₦airaland Forum

BlueDiva: I agree, Cannavaro was a beast, Matarazzi was a monster.
Still, even after the win, i just had this feeling that we were lucky.

Of course you were lucky.

chic2pimp: Tbh there wasn't that much of a gulf til we had a man sent off around the half hour mark I think and from then on it was backs to the wall.

Seriously? Whenever you find the game, please endeavour watch it.
We were all over them like a rash from the blast of the whistle.
It was non stop attack till the end.

But like always, never let a Dutch team reach pens.

BlueDiva: The Azzuri's had 10 men on the field na.

It was forced on the them.
Marc Overmars was in no joking mood. He rounded the Italian RB twice and he had to go.

I cannot remember off the tp of my head who was sent off ?

afrodoc: one of the best defensive performances of the era! the dutch threw EVERYTHING at d Italians.dont forget d missed penalties in regulation time and extra time.de boer,kluivert e.t.c byd way dt was d last dutch side to play in d classical ajax/netherlands fashion

Yeah. Kluivert lost two pens in the game.
He set fear into the team that allowed Jaap Stam sky rocket his first pen.

The performance was off the chain. Cocu hit the bar early on.
The Kluovert, then Bergkamp. R De Boer has two brilliant chances.
It was unbelievable, I still cannot believe till date how they lost.

coogar: without carrick, wilshere, cleverley and scholes....england are doomed!
there's no creative bone in the squad....the play would be so disjointed
it would be like watching iwanyanwu nationale against barcelona.

What do you mean? They've got Super Frankie Lampard.
Watching the England game yesterday against the supposed vastly inferior Norwegian side was like something I never witnessed.

The Norwegians made England look like a bunch of school boys.
They could hardly string together more than 5 passes.

chic2pimp: AZZURIS........



In the Euros perharps should really be doing better but not in the world cup though.

Should really have won Euro 2000 plus Arrigo Saachi's stubborness cost us any hope we had of winning Euro 96

With the way Italy were played off the park in the Semi's they could have gone 4 down easily.
That game, till date, is one of the most one sided football games I have ever seen.
Kluivert, Cocu, Bergkamp running riots on the Azzuris like no tomorrow.

afrodoc: i feel you.but this current dutch side is one of d least fluid in terms of buildup play i have ever seen esp when they play competitive matches.trying to shoehorn RVP and Huntelaar as well as VdV n Sneijder into d team all at d same time is not helping continuity of play,fluidity of passing e.t.c
i like this present germans for now cos their passing,pace of game n fluidity of movement is obvious.d spaniards r fluid too but a little to slow in their buildup for my liking

True talk. The technical play and overall fluidity of he Dutch has diminished over the years. The never ending rumblings of good football vs winning football I believe, has given birth to the era of new Dutch managers like Van Basten who believe less in fluidity than solidity.

The injection of players like Nigel De Jong is testament to the drift in Dutch football. I was embarrassed at the way the Netherlands played Spain in the final of the WC.

afrodoc: supported the netherlands in d 80s and early 90s cos of d dutch trio,and thats were i developed my dislike for d germans(remember rijkaard n voeller)
supported england n netherlands in 96.
supported france from 98 until zidane retired
now i'm nt sure.sitting on d fence but tilting towards d germans

The Netherlands for me. Always!
I have a little delight in seeing how the Germans set up and play.

BlueDiva: We look up to elder statesmen like you to get the thread moving.

I won't call Nani over-hyped.
I actually belong to the camp that believe that Nani is technically more gifted than C ROn.
Of course, this generates a lot of arguments. C ROn just has better mental strength in my opinion.

hazard better than nani? please don't make me laugh.
even nani of 2008 is better than hazard. na french hype...a bit like nasri!
what has he even done to justify the hype? i won't be fooled by his performance in the
french league.

I won't get into the arguments of whether he's better than Nani cos I personally rate Nani.
A French hype? Perhaps. So will everyone who moves to a new club look.
Cabaye and Ben Arfa hail from the French league. It's not an automatic signal to feel deflated.
I guess we'll have to see him play in the PL to know what he's about.

He's 21. There's a lot of room for improvement.

that's the point....any of nani, valencia, young and rooney can do the things
you typed above. you saw ashley young last night operating behind the lone striker
nani can do that, and valencia does that for his national team. hazard is talented no doubt
but his signing won't solve united's major problem in the midfield. we need an essien/keane
type of midfielder before considering hazard.

