Ballzproblem2:
useless cunt

I still dey knnnack your mamaaa and her brain don dey reset small small. Hope dey

Ebukacute:

I still dey knnnack my mamaaa and her brain don dey reset small small. Hope dey

🚨 A Leo Messi animated series is in the works at Sony.

The series will show Messi as a child facing obstacles in a video game. The series is aimed at children and young people.

(Source: Deadline)

🥺

nateevs:


This is a myth. You are only parroting the talking points of others. Form your own opinion.

Until James and Chilly got injured, I failed to see a game where we were not the overwhelmingly dominant team under Tuchel. I think City and Madrid away were the only teams that dominated us with James and Chilly present. Go and rewatch what we did to Juventus at SB in a 3-4-3.

It is a myth that you cannot be dominant with a 3-4-3. I don't want to get into the debate of whose deficiencies were being covered with the deployment of the set-up.

Regarding the extra body in midfield, Tuchel solved that problem by evolving Chilly and James to be tactically aware and tuck into midfield at intervals between attacking and defensive positions. Some say it was to cover for Jorghinho, but it was also to provide outlets for tactical flexibility in midfield, so it appeared at times that we were playing with 3 in the midfield depending on the phase of play in time.

3-4-3 is not synonymous with defensive play. You just need a tactical genius like Tuchel to show you how. Imagine what he could do with these crop of players.

first the lie that 3-4-3 is a tactical formation to shield some players have been busted

Secondly how many top club are very productive with 3 at the back ? It's not a formation that gets the best out of any attacking team.


We have signed good technical and attacking players, is there any need of playing 3 at the back when there is no tactical deficiency players again..

🚨 Telegraph Sport understands that most of the Chelsea players signed permanently by the club in the past two transfer windows agreed to a variation in their contracts, thought to be worth over 25 per cent in some cases, based on playing in the Champions League.

The move was designed to help protect Chelsea from some of the financial implications of missing out on the Champions League, either now or in the future, by the Todd Boehly-Clearlake Capital owners.

#CFC

(@Matt_Law_DT)

andrewbaba44:


I will always love him ,so happy he is doing so well

I don’t even see him as a flop ,man always gave his best on the pitch for Barca

If not for that huge 600k weekly salary he would have been cooking under xavi by now with no Messi

You don't see Griezmann as a Barca flop but you saw Coutinho as Barca flop

This is what happened when the motive for arguing with me is always emotional not based on facts.

lordfalcao:
first the lie that 3-4-3 is a tactical formation to shield some players have been busted

Secondly how many top club are very productive with 3 at the back ? It's not a formation that gets the best out of any attacking team.


We have signed good technical and attacking players, is there any need of playing 3 at the back when there is no tactical deficiency players again..

But we have tactical deficiency coach

raumdeuter:


How many of your newly signed players played 3 at the back in their previous clubs?

many postulated here that the reason Chelsea were being reactive and play 3 at the back is to cover some deficiency and a short term fix until you get the right players to play expansive football

3 at the back is not a style you use for proactive football, as you have 10outfield players by playing 3 atb, plus 2 wingbacks plus 1/2 DM. that is effectively 6 to 7 defensive players. The only coach who uses 3 ATB as his default formation is Cuntay and we know the type of haram football he resort to 70% of the time

There is a reason many TOP coaches and top clubs don't use it. And growing up 3-5-2 is mainly associated with Cattenacio and Italian NT

Tuchel before his stint at Chelsea was not a 3ATB coach either in Dortmund or in PSG

Like I said, it is all a matter of personal preference and opinion. And in my opinion, it is closed-minded way of seeing 3-4-3.

Football (and tactics specifically) evolves. There was a time when proactive football was considered to be a 4-4-2. Who uses a 4-4-2 now except in throw-the-kitchen sink-at-it scenarios?

I remember having this same debate with some guys back in 03/04 when most British clubs were still heavily using 4-4-2 and JM came to the PL sticking with a 4-3-3. I was asked at the time, how many top teams were using a 4-3-3?

Statistically, there are more coaches using 3 at the back than 10 years ago. It only means that there are more tacticians seeing the benefits of a 3-4-3 as a means of proactive attack.

The difference in opinions comes down to the definition of the wing backs. Where the wing backs are ultra-attacking players like James and Chilwell (and not the likes of Cucurella), they are seen as extra wing forwards, rather than wing backs. A tactician can then tell you that they are deploying 6 attacking players (3 forwards, 2 wing forwards, and 1 central midfielder) out of 11 in the attacking phase of play, but able to be pragmatic in defence at the same time, because the starting positions of the WBs is the middle of the pitch.

