I am shocked that there is chelsea fans who actually enjoy watching the team play like that!!
negative football with the sole purpose of not conceding a goal. Cant imagine Roman Abramovich likes watching that.
seriously dude, do you honestly think chelsea deserve praise for tonight's performance??
nobody wants to watch teams just defend.
Cant imagine the players enjoy playing in a team that parks the bus all night.
I am sure you can remember when your team was in the CL, I know it's been a while.
The key is to be in with a chance in the second leg, something both City and Arsenal failed to do. At least Chelsea now have a chance hence I am more than happy.
Players looked quite pleased at the end, I am sure they are excited being in a CL semi final.
I am shocked that there is chelsea fans who actually enjoy watching the team play like that!!
negative football with the sole purpose of not conceding a goal. Cant imagine Roman Abramovich likes watching that.
seriously dude, do you honestly think chelsea deserve praise for tonight's performance??
nobody wants to watch teams just defend.
Cant imagine the players enjoy playing in a team that parks the bus all night.
Very true, I have heard they hate being (maybe) 90 minutes from a Champions League final, They would rather go out in the group stages or not even being in the Champions League
I really don't understand why people who don't like the way Chelsea play watch the games.
Its like going to see Shakespeare and complaining there was too much talking and not enough explosions etc.
If I don't like the style of something I don't watch, I cannot stand the reality rubbish we seem to have on TV nowadays so don't watch TOWIE or Shite Factor etc.
Don't like something go and watch Eastender's or something. We have quite a few channels nowadays
it's a Champions League semi-final, of course you're going to watch
I really don't buy into all this "it's a results business" stuff, as that appears to suggest it's the only way to get results. when you look at the calibre of players Mourinho always has at his disposal, it's hilarious to hear him being described as a genius for getting a team of £30m players to defend for their lives against any good team they play in Europe.
and I'm glad people are highlighting the cynical side of Chelsea's play tonight. it's what Mourinho teams do. when he was in Spain, everyone blamed Barca for the clasicos being ruined, and conveniently fell for the Great Mourinho Deception, when the truth is his teams have done that pretty much his entire career. no surprises that he leaves Spain, and the clasicos go back to being good games again.
the guy is clearly a top manager, but his sides play some dreadful and cowardly football all in the name of "results" when it matters most.
Rubbish, classico's are still full of diving and cheating, by both teams.
Nothing cowardly about defending your goal. Stopping Atletico scoring is a massive achievement and something few have done.
how would I know it was gonna be a crap game before watching it?
Did you think Chelsea was going to play attacking and flowing football or did you think they was going to play a defensive style?
People's views of Chelsea's style of play has not changed all season and we knew what to expect. I am not going to watch the new series of Briton's got talent because I know what to expect, I will watch something I enjoy instead
I wasn't expecting Chelsea to go all Brazil 82 on us, but I was hoping for a good game, and I don't believe that was unreasonable, yet it turned out to be dreadful.
for all the excuses being made, this was still a expensively-assembled and massively experienced Chelsea team against a relatively inexperienced and threadbare Atletico. the underdog defence maybe works against Bayern and Barca (even though Chelsea have outspent those), but it doesn't against Atletico. even if Chelsea do end up winning the tie, I don't believe for one second that it's the only way they could've done so. they don't have a duty to play any particular type of football or entertain, but as an observer I reserve the right to comment or criticise as I see fit.
Chelsea's CL semi-final scores under Mourinho: 0-0, 0-1, 1-0, 0-1, 0-0. 1 goal scored in 480 minutes (inc extra time).
Pretty pathetic and for anyone to try and claim its because he has no strikers I would say history shows he plays these semi final games as cautious as possible regardless who he has in the side.
Park the bus football from a Billion pound club.
Utterly embarrassing, as it wouldn`t be acceptable at any other club in the world.
seriously dude, do you honestly think chelsea deserve praise for tonight's performance??
nobody wants to watch teams just defend.
Cant imagine the players enjoy playing in a team that parks the bus all night.
I'm not just talking about tonight though. Every piece of success Chelsea have achieved in the last 10 years has got more snide remarks then it has praise. It's pathetic and it makes you all sound so frigging bitter.
If your club wins things you don't give a sh*t how it is won. Chelsea have won things playing attacking football and defensive football. At the end of the day we won those things playing the way our manager at the time thought was best for the club. How you play to win titles is irrelevant. There is no rule that says every team must play a certain way to win trophies.
I would rather win all trophy's playing so called negative football then lose, like Arsenal do, playing so called attractive football.
Odds said Chelsea wouldn't be winning the Champions League 2 years ago but they did, and we played the so called boring football then too.
That must have really annoyed you seeing Chelsea win that, let's hope that happens again.
That year I wanted to see Chelsea win it. They appointed Di Mateo who had no experience at all near the end of the season at a time when Chelsea were falling apart under AVB. By then I saw them as the underdogs and would understood why they played like that.
Mourinho could not win the CL with Real Madrid, and I don't see him winning it with Chelsea either. His negative tactics with eventually be found out
winning the game is another way of not getting beaten. just saying....
Winning away to Atletico Madrid? It really is that simple, is it? Is that what Barcelona did in the last round then? There was me thinking they'd won every CL home game this season before last night, and a draw was a decent result to take back to the Bridge.