Apart from the right back option that Valencia offers, I believe Hazard can offer the wing play of Nani, Valencia and Young, the close control of Nani and a better central midfield play than Rooney can muster. Anyways, I definitely will never want him to choose you.

Except Mata and Josh McEachran, there's no other Chelsea player who possesses the ability to deliver vertical passes 'consistently'. For a team that seeks to break down resolute defences, I believe quick one-twos off of vertical passes in the attacking third is one thing lacking in the Chelsea style attack and we need that with strong wing play to break down defences.

coogar: i hope this is true.....

I have seen on your thread that you don't want Hazard.
In my opinion I believe Hazard is more than just an upgrade on Nani, Young and Valencia.

I believe Hazard is a much more technically aware and intelligent. He's capable of playing as a pure winger, an inside forward, or just behind the attack line. He's got drive, vision, guile and close control (which is what I always desire in a player)

I really believe he will slot right into Utd. Despite all the drama surrounding him, I still will want him.
L'equipe are reporting a £100k per week wages. With the likes of Mata reportedly on £75k, I wonder what that will do to the balance of the wages structure. With Hazard though, I will acquire now and worry about that later.

BlueDiva: The Champions thread has been so quiet and almost disappearing into 2nd page.

Amazing isn't it? No arguments, no posts!



L'equipe are reporting that Hazard has chosen Chelsea and his agents are in london to sort out fine details of the deal.

coogar: check your email!

Champ! Nice one.

dare2think: Apparently, he wants 5 more CL!

When you are that rich, your eccentricity becomes more evident when challenges becomes reduced!

Why not? We love it.

Ibime: Of course you know why RA likes having no manager around this time of year. Its his chance to play Football Manager without being questioned by anyone.

You would think that now that he's won the CL.
He'll take a back seat and allow the professionals do the job.

It looks like Roman's into overdrive.


Talking technical matters, I once read a piece that says Emanalo, the technical team and Roman are working on establishing the team to work around a 4-2-1-3 and 4-3-3 formation with players not older than 25. As such, they are going out there scouting and buying first team, squad and youth players based on this set-up. Any manager hired will be willing to work with this frame work as do the youth coaches already. (The youth team in set up around 4-2-1-3/4-3-3 formation).

The article also mentioned the shift to shrewd signings, and this is the part you won't like, the framework was was started by AVB. (|Don't murder me please, it's what I read).

I think they are trying to establish a philosophy. The problem is, it's the wrong people making the footballing decisions.

debosky: Only Chelski will be offered such a valuation and then go and win the UCL

Fixed for you Debo.

coogar: i have another gift for you.....what's your email again?

nateevs@yahoo.com

The Chelsea way! Scouting, bidding, negotiations, all without a manager in place.

BlueDiva: Chelsea management are just clueless.
Buck, Gourlay and co are simly daft.

It's the result of

1. Having average players on huge wages. If the Club decides to part ways with Malouda, unless someone is willing to offer him £100,000 a week, he is going nowhere.

2. Letting players run down until there's little juice in them before we move them on. If we had endeavoured to move Essien on 2 years ago before his 3rd major knee surgery, we could easily have got £20m for him + saved wages running into almost £10m over 2 years. Imagine Paulo on £80k not kicking a ball.


I do not believe the story of extending their deals though. However, I will not be surprised if we cannot move them on. The truth is no-one will buy them with their current wages. Unless they (the players)take a wage cut.

Actually, If I am right about this, Ola John was linked with Chelsea a few months ago. Luuk De Jong was also being scouted at about the same time. I heard Emenalo went to watch him.


Lucas Moura reminds me of two words. . . . Theo Walcott. Unless he improves tremendously between now and when Roman signs him. (Well we all know that's probabaly going to happen unless Sao Paolo insist on £40m). As he's only 19, he could improve however at this point, it's a huge risk for the amount of money rejected already. I honestly thought the club has moved away from expensive signings to shrewd ones except for the likes of Hazard.

Ibime: Meanwhile, is this true?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18185485

Florent Malouda, Michael Essien and Paulo Ferreira all have one year remaining at the club and are likely to be invited for new contract talks over the summer.

