Android22:
Just shattap. If you have sworn an oath to be an olodo for the rest of your life must I join you?

Did I tell you Chelsea never played a high line? I said any graphic claiming Chelsea played a high line more times than Liverpool is from a blind and cretinous bellend which you clearly are as well.

Werey.
You enter my hand today.

The reason I posted that stat is because you said Chelsea doesn't not play expansive football like Liverpool and Brighton.

And I posted that stat because high-line is one of the best metric to determine an expansive play.

Android22:
You are now asking me about conceding less goals even when attacking pedigree is being discussed. lol

I pull that up when you said pochettino is trying to the PSG team he inherited from Tuchel which is not balance and only good at attack.
To show you it's a lie that he want to balance the PSG because if he want to the defensive aspect will not be worse.

Android22:
Thank you for showing us you can't read. You did not see the part about ball in play? Did I not tell you that my recollection was that the ball was not in play? When you said it was in play did I disagree? Stop wasting my time.

You still dey lie when you are faces with clear evidence.

Show me where you stated IF the ball was in play in the screenshot I posted.

Or is WOULD same as IF?

Android22:
lol what is the high line metric? If I wanted to know which team fouled more or scored more we can collate such data. How will you do so for high line?

Can you tell me the games Liverpool did not play a high line last season?

Alaye stop being cocky.
The picture i posted clearly show which team play high-line most and if you doubt it then head in to The athletic website to read it, so all this rubbish you are saying I have no business with it.

I'm not saying Liverpool did not play high-line or anything I'm just proofing to you that Chelsea also play a high-line and that symbolize we play attacking football.

Android22:
TT is a good coach. He used attacking formations in his first season there and we saw the results. However, when injuries happened he changed style and the results dipped.

Pochettino did not have a balanced PSG team. They were clearly top heavy and he could not bench anyone. They were good in attack but average else where so of course, the effect was shown.

We are not discussing who is better OVERALL. Stick to attacking philosophies, advanced positions players take, improvements in attacking displays and output in players/teams over the course of their coaching careers. Poch is better than TT in those.

You just dey run from pilllar to post.

We did not change our style last season after injury that's why loftus-cheek, pulisic became RWB and tried to recall Emerson palmeri from his loan.

PSG did not have a balance team and we're only good at attack when it's get to pochettino's turn abi.
Then how did Tuchel manage to concede lesser goals to pochettino and despite having way more attacking output?

Who's discussing who is better overall with you.
Proof your claim or shut up.

Android22:
I said IF the ball was not in play it will only be a red card but the corner still stays with Tottenham. You proved to me that the ball was in play so I rested my case.

Why you dey lie now.
You said the decision of the VAR or referee will have no impact in the retake of the corner.

Abi no be you be this.

Android22:
I know the athletic. My point is, nobody can verify that data so it is useless using it.

The article is on their website now.
Go and read it or have you lost your reading ability.

Android22:
You have not provided any evidence for anything you are saying either. Your argument is that Dortmund averaged more goals than Español or Southampton. No shit.

What about PSG?

Pochettino inherited the squad from Tuchel and even went on to add Lionel Messi but he can't replicate the attacking output of Tuchel.

Android22:
If someone teaches you how to read will they also teach you how to understand? If I want to verify that the athletic data is right, how will I go about it?

You don begin dey throw jab.
If your brain is working perfectly you should The athletic have a website, and a Twitter page which dey use.

Android22:
You debunked that if the ball was not in play the freekick would have gone to Chelsea or you don't know that was the argument?

Let's not go back there again.
You said it's not a free kick because the ball was not in play and spurs will be allow to take the subsequent corner kick irrespective of VAR and referee verdict but I told you the ball is in play and it's a free kick and the subsequent corner should not be taken.
Which I'm very right about.

lateefGRDT:
bro be like u get time sef...

Honestly he too dey yarn rubbish for here.
Same way he was here yarning dust about the foul on cucurella against spurs, until I was force to debunk his rubbish.

Android22:
Your evidence is the athletic screenshot which nobody can verify? How will we be able to ascertain it?

Then provide yours?

If The athletic is not more reliable then you can go ahead and provide a more reliable one.

Android22:
I don't want you to take my word for it but at least I want you to understand what is being debated.

The data you have above is great but you are mentioning it with what Pep's teams have been not what they could have been if he was in Wolves. Do you agree that some of those stats will be less than Conte's in Tottenham if Pep was in Wolves?

Do you agree that a team could defensively also have more possession?

We are making progress.

