Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General football forum' started by aguero93:20, 11 Aug 2016.
Boring sums up how you play plus cynical,hazard is on his arse at the slightest breeze
Well, okay then.
Wouldn't expect a Chelsea supporter to think any differently about your team.
Doesn't mean that you are right or totally objective in that opinion though.
That's fair, but I think it's telling that, in my experience, it's mostly just this forum that I regularly find Chelsea so consistently labeled a boring functional team.
Perhaps City fans expect a more attractive type of football than Chelsea fans - Mourinho's influence will have no doubt conditioned you to pragmatic football.
Well that's exactly what you are. It's pretty much your identity in world football, you're the big club who plays like a small club, to good success. You sit back, absorb pressure and try and hit teams on the break with pacey wingers and a big strong striker. A lot like Palace tbh, but with much better players
I meant among neutrals.
I think attractive football is subjective. If people think possession football is the only way to be attractive, then very few teams play attractive football. Chelsea fans know what good football looks like. Most gladly admit we were a bit pragmatic under Mourinho.
Except we average about 55-60% possession in most seasons. We only play the way you described in certain games, which probably make up about 3% of our games over the course of a season, which IMO adds to the versatility of the team. Being able to switch between styles and strategies seamlessly is good trait to have IMO.
They're just happy to see them all playing after the disgraceful way they downed tools last year.
I'll take boring football any day of the week over the shit we served up tonight.