Chelsea Vs Arsenal Sun 3/10/10 KO 4pm Match Thread

shano_88

DB10 wrote: »

Wenger what is your excuse now we have done the same thing yet again.

Arrogant loser of a manager.

why is it you always seem to come out when we lose a match and stay quiet when we win?

and as for arrogant loser of a manager, just lol.

Soby

Just seen the highlights there.Great win ..Love that free kick..Never thought he could score one better than the one agaisnt liverpool. Arsenal had there chances though. Chamakh could have had a hat trick of headers alone

GavRedKing

flahavaj wrote: »

Once he gets settled into English football and gets a bit stronger that guy is gonna be an absolute animal of a player.:(

This.

He is going to be a top quality player and he is still young, 23 (iirc).

He needed a performance like that to kind of stop people getting on his back, early he gave away a few passes and got caught on the ball, but when he realises that he cant take that extra touch and beefs up a bit he will be immense for us. Although playing in midfield with Essien always helps too :pac:

Barr

Chelsea were well worth the win. Arsenal finishing was very poor yesterday.

KeithAFC

gosplan wrote: »

Obviously this sounds stupid but the goal aside, I thought they handled Drogba about as well as could be expected.

Even the goal was an impossible finish. If you look at Drogba's reaction he really wasn't expecting it to go in.

The problem was that Arsenal needed to score but couldn't. Swapping Fabregas for Diaby would have made a big difference in this regard. I think we were shown today that Diaby just isn't a very good midfielder. He can look very good when the team are coasting but when there's no obvious pass on and he's under a bit of pressure, it really shows.

Drogba had a few chances. Ok, we did better than last time but the chances we had, needed to score but we needed to also stop them. And we didn't.

JP Liz V1

Chelesa played the best and deserved the win well done to them

A Primal Nut

Would have been a completely different game if Van Persie and Fabregas were playing as they could have turned that possession into goalscoring chances. Arsenal need to hope that these players can be fit for the rest of the big games of the season. If they do, they will have no problems winning trophies. Without them they won't win anything; like any team who are missing their two best attacking players.

One of the pros of Chelsea is they have a built a team around established players without a history of injuries. Their only first 11 player missing through injury yesterday was Frank Lampard, who is currently injured for what seems like the first time in his career. Their only injury-prone player is Essien - the rest of their players are rarely injured. Compare that to Arsenal who had five first 11 players missing; Almunia, Vermealen, Fabregas, Walcott and Van Persie; Diaby went off injured and players who would have been played in their absence like Aaron Ramsey and Nicklas Bendtner were also missing. This is what seperates Chelsea from Arsenal and to a lesser extent, Manchester United; nothing to do with experience or physicality.

smuckers

A Primal Nut wrote: »

Would have been a completely different game if Van Persie and Fabregas were playing as they could have turned that possession into goalscoring chances. Arsenal need to hope that these players can be fit for the rest of the big games of the season. If they do, they will have no problems winning trophies. Without them they won't win anything; like any team who are missing their two best attacking players.

One of the pros of Chelsea is they have a built a team have established without a history of injuries. Their only injured playing missing from yesterday is Frank Lampard, who is injured for probably the first time in his career. Their only injury-prone player is Essien - the rest of their players are rarely injured. Compare that to Arsenal who had five first 11 players missing; Almunia, Vermealen, Fabregas, Walcott and Van Persie; Diaby went off injured and players who would have been played in their absence like Aaron Ramsey and Nicklas Bendtner were also missing. This is what seperates Chelsea from Arsenal and to a lesser extent, Manchester United; nothing to do with experience or physicality.

Chelsea were without Lamps Bosingwa Kalou and Benayoun.

Frisbee

smuckers wrote: »

Chelsea were without Lamps Bosingwa Kalou and Benayoun.

And of them only Lampard is a guaranteed starter. Bosingwa would be close but Ivanovic is a better RB and Kalou and Benayoun are squad players.

Arsenal however were without our first choice keeper, CB, midielder/captain/talisman and striker.

Pepe LeFrits

Arsenal's injuries aren't worth mentioning at this stage. Bringing them up implies that in the future they may not happen and thus should be factored into evaluating Arsenal's chances, but we all know that isn't true now.

Back in 2003, Sol Campbell (among others) got injured, Arsenal collapsed and Man United overtook us and won the league. It was worth mentioning back then; the next year the team stayed fit and won the league unbeaten. Does anyone really expect the current team's key players to stay fit?

A Primal Nut

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

Arsenal's injuries aren't worth mentioning at this stage. Bringing them up implies that in the future they may not happen and thus should be factored into evaluating Arsenal's chances, but we all know that isn't true now.

Back in 2003, Sol Campbell (among others) got injured, Arsenal collapsed and Man United overtook us and won the league. It was worth mentioning back then; the next year the team stayed fit and won the league unbeaten. Does anyone really expect the current team's key players to stay fit?

I agree, which is why I'm not using the injuries as an excuse. More as an explanation!

Lukker-

They missed Fabregas the most. Without him they can still pass the ball around but they cannot play the killer final ball. But that said Fab never really does the business against Chelsea especially when Essien plays because he just has him on shackles. Arsenal reverted to high balls into Chamackh alot and he could rarely find space to make a comfortable connection. They played a very high line yesterday and were lucky it didn't cost them more, they retained possesion better but were they were split a good few times and would have been caught more apart from some mis-timed runs by Chelsea players and a 1 or 2 questionable offsides.

L'prof

Lukker- wrote: »

They missed Fabregas the most. Without him they can still pass the ball around but they cannot play the killer final ball. But that said Fab never really does the business against Chelsea especially when Essien plays because he just has him on shackles. Arsenal reverted to high balls into Chamackh alot and he could rarely find space to make a comfortable connection. They played a very high line yesterday and were lucky it didn't cost them more, they retained possesion better but were they were split a good few times and would have been caught more apart from some mis-timed runs by Chelsea players and a 1 or 2 questionable offsides.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't most of this occur after we went behind and had to chase the game? It had to be done to try and get back into the game.