Chelsea (H) Post Match Thread

[canyerdogputoutafire]

We laugh at opponents when teams put the ball out of play so easily.

It's why I can't watch anyone but City these days on TV. We are being spoiled.

Everyone else seems to play a different version of the game which leaves me numb and confounded we accept it as normal for so long.

Spot on, I was saying exactly this after a match recently and added I had become a "football snob".

 

[goalmole]

I think it's kind of unfair how Aguero's recent performances have gone so unnoticed. He's playing so well. He's now such a great team player it's actually beautiful. Terrific performance. And such a great keeper of the ball, incredible.

I don't think they have gone unnoticed. I was one of those that was saying that he didn't fit into our playing style anymore. If he had not adapted and changed his playing style I would still be saying the same thing. However in the last few games it is apparent that something has clicked and he now looks a very different player. Some of his play nowadays seems almost Silvaesque and the team is all the better for it.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

It's rather interesting that the current champions hoofed the ball into no-man's-land a couple of times yesterday just to relieve some of the pressure they were under, along with a lot of overhit passes for those two greyhounds, Hazard and Pedro, to chase after!

 

[mancity1]

Chelsea tactics were spot on, it was a draw all day if all their players did their jobs properly and concentrated for the entirety.

We'll face much more of the same against other tops teams in the Champions League when it comes to trying to close the lines and trying to rely on their individuals to make us pay on the counter.

Great effort from our lads and the passing always has intent, even if it doesn't look like it. Keeps the opposition moving and tiring out.

As Ederson has proved so adeptly, just because you can kick the ball as a goalkeeper, doesn't mean anything if you can't deliver it with absolute intent and precision.

We laugh at opponents when teams put the ball out of play so easily.

It's why I can't watch anyone but City these days on TV. We are being spoiled.

Everyone else seems to play a different version of the game which leaves me numb and confounded we accept it as normal for so long.

With respect Tolmie I have to disagree as they stood off never pressing the whole time for the inevitable mistake only purely to wait for the mistake but because we were always positioned for the counter their counter was non existent in terms of its effectiveness.

A Klopp press ala at Anfield would have ensured a far better return on 3-0 at Eddies end and a record low percentage of time in out half for any side that has come to COMS this season.

The 18 seconds of laughter in the second half told the tale of the tape and while 13-3 was decent considering they defended so deep only poor finishing would keep us from scoring.

A side like Chelsea in their position that plays without a recognised target and plays without any desire to make the play for the full 93 minutes is a side that is managed by someone who doesn't want the job next year and won't be given it anyway.

Costa like him or hate him told the tale for Conte at Chelsea and man management under him and while clearly the events leading up to the game effecting him greatly and of course it would any decent human being Chelsea will be his one hit wonder.

Happy no end for us that they gifted us 3 points and we deserved them no doubt but Chelsea were pathetic and clearly under instructions to stand off.

 

[kaz7]

Eden Hazard on City vs. Chelsea: "I wouldn't have got a touch even if we played for three hours, even if we improved in the last 10 or 15 minutes."

 

[paulchapo]

Think it's more to do with Conte wanting the sack (& payoff)

It was bizarre taking Hazard off last week when the game was still up for grabs. Yesterday was more puzzling seeing as they really needed to win the game. Every man & his dog knew yesterday that we would press high. He left both big strikers on the bench giving the them no out ball.

Conte has been complaining that he hasn't had sufficient funds compared to both us & the Rags. He then proceeds to leave a £60 Mill striker on the bench. If i was Roman i'd be fuming, especially as it's now likely they will lose out on CL again.

They needed Giroud up front because all they did was pump it long. He could have won some headers, held it up and brought Hazard into play. If I was a Chelsea fan I would be fuming with that touchline dancing Muppet Conte.

 

[MillionDollarDream]

Mate, whatever I’ve done to you in life I’m sorry. It’s as if you watch my every post waiting for you “aha” moment to jump in and throw your petty Liverpool dig. Chill out and stop being so childish. I’m as happy as any blue at beating Chelsea and being this far clear, I was just pointing out my justified worry against the likes of Barca and Madrid. Don’t know what that gets you so wound up.

