₦airaland Forum

GustavoFring: ^^ I think he is better than Cech these days though...

Not yet.

lalaboi: Wise words from Nateevs in 2014. . "Arsenal and Manutd were not rivals when RVP moved". .

You managed to type all that and not even answer a serious question i asked. Put your imagination to test. WHy do you think Mourinho lined up that way at OT?

Seriously? Imagination? I can give you 3 football reasons he played the way he did.

1. He set up to be safe
2. He wanted to try Andre in an attacking role.
3. He wanted a forward line with pace.

Any football reason will suffice. Not a load of bollocks that JM was trying to lure Rooney. It's not working.




RE:Arsenal/United

Find below a list of the seasons and by how many points Arsenal finished behind not the league leaders but only Manchester United. In fact, the season ended that RVP went to United, Arsenal finished a whopping 19pts behind United. Also interesting to know that the last time Arsenal finished above 3rd position in the league was in 04/05 when they finished 2nd. In that same time, United never finished below 2nd and more importantly, won the league 5 times.

Rivals ko, Rivals ni.


05/06 16pts
06/07 21 points
07/08 4pts
08/09 18pts
09/10 10 pts
10/11 12 pts
11/12 19pts
12/13 16 pts

mithel: So best manager. ...so what are we all yarning again na

Best and appropriate . . . Need I explain ?

I said MIGHT. It was no guarantee it would land the deal. It was a risk. I dont expect you to believe it.

Exactly. No guarantee. And the most important thing in this whole stoopid argument we are having is that Jose knows this. However, for some strange reason, we are being led by you to believe he doesn't. You are using what you have seen to make uninformed judgements about the whole scenario, making it look like facts and saying others don't understand.

At this point, Jose must have been informed by Rooney's agent and must have known Rooney's mindset about a transfer request. Also agents and football people will already know United's likely response to a transfer request from Rooney. These guys know these things. The ones who don't are the likes of you and me. And although, normally, this is a good thing but it's turning out to be an unfortunate thing, as you are using the holes therein (due to insufficient knowledge), to fabricate a story.

As it turned out, Rooney handed in no request and no deal was made. However Jose already knew this would happen and for that reason, was not risking 3 pts. This is all a figment of your own imagination. Everyone is allowed to dream. Just don't tell us we are not smart when we don't get the dream.



This answers all your other quotes except this.

Obviously! But They bought A top striker from a Rival the season before. So why can't they sell to Chelsea? Who sold Veron to us?

Seriously? Are we really having this conversation? Ok let me indulge you.

Arsenal were not United's rival when that deal happened.
Buying is not the same as selling. They tried their luck, it happened. Arsenal were a selling club
United buying RVP from Arsenal in 2012 is not the same as United selling Rooney to Chelsea in 2013 and should not be made to look so.
United selling an already washed up Veron to Chelsea (a UEFA League contender at the time) is not the same as selling Rooney to Chelsea (the team with arguably the strongest squad and best manager) in 2013.


Why am I having to explain all this?

lalaboi: We had 2 bids rejected! One thing was missing. . What? An input from Rooney to push the deal through. If he had gone public and handed in a transfer request (not a guarantee) we MIGHT be seeing him in Blue right now. And i believe that lil stunt at OT earlier this season was sending a message to Rooney.

Only Jose is capable of such things.

Bros abeg abeg. You can deceive the likes of Ibime with the fabrication. Not me.

1. Despite any transfer request, United don't have an imperative to sell because the player in question is under contract.
2. Despite any transfer request, United don't have to sell TO CHELSEA - a rival. They can refuse our bid and flog him to Spain. (See the Robinho case)
3. Jose knows this.
4. And will actually look stupid, not cheeky or smart (as you are trying to make it seem) if ever anyone finds out this in-existent motive.
5. For these reasons he won't risks 3pts.
6. 2 bids are more than enough interest to make Rooney hand in a request.
7. You are making a silly assertion in assuming that Jose cannot call Rooney's agent to know if Rooney will hand in a request or not.
8. Making another silly assertion assuming that Jose cannot pass any interests to Rooney personally through his agent. . . but has to show him on a match day with 3 pts at stake.


