Is our midfield good enough?

[Krypt 241]

The worrying thing is could this be Frank's last season ? who could possibly come in and get 20 goals a season (bar this) from midfield.

[Term-X 7,891]

Well, Lampards wages are too high for him to be a bench player.

[steve5221 91]

Yossi if he can get fit???

[Krypt 241]

Yossi if he can get fit???

His not going to get us 15/20 goals a season. Aslo he is no spring chicken himself he will be 31 in may.

[Styles 9,790]

The worrying thing is could this be Frank's last season ? who could possibly come in and get 20 goals a season (bar this) from midfield.

We have to move away from our reliance on one player to score goals. It is a team game. Xavi rarely ever scores but I would take him over Lampard 10/10 because he is simply a better midfielder and would improve the team.

Look at Lampard's passing stats from last night - http://oi51.tinypic.com/i71vdv.jpg

20 misplaced passes. Why is he giving away the ball that often?

[Kostas 1,468]

Very interesting topic.

While I firmly believe that with our best midfielders in form and playing our 4-3-3 our midfield is good enough for what we need it to do its rather a question of style rather than ability.

To understand the reasons that caused such a question I feel we need to dwell in this squad's history ('istoree for you lurking Scousers). Ever since Mourinho we've been playing a brand of football that suits midfielders like Essien and where technical ability isn't vital. Our direct football brought results more often than visually attractive play.

Roman's wish for a more attacking style was one of the reasons he hired Scolari who for all his faults turned us into a pretty impressive side in his first few months only to be let down by a squad that didn't match his vision. One of the main reasons behind Hiddink's success was that he opted to switch back to Mourinho's more defensive and direct tactics which our squad (read: midfielders) was designed and build for.

Ancelotti, to his credit, took a far more attacking approach than his predecessors and (again to his credit) managed to get results out of that team along with very impressive football at times. While last season he did succeed in marrying our squad and his football I believe that at the end of the day our current midfield options don't suit the football he tries to play (not good enough, if you will). It'll only become even more painfully obvious if the switch to a midfield diamond isn't temporary.

What's interesting now is what our club (Football Board + Ancelotti) plans for the future. While signing an Essien clone in Ramires probably points towards us continuing utilizing the "runner" type of midfielders its worth noticing that the majority our our young mids (Mikel, Kakuta, McEachran or even Matic who was a CFC player only a month ago) are technically at least equal to anyone we had in Mourinho's days.

[Styles 9,790]

Very interesting topic.

While I firmly believe that with our best midfielders in form and playing our 4-3-3 our midfield is good enough for what we need it to do its rather a question of style rather than ability.

To understand the reasons that caused such a question I feel we need to dwell in this squad's history ('istoree for you lurking Scousers) Ever since Mourinho we've been playing a brand of football that suits midfielders like Essien and where technical ability isn't vital. Our direct football brought results more often than visual attractive play.

Roman's wish for a more attacking style was one of the reasons he hired Scolari who for all his faults turned us into a pretty impressive side in his first few months only to be let down by a squad that didn't match his vision. One of the main reasons behind Hiddink's success was that he opted to switch back to Mourinho's more defensive and direct tactics which our squad (read: midfielders) was designed and build for.

Ancelotti, to his credit, took a far more attacking approach than his predecessors and (again to his credit) managed to get results out of that team along with very impressive football at times. While last season he did succeed in marrying our squad and his football I believe that at the end of the day our current midfield options don't suit the football he tries to play (not good enough, if you will). It'll only become even more painfully obvious if the switch to a midfield diamond isn't temporary.

What's interesting now is what our club (Football Board + Ancelotti) plans for the future. While signing an Essien clone in Ramires probably points towards us continuing utilizing the "runner" type of midfielders its worth noticing that the majority our our young mids (Mikel, Kakuta, McEachran or even Matic who was a CFC player only a month ago) are technically at least equal to anyone we had in Mourinho's days.

Fantastic post.

