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

Mikel John Obi


Fulham Broadway
 Share
Followers 3

Recommended Posts

Had a good game just like most our players today. Kept the ball well despite Caroll trying to put pressure on him from behind. Recycled possession well and won most of the clearances, especially in the second half, before moving the ball forward again which is exactly why you need a defensive midfielder against teams that will park the bus.

Plus, we needed a physical presence in midfield today. So either him or Matic had to start, and judging by Nemanjas performance when he came on, I'd say he still hasn't found his feet and settled in too well so Jose made the right choice, IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 6.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

x lol

I'm not crying 

What does he do? attacking wise he offers next to nothing, defensively he's lazy, hardly ever tracks his man, rarely wins back the ball... when he does it takes him 30 seconds to actually release the

Posted Images

Had a good game just like most our players today. Kept the ball well despite Caroll trying to put pressure on him from behind. Recycled possession well and won most of the clearances, especially in the second half, before moving the ball forward again which is exactly why you need a defensive midfielder against teams that will park the bus.

Plus, we needed a physical presence in midfield today. So either him or Matic had to start, and judging by Nemanjas performance when he came on, I'd say he still hasn't found his feet and settled in too well so Jose made the right choice, IMO.

you are quite incredible .....

Link to post
Share on other sites

yup... It's called the la la land. :)

No physical presence was needed in midfield. Oscar could've should've played there. You only need physical presence in tight spaces where players are pressurized and can lose possession. Not in the center of the pitch where there is no opposition.

Sometimes football is as simple and true as arithmetic: the number of players we committed to attacking wasn't enough. Yes, we could have scored anyway, but the odds of scoring goals would have been higher if we had more attacking players on the pitch, preferably in the starting lineup.

Or perhaps we needed more rounded players who do both as opposed to specialized players like Mikel.

Mikel contributed NOTHING but dont worry Choulou will provide some stats to prove that without Mikel we would have been Hammered ...

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mikel contributed NOTHING but dont worry Choulou will provide some stats to prove that without Mikel we would have been Hammered ...

Haha .. quality post. Could reply to most of the Mikel thread using this as a template!

:-)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wasn't needed last night....in fact with the acquisition of Matic, when is he ever needed? He's such a passenger, always has been. At least when Matic came on he tried to do something to help his team win.

What a novel idea huh?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he should have a new role with the team, against low tier teams he should never see the field until we secure a lead. However, I think he will play a crucial role against the better squads across all competitions. When we secure a lead we throw in Mikel with Matic and Ramires and it becomes virtually impossible for any team to score on us. IMO this is pretty huge advantage for us, not many teams have the potential combinations that we have in our midfield now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yup... It's called the la la land. :)

No physical presence was needed in midfield. Oscar could've should've played there. You only need physical presence in tight spaces where players are pressurized and can lose possession. Not in the center of the pitch where there is no opposition.

Sometimes football is as simple and true as arithmetic: the number of players we committed to attacking wasn't enough. Yes, we might have scored anyway, but the odds of scoring goals would have been higher if we had more attacking players on the pitch, preferably in the starting lineup.

Or perhaps we needed more rounded players who do both as opposed to specialized players like Mikel.

Funny thing is that Jose obviously thought we needed physical presence and a defensive midfielder yesterday or he would have started Rami and Lamps instead. Even when subbed Mikel off he brought Matic on to do the exact same job because Matic can (theoretically) shoot from distance.

It's not really a foreign concept to play a defensive midfielder against teams that will defend deep to keep them pinned in. It's used by most top managers in the world. In fact, Italian managers used to bring on another defensive midfielder when they need a goal to win all the clearances and ensure that the opposite teams stays pinned in the final third like Mancini used to do at City.

But I guess we are all in la la land... :rolleyes:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny thing is that Jose obviously thought we needed physical presence and a defensive midfielder yesterday or he would have started Rami and Lamps instead. Even when subbed Mikel off he brought Matic on to do the exact same job because Matic can (theoretically) shoot from distance.

It's not really a foreign concept to play a defensive midfielder against teams that will defend deep to keep them pinned in. It's used by most top managers in the world. In fact, Italian managers used to bring on another defensive midfielder when they need a goal to win all the clearances and ensure that the opposite teams stays pinned in the final third like Mancini used to do at City.

But I guess we are all in la la land... :rolleyes:

Mancini is not a great example. They were shit last year againt teams that were defending deep.

And I would agree with you if we would play a team that would be good at starting counter-attacks like Basel but it's not like West Ham had defenders and midfielders who are good at that.

And adding a defensive midfielder is to free up a fullback going full attack, covering for him. But we didn't use attacking fullbacks.

I still don't understand why we changed so much our line-up from the Stoke game.

william is doing a good job in midfield but in the final third, he's not been that great until now.

Azpi offering width on the right, Schurrle making run in the box.

5 different players from the stoke game and offering less in attack (Azpi because he's on the left) was way too much.

We needed more progressive passing from the pivot and width from the fullbacks in this game. It was the opposite with our line-up.

