2011-2012 English Premier League

you only have to play so defensively if you suck and aren't good enough to try and score, which chelsea clearly aren't. so yes, it was poor. the game was poor. chelsea have been poor all year. the fact that you admitted they had luck shows they played poor soccer. its a sad day when a team can play as much cowardice as chelsea did throughout the cl and win it. they're not even a bad side, theres no reason to think they would have been ripped apart by bayern had they gone out and tried to play
 
biggest transfer flirt ever.

He's probably going to wind up in manchester, then after a few years will go to madrid or barcelona. It's just the way it works. Unfortunately no other club in the world holds the same status as those two, so they are always the dream destination.
 
If Bayern didn't deserve to win because their inability to score after dominating a game, then there's no way in hell Chelsea deserved to win. I don't see your logic. Chelsea were outplayed, and they got lucky. Simple as that. They didn't play good soccer. They didn't even play good defense. They should not have won. The only person on Chelsea who played well was Cech, which seems to be the case for all of Chelsea's games.
 
true but that doesn't mean they played good soccer, does it? playing a smart game tactically isn't the same as playing a good game of soccer.
 
Who. Gives. A. Fuck. in this money - motivated football environment, the beautiful game isn't going to always be beautiful.
 
so would you rather your team in the biggest club competition in the world go all out attack and lose or play smart and win?

chelsea had chances, just bayern at home, with the expectations of the fans pushed forwards so chelsea played a counter attacking game

look at it from another view, look how many goals sunderland scored this season from sitting back and counter attacking, with the pace of campbell, mcclean, larsson and sessegnon that was our best way of scoring

you can't always attack.
 
it kills me.

Who'd have thought that newcastle and arsenal would be grouped together, and tottenham can be thrown in there for the most part.

None of those 3 won a trophy, nor have they in awhile...but they're doing it right. NUFC impressed the hell out of me in particular, taking nobody players and getting the most out of them.

And on that note, anyone watch the french ligue 1 this season? ridiculous final weekend with montpelier winning it all, despite having only been promoted 3 years ago i think. Their first championship too, which fueled the insanity.
 
i wouldn't be completely surprised to see them go to psg together.

they're like gourcuff and chamakh. Won the league for bordeaux playing in an incredible partnership. Broke off to different teams, and both have been shit since.

A smart buyer would heap on the extra money to get them both. You don't break up a partnership that wins a league.
 
Good point. Giroud has been heavily linked with Bayern recently and I really hope that doesn't materialize. Gomez may have struggled in the final but he's not about to give up his starting place. Shame to see a player like Giroud sit on the bench.
 
I'm sorry but Billy Beane didn't invent the concept of buying underrated players at cheap prices. Cisse, Ben Arfa, and Cabaye were far from unknown players. They were sought after by many clubs, but NUFC lucked out in that no true "heavyweight" clubs were interested.
 
But they did play good football, it just wasn't attacking. They were perfectly disciplined and if you look at the base stats, Chelsea were more successful in front of goal than Munich. Also, Chelsea weren't really lucky in the final, Bayern were off in front of goal and very wasteful. Yes they should probably have won 3-0 but they only have themselves to blame.

And anyway, when you're in the final of the champions league, i really don't believe it matters how you win, just that you do. And any idiot Arsenal fan who wants to talk beautiful football, just check the Emirates trophy cabinet before you sit down...(pending assumption that there must be some)
 
...My point was that, how often does buying underrated players at cheaper prices end up successful in the EPL, and send a team 2 years removed from the 2nd tier to Europe? Tons of teams have tried that before unsuccessfully. perhaps some in the more distant past have done it successfully in a different era of football, but in the last decade, it's pretty rare to see that.

Of course those guys weren't unknown or sought after. Newcastle isn't even a small club.
 
Fuck chelsea. Up until drogba scored (on what their first corner) they hadnt any possession. SO pissed at robin
 
Seriously...never mind the miss earlier, but claiming you're too tired and/or not confident enough to take a penalty with the CL on the line?! Shit like that must sit well with your teammates, haha. The odds are stacked in the shooter's favor to begin with. I take back whatever I've said about Robben in the past, he's a little diving bitch.
 