I mean it’s not like Barca and Madrid finish games with 100% passing success so I can see why so many think your comment was beyond nit picking.

 

[pikku]

Most one sided one nil victory ever and to think I was kind of apprehensive of this fixture until yesterday. Abysmal tactics from Chelsea, current PL champions, shame on them. Not one of the most riveting games coz only one team tried to play football, but valuable three points.

 

[argyle]

We give the ball away far too much, against Barca/real/Bayern I can see us getting punished. Walker is one of my favourite players but he gives the ball away a lot.

Just looking at the post-match comments and this sticks out a mile.

Seriously? We had near 1000 passes and over 70% possession.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

The analysis of our evisceration of the reigning champions has seen pundits trotting out several already well worn myths about City and our "rivals".

Chelsea were a disgrace and never came to try to win. This one really takes the biscuit. Chelsea shipped three in quick time to Bournemouth at Stamford Bridge, fought their way back into the game against Watford then shipped three in the last 5 minutes to suffer a 4-1 thrashing but then outplayed the rags before letting them come from behind to win. That's not the best form to take into a game at the Etihad, and traditionally Chelsea have never taken top teams on in glorious extravaganzas of attacking football. But they have always been very well organised, able to defend in depth and dangerous on the counter, but the counter has to be played carefully. I thought Hazard, Willian and Pedro were a much better bet than Morata and/or Giroud. It would have been no good expecting to defend deep then expect to get up in support of Morata or Giroud for lay offs, but Hazard and Willian can run the ball as can Pedro. What did for Chelsea was just how suffocating the City press is, so that none of the Chelsea lads ever got free to turn and run with the ball and no-one got time to find them in space or get any good possession to them. That was why Hazard & co looked so frustrated. That was a thoroughly professional performance from City and ranks with the way we tore into Spurs at home and never gave them a second to think.

The other great myth is that Liverpool have shown the world how to beat City. The secret is, apparently, something called "the Klopp press". As I see it this is a fairly emotional "up lads and at 'em manoeuvre" which many clubs simply don't, and so can't, play. It's by no means as suffocating as the City press and what has intrigued me is how often it doesn't work. There have been whole games where sides have sat deep (eg Swansea) so that if the high press wins the ball there's no space for Liverpool to use it before the cover plugs the gaps. It is the football equivalent of trench warfare! On the other hand, City beat the Klopp press for all but 10 minutes of our game at Anfield, but in that period we made disastrous mistakes which actually had nothing to do with their pressing. To assume that a 5-0 castration is of no significance, but that an isolated victory on a single Sunday in January has given everyone the keys to the kingdom of heaven is nonsense. Wigan sat deep with 10 or eleven behind the ball - doesn't this show the validity of Conte's approach?

So, I think Chelsea had a perfectly understandable game plan, one which would hardly raise an eyebrow if Mourinho adopted it YET AGAIN, but one which we nullified. I can understand the complaints of the pundits but I think we should listen to Conte at least - he actually had to try and get something out of the game, and I don't think anyone involved with Chelsea would have thanked him for a 3 or 4 nil drubbing. On the day, at least, we were far too good for Chelsea. That's the lesson of a game that was always thought provoking.

 

[mancity1]

The analysis of our evisceration of the reigning champions has seen pundits trotting out several already well worn myths about City and our "rivals".

