airmark:


Without even checking the fact that we are topping the big chances missed chart and checking goal scored and goal conceded stats, eye test would have informed a true Chelsea fan that watched most of our matches, our major problem.

It's either Kimbeast doesn't watch our matches or he doesn't know how to use data. It's like a cutlass in a leprous hand.

We just need to strike a balance between this attack and defense thing.

If you score 5 goals in a match and concede 6, will you praise your attack for scoring 5 in a match or will you blame you defense for conceding 6?

Conversely,if you concede just 1 goal but scored zero, will you praise your defense for being tight enough to concede "just" 1 goal or will you blame your attack for not being able to score any?

While our attack need massive improvement to convert chances created, our defense also need to tighten up. Individual errors in defense have cost us a lot this season. So yes, defense is also our problem.

In 2004/05 when Mourinho broke the record of least goals conceded in the league, we scored 72 goals. Arsenal in second scored 87..... The amount of 1-0 matches we played that season was uncountable.

2020/21 when Tuchel won us UCL, we conceded just 4 goals all campaign. 4 goals in 13 matches!

Make una no dey underrate the importance of defense in football.

timbros:
We just need to strike a balance between this attack and defense thing.

If you score 5 goals in a match and concede 6, will you praise your attack for scoring 5 in a match or will you blame you defense for conceding 6?

Conversely,if you concede just 1 goal but scored zero, will you praise your defense for being tight enough to concede "just" 1 goal or will you blame your attack for not being able to score any?

While our attack need massive improvement to convert chances created, our defense also need to tighten up. Individual errors in defense have cost us a lot this season. So yes, defense is also our problem.

In 2004/05 when Mourinho broke the record of least goals conceded in the league, we scored 72 goals. Arsenal in second scored 87..... The amount of 1-0 matches we played that season was uncountable.

2020/21 when Tuchel won us UCL, we conceded just 4 goals all campaign. 4 goals in 13 matches!

Make una no dey underrate the importance of defense in football.

The question is, is defence our major problem?

This is 2024, where those small teams in 2004/2005 now have financial muscle to get quality players and rub shoulders with the big boys.

Man City won the league consecutively, not because they had the best defence, but because they had the highest goals scored.

Why is Spurs with same goals conceded as us, topping us and Man UTD with lesser goals conceded, this season?

Why is Crystal Palace with lesser goals conceded are still below us on the table?

Answers to these questions, would point you to only one answer. Those who said attack is the best form of defence, are no fools.

So, like it was last season, our attack is our major problem.

timbros:
We just need to strike a balance between this attack and defense thing.

If you score 5 goals in a match and concede 6, will you praise your attack for scoring 5 in a match or will you blame you defense for conceding 6?

Conversely,if you concede just 1 goal but scored zero, will you praise your defense for being tight enough to concede "just" 1 goal or will you blame your attack for not being able to score any?

While our attack need massive improvement to convert chances created, our defense also need to tighten up. Individual errors in defense have cost us a lot this season. So yes, defense is also our problem.

In 2004/05 when Mourinho broke the record of least goals conceded in the league, we scored 72 goals. Arsenal in second scored 87..... The amount of 1-0 matches we played that season was uncountable.

2020/21 when Tuchel won us UCL, we conceded just 4 goals all campaign. 4 goals in 13 matches!

Make una no dey underrate the importance of defense in football.

In this day and age of VAR giving out penalties wotowoto, unlimited injury time to account for time wasting etc, conditions favour attack than defence. Days of 1-0 matches are over. Chances are if you base your team on defence like Chelsea of 2005, you will drop more points on average. Playing in your own box now is an invitation to VAR to award penalties against you and invitation to opposition attackers to look for initiate contact and go down

Yes we can improve on defence, but I bet if our attackers had been finishing their chances early, allowing us to control the game and simultaneously demotivating our opponents, our goals conceded record would be better. Instead what is happening is we fail to score, opponents ginger, score against us some time in 2nd half, then we overextend ourself while chasing equaliser and concede a 2nd goal. All those could have been avoided if our attackers put us in control in the first half by finishing their chances.

airmark:


The question is, is defence our major problem?

