Chelsea v Sunderland, 5:30 k/o, SS1

bad2dabone

Chelsea's collapse is quite spectacular, in the last six games they've lost to Villa, Palace and Sunderland.

Incredible.

LightningBlue

Crackle wrote: »

Really poor performance throughout, but the last 30 minutes were especially poor. Just resorting to long balls, most of which went straight to Sunderland players. With Oscar's loss of form, Hazard being injured and others not doing enough, the selling of Mata looks to be biting us in the rear.

The unbeaten home run had to end sometime, just a pity it had to be now at this stage of the season. Congratulations to Sunderland, fighting for their lives and picked up 4 good points this week.

I'd normally defend most of what Jose does, but that interview was embarrassing.

Have to agree with all of this. We just started to run out of ideas at the end. Sunderland made it difficult for us and we didn't rise to the challenge today. Hazard was a big miss as he single-handedly won the reverse fixture in November.

The main issue with the Mata sale seems to be that not one player in our squad is capable of getting a cross from a set-piece past the first man. That and his composure on the edge of the area to either pick the right pass or shoot. Oscar has gone backwards the last 3-4 months due to burnout.

Mourinho has done quite a few things right this season.
He's got our back 5 back to being the best in the league.
He's recruited well with Willian, Matic, Salah and Eto'o has scored crucial goals to keep us in the hunt this long.

However we seem to only have one blue-print of a side at the moment and its not tactically flexible.

In games like these were teams drop deep and defend we don't:
1) have fullbacks who are able to overload down either flank or complete a cross
2) have a no 10 who can pick a pass with composure since Oscar went off the boil in January
3) A reliable centre-forward that can stretch defenses and take attention off Hazard and co.

If he can identify the players he wants to solve these issues and let us be more flexible tactically next season we will be in a better position to challenge for the league next season.
Realistically a CF and CM are a must especially if Lampard moves on.

Panthro

bad2dabone wrote: »

Chelsea's collapse is quite spectacular, in the last six games they've lost to Villa, Palace and Sunderland.

Incredible.

Think they beat some French team in there somewhere too.

AdamD

Andersonisgod wrote: »

That's the Sky Sports method of analysis, take an incident out of context and analyse it as though it were a crime scene. If the referee gets the first decision correct then Larsson is no longer on the pitch, Chelsea are a goal ahead, Sunderland take tip off and it sets into action an entirely different course of events. You should check out The Butterfly Effect for more on this topic.

I believe your blinkers are getting in the way, you should check out wikipedia for more on this matter.

Andersonisgod

Panthro wrote: »

Think they beat some French team in there somewhere too.

Panthro you're not helping, some people are trying to create a narrative rather than taking an overall, informed view which includes context and comments like yours are detracting from the ability to do that.

The overall view is not one of some epic collapse, it is one that Mourinho has made very clear during the season, the lack of a top class striker has hurt us. In the smaller games, which Mourinho simply cant place as much focus on as a PSG or Atletico, you need your big players to step up, you need a prolific scorer to bail you out in games such as these sometimes and Mourinho simply hasn't had that this season. He will go into the Summer window entirely aware of what he needs and, you'd assume, with the club's full backing. He will start next season with a far better understanding of the Premier League landscape too.

Andersonisgod

AdamD wrote: »

I believe your blinkers are getting in the way, you should check out wikipedia for more on this matter.

I'm sorry but that doesn't appear to be a logical response. I've referenced an incident and put forward an argument that would negate yours (that being that, had Dean got the first decision correct the following incident doesn't even occur) but you've replied with a cliche an an odd Wikipedia reference which I don't quite understand. Perhaps that's a flaw on my part, but that Wikipedia reference is really quite vague, perhaps, as you have phrased the latter part of your sentence similar to how I phrased my final sentence of my earlier comment, you are insinuating that I have merely looked up The Butterfly Effect on Wikipedia rather than having been previously aware of the movie with that title starring Ashton Kutcher or, indeed, the existence of such a theory in the first place and I just happened on it by chance in time to include it as a witty reference for the final sentence of my comment, in which case how lucky am I?

homer simpson

homer simpson wrote: »

Isn't he just.

