i would imagine alot of it is bitterness towards the fact jose has made mincemeat of many of the "pleasing to watch" teams over the course of his career.
anti football is just an excuse for not getting your own job done imo.
[QUOTE=Leinxus;72339597]United have not been a top team this season, they've been there for the taking, a draw by a top team against United this season is considered two points dropped, not one point gained since United have been at their weakest in years but of course, what does Jose do? Play it safe and park the bus to get the draw, that's two points dropped, something which could cost Chelsea very dearly now.
No, but unfortunately it's one of the few defences they have, 'Well, what do you expect us to do? Go all out attack and get destroyed?!'.
No ones asking Chelsea to go all guns blazing, counter attacking football is perfectly fine but last night only one team was playing, the other was just packing the box like it was the 95th minute and one goal was going to knock them out.[/QUOTE]
Did we not get the 0-0 draw about 3 games into the season? Darn not being able to see that a team that won the title with easy would not be a top team this season, Really we need a fortune teller not a striker.
If we had know how badly they was going to be (say lets we played them later in the season) we might have won 3-1
i have not made anything out thank you very much, football is not an exact science, there is no 100% successful tactic. As has been said many times now the manager employs the tactic he thinks gives his side the best chance of progression. it might work, it might fail, there is no point pretending what could have happened as none of us have a clue.
if you find it hard to watch thats your issue, if you think its cowardly i would put it to you that you dont understand this beautiful game at all.
ah, THAT'S what it is. I don't understand the game. got'cha.
So you thought watching Chelsea with the team that was known at least a hour before kick off, With a manger known for his defensive mindset and one that is really struggling for goals and playing away from home in the 1st leg would be interesting game? In a defensive way (which it was always going to be) it was very interesting.
It was a game that lived up to everything anyone who has watched Chelsea a handful of times this season and even the smallest amount of knowledge of the manager would have expected.
Yet the same people who moan about "Jose's Style" of football continue to be surprised when they dont like what they seeing and yet next week are sitting down to watch one of his teams play again, Its like complaing about the boat sinking at the end of the film the titanic.
have Chelsea played better games than that before? if they have, then you really have no point. there are loads of games that one expects to be good that turn out horrible and vice-versa, and that's a big part of what makes football what it is. it's daft to claim I should've known and therefore not have watched, as no-one ever really knows.
Did we not get the 0-0 draw about 3 games into the season? Darn not being able to see that a team that won the title with easy would not be a top team this season, Really we need a fortune teller not a striker.
If we had know how badly they was going to be (say lets we played them later in the season) we might have won 3-1
So you need other teams to expose United's weaknesses before you come out of your box and actually try to attack?
Thankfully other teams did not have this mentality, much weaker teams than Chelsea went to Old Trafford and had a go at them despite them being champions, their reward? Three points for having some guts to attack the opposition, it's at this point that people saw the cracks appearing, the cracks would have appeared alot sooner had Chelsea been more adventurous.
Instead Chelsea played it safe and parked the bus, they've got no one to blame but themselves for two dropped points which could now be huge.
So you need other teams to expose United's weaknesses before you come out of your box and actually try to attack?
Thankfully other teams did not have this mentality, much weaker teams than Chelsea went to Old Trafford and had a go at them despite them being champions, their reward? Three points for having some guts to attack the opposition, it's at this point that people saw the cracks appearing, the cracks would have appeared alot sooner had Chelsea been more adventurous.
Instead Chelsea played it safe and parked the bus, they've got no one to blame but themselves for two dropped points which could now be huge.
Difficult as it was Utd's first home game of the season
When unsure, park the bus...is that it? Two (massive) dropped points that way of thinking has cost your team.
So all the teams that drew at Old Trafford during SAF term "parked the bus".
Or is it what acutally happened and not "in the media football for TOWIE fans version" in that a new manager of a team that finished double figures from the Champions a season before (with few little new players) went to the home of the Champions and a team who scored more goals then anyone else last season got a draw (and only 5 teams managed that the season before).
At the start of the season (apart from you who could see the future) and in any season going back to god knows when a draw at OT was a good result.
So all the teams that drew at Old Trafford during SAF term "parked the bus".
Or is it what acutally happened and not "in the media football for TOWIE fans version" in that a new manager of a team that finished double figures from the Champions a season before (with few little new players) went to the home of the Champions and a team who scored more goals then anyone else last season got a draw (and only 5 teams managed that the season before).
At the start of the season (apart from you who could see the future) and in any season going back to god knows when a draw at OT was a good result.
My point is, if Chelsea had shown a bit of adventure it would have shown the cracks in United's team and they could have gone away with the win.
United's third home game was against West Brom which they lost 2-1, if West Brom had sat back like Chelsea did out of fear they would have got a point or none at all, instead they took the game to them and took home the three points, Chelsea played it too safe and are now paying the price but Jose is that type of manager i suppose, he'd rather play it safe than take any risks.
They were always mediocore, it just took a few ballsy teams to show the rest of the Premier League and once they did, the floodgates were open.
By the floodgates do you mean the 6 teams that went to OT after the West Brom game (including the very attacking Arsenal) and did not come away with 3 points?
I dont know what sort of flood you seen but it dont seem that much of a flood to me. It was not until Jan that Utd begain to slip.
Between us playing them at OT and the slip they played something like 27 games and losing something like 6 of them
Grow up. Do you really think there would be so much money in football if only the fans of clubs were happy with how their team played?
