Originally Posted by 0rch1deam:
“Just browsing the site and saw this comment, and yes, to a point you may be right. However, football is a spectator event, it needs people through the gates to watch it and due to the prices - to enjoy watching it. Same as for the TV companies, if people switch off Chelsea matches because the playing style is 'boring' - they will not be too keen to show the matches in future. Both those examples begin a loss of revenue for the club, sure you have a sugar daddy who can sub you to a point, but he won't be happy seeing his money going down the drain.
Mourinho will win matches, but at a cost to the Beautiful Game.”
But I just don't get that. Take yesterday's game for instance, it was dull I'll readily admit that. But what more could Chelsea have done ?
We had more than 70% of the possession, and after Swansea were reduced to 10 men we attacked throughout. We played some decent football but with no end result until Demba Ba took advantage of a defensive error. If we had run riot and won 5-0, would that have made it a beautiful game ?
It's really back to the discussion we were having last week. The Liverpool v Man City game was exciting because it was a big event. As it happens, the way the game flowed with Liverpool taking a 2-0 lead, Man City fighting back, then Liverpool getting their winner turned it into a classic. But a goalless draw would have been just as gripping given the importance of the game.
I think people tune in in their millions to watch important games rather than pretty football. While Chelsea are still good enough to be involved in important games, I don't think there's any danger of people turning off.
Ps..I also think we play some pretty good darned football..at times.