Castiel said:I agree with you. We were more than capable of winning there. I wouldn't have started Lampard either. But he played a gambit and it didn't pay off (attack wise anyway). But in true Mourinho style, if we can't win - we don't lose.
I remember when we went to OT under AVB. We played some absolutely blistering football, pinning them back for the entire first half as Mata, Hazard and Oscar ran riot - and they wrecked us 3-0 on the counter with only 3 chances (to something stupid like 10 for us). I much prefer this cagey tactical draw, to the spanking we got for all our great football before.
Not too concerned. The first time he was here we didn't start convincingly at all, but we kept picking up points. The first thing he did was turn our defence into the fortress it was, and the attack (then the Robben/Duff axis) came a bit later. He didn't even settle on a formation until around half way through his first season. I agree on Lampard though, I really hope he's not going to be a regular this season.supercrystal7 said:It seems some times there really is no smoke without fire: Mata seems to not be wanted by Mourinho.
Anyway today was a boring game and I don't like the way Mourinho is taking Chelsea. He is not getting the best out of the attacking players and playing Lampard is too sentiment. I have always championed Lampard, but he is not the player he used to be and leads to the midfield being outplayed. Mourinho maybe too rigid for the flair players.
I'm sure you're right about Mata. The caution was predictable. Mourinho knew Chelsea would most likely get beat if they played an open game. A good point for you. Get a good striker in what's left of the window, and you are well placed.Castiel said:Not too concerned. The first time he was here we didn't start convincingly at all, but we kept picking up points. The first thing he did was turn our defence into the fortress it was, and the attack (then the Robben/Duff axis) came a bit later. He didn't even settle on a formation until around half way through his first season. I agree on Lampard though, I really hope he's not going to be a regular this season.supercrystal7 said:It seems some times there really is no smoke without fire: Mata seems to not be wanted by Mourinho.
Anyway today was a boring game and I don't like the way Mourinho is taking Chelsea. He is not getting the best out of the attacking players and playing Lampard is too sentiment. I have always championed Lampard, but he is not the player he used to be and leads to the midfield being outplayed. Mourinho maybe too rigid for the flair players.
As for Mata, he's just coming back from a rather long injury. He was played against Villa and looked completely off the pace. I think people are getting too carried away.
The first time around he was allowed to build the squad he liked, this time it seems Roman has a bigger influence. Chelsea will challenge for the title, but I don't think the attack will ever be as strong as say with Ancelotti or even Di Mateo.Castiel said:Not too concerned. The first time he was here we didn't start convincingly at all, but we kept picking up points. The first thing he did was turn our defence into the fortress it was, and the attack (then the Robben/Duff axis) came a bit later. He didn't even settle on a formation until around half way through his first season. I agree on Lampard though, I really hope he's not going to be a regular this season.supercrystal7 said:It seems some times there really is no smoke without fire: Mata seems to not be wanted by Mourinho.
Anyway today was a boring game and I don't like the way Mourinho is taking Chelsea. He is not getting the best out of the attacking players and playing Lampard is too sentiment. I have always championed Lampard, but he is not the player he used to be and leads to the midfield being outplayed. Mourinho maybe too rigid for the flair players.
As for Mata, he's just coming back from a rather long injury. He was played against Villa and looked completely off the pace. I think people are getting too carried away.
He inherited a large chunk of his first squad as well. There are plenty of similarities between then and now, but the attacking talent he has now is much better with the exception of the striker issue. We have been criticised for our defence in recent seasons and what he's done so far has completely turned it around. Perhaps not as attacking as Ancelotti, but I'm sure he has something in mind to turn us into a potent enough unit. Remember that first half against Hull before we dropped down a gear?supercrystal7 said:The first time around he was allowed to build the squad he liked, this time it seems Roman has a bigger influence. Chelsea will challenge for the title, but I don't think the attack will ever be as strong as say with Ancelotti or even Di Mateo.
My brother is a Chelsea fan and he has been giving me the same story about Mata. He had a poor game at Villa, but it's more than just being a bit unfit. The words coming from Mourinho are not promising. He has said more than once he sees Mata as a right winger, but at the same time has criticised his ability to play this position. He has basically said Mata does not work hard enough on the right or have enough discipline to stay out wide and for this he prefers De Bryune. Then he goes and signs William. In every game Oscar has started in the middle, which seems to be his plan and he has also talked about wanting pace in his team.
bluethunder said:i don't rate chelsea. i think they are a weak side.
Scouse_Jimi said:bluethunder said:i don't rate chelsea. i think they are a weak side.
Wow...really?
They work a shit load harder as a team than you's lot do...
Man for man I'd agree that City have the stronger players but the stronger team? Manure/Chelsea are the strongest two TEAMS in the league man for man, team against team...