I really doubt the story. If the likes of Kalou (I still consider him useful by the way) is being released, why would we offer Malouda a new contract. I will rather keep Kalou. Malouda, Essien and Paulo will leave the end of next season (if the club finds no buyer). The others with 2 years left, Terry, Lamps(will get one more year I believe), et al, end of 2013/14.

debosky: You're wrong - I've given Modric his due - his performances over the season were fairly consistent, BUT he failed at a crucial moment - that's the point.

The crucial game I mentioned was that against Aston Villa - they are not a big team. Did he not play in his so called 'preferred' position? Instead all he did was play duff corner kicks (19 no less) which all resulted in zilch.

How exactly do you reach the conclusion that he failed?
Modric does not score goals like Lampard so you didn't expect him to score the goals needed.
Also an assist is a pass that a team mate converts to a goal. Meaning most times, an assist is heavily dependent on how prolific one's team mates are rather, than the assist maker themselves.

As the case is, Chelsea has more prolific players in front of goal than Tottenham does. If Modric takes 19 corner kicks and his team mates never converted one, how can that be deemed as Modric not stepping up when needed?

Everything's wrong with your logic. You have a lot of explaining to do else just wrap it up.

In your post above you cite an example using RVP. RVP's role is to score goals. Hence, his contribution at the crucial time is measurable. Modric's role in the team is not to score goals. If he does, it's a bonus. He is a deep lying play maker - which he played against Villa - which means his primary role is the continuity of flow in possession and finding the best positioned player for an attacking move.


My question therefore is what exactly in footballing terms did you expect Modric to do? For you to say he failed on the day, it means you saw him neglect his primary role.

debosky: I repeat, CONSISTENT performances AND at crucial moments. Messi, Xavi and Iniesta have done so countless times this season already - they've already this season.

If they failed at one point after winning 2 back to back titles, but still won other things (and may still win Copa del Rey) then it is not the same thing.

Please tell me what Modric won for Spurs.

Please tell me what Alan Shearer won for Newcastle.
Does that in anyway mean Alan is below par or quaked under the pressure?

You could have turned back after the initial beer parlour analysis, now you are making it worse by trying to tell us 'only' where it applies.

That is the true measure of player - consistent performances over the season AND an ability to deliver when the stakes are highest. Modric lacks the latter.

The only one way you can come to this conclusion is if you watch every game Spurs play. Against Chelsea for example, I remember Modric being played on the left of midfield. Harry usually does this against the top four sides. This is so he can add some steel in midfield with Sandro and Parker. Then he plays only one of Bale and Lennon. You wouldn't expect Modric to perform like he would against small teams when played in his preferred deep lying position. Lampard never plays on the left of midfield.

Secondly, players' roles differ. My question is how do you come to this conclusion? What exactly do you expect Modric to do that he doesn't in big games?

debosky: The results speak for themselves - when Arsenal squandered 2 points against Norwich, it set up nicely for Spurs to take advantage and go into the last day of the season in 3rd place. They went to relegation threatened Villa the day after and choked. Modric and his colleagues huffed and puffed, and even with 19 corners and 21 shots, they could only muster a goal, and even that came from a penalty. Sounds similar to another bunch of chokers who messed up in Munich.

And please don't give the 10 man excuse - Lamps and Chelski were down to 10 men against the best team in the world, not some abysmally awful Villa side, yet Lamps was able to judiciously use one of the rare forays forward to set up Ramires for a goal, all that in a period where they were playing a game every 4 days, while Spurs were ONLY competing for the CL slot at this time.

Both sides in a similar position - on the cusp of a major achievement - Lamps delivers in one, Modric fails to deliver in the other.

Come on Debo!
How many times in previous seasons has Arsenal failed to take advantage of rivals slipping up?
What exactly did that say about Fabregas?

By your logic, Bayern huffed and puffed with 43 shots and 20 corners, they could only muster a goal; therefore Malouda must be better than Robben. Barcelona on the cusp of a major achievement, Messi blows a pen, Ramies scores a wonder goal that keeps Chelsea in the tie, therefore, Ramires should bench Messi.


Haba Debo!

Hey Debosky said so, so it happened.

debosky: when push came to shove, Modric was unable to deliver. In the crucial games at the end of the season that would've guaranteed the Spuds CL footie, he choked.