Chelsea were a disgrace and never came to try to win. This one really takes the biscuit. Chelsea shipped three in quick time to Bournemouth at Stamford Bridge, fought their way back into the game against Watford then shipped three in the last 5 minutes to suffer a 4-1 thrashing but then outplayed the rags before letting them come from behind to win. That's not the best form to take into a game at the Etihad, and traditionally Chelsea have never taken top teams on in glorious extravaganzas of attacking football. But they have always been very well organised, able to defend in depth and dangerous on the counter, but the counter has to be played carefully. I thought Hazard, Willian and Pedro were a much better bet than Morata and/or Giroud. It would have been no good expecting to defend deep then expect to get up in support of Morata or Giroud for lay offs, but Hazard and Willian can run the ball as can Pedro. What did for Chelsea was just how suffocating the City press is, so that none of the Chelsea lads ever got free to turn and run with the ball and no-one got time to find them in space or get any good possession to them. That was why Hazard & co looked so frustrated. That was a thoroughly professional performance from City and ranks with the way we tore into Spurs at home and never gave them a second to think.

The other great myth is that Liverpool have shown the world how to beat City. The secret is, apparently, something called "the Klopp press". As I see it this is a fairly emotional "up lads and at 'em manoeuvre" which many clubs simply don't, and so can't, play. It's by no means as suffocating as the City press and what has intrigued me is how often it doesn't work. There have been whole games where sides have sat deep (eg Swansea) so that if the high press wins the ball there's no space for Liverpool to use it before the cover plugs the gaps. It is the football equivalent of trench warfare! On the other hand, City beat the Klopp press for all but 10 minutes of our game at Anfield, but in that period we made disastrous mistakes which actually had nothing to do with their pressing. To assume that a 5-0 castration is of no significance, but that an isolated victory on a single Sunday in January has given everyone the keys to the kingdom of heaven is nonsense. Wigan sat deep with 10 or eleven behind the ball - doesn't this show the validity of Conte's approach?

So, I think Chelsea had a perfectly understandable game plan, one which would hardly raise an eyebrow if Mourinho adopted it YET AGAIN, but one which we nullified. I can understand the complaints of the pundits but I think we should listen to Conte at least - he actually had to try and get something out of the game, and I don't think anyone involved with Chelsea would have thanked him for a 3 or 4 nil drubbing. On the day, at least, we were far too good for Chelsea. That's the lesson of a game that was always thought provoking.

Excellent points especially about the Liverpool press.

We did make some schoolboy errors against them and it cost us the match but again we just off our game in the final third to not score 4 or 5 and have a different scenario than the one portrayed in the press.

They did press us the way we should be pressed though that did ensure mistakes were made especially for the critical second goal but as previously mentioned if Mendy was fit for that game we would have won it IMO.

Compare that to the way Chelsea were happy to give us 79 per cent possession and stay off the ball carrier and its chalk and cheese to what Liverpool did that day when they didn't have the ball.

I personally think Pep was happy to lose this game as happy as one can be to get the monkey off the back so to speak.

 

[OB1]

The analysis of our evisceration of the reigning champions has seen pundits trotting out several already well worn myths about City and our "rivals".

Chelsea were a disgrace and never came to try to win. This one really takes the biscuit. Chelsea shipped three in quick time to Bournemouth at Stamford Bridge, fought their way back into the game against Watford then shipped three in the last 5 minutes to suffer a 4-1 thrashing but then outplayed the rags before letting them come from behind to win. That's not the best form to take into a game at the Etihad, and traditionally Chelsea have never taken top teams on in glorious extravaganzas of attacking football. But they have always been very well organised, able to defend in depth and dangerous on the counter, but the counter has to be played carefully. I thought Hazard, Willian and Pedro were a much better bet than Morata and/or Giroud. It would have been no good expecting to defend deep then expect to get up in support of Morata or Giroud for lay offs, but Hazard and Willian can run the ball as can Pedro. What did for Chelsea was just how suffocating the City press is, so that none of the Chelsea lads ever got free to turn and run with the ball and no-one got time to find them in space or get any good possession to them. That was why Hazard & co looked so frustrated. That was a thoroughly professional performance from City and ranks with the way we tore into Spurs at home and never gave them a second to think.