Porto (2002–2004)
Primeira Liga (2): 2002–03, 2003–04
Taça de Portugal (1): 2002–03
Supertaça Cândido de Oliveira (1): 2003
UEFA Champions League (1): 2003–04
UEFA Cup (1): 2002–03

Chelsea (2004–2007)
Premier League (2): 2004–05, 2005–06
FA Cup (1): 2006–07
Football League Cup (2): 2004–05, 2006–07
FA Community Shield (1): 2005

Internazionale (2008–2010)
Serie A (2): 2008–09, 2009–10
Coppa Italia (1): 2009–10
Supercoppa Italiana (1): 2008
UEFA Champions League (1): 2009–10

Real Madrid (2010–2013)
La Liga (1): 2011–12
Copa del Rey (1): 2010–11
Supercopa de España (1): 2012

With a good bit of money to spend all the same. Porto fair enough he done well to win the UCL that time and he is a good tactician tbf but he isnt as good as he makes himself out to be given the vast resources at his disposal, certainly in the case of both Chelsea and Real Madrid. He'll never take on a team that isnt in a position to win the league either. Chelsea, Inter, Porto and Real were all good enough to win leagues before he took over.

AdamD

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I'm sorry but that doesn't appear to be a logical response. I've referenced an incident and put forward an argument that would negate yours (that being that, had Dean got the first decision correct the following incident doesn't even occur) but you've replied with a cliche an an odd Wikipedia reference which I don't quite understand. Perhaps that's a flaw on my part, but that Wikipedia reference is really quite vague, perhaps, as you have phrased the latter part of your sentence similar to how I phrased my final sentence of my earlier comment, you are insinuating that I have merely looked up The Butterfly Effect on Wikipedia rather than having been previously aware of the movie with that title starring Ashton Kutcher or, indeed, the existence of such a theory in the first place and I just happened on it by chance in time to include it as a witty reference for the final sentence of my comment, in which case how lucky am I?

I'm taking the piss out of you. You were giving out about poor refereeing decisions but decided to ignore the most obvious of them all, the Ramires' red. You then moved the goalposts to say if the ref gets the first one right (which is actually a debatable call, unlike Ramires'), the potential red doesn't happen. And whilst that is a fair argument in itself, its not overly relevant when we're looking back over the match as a whole and analysing the decisions as a whole. You could argue any free kick not given completely alters the outcome of the match as anything that happens thereafter would not have happened, its just impractical. The wikipedia reference was purely in response to usual standard condescending ramblings that followed your actual argument.

Augmerson

Genuinely shocked Chelsea lost, will be looking at MoTD later.

kryogen

bad2dabone wrote: »

Chelsea's collapse is quite spectacular, in the last six games they've lost to Villa, Palace and Sunderland.

Incredible.

That's David Moyes form right there

Jesus Wept

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

Will Poyet have the balls to shake Mouronho's hand and walk down the tunnel with a minute to go to tell his wife the score??

Does this relate to Josie doing the same a few weeks ago? I've been trying to find out what he was at? Fierce rude it was.

Andersonisgod

AdamD wrote: »

I'm taking the piss out of you. You were giving out about poor refereeing decisions but decided to ignore the most obvious of them all, the Ramires' red. You then moved the goalposts to say if the ref gets the first one right (which is actually a debatable call, unlike Ramires'), the potential red doesn't happen. And whilst that is a fair argument in itself, its not overly relevant when we're looking back over the match as a whole and analysing the decisions as a whole. You could argue any free kick not given completely alters the outcome of the match as anything that happens thereafter would not have happened, its just impractical. The wikipedia reference was purely in response to usual standard condescending ramblings that followed your actual argument.