I agree with pretty much everything you have said there. Under Mourinho we were an athletic counter-attacking team that would play at break-neck speed. You do not need ball-playing technical midfielders with this approach, you simply require athletic box-to-box midfielders. With wingers that stretched play they excelled with the extra room.

I highlighted the bit in bold because that is specifically relevant to the point I was making. Ancelotti's mandate seems to be to provide a free-flowing, easy on the eye football. If that is the case then many of our players are unsuited to this style of play.

The area that seems to be suffering with this the most is the midfield. Other than Mikel I don't think any of our senior midfielders are cool under pressure, able to receive the ball while marked, pass the ball accurately and move into space to receive a pass.

Of the young players McEachran is by far the best because he plays football with his head up and passes the ball one or two touch. More importantly he is able to dribble with the ball in central areas and opens up options for himself and teammates. Honestly I was salivating at the mouth when I saw the video of McEachran against Newcaslte in September. He was doing things Essien and Lampard for example would never in their wildest dreams attempt to do. Some of the dribbles between Newcastle players was incredible. The most important thing that the club can do is bring in a similar player for him to play with. He doesn't need runners beside him he needs another technical football to play and pass with.

This is the video I'm talking about -

Honestly I can't wait to see what he will be like in 2-3 years time. I just hope he gets enough games to nurture him properly.

[eldo 868]

We have to move away from our reliance on one player to score goals. It is a team game. Xavi rarely ever scores but I would take him over Lampard 10/10 because he is simply a better midfielder and would improve the team.

Look at Lampard's passing stats from last night - http://oi51.tinypic.com/i71vdv.jpg

20 misplaced passes. Why is he giving away the ball that often?

2010/11 La Liga

Messi 20 games 15 assists

Xavi 20 games 5 assists

Imo Messi is the vital link in Barca. He connects their midfield and attack. Besides scoring goals he sets up Villa and Pedro. Pedro looks ten times better and much more effective player just because of Messi.

[Styles 9,790]

2010/11 La Liga

Messi 20 games 15 assists

Xavi 20 games 5 assists

Imo Messi is the vital link in Barca. He connects their midfield and attack. Besides scoring goals he sets up Villa and Pedro. Pedro looks ten times better and much more effective player just because of Messi.

No that a simple mistake to make if you look purely at goals and assists. Look at the games, look who is controlling and dictating play. Look who is dominating midfield and making pinpoint passes to almost everybody on the field. We don't have a midfielder fit enough to lace Xavi's boots in terms of vision and passing.

Here are some videos for you to watch and see what I mean;

,

,

Messi a great footballer but Xavi is just as important to Barcelona's success as Messi.

[eldo 868]

No that a simple mistake to make if you look purely at goals and assists. Look at the games, look who is controlling and dictating play. Look who is dominating midfield and making pinpoint passes to almost everybody on the field. We don't have a midfielder fit enough to lace Xavi's boots in terms of vision and passing.

Here are some videos for you to watch and see what I mean;

Messi a great footballer but Xavi is just as important to Barcelona's success as Messi.

Yes Xavi is great at controlling their midfield, but they don't score goals because of Xavi. They just have better possession.

Why has Spain scored only 8 goals at WC, Germany on the other side scored 16.

Players like Xavi and Xabi are great kind of footballers, but they don't make chances for their strikers and wide players.

Just how Ozil and Xabi play for Real. Both have completely different tasks.

[Styles 9,790]

Yes Xavi is great at controlling their midfield, but they don't score goals because of Xavi. They just have better possession.

Why has Spain scored only 8 goals at WC, Germany on the other side scored 16.

Players like Xavi and Xabi are great kind of footballers, but they don't make chances for their strikers and wide players.

Just how Ozil and Xabi play for Real. Both have completely different tasks.

You must be having a laugh? Are you serious? Xavi doesn't create chances for strikers? :huh: That is the most absurd thing I have ever heard. Your ignorance is really showing here.