This is 2024, where those small teams in 2004/2005 now have financial muscle to get quality players and rub shoulders with the big boys.

Man City won the league consecutively, not because they had the best defence, but because they had the highest goals scored.

Why is Spurs with same goals conceded as us, topping us and Man UTD with lesser goals conceded, this season?

Why is Crystal Palace with lesser goals conceded are still below us on the table?

Answers to these questions, would point you to only one answer. Those who said attack is the best form of defence, are no fools.

So, like it was last season, our attack is our major problem.

My first sentence literally said we should strike a balance between attack and defence.

I still ask, if our attack score 8 goals and we concede 9, will it win us games?

Ibime:




In this day and age of VAR giving out penalties wotowoto, unlimited injury time to account for time wasting etc, conditions favour attack than defence. Days of 1-0 matches are over. Chances are if you base your team on defence like Chelsea of 2005, you will drop more points on average. Playing in your own box now is an invitation to VAR to award penalties against you and invitation to opposition attackers to look for initiate contact and go down

Yes we can improve on defence, but I bet if our attackers had been finishing their chances early, allowing us to control the game and simultaneously demotivating our opponents, our goals conceded record would be better. Instead what is happening is we fail to score, opponents ginger, score against us some time in 2nd half, then we overextend ourself while chasing equaliser and concede a 2nd goal. All those could have been avoided if our attackers put us in control in the first half by finishing their chances.

Valid point on VAR.

However there is a confidence that comes with knowing that, no matter what, your defence will always stand strong, hardly conceding goals. Coming into a game with Cech in goal and Sanchez in goal, which is better? Even though Cech is not invincible, he most times singlehandedly win us points. Same cannot be said of Sanchez.

When your back is very solid, you go into any battle with full confidence.

Like I said, balance is the key. While our attack need massive improvement, our defence also need to upgrade. Think of all the individual errors we point out here week in week out after every goal conceded. Think of how many points we would have picked if those individual defenders didn't commit those errors...

De Zerbi's 2-4-2-2 build-up structure with six outfield players is unconventional and differs from the more common 4-3-3 formation with a single pivot. This approach is high-risk, high reward, as it seeks to achieve numerical superiority during the build-up phase while inviting the opposition to press high.

In 2-4-2-2 build-up structure:

1. Two centre-backs: would drop low and wide to create space for the goalkeeper to act as an additional passing option, which helps to alleviate pressure from the high press.

2. Two central midfielders (double pivot): would drop deep, positioning themselves in line with the full backs. This creates a 4-player line that helps to maintain numerical superiority and provides multiple passing options against the opposition's press.

3. Two full backs: would stay in line with the double pivot, providing width and stretching the opposition's press. Their presence ensures that the opponents must commit more players to the press, which could leave spaces further up the pitch.

4. Striker and attacking midfielder: would take central positions, looking to exploit gaps in the opposition's defence and provide direct passing options.

5. Two wingers: would stay high and wide, stretching the opposition's defence and providing passing options, should the build-up succeed in bypassing the press.

De Zerbi's 2-4-2-2 build-up approach focuses on creating numerical superiority and exploiting the space left by the opposition's high press. If the opposition commits six players to the press, it opens opportunities for De Zerbi's team to quickly transition into a 4v4 situation in the attacking half. The vertical passes and fast attacks are crucial to capitalize on the spaces left by the opposition's press, turning a high-risk build-up into a high-reward attacking opportunity.

"PRINCIPLES OF THE POSITIONAL PLAY" - Complete guide to understanding and coaching Positional Play. Tactical theory covers 10 principles used by masters of the Positional Play like Johan Cruyff and Pep Guardiola, but also, by up and coming coaches like Roberto De Zerbi (artificial transitions) and Xabi Alonso (central vertical combinations) : playing out from the back, control of possession, positioning, movement, compactness, exploiting half-spaces, combination play, counter-pressing, vertical play and overload to isolate. With the total of 40 Tactical practices included (4 practices to coach each of the 10 principles). www.phaseofplay.com

🚨 Chelsea are now actively encouraging offers for Armando Broja and are ready to sell. The Blues appear to have lost faith in the academy graduate.