Winning away to Atletico Madrid? It really is that simple, is it? Is that what Barcelona did in the last round then? There was me thinking they'd won every CL home game this season before last night, and a draw was a decent result to take back to the Bridge.
sorry, but where did I say it was easy? it's just stupid to try and pretend that was the only way Chelsea could get anything out of last night.
sorry, but where did I say it was easy? it's just stupid to try and pretend that was the only way Chelsea could get anything out of last night.
its not the ONLY way, but it is an option, one mourinho is comfortable with and has provided him with lots of success in the past.
there is not set way to play the game, its all about winning and chelsea have given themselves a good chance to do that.
tiki taka is not the be all and end all, chelsea didnt park the bus imo but they were v defensive, its a valid tactic to employ.
barca play great football but likelihood is they will finish this season trophy less, chelsea might play a brand less pleasing on the eye but win the prem and champions league so for anyone to criticise them is crazy. Its a results business and you do what works best for you,not for others.
sorry, but where did I say it was easy? it's just stupid to try and pretend that was the only way Chelsea could get anything out of last night.
Where did I say it's the only way? You're the one that harps on like the game should only be played a certain way, and is so dismissive of anything else. It's about playing percentages, rather than unnecessarily throwing caution to the wind. It's the half way point in the tie, you don't go all out to win the first leg away from home if a draw's a perfectably acceptable result. If we had done that and lost I'm sure you would have been calling Mourinho tactically foolish (like people said about Ranieri in the CL semi 1st leg away to Monaco in 2004).
Comments
Another gem from mourinho.
"It's very difficult to play a match when only one team wants to play. A match is about two teams playing."
Why did you watch then?
Do you go cinema to watch films you know you wont like?
I am sure you can remember when your team was in the CL, I know it's been a while.
The key is to be in with a chance in the second leg, something both City and Arsenal failed to do. At least Chelsea now have a chance hence I am more than happy.
Players looked quite pleased at the end, I am sure they are excited being in a CL semi final.
Very true, I have heard they hate being (maybe) 90 minutes from a Champions League final, They would rather go out in the group stages or not even being in the Champions League
Only if I was going to enjoy watching it.
People know they are not going to enjoy watching Chelsea, So why watch something that you know you wont enjoy it?
It can only be to complain about it
Rubbish, classico's are still full of diving and cheating, by both teams.
Nothing cowardly about defending your goal. Stopping Atletico scoring is a massive achievement and something few have done.
how would I know it was gonna be a crap game before watching it?
As are those Liverpool fans obsessed with Jose ;-)
Did you think Chelsea was going to play attacking and flowing football or did you think they was going to play a defensive style?
People's views of Chelsea's style of play has not changed all season and we knew what to expect. I am not going to watch the new series of Briton's got talent because I know what to expect, I will watch something I enjoy instead
for all the excuses being made, this was still a expensively-assembled and massively experienced Chelsea team against a relatively inexperienced and threadbare Atletico. the underdog defence maybe works against Bayern and Barca (even though Chelsea have outspent those), but it doesn't against Atletico. even if Chelsea do end up winning the tie, I don't believe for one second that it's the only way they could've done so. they don't have a duty to play any particular type of football or entertain, but as an observer I reserve the right to comment or criticise as I see fit.
Park the bus football from a Billion pound club.
Utterly embarrassing, as it wouldn`t be acceptable at any other club in the world.
Where is the glory in winning this way?
We're not the ones who brought up a game from 9 years ago. Yes Jose; I mean you!
I'm not just talking about tonight though. Every piece of success Chelsea have achieved in the last 10 years has got more snide remarks then it has praise. It's pathetic and it makes you all sound so frigging bitter.
If your club wins things you don't give a sh*t how it is won. Chelsea have won things playing attacking football and defensive football. At the end of the day we won those things playing the way our manager at the time thought was best for the club. How you play to win titles is irrelevant. There is no rule that says every team must play a certain way to win trophies.
I would rather win all trophy's playing so called negative football then lose, like Arsenal do, playing so called attractive football.
Odds said Chelsea wouldn't be winning the Champions League 2 years ago but they did, and we played the so called boring football then too.
That must have really annoyed you seeing Chelsea win that, let's hope that happens again.
That year I wanted to see Chelsea win it. They appointed Di Mateo who had no experience at all near the end of the season at a time when Chelsea were falling apart under AVB. By then I saw them as the underdogs and would understood why they played like that.
Mourinho could not win the CL with Real Madrid, and I don't see him winning it with Chelsea either. His negative tactics with eventually be found out
You clearly do. It understand the home and away system of the cl semi finals.
In the away game you must not get beaten, it really is that simple.
If you do not like this, perhaps you should contact uefa
Winning away to Atletico Madrid? It really is that simple, is it? Is that what Barcelona did in the last round then? There was me thinking they'd won every CL home game this season before last night, and a draw was a decent result to take back to the Bridge.
hopefully hazard will be fit for return leg.
sorry, but where did I say it was easy? it's just stupid to try and pretend that was the only way Chelsea could get anything out of last night.
its not the ONLY way, but it is an option, one mourinho is comfortable with and has provided him with lots of success in the past.
there is not set way to play the game, its all about winning and chelsea have given themselves a good chance to do that.
tiki taka is not the be all and end all, chelsea didnt park the bus imo but they were v defensive, its a valid tactic to employ.
barca play great football but likelihood is they will finish this season trophy less, chelsea might play a brand less pleasing on the eye but win the prem and champions league so for anyone to criticise them is crazy. Its a results business and you do what works best for you,not for others.
Where did I say it's the only way? You're the one that harps on like the game should only be played a certain way, and is so dismissive of anything else. It's about playing percentages, rather than unnecessarily throwing caution to the wind. It's the half way point in the tie, you don't go all out to win the first leg away from home if a draw's a perfectably acceptable result. If we had done that and lost I'm sure you would have been calling Mourinho tactically foolish (like people said about Ranieri in the CL semi 1st leg away to Monaco in 2004).