the moment. But unfortunately, with the type of non-glamorous role he has (and with Kalou gone), he's often going to be the scapegoat for the million other problem that team is having.

1. You talk about Luiz leaving the defense open and vulnerable when he plays in midfield. Here is something for you:

Luiz started 15 games in midfield. We won 12, drew 1 and lost 2 of those. The 2 we lost with Luiz in midfield were against QPR (when Rafa had a brainfart and rested Ramires, Mata and Hazard) and against Swansea in CoCup (Ivanovic back passes anyone?). So clearly him leaving the defense open and vulnerable has worked well for our results. OR alternatively you are just making stuff up and the ground reality is completely different.

2. Somebody needs to tell you that going to ground and not staying on your feet is not the only way to win tackles. You can stay on your feet and still win tackles. If the job of holding midfielder is to block channels an divert traffic towards lesser dangerous positions, then mind explaining why Chelsea conceded 1.53 goals per game when Mikel started the game vs 0.89 goals per game when Mikel did not start. Clearly this blocking channels strategy of Mikel is not working. OR alternatively you are just making stuff up and the ground reality is completely different.

3. People dont say that we area settling for Luiz, Iva, Azpi, Rami or Oscar because they actually contribute to the team. Regarding your proposition that Mikel is easy to single out because he does an unnoticeable job, mind sharing with us why the same things are not said about other players like Busquets, Xabi Alonso, Schweinstiger, Martinez, Carrick etc. OR alternatively you are just making stuff up and the ground reality is completely different.

Finally you lost all credibility with this statement

in fact in the league right now, bar Carrick, you can't find a holding midfielder who is better than Mikel.

[bleed_blue 136]

Anyways now that the season is over, here is a look at Chelsea's results in Premier League with Mikel starting vs Mikel not starting

With Mikel starting

Games: 19

Wins: 9

Draws: 5

Defeats: 5

Points: 32

Goals For: 31

Goals against: 23

Goal Difference: 8

Win %age: 47.3%

Loss%age: 26.3%

points per game: 1.68

goals scored per game: 1.63

goals conceded per game: 1.21

Without Mikel

Games: 19

Wins: 13

Draws: 4

Defeats: 2

Points: 43

Goals for: 44

Goals against: 16

Goal difference: 28

Win %age: 68.4%

Loss %age: 10.5%

Points per game: 2.26

goals scored per game: 2.31

goals conceded per game:0.84

[The Skipper 20,593]

Anyways now that the season is over, here is a look at Chelsea's results in Premier League with Mikel starting vs Mikel not starting

With Mikel starting

Games: 19

Wins: 9

Draws: 5

Defeats: 5

Points: 32

Goals For: 31

Goals against: 23

Goal Difference: 8

Win %age: 47.3%

Loss%age: 26.3%

points per game: 1.68

goals scored per game: 1.63

goals conceded per game: 1.21

Without Mikel

Games: 19

Wins: 13

Draws: 4

Defeats: 2

Points: 43

Goals for: 44

Goals against: 16

Goal difference: 28

Win %age: 68.4%

Loss %age: 10.5%

Points per game: 2.26

goals scored per game: 2.31

goals conceded per game:0.84

I know you're just posting up the stats, but its not as simple as Mikel being the underlying factor as to why we won more games when he didn't play. There are a lot of other intangibles and non-statistical factors as to why we've won more when Mikel hasn't played.

He's off form and been injured and therefore hasn't featured as many times as he should've, but no doubt people will obviously use these to condemn Mikel even further though. Mikel's had a rough season, but he's still a good player in my books, and I'm interested to see how he'll perform next season under a new manager. I won't write him off just yet because he's shown on numerous occasions that he can be a good player here.

Just did some quick research as I think your stats aren't accurate as you're choosing to omit games where Mikel was subbed in, which is unfair in my opinion.

Out of the 38 games we've played, Mikel has only been named in the squad 24 times.

Out of those 24, he's started 19 and been subbed in 3 times and out of those 22 games, our record during those games stands at 12W/6D/5L which brings the overall win percentage to when we have played Mikel to 54.5% - which isn't as bad as your initial stats suggest.

As I've said anyway, I wouldn't look at the stats simply because there are many other intangibles to them e.g. the team hitting good form in recent weeks. But like I said, people (not you per se) will still use it as a case against him.

[bleed_blue 136]

I know you're just posting up the stats, but its not as simple as Mikel being the underlying factor as to why we won more games when he didn't play. There are a lot of other intangibles and non-statistical factors as to why we've won more when Mikel hasn't played.

He's off form and been injured and therefore hasn't featured as many times as he should've, but no doubt people will obviously use these to condemn Mikel even further though. Mikel's had a rough season, but he's still a good player in my books, and I'm interested to see how he'll perform next season under a new manager. I won't write him off just yet because he's shown on numerous occasions that he can be a good player here.

Just did some quick research as I think your stats aren't accurate as you're choosing to omit games where Mikel was subbed in, which is unfair in my opinion.

Out of the 38 games we've played, Mikel has only been named in the squad 24 times.