Abeg abeg when you and Ibime dey flenjour over a calabash of palm wine at the beer parlour, you can start this kain analysis.
It will be frowned upon in this intelligent domain.

lalaboi: I dont see what is Ridiculous about it. Jose is Unique. Everyone knows he is capable of doing strange things and he does them everytime. It makes sense the way he set up the team, The risk. . . it was unexpected! Obviously people would not think like that because they forget is Jose! I dont need to say more. Its JOSE.

Managers like Jose ar enot afraid to take risks. He has shown that a lot of time. Jose and normal cannot live in the same house, let alone manage a club. If you dont believe he could do such then you must think this Jose is not the real one.

You do need to say more. It is ridiculous because Jose does not need to risk 3 points to let Rooney know he is wanted. Especially as 'letting him know he is wanted' is only a tiny part of the whole transfer process. There is United's willingness to sell, transfer fee, agent's fee, wages, etc.

It is ridiculous because as at the United game, we already had 2 bids rejected. Now you are making it seem like lodging two bids is somehow insignificant and that Jose registering his interest by risking 3 pts is more believable to Rooney.

So why didn't Rooney turn up in the end?

lalaboi: I am not responsible for things you don't understand Oga Dayo. . .

What Dayo is suggesting is that your assertion that a top manager like Jose would risk 3 points to lure a player is ridiculous.
I think it is even more ridiculous when you attempt to pass that personal opinion as fact and then claim others don't understand it.

nitlad: Wigan wen dey play attacking football dey languish for Championship, meanwhile, Stoke still dey flenjo for PL.

Selective attention. Have you ever compared the fanbase and spending power of Wigan and Stoke? I bet not.
How about Alex McLeish and his defensive football took Birmingham down, while the likes of Swansea and Southampton still dey flenjo for PL.

mithel: Lasted for italy though, ac milan....I don't know what people think is attacking football sha..but what I know is if we are going to be playing the boring pass pass 20-50 times before a chance that both barca and Spain play then you guys are on a long thing....same barca hasn't won against Chelsea in ages...got knocked out when man utd did same against them in 2008 at old Trafford but when arsenal and the same man utd decided to do oversabi like you guys are wanting they shipped it in droves...

Give me the sweet counter attacking football USA played during the confederation's cup in south Africa then I am okay. ..attacking pass pass pass to death style is overrated

It may have done a little help for Italy but they will never be seen like Brazil. And everyone knows the pedigree of Brazilian football. Tell me what style of football has matched the success that Spain achieved recently.

It's fraudulent to suggest that because Barca have not had one over Chelsea recently, then something is fundamentally wrong with their style. Conveniently forgetting that the same style brought them on-field success in 13 trophies in 3 years and enormous off-field success. Plus a thriving a thriving youth football policy, global recognition and above all stability.


"Give me the sweet counter attacking football USA played during the confederation's cup in south Africa then I am okay. ..attacking pass pass pass to death style is overrated"). . . . bla blah blah

Reality check bro, the team that was attacking pass pass pass to death won the world cup. Not your darling USA.

El Guapo: [color=#0066ff]''The best way to attack is to defend...''

''Cross the sea unseen'' [this means breaching an opposition's defence when they less expected it]

Those words were spewed in the movie i watched this evening ''Da Vinci's demons''. I tried to demystify the mysteries that are embedded in them, i guess it all made sense after all.

Wouldn't it be total folly to attack attack and entertain some mofos that wouldn't commiserate with you when you get sacked for bad results yet lovely performances?

Roma had more of the possession on the night, they played with flair and appeared more dangerous in front of goal, but they never knew Juve were going to 'cross the sea unseen', 3-0 it read at the end of the day.

Its a fine line between Masterstroke and Imperfection. [/color]

There's a funny thing with proponents of defensive football. They always like to make it look like defensive football outlasts and outlives attacking football. It doesn't. So what if Juve set up defensively, when they meet Barca/Bayern in the CL, attacking football will prevail. End of story.

