MSP
Well-Known Member
aguero93:20 said:
yes, look again, had to add bigimg tag, didn't show full image and part on the right at first :D
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Chelsea Thread 2013/14 (continued)
- Thread starter supercrystal7
- Start date
yes, look again, had to add bigimg tag, didn't show full image and part on the right at first :D
I don't understand this "Chelsea had no strikers" argument.
Firstly, Mourinho loaned out Lukaku, their best striker. If you aren't happy with your striker, why loan out one who scored 17 goals in the league the season before? Stupid decision.
Secondly, Mourinho never really gave Eto'o or Ba a real run of games. He rotated them so much, none of the two had the time to find some form. He did give Torres a good run in the side, despite being their worst striker. Ba's not the best player in the world, but he scored regularly at West Ham and Newcastle. Arsenal had worse striking options IMO.
Thirdly, Mourinho had two transfer windows to rectify this problem and did nothing. He spent £60 million on players in the two windows, so money was spent.
If Chelsea didn't have good enough strikers, the blame is 100% at Mourinho's door.
Firstly, Mourinho loaned out Lukaku, their best striker. If you aren't happy with your striker, why loan out one who scored 17 goals in the league the season before? Stupid decision.
Secondly, Mourinho never really gave Eto'o or Ba a real run of games. He rotated them so much, none of the two had the time to find some form. He did give Torres a good run in the side, despite being their worst striker. Ba's not the best player in the world, but he scored regularly at West Ham and Newcastle. Arsenal had worse striking options IMO.
Thirdly, Mourinho had two transfer windows to rectify this problem and did nothing. He spent £60 million on players in the two windows, so money was spent.
If Chelsea didn't have good enough strikers, the blame is 100% at Mourinho's door.
whyalwaysyou
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 May 2012
- Messages
- 222
Andouble said:He will be a flop.
Hope he wins the double with Atleti, but he will flop.
People said exact same about Drogba, who went there from a worse league. Costa is a trademark Mourinho striker, he will get the best out of him. I think a lot of the people on here, not aimed at you pal, are hoping he flops because we know how good he could very well turn out to be. I struggle to believe had he signed for City, we'd be saying "he'll flop, definiely" Was watching SSN last night and Graham Hunter came on the phone, said he could easily be the prems biggest star next year and he could see him scoring for fun at Chelsea.
MSP
Well-Known Member
I would want better striker for that money and I don't find him real world class one, everyone looks world class in that Atletico Madrid side.
He might fit them though, he really is Mourinho type striker so jury is out for him, I'm just not huge fan.
He might fit them though, he really is Mourinho type striker so jury is out for him, I'm just not huge fan.
sam-caddick
Well-Known Member
MSP said:I would want better striker for that money and I don't find him real world class one, everyone looks world class in that Atletico Madrid side.
He might fit them though, he really is Mourinho type striker so jury is out for him, I'm just not huge fan.
I don't know mate, Chelsea activated Costa's £32m buyout clause and had Atletico not had that clause they could have easiliy got Cavani or Falcao money for him, like £50-60m.
36 goals so far this season and is coming into his prime at 25, he is the perfect Mourinho type striker as well.
He has to watch his on the pitch antics though, there is no retrospective bans in Spain and if he does some of the stuff he has got away with this season in La Liga it will see him getting big bans in the Premier League.
East Level 2
Well-Known Member
This, this and this.CityFan94 said:I don't understand this "Chelsea had no strikers" argument.
Firstly, Mourinho loaned out Lukaku, their best striker. If you aren't happy with your striker, why loan out one who scored 17 goals in the league the season before? Stupid decision.
Secondly, Mourinho never really gave Eto'o or Ba a real run of games. He rotated them so much, none of the two had the time to find some form. He did give Torres a good run in the side, despite being their worst striker. Ba's not the best player in the world, but he scored regularly at West Ham and Newcastle. Arsenal had worse striking options IMO.
Thirdly, Mourinho had two transfer windows to rectify this problem and did nothing. He spent £60 million on players in the two windows, so money was spent.
If Chelsea didn't have good enough strikers, the blame is 100% at Mourinho's door.
Every time I hear they've no strikers I ask about Torres, Ba and Eto'o; all were top class recently, and Lukaku who is probably better than the other three on recent form. If Maureen was such a good coach rather than just a talking arsehole and pantomime twat he'd have coached the midfield and strikers to work together. Alternatively he'd have recalled Lukaku rather than just having him score against the challengers. Surely him playing for Chelsea for up to 38 games was more likely to benefit them than having him opposing us, Arsenal, Liverpool and Spuds in 8 games.
East Level 2 said:This, this and this.CityFan94 said:I don't understand this "Chelsea had no strikers" argument.
Firstly, Mourinho loaned out Lukaku, their best striker. If you aren't happy with your striker, why loan out one who scored 17 goals in the league the season before? Stupid decision.
Secondly, Mourinho never really gave Eto'o or Ba a real run of games. He rotated them so much, none of the two had the time to find some form. He did give Torres a good run in the side, despite being their worst striker. Ba's not the best player in the world, but he scored regularly at West Ham and Newcastle. Arsenal had worse striking options IMO.
Thirdly, Mourinho had two transfer windows to rectify this problem and did nothing. He spent £60 million on players in the two windows, so money was spent.
If Chelsea didn't have good enough strikers, the blame is 100% at Mourinho's door.
Every time I hear they've no strikers I ask about Torres, Ba and Eto'o; all were top class recently, and Lukaku who is probably better than the other three on recent form. If Maureen was such a good coach rather than just a talking arsehole and pantomime twat he'd have coached the midfield and strikers to work together. Alternatively he'd have recalled Lukaku rather than just having him score against the challengers. Surely him playing for Chelsea for up to 38 games was more likely to benefit them than having him opposing us, Arsenal, Liverpool and Spuds in 8 games.
Strange isn't it, those 3 aren't too shoddy - is there a stat that says they've missed loads of chances between them or is it just lack of chances created for them? Sure any of them would bag a few playing up front for us. The press seem to lap up the bullshit though - Wilkins reckons Chelsea would have won the league at a canter "if they had a striker"!
Barcon
Well-Known Member
Serious question here. What are some of the things he's done that might get him in trouble in the prem?
Not trying to be a smart arse, they only show him scoring goals on the telly over here. I take it he's a bit of a ****.
Not trying to be a smart arse, they only show him scoring goals on the telly over here. I take it he's a bit of a ****.
Barcon said:Serious question here. What are some of the things he's done that might get him in trouble in the prem?
Not trying to be a smart arse, they only show him scoring goals on the telly over here. I take it he's a bit of a ****.
Suarez without the biting and racism. Still a cheating diving moaning ****. Cut from the same cloth of sportsmanship as Hulk, Pepe, Busquets etc
MSP
Well-Known Member
Andouble said:Barcon said:Serious question here. What are some of the things he's done that might get him in trouble in the prem?
Not trying to be a smart arse, they only show him scoring goals on the telly over here. I take it he's a bit of a ****.
Suarez without the biting and racism. Still a cheating diving moaning ****. Cut from the same cloth of sportsmanship as Hulk, Pepe, Busquets etc
Mourinho's long lost son.