Out of those 24, he's started 19 and been subbed in 3 times and out of those 22 games, our record during those games stands at 12W/6D/5L which brings the overall win percentage to when we have played Mikel to 54.5% - which isn't as bad as your initial stats suggest.

As I've said anyway, I wouldn't look at the stats simply because there are many other intangibles to them e.g. the team hitting good form in recent weeks. But like I said, people (not you per se) will still use it as a case against him.

Let us talk about being unfair.

The games in which Mikel was subbed in

1. vs. West Brom at home: we were winning the game 1-0 when he came on for the final 30 seconds of injury time and the score stayed the same.

2. vs West Ham at home: we were winning the game 2-0 when he came on for final 4 minutes and the score stayed the same

3. vs Fulham away: we were winning the game 3-0 when he came on for the final 14 minutes and the score stayed the same.

It is completely wrong to add these games under Mikel's name.

Infact I have been lenient to him. Here are some of the games where he was subbed out and the games changed

1. vs Reading at home: We were losing 1-2 when he was subbed off after 68 minutes and then we ended up winning the game 4-2

2. vs Stoke at home: we were drawing the game 0-0 when he was subbed off after 81 minutes and we ended up winning the game 1-0

So by your method it would have been 19 games started, 7W/6D/6L. That makes an even more depressing reading, 36.8% winning percentage.

[The Skipper 20,593]

Let us talk about being unfair.

The games in which Mikel was subbed in

1. vs. West Brom at home: we were winning the game 1-0 when he came on for the final 30 seconds of injury time and the score stayed the same.

2. vs West Ham at home: we were winning the game 2-0 when he came on for final 4 minutes and the score stayed the same

3. vs Fulham away: we were winning the game 3-0 when he came on for the final 14 minutes and the score stayed the same.

It is completely wrong to add these games under Mikel's name.

Infact I have been lenient to him. Here are some of the games where he was subbed out and the games changed

1. vs Reading at home: We were losing 1-2 when he was subbed off after 68 minutes and then we ended up winning the game 4-2

2. vs Stoke at home: we were drawing the game 0-0 when he was subbed off after 81 minutes and we ended up winning the game 1-0

So by your method it would have been 19 games started, 7W/6D/6L. That makes an even more depressing reading.

Fair enough. But like I said before in the same post, for me anyway, stats don't tell the whole story.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

@CHOULO19,

I understand that sometimes committing to a tackle can give the opponent an opportunity to get past but I think ball-winning or atleast interceptions count under a holding-midfielders job description. Vidal and Fernandinho get stuck into 50-50's and come away with the ball. Mikel doesn't have that ability nor the tendency to go for the ball. He's a holding midfielder - who doesn't recover possession.

Chelsea are settling for Mikel in DM. He's not mobile enough,(that's also a reason why he doesn't win or intercept the ball) and also, he backs off instead of cutting off the angles as you said. Very often he backs off all the way into the penalty box to slot in as a 3rd CB, which is one more reason why Chelsea lose control of the games

btw, Arteta, Lucas, Yacob, Schneiderlein, Sandro all better for me this season

I've only watched Fernandinho in the CL, so I will comment on Vidal only since I've watched every Juve game this season. Vidal has many many qualities, but his defensive ability is not one of them. He is too aggressive and even though he sometimes does get the ball, other times he does not and that often puts Juve in trouble. Again people just judge Vidal based on a couple of great games he had in the CL while forgetting a couple of horror games he had as well like against Bayern. And just to put an end to the myth, Mikel has a higher interception per game ratio than Vidal; check whoscored.com. Mikel has the ability to go to ground, but just like Alonso said, it's only something you resort to when you make a mistake.

I disagree that Mikel is not dynamic, just watch his matches with Nigeria where he is given a more free role and you can see him all over the pitch in a more of a box to box style. But at Chelsea his role requires discipline. He is the midfielder that is supposed to shield the back 4 and he shows great discipline to stay in position and not leave gaps behind him. Naturally, when your opposition are in control and are committing men into the box, your DM should get into the box because 2 CBs to defend the area wouldn't be enough.

Finally, regarding the comparisons you made, I couldn't disagree more. I mean Arteta who can't pass for his life, Yacob who spends more time out of position that actually in it, and Sandro the head-less chicken?! Also, none of those players have Mikel's distribution and ball retention abilities. We've been talking about the defensive part of the holding midfielders role because that is what you criticized in you original post, but for me Mikel's biggest assets are on the ball. He always provides an outlet for the back four because they know that they can give Mikel the ball in almost any situation and he has the ball retention skills to keep it under immense pressure and then play a safe pass. He also has incredible pass completion percentage meaning that when Mikel plays, our distribution of the ball is more accurate and we lose the ball less often. That's why you see when Mikel does not start, our CBs tend to lump the ball forward much more often.

[mybodyisready 155]

@Choulo19 - Lettuce beef cereal, Vidal is the best box to box midfielder in the world

[The only place to be 11,313]

Mikel has the ability to go to ground, but just like Alonso said, it's only something you resort to when you make a mistake.

Have you learnt nothing from watching Mikel play? When you make a mistake, the last thing you do is go to ground.

What you do is stand there for a few seconds and do nothing.