And you know this how?
Can you kindly discuss how you've come to this conclusion?

dare2think: Thanks!

Was at the parade and saw Terry from a distance! I have to admit, Even I could feel his leadership aura from a mile!

Asides from his childish antics, Terry is another lengend in the making.

I saw so many blue fans and chics from all over the world, I will never forget that day.

I so desperately wanted to be there. I could not.
I watched the whole parade later on Chelsea TV.

Amazing moment. Yes Terry's a legend in the making.
One of the most amazing moments for me was Roman on the bus as well.

7 trophies up for grabs next season. I just cannot wait.

dare2think: ^^^^^

Much respect my homie, I'm sorry for my uncouth language and demeanour!

Love Chelsea to bit and am sure you feel the same!

I'll delete my rude posts as soon as I'm less busy!

Sorry Once again!

Thanks man. It's nice to know you are a true gentleman!
We'll like to have more of your views on here.

@Dare2think.


You and I have taken things too far. It's absolutely the wrong time to be having such discussions.
I tried to get a point across. I tried very hard to isolate that point of view without causing a long argument that could resemble being unappreciative of the achievement.

It looks very clear to me now that I failed to achieve that and I must stop here. I accept your point of view.
I'll delete all the posts and please remove the quotes from yours if you can. (FBS, Diva, Ibime, please do the same if you can).


It's been an eventful few weeks for the club and there are many positives to talk about. We just won the UCL for heaven's sake!
We have a big season ahead of us and an equally big summer to improve the squad.

debosky: It may not fit with your purist view of how Chelski should play, but the time for such talk is not while basking in the euphoria of such an epic victory.

This exactly is what I tried from the very beginning to avoid. Check my posts, I made it clear very many times that we won! No one cares about how we won. To be honest, for a change I will side with the anti-football pundits and justify why we should have played like that to win. I reiterated a trillion times in my posts that I am not attacking and will not attack the way we played because it was a means to a goal.

My overall aim was to defend what I said to Diva first time, that although, we did what we have to do but it was not pretty. A very concise and clear definition of accepting the manner we approached the game but defining the eventual look and feel of the approach. There are many things I could take too far, this is not one of them.

Edited. Unnecessary post!

Edited. Unnecessary post!

dare2think: Dude, STFU.

Perhaps you should read your earlier post again, you sounded like an Arsenal fan trying to downgrade a very successfully display by comparing us to 'stoke' and saying it was not a 'spectacle'.
What else do you want? To Play spectacular and to lose?
A season where everyone underestimated the team, yet they still won two finals.
'It defies all odds that we won the CL. We shouldn't (and I am not ashamed to say that) but we did'.

^ What kind of fan says the above? We shouldn't?
I repeat, why dont you take the cup and give it to a spectacular team since you imply that we shouldn't have won it!

Hehehe. Just when you want to enjoy the moment, some nutter always seems to want to sustain an argument on the basis of fallacy.
Since you are wiser than I am why don't you answer these questions?

1. What sort of display from a team do you call 1 shot on goal in the first half, 3 shots on goal in 120mins, 1 corner kick in 120mins, only 2 saves from opposition keeper in 120mins, average 35% possession in first half?


2. How do you think our CL victory does not defy all odds when the following happened?

- 20% possession against Barcelona.
- 10 men for 70mins.
- Missed penalty kick by the world's best player when the goal would have taken them through.
- 4 sitters missed in the first leg.
- ball hit the post/bar in two legs over 5 times.
- missed penalty by Robben
- 20 corner kicks against Bayern.
- 43 shots against Bayern. . . . . . .
- losing on penalties against a German team.

a few of the events I can remember.


In your wisdom please explain how all this don't defy all odds. Coming here talking bollocks. Even you said this yourself. .

A season where everyone underestimated the team, yet they still won two finals.

Is this not a classic case of "against all odds"? You don't even understand your own argument.


I say it as it is and it was not pretty. We should not have won it but we did.
If you cannot stand the truth, go electrocute yourself.

BlueDiva: DK is alive.
I always knew you were a closet Chelsea fan.

Long live this great African.

I think one of the most beautiful scenes of yesterday nigh must have been the CL trophy being handed to RA.
Did you catch it?