Mikel John Obi

[robsblubot 3,529]

Watch the build up to the goal and you'll see that Mikel was actually pressing to regain the ball.

Lamps lost his man and that's why they scored.

That's not what bothered me. It after their attack got past mikel that he jogged back instead of sprinting. I did notice that and if u watch a replay u can spot him running back trying to get back into the action - just too slow.

Lamps was never about defending, but if mikel's job isn't defending then i don't know what it is.

I guess Mourinho also did not think much of what mikel was doing or not doing in the first half.

This is what I wrote on the match thread:

As usual I'm unhappy with Mikel's performance, yes his passing was mostly good but his defensive work not so much. I don't understand, for example, why he always jogs back when he's behind the line of play; he should've been sprinting to get back and try to help as soon as possible. An additional man in the box could've prevented the passing and Spurs goal.

[Phil Driver 503]

Yes it is Mikel who forces the team to hang back and you cant dispute the fact that we dominated the midfield after his removal .

Jose said he saw the problem in the first half and he changed the problem and the game,the problem was Mikel ,nobody else.

His removal meant that we did not hang back and the result was Rammy and Lampard engaged there midfield and we dominated and they failed to pick us up ,we only managed this because Mikel was removed for hanging back and Ramires supported Lampard in taking the game to Spurs .

it was blindingly obvious . If you have one of your two midfielders hanging back the other one becomes isolated and the opposition dominate ,yesterday showed this graphically . Jose said he saw the problem and he changed it and we were much better . We took the game to them and they had to hang back and were not picking us up,Mou did not clearly set us up to hang back and let Spurs dominate . The midfield was only conservative as you put it ,when Mikel was part of it . You do remember how poor Rammy was in the Fulham game? There is a theme here and that is whoever plays with Mikel will struggle .

[Dylan_91 90]

I think the main reason the game changed was because we moved Ramires back into the middle where he belonged and we brought mata on. Think it would have had the same effect if he took lampard off and I'm sure Jose knows that.

[Dylan_91 90]

I think the main reason the game changed was because we moved Ramires back into the middle where he belonged and we brought mata on. Think it would have had the same effect if he took lampard off and I'm sure Jose knows that.

[Dylan_91 90]

Sorry about double post

[Phil Driver 503]

How could it have the same effect ?

The effect was only achieved because he took Mikel off . Any other effect is surely a fantasy? that is impossible to be sure about ,I am sure Jose knows that ,the only effect you can be sure of is the effect Mikel had on the first half and the effect he did not have on the second half.

The Ramires / Mikel combination would still have seen Mikel sitting back and doing not a lot ,right ,otherwise why didnt Jose take Lampard off and blame him for the problems we had in the first half answer - because the problems were caused by Mikel hanging back and playing very slowly in a high tempo London derby which allowed Spurs to dominate our midfield with Mikel on the pitch.

[Dylan_91 90]

At no point has Jose blamed mikel, you've just made that up. Recently Mikel has been given more freedom and hasn't just been sitting back. Did you see the ball he played over the top to Torres in the first half? If Torres controlled it he would have been through. In my opinion lampard didn't do much and was no better than Mikel in the first half. Jose just had to take one of them off so we could have Ramires' energy in the middle. I'm guessing he kept lampard on because he's a goal threat.

[Stats 7,059]

At no point has Jose blamed mikel, you've just made that up. Recently Mikel has been given more freedom and hasn't just been sitting back. Did you see the ball he played over the top to Torres in the first half? If Torres controlled it he would have been through. In my opinion lampard didn't do much and was no better than Mikel in the first half. Jose just had to take one of them off so we could have Ramires' energy in the middle. I'm guessing he kept lampard on because he's a goal threat.

This. He did not take off Mikel because he was bad. He done it because he wanted to chase the game and yes I don't think anyone acknowledged that brilliant ball he created for Torres in the first half. Thanks for picking up on that. Said it last week but his long range passing is fantastic. Shame Torres could not finish it off.

[Phil Driver 503]

At no point has Jose blamed mikel, you've just made that up. Recently Mikel has been given more freedom and hasn't just been sitting back. Did you see the ball he played over the top to Torres in the first half? If Torres controlled it he would have been through. In my opinion lampard didn't do much and was no better than Mikel in the first half. Jose just had to take one of them off so we could have Ramires' energy in the middle. I'm guessing he kept lampard on because he's a goal threat.

You seem to be quite good at guessing . No he did not have to take anybody off ,he took Mikel off ,

[The Skipper 20,593]

Yes it is Mikel who forces the team to hang back and you cant dispute the fact that we dominated the midfield after his removal .

