Luka Modric

[nadavTKL 1,787]

with Modric, Mata, Hazard, Torres and Marin the midfield can and will get run over with a few nice passes or a concise counter attack.

Oh... finaly someone who gets it.

People need to understand that when you have that front 4, which basicly cant realy defend (exept Mata), you got to have

strong defense, and a very storng defensive midfield. Thats if you want to win trophis off course, otherwise we can easily

turned into arsenal or spurs. We should keep playing Mikel and Lamps.

[Spike 12,049]

Mark my words, Hazard won't track back very often. Just because Chelsea is 'step up' or some other arrogant bullshit won't mean he will suddenly have a defensive work rate. That doesn't mean a thing to me.

Arsenal have had some great pleyrs in the past five or six years: Gilberto Silva, Rosicky, Touré, Gallas, Hleb, Sagna, Adebayor, Nasri, Fabregas, van Persie, Henry. If they had a Tony Adams or a Patrick Viera type leader, I'll tell you they would have won more. Without hardmen you'll win nothing in the Premier League.

[jmarlow 458]

Mark my words, Hazard won't track back very often. Just because Chelsea is 'step up' or some other arrogant bullshit won't mean he will suddenly have a defensive work rate. That doesn't mean a thing to me.

Arsenal have had some great pleyrs in the past five or six years: Gilberto Silva, Rosicky, Touré, Gallas, Hleb, Sagna, Adebayor, Nasri, Fabregas, van Persie, Henry. If they had a Tony Adams or a Patrick Viera type leader, I'll tell you they would have won more. Without hardmen you'll win nothing in the Premier League.

my word! smh

first of all! how is that arrogant saying moving from Lille in the French league to the European Champions in the PL is a step up? please do explain.

To say Hazard wont track back is just ridiculous! and its not even a big issue anyway! if Hazard will refuse to track back as you seem to think then Mata will do it then!

and then to say you wont win anything without hardmen in the PL, who said anything about Chelsea not having Hardmen in the team? Lampard will still play a part next season, Mikel will as will Ivanovic, Cahill, Luiz and Terry! not exactly a bunch of softies are they?

[jmarlow 458]

Oh... finaly someone who gets it.

People need to understand that when you have that front 4, which basicly cant realy defend (exept Mata), you got to have

strong defense, and a very storng defensive midfield. Thats if you want to win trophis off course, otherwise we can easily

turned into arsenal or spurs. We should keep playing Mikel and Lamps.

Mikel and Lamps are only good together when we park the bus! people dont understand when we play attacking football next season, Mikel and Lamps in that double pivot would be our downfall! Modric-Fellani would be so so so much better and more effective than Lamps-Mikel in a attacking team. Plus the fact everyone keeps either forgeting Ramires or just leaving him out of their team! Ramires, Modric and Mikel/Fellani would be more than adequate cover to protect our back four!

What do people think? that we are going to play with Torres, Mata, Hazard, Marin and Modric all bombing forward and leaving Mikel on his own? NO this isnt Fifa!

[Spike 12,049]

my word! smh

Inspired genius.

[jmarlow 458]

Inspired genius.

try reading the whole post eh! and not just my first reaction when reading yours!

[Spike 12,049]

my word! smh

first of all! how is that arrogant saying moving from Lille in the French league to the European Champions in the PL is a step up? please do explain.

To say Hazard wont track back is just ridiculous! and its not even a big issue anyway! if Hazard will refuse to track back as you seem to think then Mata will do it then!

and then to say you wont win anything without hardmen in the PL, who said anything about Chelsea not having Hardmen in the team? Lampard will still play a part next season, Mikel will as will Ivanovic, Cahill, Luiz and Terry! not exactly a bunch of softies are they?

Saying that it is a step up isn't arrogant, but you almost implied that Hazard will have to change his playing style to be more defensive in England. I was probably reading too much into it but this is the line that bothered me 'Players know if they come to the PL, they have to work for the team', so players in other leageus don't work for their teams?

I never said anything about Chelsea not having hardmen, I was saying that since Arsenal lacked hardmen they failed. My main gripe was that having Modric in the double pivot is too attack minded and would end up being cut top pieces with a concise counter. Modric and Mikel wouldn't be viable cover for such an offensive line up. Mata doesn't track back very much anyway even when he does his challenges are rather sheepish. You must remember how easily Barcelona and Arsenal conceed on the counter, I'm not saying that Chelsea will play in the exact same way but an overly offensive line up can and will lead to disaster. I can just see the 5-3 against Arsenal happening again if Modric is played in a deep role. Don't forget that Tottenham wore torn to shreds against Manchester City and Arsenal (and Chelsea) last season, I'm not comparing Chelsea's and Tottenham's quality but the offensive and 'attractive' style of football can be dangerous. Against bottom half teams I would support this style but against the stonger sides it would be suicide.

As I said earlier Modric would be more suited to a 4-3-3 formation where he allowed to take on the 'Iniesta' role. 4-2-3-1 just seems to flimsy for an overly offensive team. I feel that the double pivot has to be overly defensive for it to work.vI'm not sold on Ramires in the double pivot either, his passing is kind of really bad.

[capriccioso 2,545]

Saying that it is a step up isn't arrogant, but you almost implied that Hazard will have to change his playing style to be more defensive in England. I was probably reading too much into it but this is the line that bothered me 'Players know if they come to the PL, they have to work for the team', so players in other leageus don't work for their teams?