The other great myth is that Liverpool have shown the world how to beat City. The secret is, apparently, something called "the Klopp press". As I see it this is a fairly emotional "up lads and at 'em manoeuvre" which many clubs simply don't, and so can't, play. It's by no means as suffocating as the City press and what has intrigued me is how often it doesn't work. There have been whole games where sides have sat deep (eg Swansea) so that if the high press wins the ball there's no space for Liverpool to use it before the cover plugs the gaps. It is the football equivalent of trench warfare! On the other hand, City beat the Klopp press for all but 10 minutes of our game at Anfield, but in that period we made disastrous mistakes which actually had nothing to do with their pressing. To assume that a 5-0 castration is of no significance, but that an isolated victory on a single Sunday in January has given everyone the keys to the kingdom of heaven is nonsense. Wigan sat deep with 10 or eleven behind the ball - doesn't this show the validity of Conte's approach?

So, I think Chelsea had a perfectly understandable game plan, one which would hardly raise an eyebrow if Mourinho adopted it YET AGAIN, but one which we nullified. I can understand the complaints of the pundits but I think we should listen to Conte at least - he actually had to try and get something out of the game, and I don't think anyone involved with Chelsea would have thanked him for a 3 or 4 nil drubbing. On the day, at least, we were far too good for Chelsea. That's the lesson of a game that was always thought provoking.

Excellent stuff. I agree with every word.

On Liverpool, I don't think we particularly enjoy playing them and I probably prefer to avoid them in Europe but part of me would also like to see us make a point against them. I think the way they play did contribute to our bad 10 minutes, even if indirectly, but I firmly believe that we were on top for most of that game and it's frustrating that our worst 10 minutes of the season so far came at Anfield.

I think City will just keep get better at playing through the press and the parked bus, through a combination of practice / coaching and squad improvements. Pep is showing every sign of being able to do at City what he did at Barca and Bayern.

 

[Bluesiam]

I think there's been a lot of drivel written on here about Chelsea's tactics.

One thing Everyone has learned this year is that if you attack us, you had better do it with incredible energy and take any chances you get or you will be picking the ball out of the net on multiple occasions.

But, this year, several teams have double parked the bus and almost got something out of the game.
So given this and:
- how much we have just spanked Arsenal twice
- how badly we beat Chelsea at the Bridge this season
- how they just lost to United after leading
- how they beat us last year
- How they won the Champion's League

.....................I think it was nailed on this is how they would play and probably not that bad a call. There's no doubt United will play the same game.

The fact is that this season, we are playing Pep's game so well, that even half decent teams are looking very, very bad, and there's not a whole lot they can do about it.

 

[OB1]

Excellent points especially about the Liverpool press.

We did make some schoolboy errors against them and it cost us the match but again we just off our game in the final third to not score 4 or 5 and have a different scenario than the one portrayed in the press.

They did press us the way we should be pressed though that did ensure mistakes were made especially for the critical second goal but as previously mentioned if Mendy was fit for that game we would have won it IMO.

Compare that to the way Chelsea were happy to give us 79 per cent possession and stay off the ball carrier and its chalk and cheese to what Liverpool did that day when they didn't have the ball.

I personally think Pep was happy to lose this game as happy as one can be to get the monkey off the back so to speak.

I don't think Pep is ever happy to lose a game.

 

[Fred_Quimby]

The analysis of our evisceration of the reigning champions has seen pundits trotting out several already well worn myths about City and our "rivals".

Chelsea were a disgrace and never came to try to win. This one really takes the biscuit. Chelsea shipped three in quick time to Bournemouth at Stamford Bridge, fought their way back into the game against Watford then shipped three in the last 5 minutes to suffer a 4-1 thrashing but then outplayed the rags before letting them come from behind to win. That's not the best form to take into a game at the Etihad, and traditionally Chelsea have never taken top teams on in glorious extravaganzas of attacking football. But they have always been very well organised, able to defend in depth and dangerous on the counter, but the counter has to be played carefully. I thought Hazard, Willian and Pedro were a much better bet than Morata and/or Giroud. It would have been no good expecting to defend deep then expect to get up in support of Morata or Giroud for lay offs, but Hazard and Willian can run the ball as can Pedro. What did for Chelsea was just how suffocating the City press is, so that none of the Chelsea lads ever got free to turn and run with the ball and no-one got time to find them in space or get any good possession to them. That was why Hazard & co looked so frustrated. That was a thoroughly professional performance from City and ranks with the way we tore into Spurs at home and never gave them a second to think.

