Ibime:

Did we concede because Lamps did not sit back?

Ibime:


Did we concede because Lamps did not sit back?

nateevs:


I don't suppose u saw their goal did u? Even if u did 't, u would have seen the replay.
This is the point El Guapo was trying to make.
Had Ramires been playing, he would have closed the space SWP needed to aim at goal.

But I don't expect you to see that. There are more intricate things to a game of footballthan blaming Torres.
When Rafa needed a goal, he took Lamps off. You think he isn't aware that Lamps is a threat?

For 60mins, we didn't play jack. We suddenly looked like scoring after Hazard and Mata came on.

However, you ignore important things like this and attribute percentage success on the pitch to the input of one man.

nateevs: Absolutely unbelievable. With Arsenal V City and Spurs V Utd coming up, Rafa should have known that closing up the gap was more important. Luiz Ramires in Defensive Midfield. Mata, Hazard, Oscar upfront, Demba Ba

El Guapo: Nateevs U're never goin' to Win this against him trust Me, U Wont!


Ibime:

Win an argument you lost already? You made this argument in September.

This is no time to rehash your foolish theories. You theorised about how Ramires woulda closed midfield down, would use his speed to plug gaps and such and such. . . that was 4 months ago. . . .we have 4 months of EVIDENCE to show that your theories were a MONUMENTAL FAILURE!!

24 goals conceded in 12 games and 4 wins in 4 months for Mikel/Ramires partnership and knocked out of UCL. Im just humouring your foolish rehashing of old and FAILED arguments.

debosky:

You must be a blind bat - who was late in coming out to close down SWP allowing him the freedom to score? Or has the phat affected your eyesight as well?

coogar: i thought chelsea would never lose with lampard in the team. ibime is a troglodyte with his moronic theories and brainless hypothesis. the wright-phillips goal was lampard's fault. the fat phuck was too slow to close down.

chamotex:



Chelsea is associated with obesity...
We have fat ibime, fat Frank and the fat waiter.

nateevs:
People are pointing out how Lamps was not quick to close down a player who was poised to shoot, you are blaming Mikel who didn't play and criticizing Ramires who only got introduced after the game was lost. The first instinct of a defensive minded player is to avert danger. You are making an excuse Lamps for pausing to stay on a man "without the ball" whilst exonorating him for not closing down the man "with the ball". What's even funny is that you ask me to blame Ivanovic - a player whose tactical position after a cross into the box is to be in the box to avert any aerial attack - all in the aim to shift blame.

nateevs:
You are making an excuse Lamps for pausing to stay on a man "without the ball" whilst exonorating him for not closing down the man "with the ball". What's even funny is that you ask me to blame Ivanovic - a player whose tactical position after a cross into the box is to be in the box to avert any aerial attack - all in the aim to shift blame.

nateevs:
I'm sorry mate. The reason we conceded that amount of goals was solely because of RDM.

You talk a load of nonsense. The chance of QPR scoring from those two unmarked men with an easy pass from SWP if Lamps over commits is much greater than the chances of SWP getting his shot in from that distance. That's why Lamps paused to think about it instead of rushing straight out. Imagine someone telling me Ivanovic is not detailed to rush out. Is he the only one marking in the box? Are others not marking just like him including Lamps himself. The same way Ivanovic did not rush out is the same way Lamps paused to consider the man he was marking, everyone expecting of course that Mata whose job it is to block shots on the edge of the dee will cover his zone. . . so stop ranting nonsense.

Lamps has the highest rating on any website you wish to check for yesterday's game, so take off your rose-tinted glasses. You are obviously the only person who credited the goal to Lamps, not the hundreds of journalists who watched the match.

Ibime: Who is this Taraabt you fear?

Taraabts movement is subpar for a no 8. In terms of off-the-ball running, he is one of the worst in his position in the Prem, thats why he never scores tap-ins or rebounds, only long range stunners. No midfield need worry unduly about Taraabt. The deadliest no8's that need worrying about are the likes of Dempsey, Fabregas, Mata, Lampard, Marchisio etc that keep running behind you and disrupting your shape. Taraabt does no such thing!!!

The only thing to fear from Taraabt is his dribbling, which is why Luiz as a decent man-to-man dueler can deal with him.

Rather, Mbia and Diakhite should be worrying about dealing with Mata/Oscar and Lampard's movement. . . which they cannot. . . as you could see, they were all at sea failing to track Jordan Henderson last match time and time again.

Finally, Im sorry to say Ramires should never be allowed near Chelsea central midfield EVER again!

El Guapo: QPR had one Vital Player on the pitch lastnite in Taarabt and I think even the most staunch Chelsea fan will agree that he was outstanding for them. The deft touch to lay the ball into the path of SWP was sublime, now what does that Say?

I made mention of Ramires Playing to track him through the Course of the Game, knowing fully well that Lampard cant Just be Game on that task but here's what a Soccer Follower had to say On it :

This is the biggest load of crap anyone ever spewed on Nairaland.

Ramires to track Taraabt on a corner? In that case I guess not only would Ramires position on the corner have been marking Lampards man, Ramires would have also been positioned in Matas position to stop the header dropping yo Taraabt. This Ramires must be a wonderkid able to be in 2 places at the same time.