Jose was sacked once by Roman for playing defensive football, in spite of all the trophies. If he comes back again with defensive football, he will be gone again and then the hunt will be on again for an attack minded manager. Defensive football may win one game, one trophy, it never creates a lasting brand.

mithel: Nawa

winning at all cost affects longevity? Loool....

I can't even believe this is funny to you.

debosky: ^ Forget Will.I.Am and Hazard for a moment - what about Oscar? Middle or wide he delivers - with an arguably weaker physique he's been able to adapt. why can't Mata do the same?

No one is saying he has something to prove, but the team's output matters more than Mata's individual stats regardless of how impressive.

The team seems to be scoring now and winning without conceding so JM - at the moment - appears justified in his decisions.

The stark difference observed when Oscar and Will.I.Am came on in your last league game is instructive - Mata needs to deliver within the current set up and forget previous stats.

Firstly, it wasn't even Mata who was poor. It was Schurrle who was. We would have won that game if Jose took out only Schurrle and brought on Willian.

Secondly, you cannot expect an Oscar (who has achieved peak sharpness over the season by virtue of the number of games he's featured in) to not offer a significant difference over Mata who hardly plays. I mean come on, who argues like this?

In the last 360 mins of game time played, Mata has played only 53mins, yet you want match sharpness that Oscar brings.


You cannot eat your cake yet have it. Mata did not play a single minute of pre-season. Does anyone remember that? Jose needs to play Mata in the hole, accepting that he will need a few games to reach effective levels in attack and watch what a beast of a player we have.

Like Omo-Ibo says, if you want chances, Mata will give you chances. End of Story.

debosky: Critique? Hazard has been criticized and he's taken it onboard and improved, so why can't Mata do the same?

If Mata can be so easily broken then he may truly be deficient character-wise.

Hazard and Willian typically have the pace to play on the wings. This is comfort zone for them. Doing the same with Mata is plain wrong. This is like expecting Lampard, even in his hay days to constantly produce performances and results on the wings and being criticized for it when obviously he has not the pace or tenacity to execute his duties.

Do I need to remind everyone that over 2 seasons, Mata stats were, 32 goals and 55 assists in all competitions? Find me 3 midfielders in Europe who churned those stats in Europe. Dude has absolutely nothing to prove.

It's simple. This is something personal and has nothing to do with tactics. If Jose throws Mata in the hole and instructs him (Mata) to not chase back for a single minute, we should still be beating Derby by at least 3 goals.

How can you have someone who produces an average of 28 assists per season on the bench? Yet complain that we create few chances and score few goals? What justifies it?

El Guapo: [color=#0066ff]Not just today that i noticed, Mikel's aerial strength seem to be on the rise.

Captain fantastic huh?

Good win today, important thing is that we had the job done and dusted, no need resorting for a draw that'd earned us an unnecessary reverse fixture.

Ibime you really wish Loftus and co got the nod for this kinda game? A Derby team that are running the racks in the Championship.[/color]

Are you suggesting we NEED our first team to breeze past Derby? If we do, something is wrong. When Jose thinks Mata cannot play against Derby, you know we are going in a wrong direction. I like winning but win at all cost is bad for longevity.

Big big moment for Lewis Baker. I hope to see him wear the colours full time some day.

Ibime: Abeg una too make noise for here. What do we care? Which time Chelsea dey play tomorrow and what channel is it on, make I plan my movements jare.

Game's on Sunday. 2.15pm on BT Sports.

Mate, when you begin saying things like Rijkaard created the tiki taka template for Pep, truly, no one will take you seriously.

[quote author=Voltaire_Q]

Oh...finally.

The definition of inane.

"Without X's Goals, TURN-up FC would be relegated,with -62 GD"

Why stop at CR7?

Take out Casillas.Red-Card Ramos.

While you're at it,remove the Referee for proper, free-flowing football.



Barcelona didn't have Messi all season eh?