of course i would rather have them play smart and win, but that doesn't make it good soccer, which is my point. i know you can't always attack but i think, and i bet lots of people will agree with me, that trying to keep possession of the ball and go forwards with it is better than sitting back and counter attacking when the opportunity arises
 
so you say that chelsea played a great defensive game and yet only won because bayern was wasteful and, had they finished better, could have won 3-0? sounds slightly contradictory to me. you also say it isn't luck that bayern missed so many chances. if that isn't luck, than what is it? chelsea have no control over how well bayern's players finish their chances so how is it not luck that they kept missing? and yes, if you look at the stats chelsea were more successful in front of goal, but, for me, the most important stats to judge how a team plays is possession and total number of shots/shots on target, categories chelsea were dominated in.

i never said it mattered how you win, i just said that the fact that they won doesn't mean it was good soccer. which i maintain.
 
possession, shots and stats like that mean nothing without conversion. Look at Arsenal, barely a game goes by when they have less possession than the opposition and they're not the best team in the premiership. Its not about winning when your playing well, its winning when your playing badly. You don't win 2 big comps in one season on purely luck. Chelsea new what they had to do and did it well with brilliant organisation and the defence being on top form. You don't beat barca and bayern by playing bad football.
 
obviously possession, and shots mean nothing without conversion, but its a better indicator of how a team plays than looking at your goal to shot ratio. i dont have the stats on me but i would be willing to bet man utd. and man city both had the majority of possession in almost all of their games too. chelsea didn't play badly, they just didn't play. you're right, you also need your keeper to play really well, props to cech for that. so brilliant organization and defense on top form means giving up multiple guilt-edged chances and relying on the opposition to miss/hit the posts/crossbar multiple times? and yes, you do, the only way to beat barca is to play bad football.
 
The way they played against Barca wasn't good. The only reason they won their games was because of Petr. That's it. He's their best player. Without him, Robben would have had two goals, Xavi would've had a goal and Messi would have had 2, more than a few other Barcelona players would have had a goal or two. They shouldn't have been in the final, and the only reason they were was because of excellent goalkeeping by Cech. Other than him, the other 10 players on Chelsea were dominated.
 
Didier gone along with their hopes of suceeding next year unless they bring in an elite striker.

Just created a Euro thread in case anyone else is following.

https://www.newschoolers.com/ns/forums/readthread/thread_id/694914/

 
Well they have Lukaku, already signed Marin, are in the race for Hulk and Hazard, and should have plenty of money to go after another striker if need be.
 
Yea I know that, but I still think none have near Didier's physical presence, which was part of the reason he was so valuable.
 
If Chelsea is improved across the board next year they won't need Drogba's physical presence as they won't be playing entirely on the counter.
 
definitely a defender more.

Djourou isn't good enough. Arsenal also need a proper leftback.

A backline of sagna-kos-verm-(new signing) would be excellent.
 
Arsenal need to lock up M'Vila more than anything. Song is no longer a reliable DM; he tries too hard to make that perfect through ball and the "cute" pass over the top. I would also love to get Jan Vertonghen as he can play everywhere along the back line and as a DM.

Ideally Hazard or Gotze would be perfect but that is just a pipe dream. Hazard already has the making of a prima donna. It was disgusting how he was whoring himself to the english clubs while he was still under contract.
 
you're forgetting mertesacker.and to gorrilla you have got to be kidding about Song. He was one of the few reliable Arsenal players
 
Not kidding, he was far from consistent this year. I thought this was a consensus opinion. Song had a number of abysmal games where he would turn the ball over every other time he had possession and look completely lost on the field. Haven't you noticed how much more offensively inclined he was this year? This was not for our benefit. Sure he had more assists, but our back line became so much more exposed as he drifted forward.
 
BTW I think the Gooner defense is fine as is. Kos, Verm and Mert are all solid in the middle; maybe get a new 4th CB because DJ ourou is garbage. Not a major concern though. Sagna on the right, nuff said, with Gibbs and Santos on the left. Sure people will complain that Jenks isn't good enough to cover Sagna when he is hurt, but that's why we should sign Vertonghen. He kills all birds with one stone.
 
He's good but he wouldn't really fit our system. Plus he probably wouldn't want to sit behind RVP. There's very little chance Ramsey leaves TBH.
 
ramsey won't leave. Diaby likely will, same with chamakh, vela, possibly park and a few other randoms.

Giroud is good, but anyone buying him would be foolish to not to try for belhanda as well. Buying either alone will have the exact same effect as buying chamakh without gourcuff had. Brilliant together, mediocre apart. And unfortunately not too many clubs are looking for that much restructuring, so it's likely they'll be split.
 
M'vila is more of a traditional DM. IMO Song works better in more of a free role, able to move forward and back at will. They might work well in tandem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top