The other great myth is that Liverpool have shown the world how to beat City. The secret is, apparently, something called "the Klopp press". As I see it this is a fairly emotional "up lads and at 'em manoeuvre" which many clubs simply don't, and so can't, play. It's by no means as suffocating as the City press and what has intrigued me is how often it doesn't work. There have been whole games where sides have sat deep (eg Swansea) so that if the high press wins the ball there's no space for Liverpool to use it before the cover plugs the gaps. It is the football equivalent of trench warfare! On the other hand, City beat the Klopp press for all but 10 minutes of our game at Anfield, but in that period we made disastrous mistakes which actually had nothing to do with their pressing. To assume that a 5-0 castration is of no significance, but that an isolated victory on a single Sunday in January has given everyone the keys to the kingdom of heaven is nonsense. Wigan sat deep with 10 or eleven behind the ball - doesn't this show the validity of Conte's approach?

So, I think Chelsea had a perfectly understandable game plan, one which would hardly raise an eyebrow if Mourinho adopted it YET AGAIN, but one which we nullified. I can understand the complaints of the pundits but I think we should listen to Conte at least - he actually had to try and get something out of the game, and I don't think anyone involved with Chelsea would have thanked him for a 3 or 4 nil drubbing. On the day, at least, we were far too good for Chelsea. That's the lesson of a game that was always thought provoking.

Great analysis here. If it hadn’t been for a brain fade spell of a few minutes in the Dippers game the pundits wouldn’t be sprouting off about the way to beat City. I believe that the Chelsea players actually gave up with 15 minutes to go and that has nothing to do with Conte’s tactics and everything to do with how we stifled them and ran them down. The stats said they put in more miles than us and that was without the ball. They must have been really cheesed off doing all that running around with no end product.

 

[doots]

Chelsea players badgering the officials yesterday asking for another match ball to be used as City wouldn't let them near the one in play.

 

[HarrytheBlue]

I think there's been a lot of drivel written on here about Chelsea's tactics.

One thing Everyone has learned this year is that if you attack us, you had better do it with incredible energy and take any chances you get or you will be picking the ball out of the net on multiple occasions.

But, this year, several teams have double parked the bus and almost got something out of the game.
So given this and:
- how much we have just spanked Arsenal twice
- how badly we beat Chelsea at the Bridge this season
- how they just lost to United after leading
- how they beat us last year
- How they won the Champion's League

.....................I think it was nailed on this is how they would play and probably not that bad a call. There's no doubt United will play the same game.

The fact is that this season, we are playing Pep's game so well, that even half decent teams are looking very, very bad, and there's not a whole lot they can do about it.

Last season we struggled to beat some park the bus teams. This season, we're beating the park the bus teams more regularly. Getting into teams' heads. It probably goes against most true pro's instincts to curb their natural desire to have a go. Looks more and more like there's no favourable way to play us now. Ha ha.

 

[taleofbluehalves]

I think there's been a lot of drivel written on here about Chelsea's tactics.

One thing Everyone has learned this year is that if you attack us, you had better do it with incredible energy and take any chances you get or you will be picking the ball out of the net on multiple occasions.

But, this year, several teams have double parked the bus and almost got something out of the game.
So given this and:
- how much we have just spanked Arsenal twice
- how badly we beat Chelsea at the Bridge this season
- how they just lost to United after leading
- how they beat us last year
- How they won the Champion's League

.....................I think it was nailed on this is how they would play and probably not that bad a call. There's no doubt United will play the same game.

The fact is that this season, we are playing Pep's game so well, that even half decent teams are looking very, very bad, and there's not a whole lot they can do about it.

I’d love teams to come out and attack us as the media and pundits crave. We’ll take them apart!

