Playing style

[Term-X 7,891]

The last time they did let a manager do that was with Mourinho by allowing him to bring Carvalho, Deco, Ferreira & Tiago..

I'm aware of that. I was referring to the demands Carlo made, not the general premise.

[chrismada9 1,948]

You can't put all the blame on CA though. There's not much he can do about his midfielders not being able to make the easiest of passes.

Absolutely! Our midfielders need to start delivering. We've always used a 4-3-3 and it's worked year in year out, and it gets the best out of players like Lampard and Essien because they're used to it.

[MetsajCFC 1,255]

Ramires, Luiz and Torres aren't the problem.

Malouda, Lampard, Zhirkov, Essien and co are the problem. If none of these players can pass the ball or create anything then there's not much Ancelotti can do.

Agree with your views, well said Styles

[LDN Blue 7,903]

I'm aware of that. I was referring to the demands Carlo made, not the general premise.

Mm, I meant that in the sense, after Mourinho left, 3/4 followed. Carvalho stated he'd wanted to leave well beyond last season, Deco wanted to go back to Brazil and Thiago was gone anyway. Ferreira's only stuck around because he feels a special connection with the club & probably because there wasn't much demand for him.

[eldo 868]

The last time they did let a manager do that was with Mourinho by allowing him to bring Carvalho, Deco, Ferreira & Tiago..

I don't think that Deco was Mourinhos signing.

I think that we made huge mistakes by signing 30 yos from another leagues..

[eldo 868]

p.s. Mikel is vital.

You *must* have a player who is willing to sit & who can actually play there. Playing Mikel let's everyone else get forward.

I said it in my piece before the PL game. We gift too much space in front of the back four & good teams will exploit that.

Every time United countered, it was because we were caught high up the pitch with no definitive midfield anchor.

Look at the time Carrick had on the ball to pick out the pass that led to the goal. No pressure on the ball because midfield were too deep.

Playing an anchor let's others push the ball carrier. Rooney was unmarked, but Mikel would naturally have dropped in there.

This isn't mine..But it's very well true.

[LDN Blue 7,903]

This isn't mine..But it's very well true.

Definitely agree.

Most successful teams always have a key anchor man now. Real have Xabi Alonso, Barcelona have Busquets ect.. He's more than a guy to be an extra line of defence.. He's an incentive for the team to attack in numbers.

Where did you grab that quote from?

[eldo 868]

Definitely agree.

Most successful teams always have a key anchor man now. Real have Xabi Alonso, Barcelona have Busquets ect.. He's more than a guy to be an extra line of defence.. He's an incentive for the team to attack in numbers.

Where did you grab that quote from?

Won't tell you. joke

Here. http://twitter.com/joetweeds

[LDN Blue 7,903]

Won't tell you. joke

Here. http://twitter.com/joetweeds

cheers!

[dodojojo 510]

In the modern game it has to be 4-3-3 or 4-5-1.....

Seeing as he have spent 50 million on Torres, we have to build the team around him in a 4-5-1 formation. That would also get the best out of Lampard. As has been said we need a right and left midfielder with Malouda, Drogba and Anelka sold.....

Or a 4-2-3-1.

I read on a another site that Ancelotti should go 4-5-1 in the 2nd leg. There's no way in hell Ancelotti would be brave or stupid enough to pull off such an experiment at this stage. It's something he should have done earlier on, like say against Copenhagen at home. Or Blackpool. It would have allowed everyone to see if Torres would truly be effective for Chelsea. But going with this formation would mean the benching of Drogba, Anelka and Kalou. Too revolutionary.

Instead Ancelotti has persisted with compromising for both sides and nullifying the very best of many of the players. Many can't play the 442. Drogba and Torres can't play together. Torres isn't great in 433. Should have gone 4-3-3 with the old lineup and/or 4-5-1 with Torres. And then used the one for the appropriate opponent.

[Bosnian Blue 2,471]

I don't think we have OUR style.Carlo has his style,Mourinho has his style,Scolari his,but there isn't a Chelsea style.

All our managers adapt the formation and the strategy to the players they have.

Now we are playing 4-4-2 cause we have Torres and Drogba,last year we had Malouda and Anelka in magnificient form so we played 4-3-3.

The size of the pitch on SB doesn't enable teams to play wide like Barcelona.

I think the best formation for Chelsea is 4-2-3-1.Two box to box midfielders,one playmaker,two fast wingers and a strong target man.Right now,we can't play that because guys like Malouda,Essien or Torres are having a difficult time.

[Kostas 1,468]

The last time they did let a manager do that was with Mourinho by allowing him to bring Carvalho, Deco, Ferreira & Tiago..

Scolari had some say in the transfers as-well. Mineiro, Deco and the Robinho saga anyone?

And I wouldn't turn this thread into yet another pointless discussion about formations. We suffered from the same things we did when we used a 4-3-3.

This topic is very similar to the brilliant "is our midfield good enough" and such discussions usually boil down to ¹the midfielders available to a team and ²it's manager.

So, since most of us know the capabilities of our main midfielders (Lampard, Essien, Mikel, Ramires, Benayoun?*) could any of you claim with confidence that they know Carletto's preferred playing style?

Off the top of my head the majority of the goals we scored when we were playing good football came from either a combination of Cole and Malouda or Drogba's brilliance. It's safe to say the first has been found out since October (way before Malouda's performances started annoying people) and Drogba can be a figure of frustration at times.

*Has he played 10 games for us?

[eldo 868]

You can't motivate someone to pass the ball or choose the right option.

[lucifer_sam257 4]

i like the way we play. its good

[Henrique 9,133]

We need an "anchor" man, but We need a good one like Makelele.

Mikel is awful, no matter what you say.

[Bosnian Blue 2,471]

We need an "anchor" man, but We need a good one like Makelele.

Mikel is awful, no matter what you say.

Why and who would that be ?

Do you really need an anchor man against teams like WBA,Birmingham,Fulham ... ?Mikel is good.

Essien can play that position against stronger teams.What we need is a playmaker,someone who can play that killer pass to Torres or Drogba.

[LDN Blue 7,903]

We need an "anchor" man, but We need a good one like Makelele.

Mikel is awful, no matter what you say.

Mikel isn't awful.

That being said, we rate him highly because he is better at Essien in that position. However he's not the best in the world at it. Busquets (minus the theatrics) is actually very highly rated. Even Mascherano is very very good.

[Henrique 9,133]

This topic just doesnt make sense at all...since it states that we should play like Stoke.