We needed quicker passing from the back and moving the ball from side to side before going for the openings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

mikel's limitations were hopelessly exposed last night.

mikel played well but contributed nothing. he was not needed. lamps-rambo would have been a much better pivot for last night. as for matic, he was horrible. dont remember a single good first touch from him, so cant understand how people are critisizing mikel but praising matic.

but i expect him to start against city. perfect match for him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mancini is not a great example. They were shit last year againt teams that were defending deep.

And I would agree with you if we would play a team that would be good at starting counter-attacks like Basel but it's not like West Ham had defenders and midfielders who are good at that.

I still don't understand why we changed so much our line-up from the Stoke game.

william is doing a good job in midfield but in the final third, he's not been that great until now.

Azpi offering width on the right, Schurrle making run in the box.

5 different players from the stoke game and offering less in attack (Azpi because he's on the left) was way too much.

We needed more progressive passing from the pivot and width from the fullbacks in this game. It was the opposite with our line-up.

We needed quicker passing from the back and moving the ball from side to side before going for the openings.

He also did it in the season where they won the league. He would bring on Barry for an attacking midfielder and more often than not it would work out for them. Plus, I gave Mancini as an example because he did it here in the EPL. Lot's of Italian managers do it: Ancelotti at Milan, Lippi at Juve...etc. On any account, I'm not saying that we should have brought on another DM yesterday, I was just using this case to explain how a DM can be important in breaking defending teams. Not just by breaking up counters, but by winning clearances back, and offering an outlet when players get stuck by the touch line and just generally ensuring that his team keep possession and keep the pressure on the other team and keep them in the final third. Yesterday, Carrol was a huge disturbance with his physical presence and his constant dropping to press our midfielders from behind. Our CBs just couldn't follow him so deep especially with the fullbacks so high up the pitch. If we didn't have Mikel and then Matic on, he would have won most of the clearances and started a lot of attacks and then there's a good chance we would have conceded.

As for the changes from Stoke, I agree Willian lacks decisiveness in the final third, so do all our players in all honesty, but Schurrle isn't in great form at the moment and I think Willian provides much more especially that his movement off the ball is exactly what Jose wants, I think. Lampard is 35, there is always a case against him starting 2 games in 3-4 days, although, I thought he should have come on earlier for the invisible Ramires because his late runs could have made a difference and they actually did but unfortunately his finishing was off yesterday. Cech for Mark is an obvious one. Can't really argue against Iva at RB because I still can't wrap my head around it. As for not starting Matic, I can see why Jose did that because he's still trying to find his feet and fit in the team as was clear by his poor performance when he came on yesterday.

At the end of the day, the result had little to do with our CMs or fullbacks and a lot to do with the finishing of the front 4.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He also did it in the season where they won the league. He would bring on Barry for an attacking midfielder and more often than not it would work out for them. Plus, I gave Mancini as an example because he did it here in the EPL. Lot's of Italian managers do it: Ancelotti at Milan, Lippi at Juve...etc. On any account, I'm not saying that we should have brought on another DM yesterday, I was just using this case to explain how a DM can be important in breaking defending teams. Not just by breaking up counters, but by winning clearances back, and offering an outlet when players get stuck by the touch line and just generally ensuring that his team keep possession and keep the pressure on the other team and keep them in the final third. Yesterday, Carrol was a huge disturbance with his physical presence and his constant dropping to press our midfielders from behind. Our CBs just couldn't follow him so deep especially with the fullbacks so high up the pitch. If we didn't have Mikel and then Matic on, he would have won most of the clearances and started a lot of attacks and then there's a good chance we would have conceded.

As for the changes from Stoke, I agree Willian lacks decisiveness in the final third, so do all our players in all honesty, but Schurrle isn't in great form at the moment and I think Willian provides much more especially that his movement off the ball is exactly what Jose wants, I think. Lampard is 35, there is always a case against him starting 2 games in 3-4 days, although, I thought he should have come on earlier for the invisible Ramires because his late runs could have made a difference and they actually did but unfortunately his finishing was off yesterday. Cech for Mark is an obvious one. Can't really argue against Iva at RB because I still can't wrap my head around it. As for not starting Matic, I can see why Jose did that because he's still trying to find his feet and fit in the team as was clear by his poor performance when he came on yesterday.

At the end of the day, the result had little to do with our CMs or fullbacks and a lot to do with the finishing of the front 4.

I agree but it would be good if the front 4 did not have to do so much every game. It must be exhausting mentally.

And I haver problems with the positioning of our players in the box, last year it was much better, covering better all the box area, now when we have crossing opportunities, it very difficulting for the one trying it as except when Lampard is making a run from deep, they are all attacking the same area with the defenders in line covering it.

How many chances with a simple back pass this year compared to last year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree but it would be good if the front 4 did not have to do so much every game. It must be exhausting mentally.

And I haver problems with the positioning of our players in the box, last year it was much better, covering better all the box area, now when we have crossing opportunities, it very difficulting for the one trying it as except when Lampard is making a run from deep, they are all attacking the same area with the defenders in line covering it.

How many chances with a simple back pass this year compared to last year.