Yes Liverpool beat us but given 5 more minutes we’d have got a draw and it was very close in the end.
If Utd do it we’ll win 5-0.

 

[the blue panther]

The analysis of our evisceration of the reigning champions has seen pundits trotting out several already well worn myths about City and our "rivals".

Chelsea were a disgrace and never came to try to win. This one really takes the biscuit. Chelsea shipped three in quick time to Bournemouth at Stamford Bridge, fought their way back into the game against Watford then shipped three in the last 5 minutes to suffer a 4-1 thrashing but then outplayed the rags before letting them come from behind to win. That's not the best form to take into a game at the Etihad, and traditionally Chelsea have never taken top teams on in glorious extravaganzas of attacking football. But they have always been very well organised, able to defend in depth and dangerous on the counter, but the counter has to be played carefully. I thought Hazard, Willian and Pedro were a much better bet than Morata and/or Giroud. It would have been no good expecting to defend deep then expect to get up in support of Morata or Giroud for lay offs, but Hazard and Willian can run the ball as can Pedro. What did for Chelsea was just how suffocating the City press is, so that none of the Chelsea lads ever got free to turn and run with the ball and no-one got time to find them in space or get any good possession to them. That was why Hazard & co looked so frustrated. That was a thoroughly professional performance from City and ranks with the way we tore into Spurs at home and never gave them a second to think.

The other great myth is that Liverpool have shown the world how to beat City. The secret is, apparently, something called "the Klopp press". As I see it this is a fairly emotional "up lads and at 'em manoeuvre" which many clubs simply don't, and so can't, play. It's by no means as suffocating as the City press and what has intrigued me is how often it doesn't work. There have been whole games where sides have sat deep (eg Swansea) so that if the high press wins the ball there's no space for Liverpool to use it before the cover plugs the gaps. It is the football equivalent of trench warfare! On the other hand, City beat the Klopp press for all but 10 minutes of our game at Anfield, but in that period we made disastrous mistakes which actually had nothing to do with their pressing. To assume that a 5-0 castration is of no significance, but that an isolated victory on a single Sunday in January has given everyone the keys to the kingdom of heaven is nonsense. Wigan sat deep with 10 or eleven behind the ball - doesn't this show the validity of Conte's approach?

So, I think Chelsea had a perfectly understandable game plan, one which would hardly raise an eyebrow if Mourinho adopted it YET AGAIN, but one which we nullified. I can understand the complaints of the pundits but I think we should listen to Conte at least - he actually had to try and get something out of the game, and I don't think anyone involved with Chelsea would have thanked him for a 3 or 4 nil drubbing. On the day, at least, we were far too good for Chelsea. That's the lesson of a game that was always thought provoking.

I agree with your analysis and only respond to highlight 2 other factors relevant to that Liverpool game. Firstly, David Silva didn't play - he adds so much to us imho that his absence should never be overlooked, yet no one comments on it when this match is referred to. Second, the team was disrupted early on when Delph went off. These were 2 major relevant factors additional to us shooting ourselves in the foot - several times in that 10 minute spell, after starting the 2nd half and looking totally in control. Yet, whilst we got beat, we STILL scored 3 goals! Away!! At Anfield!!!

 

[tonea2003]

Excellent stuff. I agree with every word.

On Liverpool, I don't think we particularly enjoy playing them and I probably prefer to avoid them in Europe but part of me would also like to see us make a point against them. I think the way they play did contribute to our bad 10 minutes, even if indirectly, but I firmly believe that we were on top for most of that game and it's frustrating that our worst 10 minutes of the season so far came at Anfield.

I think City will just keep get better at playing through the press and the parked bus, through a combination of practice / coaching and squad improvements. Pep is showing every sign of being able to do at City what he did at Barca and Bayern.

the thing with liverpool is that they have the quality technically to go with the "klopp press" which is quite a potent combination similar to our hunt in packs press, hence the scorelines we get 1-4, 5-0,4-3
they are the team to watch in my opinion, especially if they improve their backline