Other White Shirts didn't score 20+...no definitely not


Squarepants Logic In the New Year

Wow[/quote]Da fuq is dis?

El Guapo: ^^ [color=#0066ff]See gbese o, when Jose come sign Andre Schurrle ni?

Nateevs i would love to ask you this, bar Porto, which of these teams was in good shape and needed no revamp of its squad before Jose arrived there? Chelsea? Inter? Or Madrid? [/color]

Revamp? Inter had just won the league back to back. Iin 05/06, they were awarded the league after the Italian league scandal.

Madrid had just spent hundreds of millions. £72m in 08/09 and £226m in 09/10 in the two respective seasons prior to Jose's arrival. What revamp do they need?



Chelsea 's supposed revamp was only because we never had any world class players that could win the league prior to Roman's arrival. Even after we had spent over £200m, Jose was still complaining about A class and B class eggs and omelette in 05/06 season? Did he need another revamp?

El Guapo: [color=#0066ff]And how Nateevs would think in line with a whimsical Dayo is shocking!
[/color]

Why is it shocking? It's a sound point of view.

Mourinho has always shown tactical flexibility, i refuse to embrace the notion that big spending is his forte and a chief factor that has had him churn out results and play more attacking footie

Mate, tactical flexibility and attacking philosophy are mutually exclusive. You can change tactically whilst still operating under the same attacking philosophy. I am sure you know exactly which this discussion is about.

Before Jose, the likes of Carvalho, Deco, Maniche, Costinha etc were mostly nobodies - either run-of-the-mill players in a decent porto side, or players plucked from unfashionable clubs in the Liga Sagres - Paulo Ferreira from Vitoria de Setubal.

He had them mutated into world beaters, repeated it in Chelsea, Inter and Madrid.

You must understand that no one undermines Jose's ability as a coach. What is undeniable at the same time is how much influence spending power has on his success. You claim he repeated it at Chelsea but not without the influx of £120m per season after Roman's arrival. How much success do you think Jose would have had without the wholesome changes upon his arrival?

Same at Inter. . spent over £130m over two seasons.

Madrid. . 130m over 2 seasons. Without the cost of the footballer of the year.

It took Jose's ingeniuty to have his innovative Chelsea triangle replaced with a double midfield-holding pivot in Khedira and Alonso, they dictated the game. An unproven Ozil occupied the hole and appeared to be the creativity hub. Took a powerful Didier who occupies two markers and replaced him with Ronaldo. And he won the league in style.

Before you go unto winning the league in style, think about the competition in the Spanish league. See what the rest of the league get from TV revenue relative to the league leaders.

nitlad: Mourinho is not the culprit for Italy's bankruptcy, yet he took Inter to the highest peak possible in football. He didn't have hundreds of millions to spend before he desecrated European football sanctuaries en route to lifting the CL with Porto.

All the "JM gats spend plentiful to succeed" yarnings nor get footing cos Mourinho's greatest success came at Inter where greenbacks nor dey nyanfu nyanfu.

Inter Milan's spending, £53m in 08/09 and £82m in 09/10 says you are wrong.
And where's the team he built only 3/4 years ago?


Plus like Ritchie said, check out the fixtures Porto en route the final.

1025: if u don't conceed, nobody will win u. if nobody wins u, then u a great side. if mourinho does not know how to attack, how did he get the record of the highest number of goals scored in a season in la liga? .

I will tell you how. Christiano Ronaldo. Yes that same one who scored 60 goals in the season you refer to.
Take Ronaldo out and you end up with a pretty average scoring side.


Everyone refers to the Chelsea of yore but never remember to mention that along with that success came over £600m worth of non stop spending hand-picking players over the globe. JM will not achieve that without the spending.


It's true that if you do not concede, you will not lose a game. However, this does not necessarily translate to scoring. The danger in this theory is only masked by the fact that there is quality in Chelsea and more often than not, Hazard/Ramires could skip past three players and create or score an individually crafted goal. If you tried the same with quality of the team in say West Ham, the best you will get is drawing all games and that will get you relegated.