I actually agree with all of this. The only part of Jose's system which I still have question marks about is the attacking in the final third and the movement he wants from his front four especially that they don't seem to be able to do it consistently. Couldn't agree more about our positioning in the box, was miles better last season.

Your kidding right ? It's no coincidence that when Mikel came off and Lampard and Matic went into the midfield that we started playing better.

It's not because Mikel played poor but neither him nor Ramires can move the ball quickly enough and both don't offer much going forward. Same applies to our fullbacks. Ivanovic is close to useless going forward and Azpilicueta on the right loses a lot of his quality.

Also what chances did our front four mess up by finishing poorly ? Most of the shots they took were from outside the 18 yard box. Our front four didn't get any proper support untill lampard and Matic came in.

We didn't play better because the ball was moving faster because the ball was moving at the exact same speed which is the speed of the movement of the front four. All of Hazard, Willian and Oscar where still taking 4-5 touches before playing it back to the full back more often than not. The difference was that Westham had no one to track Lamps late runs into the box whereas Rami was doing practically nothing in the box-to-box role.

Speaking of Lampard, he should have had 2-3 goals if his finishing was better but instead he took his shots straight at the defenders or straight at the keeper. Hazard had 3-4 shots where he should have done much better with the finishing like the one at the start of the second half where he cut inside and it opened up for him but he missed the far post and the shot during stoppage time where he cut it back on his left and had a shot from inside the area but put it over the bar. Oscar was unlucky with a couple of shots and the post but he too had a couple of shots from inside the area but couldn't manage to hit the target. Eto'o was also unlucky not to score at the end of the first half but he too had a few shots where he should have done better. And don't get me started on Mikel's and Matic's shooting.

38 shots, only 9 on target and no goals. You can't possibly look beyond the finishing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually agree with all of this. The only part of Jose's system which I still have question marks about is the attacking in the final third and the movement he wants from his front four especially that they don't seem to be able to do it consistently. Couldn't agree more about our positioning in the box, was miles better last season.

We didn't play better because the ball was moving faster because the ball was moving at the exact same speed which is the speed of the movement of the front four. All of Hazard, Willian and Oscar where still taking 4-5 touches before playing it back to the full back more often than not. The difference was that Westham had no one to track Lamps late runs into the box whereas Rami was doing practically nothing in the box-to-box role.

Speaking of Lampard, he should have had 2-3 goals if his finishing was better but instead he took his shots straight at the defenders or straight at the keeper. Hazard had 3-4 shots where he should have done much better with the finishing like the one at the start of the second half where he cut inside and it opened up for him but he missed the far post and the shot during stoppage time where he cut it back on his left and had a shot from inside the area but put it over the bar. Oscar was unlucky with a couple of shots and the post but he too had a couple of shots from inside the area but couldn't manage to hit the target. Eto'o was also unlucky not to score at the end of the first half but he too had a few shots where he should have done better. And don't get me started on Mikel's and Matic's shooting.

38 shots, only 9 on target and no goals. You can't possibly look beyond the finishing.

I think it's a weak point in Mourinho.

Real Madrid against Manchester United last year were also lacking ideas and we would often see individual tries and shot from outside the box and the fullbacks were also not doing much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We didn't play better because the ball was moving faster because the ball was moving at the exact same speed which is the speed of the movement of the front four. All of Hazard, Willian and Oscar where still taking 4-5 touches before playing it back to the full back more often than not. The difference was that Westham had no one to track Lamps late runs into the box whereas Rami was doing practically nothing in the box-to-box role.

Speaking of Lampard, he should have had 2-3 goals if his finishing was better but instead he took his shots straight at the defenders or straight at the keeper. Hazard had 3-4 shots where he should have done much better with the finishing like the one at the start of the second half where he cut inside and it opened up for him but he missed the far post and the shot during stoppage time where he cut it back on his left and had a shot from inside the area but put it over the bar. Oscar was unlucky with a couple of shots and the post but he too had a couple of shots from inside the area but couldn't manage to hit the target. Eto'o was also unlucky not to score at the end of the first half but he too had a few shots where he should have done better. And don't get me started on Mikel's and Matic's shooting.

38 shots, only 9 on target and no goals. You can't possibly look beyond the finishing.

Sorry but blaming the inabillity of Mikel and ramires to pass the ball quickly and accurately on our AM 's movement is ridiculous. When our AM's make a move there's only a small window where that ball can be played in especially against teams that sit back the way West Ham did but neither Mikel nor Ramires have that ability so what do they do they pass the ball sideways or wait until our AM 's pop out from the defensive wall and then play it in. Completely useless.

Isn't it kinda logical that out AM's are having more touches on the ball ?

Can't really blame Lampard for the blocked shots just good defending. Should have done better on the final chance though.

The shots that your talking about really aren't clear cut chances. Yeah Hazard should have hit the target but scoring from that position really isn't easy. Same with the other shot he was twisting and turning to get rid of the 2 players marking him and just barely made enough space for a shot. Again yes he should have tried hitting the target but not easy from that angle.

Agree on the Mikel and Matic shots.

Think you just can't blame the front four alone for "finishing" poorly.

Players that had no business shooting were taking shots and were wasting possession.

  • Like 3
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...