If you don't want me to take your word for it then provide your evidence?

I have already answered that pep to wolves he can't better the big boys but he will better his pairs.

Yes a team can be defensive and have possession but their other attacking output will be very low. So to deduce a coach attacking capacity we will check all attacking metric.

Android22:
lol this is purely analogical. I want you to get the crux of my argument first.

Meanwhile, Liverpool consistently played a higher line than Chelsea did all season. I can't take any visual aid or graph seriously that cannot capture that. That is just a lie.

Everybody knows Liverpool's weak point.

Then provide evidence?

Liverpool did not play higher line than Chelsea I have given you my evidence you either debunk it with fact or provide yours?

Expect that their is no way I will just take your words and believe it.

Android22:
You are slowly seeing my point. Pep's team won't outscore Tottenham most likely but people watching his teams will see that he is better at setting up his team to attack than Conte.

That is my argument concerning TT and Poch. Poch knows how to set his teams up to attack. He may not be great at man management or defensive duties or counter attacks or making substitutions or reading the other team's tactics or handling egomaniacs but the attack part he has shown more innovation than TT.

I can build on this but I don't want to make a long post.

To proof to you that pep coach a more attacking play than Conte is very easy with several stats;
From chance created to;
Number of goals to;
Average Possession per game to;
Highline to;
Number of shot on and off target, and so on.

But you can't do that for pochettino against Tuchel and you expect me to just take your word for it.

I have given you every possible stat to show Tuchel is better at coaching attacking play than pochettino and you can't counter or provide your evidence and you expect me to just believe you as per na YOU now.

Android22:
Mike Tyson is a better "attacking" boxer than Mayweather. But overall Mayweather is a better boxer even though Mayweather is a defensive fighter.

Don't tell me Mayweather never lost therefore he is a better "attacking" boxer than Tyson.

You don deflect to boxing.
From Mourinho to Potter to guadiola to Mike Tyson to Mayweather just because you have no fact to butress your claim.

Bring proof let those people rest.

Android22:
lol

TT is to me better because he is more efficient and he coaches his teams to be more efficient.

A more efficient team will produce more results.

A more efficient team is not the same as a more attacking team.

Let me know you understand what I have said thus far before I add more layers to it.

Conte is the best example to use for an efficient coach.
Being better at coaching attacking play should result to better attacking output right?

Then bring out your proof to defend your claim?

Android22:
So Chelsea played more of a highline than Liverpool this past season? lol

Wait, if Pep was coaching Wolves with the same quality of players currently at Wolves will his team score more goals than Tottenham under Conte?

I am wading through a lot of fluff you have above.

I about to reply a post you made up there without quoting anyone so I guess I'm going to combine the reply here.

It shocked you that we played more high line than Liverpool last season? Well I'm not shocked, if you watch our matches (bar city) last season we are dominant team and created more chances than all our opponent.
Our attacker's ineptitude is the reason we are having this conversation.

You can pull out any attacking metric from last season and you will see we will definitely be there among the top.

In the case of Pep coaching wolves; I will tell you he won't be able to match the big boys in attacking output because the margins is too wide between both clubs but he will be better than all his pairs (i.e the rest mid table team).
Practal example is Brighton graham Potter current.

But in the case of pochettino and Tuchel the disparity between both clubs is not as wide as the case you reference.
But if we should to ignore that their time at PSG is the best example to measure both coaches because pochettino is the immediate successor of Tuchel but you don't want to go that line because it did not favour the line you tow.

To round this discussion up bring out proof to back your claim that pochettino coach a better attacking play than Tuchel?

Android22:
If you veer off into casting aspersions I won't respond again as I am not conversing with you to learn anything.

I brought up Mourinho to show how simplistic and contextless your argument is.

Chelsea scored 76 goals and Poch's Tottenham only beat that tally once therefore, TT is a better attacking coach is a reductive argument. I showed an analogy to help you see that that style of arguing is fallacious.

A good way to chicken out when you are cornered.

At PSG he coached more attacking play than pochettino too.
In fact their entire career he coached more attacking play than pochettino so on what basis should I believe what you said and put any stat to defend your claim.

Android22:
How many seasons has TT coached in the EPL?

THIS Chelsea is more expansive than Liverpool? Brighton?

You watched Tottenham under Poch and they were not expansive? You saw them play teams and park the bus or play strictly on the counter?

Anyone who watches TTs Chelsea will see a constantly attacking set up?

You are just being stubborn and not ready to admit you goofed.
Is it by season spent in EPL?

In Ligue 1 TT have better attacking output.