[@NizaarKinsella]

ciao

timbros:


My first sentence literally said we should strike a balance between attack and defence.

I still ask, if our attack score 8 goals and we concede 9, will it win us games?

Fix the attack, as Spurs have the same goals conceded as us, but didn't miss as many big chances as we did.

We saw how our attackers missed big chances and opponents came back to beat us. We won't be where we are if our attackers are not goal-shy.

This is what stat monger don’t know. They want us to be giving balon d’ or to ordinary player just because of tap-ins. Same reason people think Lukaku is good when he is just an average using his big body to score meaningless goals. His technical abilities are bad.

raumdeuter:


Your team has scored more goals than Man Utd, 9 more goals than Man Utd, So why are you below Man Utd in the table

Everton has conceded fewer amounts of goals than Tottenham,maybe you should tell me why the toffes are just few points from relegation while Tottenham is up there on the league log.

airmark:


Fix the attack, as Spurs have the same goals conceded as us, but didn't miss as many big chances as we did.

We saw how our attackers missed big chances and opponents came back to beat us. We won't be where we are if our attackers are not goal-shy.

Once more, you are looking at this from a biased pov that's why you keep making reference to Spurs.

How about you look at it this other way... We have scored more goals (35) than Man Utd (24) and West ham (33) but they are higher in the table than us. If just scoring goals is the answer, then they should be below us because statistically, our attack is better.

While scoring more goals is important, conceding less is also important. There is no major or minor in both. Balance it out and we are good to go.

You can't go into a match believing you will win when your defenders make individual errors all over the place and you concede needless goals everywhere.

Karim Benzema and Roberto Firmino are available on short-term deals from Saudi Arabia but do not fit into the profile of player Chelsea have targeted and both would demand huge salaries.

(@NizaarKinsella)


the board no serious

Ronaldo said on an interview that players were joining Saudi league because of his influence,why are dey leaving now? .


delusional

timbros:
We just need to strike a balance between this attack and defense thing.

If you score 5 goals in a match and concede 6, will you praise your attack for scoring 5 in a match or will you blame you defense for conceding 6?

Conversely,if you concede just 1 goal but scored zero, will you praise your defense for being tight enough to concede "just" 1 goal or will you blame your attack for not being able to score any?

While our attack need massive improvement to convert chances created, our defense also need to tighten up. Individual errors in defense have cost us a lot this season. So yes, defense is also our problem.

In 2004/05 when Mourinho broke the record of least goals conceded in the league, we scored 72 goals. Arsenal in second scored 87..... The amount of 1-0 matches we played that season was uncountable.

2020/21 when Tuchel won us UCL, we conceded just 4 goals all campaign. 4 goals in 13 matches!

Make una no dey underrate the importance of defense in football.

Na u gangan talk the truth of the matter; both defence and attack are very important. A balance of both is why Man City keeps dominating the league

timbros:


Once more, you are looking at this from a biased pov that's why you keep making reference to Spurs.

How about you look at it this other way... We have scored more goals (35) than Man Utd (24) and West ham (33) but they are higher in the table than us. If just scoring goals is the answer, then they should be below us because statistically, our attack is better.

While scoring more goals is important, conceding less is also important. There is no major or minor in both. Balance it out and we are good to go.

You can't go into a match believing you will win when your defenders make individual errors all over the place and you concede needless goals everywhere.

Statistically, our attack is not better. You are concluding based on wrong premise.

Our highest goalscorer has paltry 9 goals out of 21 matches (thanks to PKs awarded).

We are topping the 'big chances missed' chart among other important attacking stats, that you might have ignored.

BlueRayDick:


Na u gangan talk the truth of the matter; both defence and attack are very important. A balance of both is why Man City keeps dominating the league

Man City had to fix their attack before they could win UCL.

Your team conceded lesser goals than City and Aston Villa, yet they are topping you. There's a reason your club urgently is looking at improving your attack this window.

This is not rocket science.

airmark:


Maybe because they didn't miss the number of big chances that would have demoralized their defenders like Chelsea attackers did.

Spurs conceded same number of goals, why are they 9 points ahead of us and ahead of Man utd with lesser goals conceded?