Pure nonsense. Taraabt posed zero threat on the counter and Ramires was definitely not needed to track hos runs cos he made none as QPR were stuck in their half the whole ninety minutes.

What's worse, Taraabt played as a no9 yesterday so I guess Gary Cahill shoulda been dropped so Ramires the omnipresent can play centre-back and track Taraabts non-existent runs.

2013 is only 3 days old and I believe this guy just posted an early contender for the post with the most wayward logic of the year. Taraabt was able to assist from a corner because Ramires wasn't on pitch to track his run.

This guy is a fool.



So once again it's back to the drawing board for Rafa Benitez and for our title challenge. I saw a post on Twitter straight after the final whistle and it said:

El Guapo: QPR had one Vital Player on the pitch lastnite in Taarabt and I think even the most staunch Chelsea fan will agree that he was outstanding for them. The deft touch to lay the ball into the path of SWP was sublime, now what does that Say?

I made mention of Ramires Playing to track him through the Course of the Game, knowing fully well that Lampard cant Just be Game on that task but here's what a Soccer Follower had to say On it :

nateevs: Had Lamps committed to closing down SWP, the chances of QPR scoring from a pass to one of his players in the box is slimmer because there were more Chelsea bodies in the box who were closer to the QPR men in the box than there were on SWP.

nateevs:
You are not only wrong about this, you are lying. Show the credible website that rated Lampard the highest.

nateevs:
What annoyed people more is you claiming it is almost impossible to lose without Lamps. First game after your misuse of stats, we lose and naturally people will call you out.

nateevs:
Regarding Torres, I am not silent mate. I maintain the same stance. Show me where Lamps and his cohorts created one single chance for Torres yesterday in the first half. They created none. You are going on about how Torres cannot play in deep defense. Sorry mate, he cannot. What he can do, he does well and that is playing in between the lines.

So if you want Torres to work, you play to his strengths.

nateevs: Regarding Torres, I am not silent mate. I maintain the same stance. Show me where Lamps and his cohorts created one single chance for Torres yesterday in the first half. They created none. You are going on about how Torres cannot play in deep defense. Sorry mate, he cannot. What he can do, he does well and that is playing in between the lines. Same way Lamps cannot take the ball to the wings, beat a player with trick and cross the ball but you still call him the best midfielder in the PL even when the likes of Mata, Carzola and Fabregas can do that with ease. How poor do you think Lamps will turn out if you put him on the end of a 4-3-3?

So if you want Torres to work, you play to his strengths.


That said, Torres is not the only and best striker around. If you want a striker that can play with his back to goal, get out and buy one. Don't blame Torres for not being strong with his back to goal and claim Lampard is alright not being able to play on the wings.

Ibime:


This is the biggest load of crap anyone ever spewed on Nairaland.

Ramires to track Taraabt on a corner? In that case I guess not only would Ramires position on the corner have been marking Lampards man, Ramires would have also been positioned in Matas position to stop the header dropping yo Taraabt. This Ramires must be a wonderkid able to be in 2 places at the same time. This despite the fact that Ramires could never be in Lamps or Matas zone when the incident took place as his usual corner detail is to stand on the goalline.

Pure nonsense. Taraabt posed zero threat on the counter and Ramires was definitely not needed to track hos runs cos he made none as QPR were stuck in their half the whole ninety minutes.

What's worse, Taraabt played as a no9 yesterday so I guess Gary Cahill shoulda been dropped so Ramires the omnipresent can play centre-back and track Taraabts non-existent runs.

2013 is only 3 days old and I believe this guy just posted an early contender for the post with the most wayward logic of the year. The ball dropped to Taraabt from the sky because Ramires wasn't on pitch to track his run?

This guy is a fool. No two ways about it.

. . .and I cant still Grab a Shiit Outta the Whole Crap

coogar: new year - same shit, everyday!
only a lunatic would blame torres for yesterday's loss. lampard was uber-useless! phat frank cannot close down at the edge of the box because he was too heavy to quickly do a job. this is why ramirez(premier league's best tackler) is handy in such games.

For the first time eva we're On same Lane -- Trying to talk sense into Someone i heard weighs __Kilos

coogar: new year - same shit, everyday!
only a lunatic would blame torres for yesterday's loss. lampard was uber-useless! phat frank cannot close down at the edge of the box because he was too heavy to quickly do a job. this is why ramirez(premier league's best tackler) is handy in such games.

Torres - 5
Torres just didn't show up today, plain and simple. He gave the ball away far too cheaply and was second best to so many balls. Chelsea lacked a cutting edge in front of goal against QPR and that's because their top striker went missing.

Demba Ba must be watching tonight and thinking "I could do better than that" when looking at Torres. The Spaniard has not been at his best, but his side are at least creating more chances for him now.

Torres: He looked disinterested against QPR and when his only shot of the game is a half-hearted attempt straight at the 'keeper, you have to wonder how this man has now seen off three different Chelsea managers.

Benítez, in fairness, was not helped by Fernando Torres delivering one of his most anonymous performances. Demba Ba’s arrival will be timely.

coogar: new year - same shit, everyday!
only a lunatic would blame torres for yesterday's loss. lampard was uber-useless! phat frank cannot close down at the edge of the box because he was too heavy to quickly do a job. this is why ramirez(premier league's best tackler) is handy in such games.