Chelsea 0-0 Liverpool

[Tomo 21,685]

9 minutes ago, LAM09 said:

We need the closest thing to a cert this time around. Buying a CF in a similar mould to the ones you've mentioned would be a massive risk, whether they'd actually be able to deal with the physical nature to start.

Gnonto is one name (among many) that has been linked with us. He has shown flash, but we really couldn't put our future in the hands of a 19-year-old that wasn't deemed worthy at Inter.

Prime Eidur Gudjohnsen would be beyond perfect for us, not sure who if anyone is in a similar mould today. 

[robsblubot 3,259]

46 minutes ago, Gundalf said:

We arent even playing that badly recently. At least we are creating chances. In the last 5 games, the average xG was 1.99. In comparison: only City and Arsenal have a higher xG value throughout the season. We are creating, but we arent scoring. 

This is the time we agree to disagree.

[Gundalf 728]

2 minutes ago, robsblubot said:

This is the time we agree to disagree.

You cant disagree on facts 😂 but ok.

[TheHulk 1,424]

Love him.

[robsblubot 3,259]

9 minutes ago, Gundalf said:

You cant disagree on facts 😂 but ok.

Claiming opinions are facts tells me more about yourself than your opinions... you know, the things you call facts.

Edited April 4, 2023 by robsblubot

[Gundalf 728]

1 minute ago, robsblubot said:

Claiming opinions are facts tells me more about yourself than your opinions... you know, the things you call facts.

You said we arent creating chances, which is clearly wrong. A statistic is not an opinion. 

[DDA 9,570]

1 hour ago, Pizy said:

People talk about wanting Osimhen and I think he’d be great, but what would truly make this team world class is a Luis Suarez or Aguero type. A striker who is a wonderful footballer in tight spaces who can score from any angle with any sort of unorthodox finish. We get Havertz and Felix into SO MANY dangerous positions right around the box but fluff our lines.

Nkunku should thrive in these situations but if we also had a natural striker we’d score so many damn goals. Julian Alvarez would’ve been fantastic in the role but he just re-upped with City.

Can’t really think of the ideal player off the top of my head. 

Could the Danish lad be the answer?? 

[robsblubot 3,259]

2 minutes ago, Gundalf said:

You said we arent creating chances, which is clearly wrong. A statistic is not an opinion. 

Please don't misquote me... at least that.
I said that both we have been playing like shit (opinion) and that I'd not mind if we missed 10 chances per game (we don't create that many -- City does!) and missed them all if we were playing better football. We play slow.... uncompetitively slow. That's also an opinion based on observation.

I do not care about the numbers you are presenting. We can all cherry pick numbers to corroborate any one point of view. Chelsea is a struggling team and your dear quack of a manager is part of that. I could quote N newspapers and claim this opinion as a fact, but I for one know it's just an opinion.

I do not like the way we play. I think it's shit (opinion and personal preference).

That's why I suggested we agree to disagree, because we clearly disagree on the most basic thing: like what is fact vs opinion.

 

[Pizy 17,861]

7 minutes ago, DDA said:

Could the Danish lad be the answer?? 

Never seen him play so 🤷‍♂️

That Portuguese striker from Benfica is interesting but I doubt we’ll ever want to negotiate with them again.

[Gundalf 728]

I see what u mean, what u mean is attractive football. But for me team that is creating chances plays good, bc in the end thats the goal of this sport, but can play unattractive, true. In the end, the result of a game contributes a lot to the evaluation of a playing style. For example, Contes Chelsea in 2017 wasnt really attractive, not even significantly better than this team rn, but they were efficient, they had prime Hazard and Costa, scoring 40 goals in between them. The playing style itself was shit, onedimensional. But bc it was efficient and bc we were champion Conte is still admired by some Chelsea fans and some even want him back here (I dont, bc his style is shit). 

Edited April 4, 2023 by Gundalf

[Gundalf 728]

[robsblubot 3,259]

1 hour ago, Gundalf said:

I see what u mean, what u mean is attractive football. But for me team that is creating chances plays good, bc in the end thats the goal of this sport, but can play unattractive, true. In the end, the result of a game contributes a lot to the evaluation of a playing style. For example, Contes Chelsea in 2017 wasnt really attractive, not even significantly better than this team rn, but they were efficient, they had prime Hazard and Costa, scoring 40 goals in between them. The playing style itself was shit, onedimensional. But bc it was efficient and bc we were champion Conte is still admired by some Chelsea fans and some even want him back here (I dont, bc his style is shit). 

I'd say it's a bit more nuanced than that. I can enjoy very different styles of football as long as the team is competitive.
If I were to define one quality I see in every form of competitive football (Tuchel's as well) is quickness! I don't only mean pace, as running speed, but the speed at which a team can move the football. Quickness also affects the quality of the chances created: how disrupted and out of position the opposition defense gets. Note that a team does not need to constantly play high tempo, but they have to have the ability to switch to a higher tempo to hurt quality opposition.