When Cucurela Disasi Silva Badiashile and Gusto also concede cheap comical goals from non threatening situations don't you think that demoralized the team too

airmark:




Man City had to fix their attack before they could win UCL.

Your team conceded lesser goals than City and Aston Villa, yet they are topping you. There's a reason your club urgently is looking at improving your attack this window.

This is not rocket science.

The same Man city that bought almost each of their backline 50m and above before they started making serious push for the Champion league?

Guardiola strengthened his defense then proceeded to add Halland upfront. It's not like Guardiola bought Halland into a team that was weak defensively na.

Nobody is saying defence should be prioritize above attack; strike a balance between the two and see ur teeam dominate

BlueRayDick:


The same Man city that bought almost each of their backline 50m and above before they started making serious push for the Champion league?

Guardiola strengthened his defense then proceeded to add Halland upfront. It's not like Guardiola bought Halland into a team that was weak defensively na.

Nobody is saying defence should be prioritize above attack; strike a balance between the two and see ur teeam dominate

You dey mind am?
Has scoring ever been Man city problem?
2016/17 they crashed out of the CL 6-6 aggregates to Monaco
In 2018 they crashed out of the CL after conceding 5 goals to Liverpool
In 2019 City crashed out of the CL after a 4-4 game to Spurs
In 2020 City crashed out of the CL conceding 3 goals to Lyon
In 2022 they crashed out to Madrid after losing 6-5 aggregates

In all these years Man city in at least 1 leg conceded 3 goals

Last year in the entire CL there was no single match where Man city conceded 3 goals. Let's even go further and show if over 2 legs Man city ever conceded 3 goals in any fixture home and away last season

In last season entire CL, Man city in 13 games conceded 5 goals, while in previous seasons they were regularly conceding 4, 5 and 6 in just 1 fixture

In 2022 City faced Madrid and scored 5 goals but got knocked out 6-5
In 2023 City faced Madrid and scored 5 goals but qualified easily. 5-1

What is the difference

airmark:


Statistically, our attack is not better. You are concluding based on wrong premise.

Our highest goalscorer has paltry 9 goals out of 21 matches (thanks to PKs awarded).

We are topping the 'big chances missed' chart among other important attacking stats, that you might have ignored.

The table says Chelsea GF 35, Man Utd GF 24, West Ham GF 33.

Which attack is better?

I don't know why you dey like twist twist things to suit the narrative you wan promote.

When Chelsea conseded just 15 goals, the record was straightforward. Nobody start twisting how many goals the opponent suppose score but somehow missed or how many ball hit bar or how many teams didn't play Chelsea with their top scorer on the pitch. The table simply says Chelsea GA 15....And that's a record. Simple and direct.

Why all the twisting?

BlueRayDick:


Na u gangan talk the truth of the matter; both defence and attack are very important. A balance of both is why Man City keeps dominating the league

Exactly.

You just hit the nail on the head with Man City example.

nihilistjnr:


By FAR.

The disrespect Lukaku gets on this thread is absurd, especially when you consider this man is only 6 goals away from 300 club goals at the age of 30.

De Lima finished his club career with 280 goals. Drogba with 212. Thierry Henry finished with 290.

Nobody said he's the second coming of Jesus Christ...but he is top striker and has the numbers to show for it.

You go explain tire
He's jambody

BlueRayDick:


The same Man city that bought almost each of their backline 50m and above before they started making serious push for the Champion league?

Guardiola strengthened his defense then proceeded to add Halland upfront. It's not like Guardiola bought Halland into a team that was weak defensively na.

Nobody is saying defence should be prioritize above attack; strike a balance between the two and see ur teeam dominate

Man City got to Ucl senifinal before Fraudiola joined them. So it wasn't Fraudiola that got them to make serious push for Ucl.

The difference that got them the Ucl trophy, was selling Sterling and bringing in Haaland to a team with a defence that conceded against Mount and Havertz and couldn't score against Mendy and Christensen.

raumdeuter:


When Cucurela Disasi Silva Badiashile and Gusto also concede cheap comical goals from non threatening situations don't you think that demoralized the team too

They have been demoralized by your useless Sterling and Jackson.