So when you refer to the so-called "tried and tested" formula, never forget to add that the quality is what masks the danger in the that approach. Not conceding first and hoping to score is never a sustainable tactical approach to football. Without spending huge amounts, you will never win anything.

lalaboi: Well. . Mourinho wanted to be like citeh! outscore your opponents even if you conceed alot. That did not work out too well. \

More emphasis have been placed on the Defence because of the recent Horrow shows! It has paid off and everyone has stepped up thier game a bit. I prefer the Defend and take your chances if you ask me, Chelsea players are not suited for the attack attack attack and outscore your opponents

In my opinion, too many assumptions.

* Mourinho wanted to be like City. JM did not choose to be like City. Muourinho's choice will never be attacking football. This is the mandate he has been given. And that's why he keeps repeating in the press that he will default to defensive football.
* That didn't work out too well. Only because JM does not know how to set up a to attack.
* Chelsea players are not suited for attack attack. . . . This is unfounded when you factor in the fact that we have Oscar, Mata, Willian, Hazard et al. What do you think folks like Martinez, Pochettinno, Laudrup will do if they could afford all of the talent we have?

These guys have only a fraction of the talent we have yet managed to get and sustain attacking football from their mediocre players. At the Bridge, folks say we don't have the players.


Defensive football is easy. Attacking football is very difficult to teach, implement and sustain. You either know how to or you don't.

Happy Birthday Gustavo and happy new year to all Chelsea fans.

FBS: Funny to see and read how even some Chelsea folks want JM to fail.

Y'all are on a long thing.

To be fair, I haven't seen a single post from anyone who wants JM to fail.
That is just not true.


The discussion so far has been between those who are willing to openly criticize JM and those who aren't.

El Guapo: [color=#0066ff]
Like i would say, i'd criticise Mou anyday anytime if he failed to have his tactical gears on, but then i would never digress from my claim that recent results and displays are solely the players' faults and not a reflection of the gaffer's ideas.[/color]

This is a very bold statement to make. Nothing else can be farther away from the truth. I don't know how you justify this.

The football is appalling really. Having a large chunk of possession but no idea of what to do with it in the final third. Everyone's running around like machines but there's no particular pattern of play. No structure, non existent forward passes in areas that matter and poor movement in attack.

It's like a disjointed display of individual abilities, for the umpteenth time, against a very poor side. Strikers won't score with this 'no pattern of play' and games won't be won. If the opposition were a little better, we won't win this.


1-0 sha but I worry.

GustavoFring: I didn't know you were an Ikemba wuruwuru like this o.

How can you compare a 2-2 draw to a 3-2 loss?

How can you compare a game where Barca had 73% Possesion to one where we had 55?


How can you compare a game where stoke had 9 shots and 5 corners to one where we had only 7 shots and 1 corner?

Yeah the Stoke game was exactly like the Barca game...

Splitting hairs.
I made a response to your comments. .

GustavoFring:
So let me get this straight. Stoke were playing defensive football when they put 3 goals past us, but were playing attacking football when they lost 4-0?

to let you know that it is possible to play defensive football and score goals, yet play attacking football and lose heavily.




57%, 99%, shots, corner, . . . all that na maths. I cannot allow to the discussion to descend into which match was more defensive. If that is not doing it for you, Chelsea V Newcastle.

Chelsea 61% percentage possession, Newcastle 39%. Yet they put 2 past us. According to your logic, the game must have been more like "open" since Newcastle had 15 shots and 8 on target. Even though all those who watched the game saw clearly that Newcastle played deep start to finish.


Why are we even having this conversation?

GustavoFring: So let me get this straight. Stoke were playing defensive football when they put 3 goals past us, but were playing attacking football when they lost 4-0?

Sort of how Chelsea played defensive football against Barcelona over 2 legs and went on to the UCL final and then played attacking football against Sunderland and lost 3-0 at the Bridge. Yeah, that's it. You got it straight.

If a manager does not have a plan B, then whose fault is it when he cannot get results against common Basel?