Change the text book definition of a wing back, and suddenly, it's another attacking player.

In the next few years, WBs will be become hybrid players contributing seriously to GAs, rather than purely defensive players now.

lordfalcao:
first the lie that 3-4-3 is a tactical formation to shield some players have been busted

Secondly how many top club are very productive with 3 at the back ? It's not a formation that gets the best out of any attacking team.


We have signed good technical and attacking players, is there any need of playing 3 at the back when there is no tactical deficiency players again..

I cannot give you the answer to the question when you keep saying the reason for the 3-4-3 is to protect tactically deficient players, yet disagreeing with the same notion at the same time.

What is the answer you want?

popizaino:



You don't see Griezmann as a Barca flop but you saw Coutinho as Barca flop

This is what happened when the motive for arguing with me is always emotional not based on facts.

Coutinho no give half of wetin Griezman give Barca. Both defensively and offensively. Griezman workrate was mad.. Crazy mad!!!

God, let the return of Pulisic give us the needed luck to qualify past Dortmund.

Espiritu fortuna!

Whether 343 or 443 potter should make sure we have nothing but a win against dortmund tomorrow. With kante back at least we should be better on transitions after he breaks play. Harvertz and sterling should wake up and take their chances because our defence is not strong without Silva and badiashile we stupidly dropped out of champions league squad. We have to score. I don't want to see cucuruku and cheek at any point in that match. Raumdeuter must not be allowed to cook us before we cook him on wednesday.

Kovacic wants Chelsea to stick with 3 at the back: "I think the formation worked really well [against Leeds]. We prepared it good in training and we're used to this system since a long time, so it's a familiar one. We had a good game but the most important is that we continue."

🧐

nateevs:


Like I said, it is all a matter of personal preference and opinion. And in my opinion, it is closed-minded way of seeing 3-4-3.

Football (and tactics specifically) evolves. There was a time when proactive football was considered to be a 4-4-2. Who uses a 4-4-2 now except in throw-the-kitchen-at-it scenarios?

I remember having this same debate with some guys back in 03/04 when most British clubs were still heavily using 4-4-2 and JM came to the PL sticking with a 4-3-3. I was asked at the time, how many top teams were using a 4-3-3?

Statistically, there are more coaches using 3 at the back than 10 years ago. It only means that there are more tacticians seeing the benefits of a 3-4-3 as a means of proactive attack.

The difference in opinions comes down to the definition of the wing backs. Where the wing backs are ultra-attacking players like James and Chilwell (and not the likes of Cucurella), they are seen as extra wing forwards, rather than wing backs. A tactician can then tell you that they are deploying 6 attacking players (3 forwards, 2 wing forwards, and 1 central midfielder) out of 11 in the attacking phase of play, but able to be pragmatic in defence at the same time, because the starting positions of the WBs is the middle of the pitch.

Change the text book definition of a wing back, and suddenly, it's another attacking player.

In the next few years, WBs will be become hybrid players contributing seriously to GAs, rather than purely defensive players now.

of the top 10 coaches you know and top 10 clubs in Europe across different leagues, which of these do you know that use this 3 at the back as their default tactic

A wing back is first a defender by trade and mentality, which is why you will play Reece James and not Ziyech and Pulisic, you see traditional wingers as wing backs when they are throwing the kitchen sink and in desperate times
Top teams put their opponent on the back foot most of the time and they try to get as many players who are naturally inclined to attack

Beyond arguing it on these pages and on the web, there is probably a reason Bayern Madrid Barcelona Liverpool City, United, PSG Dortmund even Arteta's Arsenal do not use this tactic. The tactic has been tried before most of them started playing, yet they don't. These top coaches at these top clubs who think, sleep, drink and eat football

3 at the back in usually make your 3 CBs man mark the opponent forward 3, and win individual battles and this can be a vulnerability when the attackers are drop deep and you have runners from midfield where you are already light in a 2 vs 3 situation this is why 3 at the back teams tend to sit deeper to avoid their CBs being spread thin. Also your CBs can be dragged infield and open spaces for runners

Also another weakness is the half spaces between the Wing back and the RCB/LCB. Your unpredictability in attack is also the vulnerability in defence as a smart winger targets those half spaces and there is a confusion on who to mark who. So your RCB and LCB have to be comfortable playing as full backs when the wing backs are caught upfield

This now bring another level of stress on the wingbacks as they need to have a motor inside them to run forward to cover that wing and run back to d defensive work

These are some of the inherent weaknesses that make many top coaches and top clubs avoid the tactics, Did Chelsea now spend almost 600m to play a tactic that has this much weakness

popizaino:



You don't see Griezmann as a Barca flop but you saw Coutinho as Barca flop

This is what happened when the motive for arguing with me is always emotional not based on facts.