Don't worry, when they do it it's ok, it's all about the result, tactical masterclass etc when an opposition team gives them a taste of their own medicine it's 18th century football and downright unacceptable ^_^
If Chelsea win the CL then the owner, fans and manager alike will all be perfectly happy. If they don't win it then none of the above are gonna feel any better or worse if they played pretty football or not.
If Chelsea win the CL then the owner, fans and manager alike will all be perfectly happy. If they don't win it then none of the above are gonna feel any better or worse if they played pretty football or not.
It's pretty well known that Abramovich wants Chelsea to play vibrant, attacking football, not entirely unreasonable considering how much he has spent on Chelsea, so he'll be happy with the trophy but with Chelsea's football? Doubt it.
It's pretty well known that Abramovich wants Chelsea to play vibrant, attacking football, not entirely unreasonable considering how much he has spent on Chelsea, so he'll be happy with the trophy but with Chelsea's football? Doubt it.
You claim to know so much about Romans thoughts and opinions.
Where do you get all your inside information from ?
Comments
anti football is just an excuse for not getting your own job done imo.
No, but unfortunately it's one of the few defences they have, 'Well, what do you expect us to do? Go all out attack and get destroyed?!'.
No ones asking Chelsea to go all guns blazing, counter attacking football is perfectly fine but last night only one team was playing, the other was just packing the box like it was the 95th minute and one goal was going to knock them out.[/QUOTE]
Did we not get the 0-0 draw about 3 games into the season? Darn not being able to see that a team that won the title with easy would not be a top team this season, Really we need a fortune teller not a striker.
If we had know how badly they was going to be (say lets we played them later in the season) we might have won 3-1
have Chelsea played better games than that before? if they have, then you really have no point. there are loads of games that one expects to be good that turn out horrible and vice-versa, and that's a big part of what makes football what it is. it's daft to claim I should've known and therefore not have watched, as no-one ever really knows.
So you need other teams to expose United's weaknesses before you come out of your box and actually try to attack?
Thankfully other teams did not have this mentality, much weaker teams than Chelsea went to Old Trafford and had a go at them despite them being champions, their reward? Three points for having some guts to attack the opposition, it's at this point that people saw the cracks appearing, the cracks would have appeared alot sooner had Chelsea been more adventurous.
Instead Chelsea played it safe and parked the bus, they've got no one to blame but themselves for two dropped points which could now be huge.
Difficult as it was Utd's first home game of the season
When unsure, park the bus...is that it? Two (massive) dropped points that way of thinking has cost your team.
why are you stating that as fact?
it could be one massive point gained. not to mention momentum of staying unbeaten at that point in the season.
all this is obvious however to football fans who understand the game.
One point for a top team against the mediocrity that is United this season is not 'massive' in any way, shape or form.
So all the teams that drew at Old Trafford during SAF term "parked the bus".
Or is it what acutally happened and not "in the media football for TOWIE fans version" in that a new manager of a team that finished double figures from the Champions a season before (with few little new players) went to the home of the Champions and a team who scored more goals then anyone else last season got a draw (and only 5 teams managed that the season before).
At the start of the season (apart from you who could see the future) and in any season going back to god knows when a draw at OT was a good result.
Which would have been fine if they was medicore then
My point is, if Chelsea had shown a bit of adventure it would have shown the cracks in United's team and they could have gone away with the win.
United's third home game was against West Brom which they lost 2-1, if West Brom had sat back like Chelsea did out of fear they would have got a point or none at all, instead they took the game to them and took home the three points, Chelsea played it too safe and are now paying the price but Jose is that type of manager i suppose, he'd rather play it safe than take any risks.
Grow up. Do you really think there would be so much money in football if only the fans of clubs were happy with how their team played?
They were always mediocore, it just took a few ballsy teams to show the rest of the Premier League and once they did, the floodgates were open.
By the floodgates do you mean the 6 teams that went to OT after the West Brom game (including the very attacking Arsenal) and did not come away with 3 points?
I dont know what sort of flood you seen but it dont seem that much of a flood to me. It was not until Jan that Utd begain to slip.
Between us playing them at OT and the slip they played something like 27 games and losing something like 6 of them
Don't worry, when they do it it's ok, it's all about the result, tactical masterclass etc when an opposition team gives them a taste of their own medicine it's 18th century football and downright unacceptable ^_^
are you seriously saying chelsea priority should be pleasing neutrals over winning?
really?
I would say its about pleasing there own fans but then again it seems those that attend stamford bridge are easily pleased. The owner not so much.
that's what you got from what I've said?
It's pretty well known that Abramovich wants Chelsea to play vibrant, attacking football, not entirely unreasonable considering how much he has spent on Chelsea, so he'll be happy with the trophy but with Chelsea's football? Doubt it.
Yes, that's exactly what I'm getting at. Thank you for having the searing intelligence to see it.
I can easily see Athletico pulling off an upset and going through on away goals.
Just barely. It would take a near collapse from both City and Liverpool for Chelsea to win, even a win at Anfield puts it back in City's hands.
Incidentally, Atletico did only produce 5 wins en route to winning the UEFA Cup in 2010 but they were a little more attacking.
It's one thing parking the bus away from home but even at Stamford Bridge when Drogba was playing, they often played like Stoke.
You claim to know so much about Romans thoughts and opinions.
Where do you get all your inside information from ?