Teams know we have useless attackers and once they can score, we won't do a comeback.

timbros:


The table says Chelsea GF 35, Man Utd GF 24, West Ham GF 33.

Which attack is better?

I don't know why you dey like twist twist things to suit the narrative you wan promote.

When Chelsea conseded just 15 goals, the record was straightforward. Nobody start twisting how many goals the opponent suppose score but somehow missed or how many ball hit bar or how many teams didn't play Chelsea with their top scorer on the pitch. The table simply says Chelsea GA 15....And that's a record. Simple and direct.

Why all the twisting?

Not enough to know the best attack and you should know that.

You can see Chelsea having 70+% possession, 21 shots and none scored and they lost by a goal or 2 in matches. A good attack would have scored at least 3 from 21 shots and all these arguments wouldn't have surfaced.

We created enough big chances to be knocking on Ucl qualification like Spurs, but our attackers messed us up. Pocchetino would be stupid not to have seen it by now.

Attack is the best form of defence, a Messified Barca with Mascherano as CB, and spineless DEFENSIVE midfielder, confirmed it.

airmark:


Man City got to Ucl senifinal before Fraudiola joined them. So it wasn't Fraudiola that got them to make serious push for Ucl.

The difference that got them the Ucl trophy, was selling Sterling and bringing in Haaland to a team with a defence that conceded against Mount and Havertz and couldn't score against Mendy and Christensen.

A balanced Man city team won the champions league eventually. That's the koko of the matter.

Goalkeeper: Thibaut Courtois (Real Madrid).

Defenders: Kyle Walker (Manchester City), Ruben Dias (Manchester City), Alessandro Bastoni (Inter), Federico Dimarco (Inter).

Midfielders: John Stones (Manchester City), Rodri (Manchester City), Kevin De Bruyne (Manchester City).

Forwards: Bernardo Silva (Manchester City), Erling Haaland (Manchester City), Vinicius Junior (Real Madrid).

Just take a look at the UEFA team of the year which is largely populated by Man city players. By the composition of the team alone u can confirm it was a balance between defense and attack that won City the cup not only because Halland joined them

Ballzproblem2:
Ronaldo said on an interview that players were joining Saudi league because of his influence,why are dey leaving now? .


delusional

He is delusional just like his fans, they rant, cry and fake laugh trying to justify their wack knowledge of the game.

BlueRayDick:


A balanced Man city team won the champions league eventually. That's the koko of the matter.



Just take a look at the UEFA team of the year which is largely populated by Man city players. By the composition of the team alone u can confirm it was a balance between defense and attack that won City the cup not only because Halland joined them

And Fraudiola made it balance by bringing a massive Haaland and ejecting Sterling, without touching the defence. You get it?

Chelsea need such balancing. Flush out Sterling and other washed attackers and upgrade. Opponents will be begging for draw, submerged in their own half.

airmark:


Not enough to know the best attack and you should know that.

You can see Chelsea having 70+% possession, 21 shots and none scored and they lost by a goal or 2 in matches. A good attack would have scored at least 3 from 21 shots and all these arguments wouldn't have surfaced.

We created enough big chances to be knocking on Ucl qualification like Spurs, but our attackers messed us up. Pocchetino would be stupid not to have seen it by now.

Attack is the best form of defence, a Messified Barca with Mascherano as CB, and spineless DEFENSIVE midfielder, confirmed it.

35 vs 24 vs 33.... Which is higher Airmark? Stop the shalaye

airmark:


And Fraudiola made it balance by bringing a massive Haaland and ejecting Sterling, without touching the defence. You get it?

Chelsea need such balancing. Flush out Sterling and other washed attackers and upgrade. Opponents will be begging for draw, submerged in their own half.

Really??

SMH

airmark:


And Fraudiola made it balance by bringing a massive Haaland and ejecting Sterling, without touching the defence. You get it?

Chelsea need such balancing. Flush out Sterling and other washed attackers and upgrade. Opponents will be begging for draw, submerged in their own half.

So Guardiola didn't touch any of the defenders he met at City ?

How come u always call for his head for spending 1 billion pounds before winning UCL without Messi ? Did he spend all the 1 billion pounds on Halland alone ?