Guy rest with your coutinho fantasy

After his first few months at Barca he began to flop that even Liverpool refused to take him back on loan

Griezman didn’t give the best of performance but he was good enough to start all games and was so hard working in his contributions

One is at Aston Villa and not even good enough to start ,the other is at ATM and will still start at many top clubs

I have nothing more to say to you

raumdeuter:


of the top 10 coaches you know and top 10 clubs in Europe across different leagues, which of these do you know that use this 3 at the back as their default tactic

A wing back is first a defender by trade and mentality, which is why you will play Reece James and not Ziyech and Pulisic, you see traditional wingers as wing backs when they are throwing the kitchen sink and in desperate times
Top teams put their opponent on the back foot most of the time and they try to get as many players who are naturally inclined to attack

Beyond arguing it on these pages and on the web, there is probably a reason Bayern Madrid Barcelona Liverpool City, United, PSG Dortmund even Arteta's Arsenal do not use this tactic. The tactic has been tried before most of them started playing, yet they don't. These top coaches at these top clubs who think, sleep, drink and eat football

3 at the back in usually make your 3 CBs man mark the opponent forward 3, and win individual battles and this can be a vulnerability when the attackers are drop deep and you have runners from midfield where you are already light in a 2 vs 3 situation this is why 3 at the back teams tend to sit deeper to avoid their CBs being spread thin. Also your CBs can be dragged infield and open spaces for runners

Also another weakness is the half spaces between the Wing back and the RCB/LCB. Your unpredictability in attack is also the vulnerability in defence as a smart winger targets those half spaces and there is a confusion on who to mark who. So your RCB and LCB have to be comfortable playing as full backs when the wing backs are caught upfield

This now bring another level of stress on the wingbacks as they need to have a motor inside them to run forward to cover that wing and run back to d defensive work

These are some of the inherent weaknesses that make many top coaches and top clubs avoid the tactics, Did Chelsea now spend almost 600m to play a tactic that has this much weakness

Again, closed-minded way of looking at it. Saying that wing backs are defenders first only, is a lazy attempt at laying credence to only the defensive side of the set up.

Yes it is true that we play James and Chilly in those positions, but why is it that we hate Chalobah and Cucurella in the same positions? The answer to that question is the exact reason it is a hybrid attacking set up when you have the right players, and not the ultra defensive game-play you are making it out be.

It comes down to the understanding of the evolution of tactics.

I am not sure I care about what the top 10 managers employ. Heck I have seen Managers like Mancini, JM, and Simeone use a 4-3-3 and still select 7 defensive-minded players. So what is the point you are trying to make?

I know one top manager who won the CL with a 3-4-3....And when he got a blank cheque the following season to build a proper squad, he targeted players to fortify a 3-4-3, instead of migrating to 4-3-3.

Why's that?

A 3-4-3 can either be attacking or defensive depending on the average position of the players on the pitch and the type of players available to the manager.
Average position of the players - This is not confined to only 3-4-3. Average position of the players matter in any formation, a 433 deployed by pep Guardiola or klopp will be different when thesame 433 is deployed by Simeone or Mourinho.

A 3-4-3 with James and Chilwell won't give you thesame result compare to a 3-4-3 with azpi and cucurella.

raumdeuter:


of the top 10 coaches you know and top 10 clubs in Europe across different leagues, which of these do you know that use this 3 at the back as their default tactic

A wing back is first a defender by trade and mentality, which is why you will play Reece James and not Ziyech and Pulisic, you see traditional wingers as wing backs when they are throwing the kitchen sink and in desperate times
Top teams put their opponent on the back foot most of the time and they try to get as many players who are naturally inclined to attack

Beyond arguing it on these pages and on the web, there is probably a reason Bayern Madrid Barcelona Liverpool City, United, PSG Dortmund even Arteta's Arsenal do not use this tactic. The tactic has been tried before most of them started playing, yet they don't. These top coaches at these top clubs who think, sleep, drink and eat football