Spain scored 8 goals because teams played a 10-0 formation against them most of the time. Yet they still won, the controlled the game and were decisive when it mattered. Games are tight because the opposition make it tight but they still find a way through. Germany scored 14 because nobody respected them, teams opened up against them and left themselves open to the counter i.e. Germany vs Argentina.What do you think the result would be if teams opened up agains Spain the same way they did against Germany? You would see scorelines of 5-0 or 6-0.

[eldo 868]

You must be having a laugh? Are you serious? Xavi doesn't create chances for strikers? :huh: That is the most absurd thing I have ever heard. Your ignorance is really showing here.

Spain scored 8 goals because teams played a 10-0 formation against them most of the time. Yet they still won, the controlled the game and were decisive when it mattered. Games are tight because the opposition make it tight but they still find a way through. Germany scored 14 because nobody respected them, teams opened up against them and left themselves open to the counter i.e. Germany vs Argentina.What do you think the result would be if teams opened up agains Spain the same way they did against Germany? You would see scorelines of 5-0 or 6-0.

They played against Columbia last week.

This was the formation.

Villa

Iniesta Xavi Pedro

Xabi Busquets

It was borring, Villa had nothing to do. Only when younger guys like Mata, Llorente and Silva came some chances were created. Also in South Africa, they scored when Fiberglass, who assisted for that goal, came in.

Germany knew where the goal is. Schweinsteiger, Ozil, Muller all of them only saw that goal, that is why Klose scored so many goals. They created chances for him.

[Styles 9,790]

They played against Columbia last week.

This was the formation.

Villa

Iniesta Xavi Pedro

Xabi Busquets

It was borring, Villa had nothing to do. Only when younger guys like Mata, Llorente and Silva came some chances were created. Also in South Africa, they scored when Fiberglass, who assisted for that goal, came in.

Germany knew where the goal is. Schweinsteiger, Ozil, Muller all of them only saw that goal, that is why Klose scored so many goals. They created chances for him.

So what happened when Germany met Spain?

[eldo 868]

So what happened when Germany met Spain?

You are smart enough to figure that out yourself.

[BLionheart 516]

Very interesting topic.

While I firmly believe that with our best midfielders in form and playing our 4-3-3 our midfield is good enough for what we need it to do its rather a question of style rather than ability.

To understand the reasons that caused such a question I feel we need to dwell in this squad's history ('istoree for you lurking Scousers). Ever since Mourinho we've been playing a brand of football that suits midfielders like Essien and where technical ability isn't vital. Our direct football brought results more often than visually attractive play.

Roman's wish for a more attacking style was one of the reasons he hired Scolari who for all his faults turned us into a pretty impressive side in his first few months only to be let down by a squad that didn't match his vision. One of the main reasons behind Hiddink's success was that he opted to switch back to Mourinho's more defensive and direct tactics which our squad (read: midfielders) was designed and build for.

Ancelotti, to his credit, took a far more attacking approach than his predecessors and (again to his credit) managed to get results out of that team along with very impressive football at times. While last season he did succeed in marrying our squad and his football I believe that at the end of the day our current midfield options don't suit the football he tries to play (not good enough, if you will). It'll only become even more painfully obvious if the switch to a midfield diamond isn't temporary.

What's interesting now is what our club (Football Board + Ancelotti) plans for the future. While signing an Essien clone in Ramires probably points towards us continuing utilizing the "runner" type of midfielders its worth noticing that the majority our our young mids (Mikel, Kakuta, McEachran or even Matic who was a CFC player only a month ago) are technically at least equal to anyone we had in Mourinho's days.

superb post

but that just shows that carlo has got it all wrong , a good manager should know that he should play with the best formation and tactics that suits his players instead of trying to force his players to play with his style and his same tactics that has worked with different players , with another team , in another league .....

it's bloody obvious that this isn't the right way for chelsea right now , may be in the future with players like mceacehran and kakuta we might be able to play this attractive play , but while having 2 of essien/mikel/ramires in our midfield... that shouldn't be an option ...