In EPL TT already have better output in 5/6 of pochettino EPL seasons.

In their entire career TT have better attacking output.
So what is the stat to conclude Pochettino coached more attacking play than Tuchel?

Pochettino is not a defensive coach that's not the bone of contention but he did not coach attacking play better than Tuchel.

Yes this Chelsea play high line than Liverpool and Brighton. (Check the picture below).

Android22:
Mourinho's team scored the most goals in La Liga history. He is the best attacking coach in La Liga history.

I get your time today.
You too dey package rubbish with confidence.

Firstly I can see you can't defend this any longer because you can't even counter any of my points instead you deflect to another topic entire by bringing Mourinho.

Secondly this a coach vs another coach; so to sound sensible you need to compare Mourinho to any attacking coach.

Furthermore That Mourinho's record is an anomaly because that's the main (if not only) worthy attacking stats he has.
And I can also tell you he conceded the least goal in EPL history.
And he also have the most clean sheet in a season.
And all sort of other defensive record.

Android22:
Like their time so far in the English Premier league? Like how expansive their coached teams play? Like the output of many of their players attack wise? Like how free flowing their coached teams play? Their coaching identities and philosophies?

In Tuchel only full season in EPL we scored 76 goals that's better than pochettino 5 different season in EPL bar only 1.

Tuchel played expansive football all his managerial career only at Chelsea he was a little causious and that's even only bettered by city and more expansive than anything pochettino played at Spurs.

The only time Tuchel attackers are not high on numbers is only at Chelsea and that's majorly down to our attacker's ineptitude.

Coaching identity?
I'm sorry pochettino did not have any either.

lateefGRDT:
said it all!!!
Alot of agenda here

Honestly that that line off me.
We scored 76 times in the EPL last season pochettino better that only once in 5 seasons with Tottenham.
And that's Tuchel first full season in EPL.

Tuchel Dortmund average 2.60 goals per game in burndesliga.
Tuchel PSG team scored the second most goals in PSG history in Ligue 1.

That android22 or iphone20 sabi package rubbish.

Android22:
Will PSG score more goals with or without Neymar?

There is a reason I am not addressing other points you made by the way. Your argument is like someone saying KdB is a better goal scorer than Messi and they are making reference to the fact that Messi had 6 goals in the league last season compared to KdBs 15. You judge over the course of their careers not isolated instances.

You really fumble with the "pochettino is good at coaching attacking play more than Tuchel" line, because that's absolutely wrong.
And the entirety of their career Tuchel's team average more goals per game than pochettino's team.

And don't be fooled by Chelsea formation and beer parlor analysis going on here, we don't play defensive football and we only play defensive football against only city last season.
You can check every metric or stat you want to check.

popizaino:




He has several means of devising a means of scoring and his team could be down with 3 goals in 80mins and you still very certain of equalizing. Woe betide us to go 2 goals behind under Tuchel and you will see how vulnerable we will become.



I know some shallow human being are about to tell me about liverpool match last season.

Is this all about being tactical to you?

popizaino:


You don't need to enter just accept he is tactically better Tuchel.

How is he tactically better?

BlueMann:


I think it was fake though

It has not been confirm to be fake.

But even at that he is drama queen.

FirstbornWds:


Where you see this one abeg?

Maybe you should ask adrewliversalt.

Naso I see am yesterday o.

WhoDeyHause:

Dembele is a good player.

Is Muller not a good player?
Is Leroy Sane not a good player?

Oga portable please read properly this time.

BlueMann:
Lampard na weyrey, e say Gordon's dry gin worth £100m.

Meanwhile Fofana allegedly made and deleted a post asking for a move to Chelsea.

This is actually a bad omen and a turn off.
This is the second consecutive time he will gone mad because of a transfer.

If he ended up join us what if Real Madrid come calling won't he repeat the same.

47c3ee:


Wait till they tell you that fati is better than mbappe


That’s why they are called barkabot

Honestly I was shocked yesterday when one of them said Ferran Torres, dembele, raphinha, Ansu fati is better than Thomas Muller, Coman, Leroy Sane and Serge gnabry.

Two of those guys is better than their four player combine.

Ansu fati, Dembele, Ferran Torres are better than gnabry, coman and Leroy Sane.

Pedri is the best under 22 midfielder in the world.

Busquet is better than any DM in the world.

Araujo is better than all Chelsea and Man united defender.

Jordi alba is better than Ben chilwell.

Then you wonder how they were pipe by almost all the decent team they faced last season with all these great player.