3 at the back in usually make your 3 CBs man mark the opponent forward 3, and win individual battles and this can be a vulnerability when the attackers are drop deep and you have runners from midfield where you are already light in a 2 vs 3 situation this is why 3 at the back teams tend to sit deeper to avoid their CBs being spread thin. Also your CBs can be dragged infield and open spaces for runners

Also another weakness is the half spaces between the Wing back and the RCB/LCB. Your unpredictability in attack is also the vulnerability in defence as a smart winger targets those half spaces and there is a confusion on who to mark who. So your RCB and LCB have to be comfortable playing as full backs when the wing backs are caught upfield

This now bring another level of stress on the wingbacks as they need to have a motor inside them to run forward to cover that wing and run back to d defensive work

These are some of the inherent weaknesses that make many top coaches and top clubs avoid the tactics, Did Chelsea now spend almost 600m to play a tactic that has this much weakness

This.

airmark:
God, let the return of Pulisic give us the needed luck to qualify past Dortmund.

Espiritu fortuna!

Will he make the lineup?

Would be nice if he comes in and knock out his former club from the competition.

Dortmund are supposed to cry today but with potter they might end up laughing at full time. We Chelsea fans need help.

nateevs:


I cannot give you the answer to the question when you keep saying the reason for the 3-4-3 is to protect tactically deficient players, yet disagreeing with the same notion at the same time.

What is the answer you want?

why should we play non- dominant football with rich technical and attacking players in the team ..

Thunder will fire Potter if he dares to continue with the 3 ATB.

PSG that started using 3 ATB, how fantastic has their performance been? Heck! They were a man light in midfield while also having pressing passengers in Neymar and Messi against Bayern; thus handing the Bavarians an easy win and possibly a smooth passage to quarter final.

timbros:


Will he make the lineup?

Would be nice if he comes in and knock out his former club from the competition.

Yeah, I learnt he was sharp in his last training sessions. Coming in as a Super sub will be better.

swiz123:
Thunder will fire Potter if he dares to continue with the 3 ATB.

PSG that started using 3 ATB, how fantastic has their performance been? Heck! They were a man light in midfield while also having pressing passengers in Neymar and Messi against Bayern; thus handing the Bavarians an easy win and possibly a smooth passage to quarter final.

If any defender of the three defenders gets injured today we will be in big trouble until when silva comes back. That's even if we qualify.

A coach of the biggest club in England cannot be flexible enough to use 4 defenders. This clown thinks he's tuchel that plays direct football from the wings with intensity. As there is no badiashile and silva this night we will have to start praying fofana or chalobah don't get injured so we'll not be forced to watch CSO and azpiball for weeks.

And holy boehly will still be packing forwards for this man. Today we are linked with leao. Tomorrow we are linked with kvakhatalzhdu. Both owner and coach are just giving us problem.

Snap back to reality, oops there goes potoball... Shey we go fit watch No Time To Score today? Daniel Craig sorry you wont be missed.

FirstbornWds:



Coutinho no give half of wetin Griezman give Barca. Both defensively and offensively. Griezman workrate was mad.. Crazy mad!!!

Leave that one

swiz123:
Thunder will fire Potter if he dares to continue with the 3 ATB.

PSG that started using 3 ATB, how fantastic has their performance been? Heck! They were a man light in midfield while also having pressing passengers in Neymar and Messi against Bayern; thus handing the Bavarians an easy win and possibly a smooth passage to quarter final.

psg with huge attacking players.

Were playing 3 ATB this season, no wonder their results haven't been fantastic

Mason Mount has turned down some offers which are certainly in the region of what Reece James has been given. But it has been further complicated by things like image rights, bonuses and the length of contract. Talk of Mason Mount demanding £300,000 a week is not true.

While Mason Mount has made it his priority to stay at Chelsea, he doesn’t want to sign for eight years. This shouldn’t be mistaken for a lack of loyalty, but committing to seven or eight years at the club would take Mount into his 30s.

🔗 Simon Johnson - The Athletic

mount is not serious they even offered him close to what James is earning,James penned 7 years contract this one want five he is not serious
#

Chelsea have other positions that they want to strengthen in the summer, including a goalkeeper, midfielder and a centre forward. Joao Felix would take a lot away from that budget. (via @SJohnsonSport)


so no felix permanently 😬

🚨 BREAKING: The continuity of FC Barcelona Director of Football Mateu Alemany is in danger. Chelsea have presented him with a very powerful project and offer. Right now, Chelsea are the best positioned club to land his services.