I never said anything about Chelsea not having hardmen, I was saying that since Arsenal lacked hardmen they failed. My main gripe was that having Modric in the double pivot is too attack minded and would end up being cut top pieces with a concise counter. Modric and Mikel wouldn't be viable cover for such an offensive line up. Mata doesn't track back very much anyway even when he does his challenges are rather sheepish. You must remember how easily Barcelona and Arsenal conceed on the counter, I'm not saying that Chelsea will play in the exact same way but an overly offensive line up can and will lead to disaster. I can just see the 5-3 against Arsenal happening again if Modric is played in a deep role. Don't forget that Tottenham wore torn to shreds against Manchester City and Arsenal (and Chelsea) last season, I'm not comparing Chelsea's and Tottenham's quality but the offensive and 'attractive' style of football can be dangerous. Against bottom half teams I would support this style but against the stonger sides it would be suicide.

As I said earlier Modric would be more suited to a 4-3-3 formation where he allowed to take on the 'Iniesta' role. 4-2-3-1 just seems to flimsy for an overly offensive team. I feel that the double pivot has to be overly defensive for it to work.vI'm not sold on Ramires in the double pivot either, his passing is kind of really bad.

Pirlo also has a monster free kick on him.

[Spike 12,049]

Pirlo also has a monster free kick on him.

Wrong topic, Cap?

[English Freak 456]

Saying that it is a step up isn't arrogant, but you almost implied that Hazard will have to change his playing style to be more defensive in England. I was probably reading too much into it but this is the line that bothered me 'Players know if they come to the PL, they have to work for the team', so players in other leageus don't work for their teams?

I never said anything about Chelsea not having hardmen, I was saying that since Arsenal lacked hardmen they failed. My main gripe was that having Modric in the double pivot is too attack minded and would end up being cut top pieces with a concise counter. Modric and Mikel wouldn't be viable cover for such an offensive line up. Mata doesn't track back very much anyway even when he does his challenges are rather sheepish. You must remember how easily Barcelona and Arsenal conceed on the counter, I'm not saying that Chelsea will play in the exact same way but an overly offensive line up can and will lead to disaster. I can just see the 5-3 against Arsenal happening again if Modric is played in a deep role. Don't forget that Tottenham wore torn to shreds against Manchester City and Arsenal (and Chelsea) last season, I'm not comparing Chelsea's and Tottenham's quality but the offensive and 'attractive' style of football can be dangerous. Against bottom half teams I would support this style but against the stonger sides it would be suicide.

As I said earlier Modric would be more suited to a 4-3-3 formation where he allowed to take on the 'Iniesta' role. 4-2-3-1 just seems to flimsy for an overly offensive team. I feel that the double pivot has to be overly defensive for it to work. I'm not sold on Ramires in the double pivot either, his passing is kind of really bad.

Totally agree.

Modric would be most effective in a 3-man midfield at Chelsea.

I think if we stick with the 4-2-3-1...Ramires will have to play RW.

Most effective lineup next season (not including any potential transfers):

Cech

Ivan---Terry (Luiz)---Cahill---Cole

Mikel--Lamps

Ramires (Marin)----Mata-----Hazard

Torres (Sturridge)

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

So, which is better?

--Mata-----Torres-----Hazard--

-----Ramires------Modric-----

--------------Mikel-------------

Or

------------Torres----------

---Hazard--Mata--Marin--

-----Modric------Mikel-----

IMO In the 4-3-3 Mata and Hazard may have a little less influence. Plus having that 3 man supply line in the 4-2-3-1 would help Torres more. In the 4-3-3 Ramires would start as he can defend and also his running and break aways would be great. I think Modric can play the double pivot role. Admittedly the 4-3-3 formation is more balanced but the 4-2-3-1 has more potency and creativity.

[English Freak 456]

So, which is better?

--Mata-----Torres-----Hazard--

-----Ramires------Modric-----

--------------Mikel-------------

Or

------------Torres----------

---Hazard--Mata--Marin--

-----Modric------Mikel-----

IMO In the 4-3-3 Mata and Hazard may have a little less influence. Plus having that 3 man supply line in the 4-2-3-1 would help Torres more. In the 4-3-3 Ramires would start as he can defend and also his running and break aways would be great. I think Modric can play the double pivot role. Admittedly the 4-3-3 formation is more balanced but the 4-2-3-1 has more potency and creativity.

Neither...Modric is still a Spurs player.

[jmarlow 458]

So, which is better?

--Mata-----Torres-----Hazard--

-----Ramires------Modric-----

--------------Mikel-------------

Or

------------Torres----------

---Hazard--Mata--Marin--

-----Modric------Mikel-----

IMO In the 4-3-3 Mata and Hazard may have a little less influence. Plus having that 3 man supply line in the 4-2-3-1 would help Torres more. In the 4-3-3 Ramires would start as he can defend and also his running and break aways would be great. I think Modric can play the double pivot role. Admittedly the 4-3-3 formation is more balanced but the 4-2-3-1 has more potency and creativity.

neither.

------------Torres----------

---Hazard--Mata--Ramires--

-----Modric------Mikel-----

that is the best, most effective and well balanced line up. imo.

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

neither.

------------Torres----------

---Hazard--Mata--Ramires--

-----Modric------Mikel-----

that is the best, most effective and well balanced line up. imo.

We'll probably get a RW though.

[Gary Reid 25]

No Lampard or Hulk lads?