If moving the goalposts now consists of taking into context the match as a whole rather than analysing incidents individually without context then I'll gladly be the groundsman who moves the goalposts.

~Rebel~

Andersonisgod wrote: »

That's the Sky Sports method of analysis, take an incident out of context and analyse it as though it were a crime scene. If the referee gets the first decision correct then Larsson is no longer on the pitch, Chelsea are a goal ahead, Sunderland take tip off and it sets into action an entirely different course of events. You should check out The Butterfly Effect for more on this topic.

It's completely illogical to analyze a match based only on the first wrong decision, ignoring the rest, particularly since you can have no knowledge whatsoever of how things would actually pan out in your alternate timeline.

Taking your argument to its conclusion, there was a very early challenge from Ramires in the middle of the park which should have been a foul...nothing more than that, but had it been called, then your Larsson issue obviously never happens, as everything from that point forward would be different.

The above is just going down a rabbit hole of nonsense - the game has been played, you can only accurately analyze the 90 minutes which actually took place.

The ref clearly had a bad game, missing things on both sides, but at the end of the day, Chelsea simply didn't do near enough to win.

Rayne Wooney

Our Year wrote: »

Does this relate to Maureen doing the same a few weeks ago? I've been trying to find out what he was at? Fierce rude it was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q490yFaVjc

Skip to 2 minutes in

barone

jose gives out about west hams tactics, yet every time his team are loosing and game is petering out he resorts to exactly the same, sometimes for 15 mins from time...throw terry and ivanovic forward and lump it up.

he has conned the press for a long time,i actually think he is a terrible image for a football manager,as fake as they come..


and chelsea play horrible football under him.. roman will get rid long before his contracts up,and good riddance.

SlickRic

just seen that from Mourinho.

completely and utterly classless.

Panthro

barone wrote: »

jose gives out about west hams tactics, yet every time his team are loosing and game is petering out he resorts to exactly the same, sometimes for 15 mins from time...throw terry and ivanovic forward and lump it up.

he has conned the press for a long time,i actually think he is a terrible image for a football manager,as fake as they come..


and chelsea play horrible football under him.. roman will get rid long before his contracts up,and good riddance.

Oh dear God.:o

Paully D

Panthro wrote: »

Jesus man, would ya ever just give it a rest and congratulate Sunderland on a pretty massive win.

Paully D (I think!) if you're reading, congrats on today. Massive 3 points.

Thanks mate, very kind of you to say.

I just hope we can follow it up now by beating Cardiff. The inability to win these home games that we should be winning are the ones that have us in our current position.

micks

keano_afc wrote: »

Missed the interview, what did he say? Referee's fault I suppose? Its never Jose's.

http://www.101greatgoals.com/blog/jose-mourinhos-bitter-post-match-interview-after-chelsea-defeat-to-sunderland/

Grayditch

Looking at the fixtures, I think Sunderland can do it, and it will really be from the jaws. Not enough credit was given to Sunderland's performance at Anfield. People said it was Liverpool tiring. It really wasn't. I think they want it more than the rest, and I'd bank on them staying up.

SlickRic

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Personally I thought the turning point came when the referee entirely ignored the shove on Ramires when he has an open goal, it's as stone wall as it gets, literally anywhere else on the pitch and it's a bread and butter foul, it denies a penalty and a straight red card. That's only compounded by the incorrect decision to award a penalty to Sunderland. That's how it goes though and that's all but put an end to the Chelsea title challenge.

Ramires should've been sent off before that, so you can go jump with your excuses tbh.

homer simpson

SlickRic wrote: »

Ramires should've been sent off before that, so you can go jump with your excuses tbh.

After, not before.

Too Tough To Die

Chelsea were behaving like thugs today. It's endemic at that club.

Turtyturd

Great composure from Fabio for the penalty.

ctrl-alt-delete

Can understand Jose being disgusted with the referee and linesman's performance.

It was never a penalty.