Chelsea right now, and for some time, play way too slow. It just takes way too long to do most things, esp transition from D. Once in a while certain players manage to do very quick one twos (Reece did that today), which proves that most of our players have the ability to do that, but then it's all disgruntled. The why's would be a different discussion, one that includes the ownership as well.

For ex, if your team routinely puts player A in front of the goal for a tap in, that does not only affect the team's confidence, but the player's confidence as well. He'd be more likely to find that space in a different, more difficult, situation.

Sterling did not seem to have trouble scoring for City, but then City creates 10+ chances per game...some easy tap ins due to movement. Salah used to score for fun until his team stopped producing the chances and dominating games. It's all connected. Would one say that Salah can't score? or perhaps things aren't clicking for them either? I think the latter. Liverpool are just as pedantic and slow on the ball as we are.

Again, that's no more than opinion based on personal observation, so I'm sure others may feel differently.

* realize I did not even mention high press, or the lack thereof... that is also something we've not been able to do this season.

Edited April 5, 2023 by robsblubot

[Gundalf 728]

45 minutes ago, robsblubot said:

Quickness also affects the quality of the chances created: how disrupted and out of position the opposition defense gets. Note that a team does not need to constantly play high tempo, but they have to have the ability to switch to a higher tempo to hurt quality opposition.

The xG algorithm takes this into account tho, position, distance, opponent players position and so on.  Like a tap in is a xG of 1.

Just remember the many 1on1 situations we had recently, and none of them were converted. But this means we are actually getting into these situations where we surprise the opponent, otherwise it wouldnt be a 1on1. The overall tempo and build up is too slow, I agree, but we produced enough to be in a better position where we are right now.

We should have scored 17 goals more this season under normal circumstances (following the xG), seven fucking teen. We just cant score, even tho we are creating chances. And I doubt this has sth. to do with the previous manager, bc the players we have have a similar terrible goal scoring record under any previous manager they had. 

What I want to say: it doesnt matter who the manager is, with players not converting chances, this manager will struggle. Ofc the system and the overall confidence affects this, but Im not sure a Havertz would bang in goals under Pep. 

Liverpool ist struggling a lot, lacking confidence, but even then Salah has a similar goal record this season as his xG is (xG = 13, goals = 12). 

[robsblubot 3,259]

6 hours ago, Gundalf said:

The xG algorithm takes this into account tho, position, distance, opponent players position and so on.  Like a tap in is a xG of 1.

Just remember the many 1on1 situations we had recently, and none of them were converted. But this means we are actually getting into these situations where we surprise the opponent, otherwise it wouldnt be a 1on1. The overall tempo and build up is too slow, I agree, but we produced enough to be in a better position where we are right now.

We should have scored 17 goals more this season under normal circumstances (following the xG), seven fucking teen. We just cant score, even tho we are creating chances. And I doubt this has sth. to do with the previous manager, bc the players we have have a similar terrible goal scoring record under any previous manager they had. 

What I want to say: it doesnt matter who the manager is, with players not converting chances, this manager will struggle. Ofc the system and the overall confidence affects this, but Im not sure a Havertz would bang in goals under Pep. 

Liverpool ist struggling a lot, lacking confidence, but even then Salah has a similar goal record this season as his xG is (xG = 13, goals = 12). 

Once again I do not agree with "your conclusion" from the algorithm data, and without knowing the details around the algorithm, I have no reason to trust any accuracy claim (I'm a software engineer btw).

I do not see our players getting tap-ins. I see us creating a decent number chances that a confident team, and confident players *should* be converting (only some of them)... the team is not and does not play with confidence, and esp the attacking players visibly lack confidence. Does the algorithm also have a confidence factor added to its input? that'd reintroduce the human element making it questionable anyway.

Another example: if you can press high, you can regain possession closer to the opposition goal, which means running less until getting into a position to score. That's vastly different (energy spent and concentration when applying the finish) from making long runs with or without the ball to get to the same position. That's one of the reasons city can relentlessly attack the opposition, and we can't.

You are saying, or rather the algorithm is, that player X, Y, Z, have poor conversion ratio. I'm far more interested in why that is.

Edited April 5, 2023 by robsblubot

[cosmicway 1,262]

Saw only highlights.
How can all those chances be missed ?

[Blue Armour 4,171]

Potters ghost remains.

Callagher on for Kante is straight out of his playbook 

Need that to end with whoever comes in to take charge.

[Blue Armour 4,171]

Havertz (even though deficient in front of goal) did well in every other department IMO. In that regard, he has been solid in the past few games. Put him alongside a lethal finisher, and I think he will do well. Unfortunately Felix, for all his skill, is also another softie in front of goal.

And Kante? Nothing more to be said.

[Fulham Broadway 16,424]

1 hour ago, Blue Armour said:

Potters ghost remains.

Callagher on for Kante is straight out of his playbook 

Need that to end with whoever comes in to take charge.

Think I read Kante is being moth balled for Madrid. But isn't it great he's all over the pitch again