JM's matter to answer. I am not defending anyone here.

Your submission sounds so absurd considering that we have conceded 6 goals in two matches against Stoke and Sunderland.
Games that ended 4-3 and 3-2 suggest that they were open ended games on both sides
We have lost to Everton ,Basel and Newcastle and drawn 2-2 with Westbrom.
So I dont know what teams are setting up defensively to deal with Chelsea.

Seriously? You think conceding 3 points against Sunderland suggested an open game?
Did you see the game? The 3 goals were from set pieces.
You might want to refresh your memory


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H-2Eo7lxZ4


3 goals each against Sunderland and Stoke is an anomaly and has no bearing on the starting setup of the oppo. I cannot believe you think Stoke will attack Chelsea and Everton in the same spirit.

Oddly enough, Everton have had more of the ball when they play. Their high possion stats suggest that the opposition are bunkering. Yet Lukaku is still scoring for fun
Case study Everton (4) v Stoke (0)
Everton had 54% possesion of the ball. Stoke were clearly bunkering as they do best. Lukaku scored.
So what's your point?

High possession does not automatically suggest opposition bunkering. It could also mean that the opposition are very open. Or that the opposition are unwilling to press. Shots on goals/target are a more appropriate way to reveal bunkering.

Everton v Stoke. 4-0. You are making my point for me. Stoke go out to attack Everton, hence the space and hence the number of goals. How do you think Stoke were bunkering yet Everton put 4 past them?

[quote author=A-40]It ceased to be an attack when you alluded that Mourinho had to win and work with a squad that was not the best in the league. Me I'm telling you now that Chelsea unequivocally have the best squad in the league. You guys are loaded!

When you throw words like young and inexperienced I'm still at a loss as to who these inexperienced players are. Y'all are younger maybe but not as young as you think! Looking at your main squad Schurrle,Oscar and Hazard are the only key players younger than 24

The "inexperienced" line is just bizarre and I don't even know how to respond to that[/quote]Okay. I may have employed inappropriate words in the use of "inexperienced". The premise of the post was not to absolve JM of any blame as reflected in the first part of the post.

nateevs: He is only as usual trying to deflect from the main issue which is that it is down to him that we are not top of the league. Unless he saying that this top striker will need to score 4 goals every game to prevent us losing 3-2, he is not facing the challenges. If we did not lose to Sunderland and Stoke, we will be top of the league. End of story.

Firstly, I think it's ridiculous to suggest that Lukaku must be able to 'drimble' 5 players and nutmeg the referee before he can fit in the Chelsea squad. Is Eto'o doing that? Is Torres doing Joga Bonito on the Pitch? In any case, I put them Gifs out there to Show you how to use a Lukaku.

How to use Lukaku is not alien to anyone. That's not a revelation. At least not to a manager who employed Drogba in the same way. The issue is, do you see us pumping the ball forwards to Eto'o and Torres? Perhaps that informs the reason I come to that submission.

Listen to Jose's first interview and understand the new mandate he has, "putting the ball on the ground". . .

My point is you cannot remind Jose how to use Lukaku. He (JM) already knew before he signed.

Secondly, Lukaku IS currently ballinng at Everton - He is playing for a team that has already beaten Manure and our humble selves, and drawn with Loserpool and Assnal this season. He even copped an assist against Manure. If he can do it against the Big boys, I fail to see your point about Bunkering teams

Any manager worth his salt, should know that he should build his team around Lukaku.

That's not the point. Crystal palace don't line up against Everton/West Brom thinking they cannot walk away with 3 points. Neither do the likes of Stoke, Sunderland and Fulham. The tactics are perhaps a 4-4-2 against Everton/West Brom and an attacking disposition with high defensive line pushing up close to midfield. This undoubtedly gives Lukaku more space to attack.

However, to think that the same Stoke, Fulham and Sunderland will line up against Chelsea with the same tactics is extreme naivety. It is impossible and it is a valid logic to consider that Lukaku will not have as much space he finds in a an Everton/West Brom.