The slight shove on Colback before Terry had that goal disallowed gets punished yet the shove on Ramires get ignored.

The ref also had to have seen the Ramires incident and regardless of what had preceeded it he should have saw red.

Nothing excuses the behaviour of Ramires in that incident or the Chelsea member of staff who let his emotions get the better of him.

Sunderland won't care how and why they get three points though, they have had their fair share of bad luck and bad officiating this season. Again that does not make it ok but it is done.

Just hope Sunderland can get what they need from their three remaining home fixtures.

Paully D

Grayditch wrote: »

Looking at the fixtures, I think Sunderland can do it, and it will really be from the jaws. Not enough credit was given to Sunderland's performance at Anfield. People said it was Liverpool tiring. It really wasn't. I think they want it more than the rest, and I'd bank on them staying up.

Going to take a hell of a turnaround in form for Sunderland mind. 3 home wins all season, now we need to win 3 in a row. Very unlikely that a bottom placed side can put that sort of run together. I live in hope though!

Grayditch

If Altidore was just... a lot better.

ush

ctrl-alt-delete wrote: »

Can understand Jose being disgusted with the referee and linesman's performance.

He's benefited in this season's title race from referee's performance. So I've no sympathy for him or CFC.

rob316

I used to like Jose during his first spell at Chelsea. He was entertaining, colourful and respectful.
He is despicable this time around and just down right nasty.
His chelsea romance won't last long again mark my words.
Should of stuck with rafa.

ush

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP301iR6tDQ

Agueroooo

Anyone else smell Hippo?

ctrl-alt-delete

ush wrote: »

He's benefited in this season's title race from referee's performance. So I've no sympathy for him or CFC.

I know yeah, me neither but I can understand it.

They tell you these things balance themselves out, so you just have to suck it up when they go against you because as you say there will be times when they benefit you.

Agueroooo

Did Ramires get a yellow for lashing out with the arm?


If not then its going to be hard for FA to ignore.

ush

ctrl-alt-delete wrote: »

I know yeah, me neither but I can understand it.

They tell you these things balance themselves out, so you just have to suck it up when they go against you because as you say there will be times when they benefit you.

I don't believe they balance out. Sometimes you get the advantage, other times you get screwed over with lasting consequences.

Smug pr*ck deserves it though. Got his excuses in early and didn't back his players.

Paully D

Paully D wrote: »

Going to take a hell of a turnaround in form for Sunderland mind. 3 home wins all season, now we need to win 3 in a row. Very unlikely that a bottom placed side can put that sort of run together. I live in hope though!

Yeah but momentum is everything at this stage of the season. Sunderland have shown they can match the best and the players will be in a different place now.

We have seen Wigan do this a few times in recent years.

blueser

Agueroooo wrote: »

Did Ramires get a yellow for lashing out with the arm?


If not then its going to be hard for FA to ignore.

No; no action taken against him. I would say that he'll be getting an invite in the post sometime early this coming week for a little chat at PL HQ.

Agueroooo

blueser wrote: »

No; no action taken against him. I would say that he'll be getting an invite in the post sometime early this coming week for a little chat at PL HQ.

If the ref noted the incident in his post match report then he won't, and I think the ref HAS to have seen it when you look at his position.
which makes it even more bizarre.

garra

ush wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP301iR6tDQ

He doesn't believe his own spoofing, how can he hope to convince anyone else? He genuinely looks disinterested, would be worried if I supported Chelsea.

blueser

Agueroooo wrote: »

If the ref noted the incident in his post match report then he won't, and I think the ref HAS to have seen it when you look at his position.
which makes it even more bizarre.

Well, exactly. If Dean did see it, then how the hell was Ramirez not sent off? He (Ramirez) can't seriously it was accidental; he even looked to see where Larsson was, then looked to see if the ref had spotted it.

GavRedKing

Well a Ramires ban will hopefull see a partnrrship of Luiz and Matic. its bad when luiz is the more sane character of the two.