So Mikel is the player that decides whether all of his other team mates should hang back?

So you don't think Jose instructed the players to play conservatively in the first half but rather that it was Mikel that was telling all the players to sit deep?

Didn't know Mikel was responsible for how the team's set up. Oh well. You live and learn right?

[Dylan_91 90]

You seem to be quite good at guessing . No he did not have to take anybody off ,he took Mikel off ,

The only person who doesn't have to guess is Jose. I'm just honest

[Dylan_91 90]

So Mikel is the player that decides whether all of his other team mates should hang back?

So you don't think Jose instructed the players to play conservatively in the first half but rather that it was Mikel that was telling all the players to sit deep?

Didn't know Mikel was responsible for how the team's set up. Oh well. You live and learn right?

Well said. People blaming mikel for every poor performance he features in is getting old. It's similar to the medias vendetta against Luiz

[Jase 43,479]

Just throwing in this for fun....

Squawka Football ‏@Squawka 15m

Most Completed Backwards Passes In EPL: Aaron Ramsey (152), Steven N'Zonzi (142), Jonjo Shelvey (139), Kyle Walker (137) & Yaya Toure (135).

No Mikel...

@Squawka: @ChelseaStats Mikel has completed 55 backwards passes for Chelsea (30.3% of total). Fewer than Ramires (40.1%). Lampard (50.8%).

Shock.......

[OneMoSalah 8,783]

Just throwing in this for fun....

No Mikel...

Shock.......

Yet some people say he only passes backwards/sideways loooooooooooooooooooooool

[happy_juan 64]

Yet some people say he only passes backwards/sideways loooooooooooooooooooooool

The problem is not his backward/sideways passing but his laborious approach on the ball, zero incisiveness in his passing, nothing that hurts the opponents.

"He always passes backwards" is just a convenient term that has caught on when those complaining have a valid concern about the range and quality of his passing.

[OneMoSalah 8,783]

The problem is not his backward/sideways passing but his laborious approach on the ball, zero incisiveness in his passing, nothing that hurts the opponents.

"He always passes backwards" is just a convenient term that has caught on when those complaining have a valid concern about the range and quality of his passing.

What do you want from a holding midfielder? Do you understand their role in the team? They are there to break up play, fill gaps when CBs go up the field, offer an option for their team mates in possession and ultimately RETAIN POSSESSION. He doesn't have to 'hurt the opponents' with his passing. I'm sick of all this bullshit he has to 'hurt opponents' as you put it, with his passing. Even against Spurs he played 3 class long passes that we nearly got chances from but no thats not threatening an opponent?

When AVB arrived as our coach he talked about his philosophy to some journalist, talked about his how he likes his defensive midfielder be able to surprise opponents and play long diagonals to the full backs/wingers and since Sergio Busquets plays passes that take out 4 or 5 players a time, its set the standard ridiculously high for a holding midfielder I feel. I think some people need to settle down with all these expectations for holding midfielders, Mikel does his job very well, hes one of the best in the PL, we are so much more calmer with him in the team. Hes been vital for our team for years, if you can't see it then I don't know.

[happy_juan 64]

What do you want from a holding midfielder? Do you understand their role in the team? They are there to break up play, fill gaps when CBs go up the field, offer an option for their team mates in possession and ultimately RETAIN POSSESSION. He doesn't have to 'hurt the opponents' with his passing. I'm sick of all this bullshit he has to 'hurt opponents' as you put it, with his passing. Even against Spurs he played 3 class long passes that we nearly got chances from but no thats not threatening an opponent?

When AVB arrived as our coach he talked about his philosophy to some journalist, talked about his how he likes his defensive midfielder be able to surprise opponents and play long diagonals to the full backs/wingers and since Sergio Busquets plays passes that take out 4 or 5 players a time, its set the standard ridiculously high for a holding midfielder I feel. I think some people need to settle down with all these expectations for holding midfielders, Mikel does his job very well, hes one of the best in the PL, we are so much more calmer with him in the team. Hes been vital for our team for years, if you can't see it then I don't know.

If you think being more incisive on the ball with passing is "bullshit", then I dont think I stand much chance arguing with you.

[Styles 9,790]

The problem is not his backward/sideways passing but his laborious approach on the ball, zero incisiveness in his passing, nothing that hurts the opponents.

"He always passes backwards" is just a convenient term that has caught on when those complaining have a valid concern about the range and quality of his passing.

Moving the goalposts when presented with the facts, how surprising.