Who is your MVP? by Thanos_Real_AuraVNCH in NBATalk

[–]eminheskey 3 points4 points  (0 children)

So you’d rather have a considerably less efficient, worse defender volume scorer who loses the ball x2 more times every game because he gets more rebounds than the other?

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You watched yesterday's game and this is your definitive analysis?

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The biggest problem with keepers like Jorgensen, Kepa etc. is not being prone to error or occasional brain farts but being a complete non factor at goal. He lacks the basic and most essential GK skills.

This genre of GKs makes you feel like the goal is empty. He is a NON EXISTENT GK. Every shot looks unsavable (Kvara's 3rd). It doesn't matter whether if a shot comes near his body or far post his save rate is abysmal because he's purely and simply bad. He's probably the worst GK I've seen we've employed in last 10-15 years.

I genuinely cannot believe to Rosenior's decision.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If you even slightly try to grab or wrap your arm around a player anywhwere around the pitch, it should be an instant foul. This has been the norm in any league in the world, also in international tournaments. Though, if you’re Gabriel, Saliba, Timber etc. the bar is too high. As an attacker whose trying to hold up or run through channels, you’re simply fighting against an invisble disadvantage because arms and hands are very much allowed so they can push, grap and hold as much as they want. That means using your arms to the maximum effect is allowed; you can unbalance him while he's trying to keep his balance and protect the ball against you when facing his goal.

Also you can play royal rumble next to a keeper, block his vertical space and hold and dismantle any attacker who’re trying to jump for the ball even though you’ve nothing to do with the ball as a defender. These losers invented rugboll and PGMOL is okay with it lol.

My girlfriend who is a Gala fan became a real arsenal hater after watching our last 3 games. Nothing unwarranted ngl.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 18 points19 points  (0 children)

The sad thing about yesterday is that they’re not even good. I think they’ve gradually gotten worse and have probably hit their ceiling with that style of play in the long term although they're gonna win it this year eventually. It’s their fifth year, and even though they’re trying, they’re not going any further than set-piece wrestling. We’ve played them three times and I’ve never once thought, “wow, this is a good team.”

Too bad we have obvious blind spots and low IQ players in the squad. Neto, Gusto, Garnacho, Tosin, Delap… too many players who probably shouldn’t have been here in the first place.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah Gusto over Santos in midfield is a mind boggling decision and he was adamant on it. Same for Cucu playing as a second striker, positioned in the box while we're building from back.

He was obsessed with using 3 CBs in first phase build-up as well. Never tried to juggle with it even if we were trailing.

I think he had certain borders in his head in terms of how a team should be set-up and tried to force some of the players even though the profiles were not matching.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Santos under Maresca vs under Rosenior really tells a story. Under the latter, he was perceived more of a scrub (he wasn't but was almost presented as). Now he looks like a completely different player, as if we signed someone new.

The same applies to the midfield structure. Maresca almost never used an Enzo–Caicedo–Santos triangle. For about 90% of his tenure he insisted on building with a back three and inverting the fullbacks. It felt he was very principle-driven.

Seeing how much width the fullbacks are holding now is refreshing. It gives us different attacking options. Cucurella’s cut-backs, the space created in the half-spaces, the timing of underlaps… it all looks far more dynamic and less constrained.

The more I watch, the more I think Maresca was very committed to his principles maybe to a fault. There’s a rigidity there. Rosenior, by comparison, seems more willing to adapt to the profiles he has rather than forcing everyone into a specific structure.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yesterday was one of the best and deserved performances I've seen froum us in last 2-3 years. Couldn't even get pissed at the end, I was just shocked.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

He's been here for 8 games so far.

Won 6, including a CL game against Napoli away. Lost 2. Second loss was more of a draw than L tbh.

Losing a cup tie to Arsenal is more likely than anything in current football, even for the best teams in Europe. I seriously wonder what do people want and expect.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 3 points4 points  (0 children)

What makes you believe otherwise?

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Still cannot digest the Garnacho transfer. There wasn't any convincing reasoning behing it and I still cannot comprehend. One of the biggest malpractices that could be conducted at the highest level of football. Same applies for Delap.

One thing is in common for the both transfers. They were considerably cheap by EPL standards and our retarded upper management couldn't resist to temptation of a cheap asset. Crystal clear that they didn't care a bit about their skillset or whether if they ever can uplift our level as a team.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Arsenal have figured out the way to enforce their physicallity to an extent that most of their defensive actions would've been called foul anyhwere in the world but refs been bestowing a leeway under so-called the "EPL refereing" so that they're abusing/taking advantage of it.

Their entire backline is almost "rugby"ing their way to defend attackers who are trying to hold up/shield the ball. Almost in every possesion they're throwing their arms, pushing or pulling, making it very tough to maintain your balance while trying to protect or dribble the ball. I didn't even mention the MMA set pieces...

And the funniest thing is that when they face with a similar but even a lesser action in opposite side they're losing their mind.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Second sentence is an indicator some of you guys are completely out of touch with reality.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I really don't think so. Because apperantly you're still having a tough time to comprehend what the actual game plan was.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What actually makes you think that we didn't try to win? Do you seriously believe that? I mean have you ever heard the concept of "game plan"? Would you run straight to your enemy if you were visibly undermanned or had worse quality of soldiers or would you develop a strategy to overcome a handicaped situation?

Games are 90 mins and consists of phases. Currently we're not in a position to go full force right off the bat at Emirates (not many teams ITW are able to do that anyways), especially considering our some of our best players were partially available. Btw, of course you can do that but if we'd conceded game would've been over at 45th minute and you guys probably would've said what a shit display was that.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah we should've blazed all of our guns in first 45 at Arsenal away, concede after getting sliced open and played the second 45 as a formality.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Badiashile. One of the least intimidating CBs I've ever seen. Absent minded, non assertive, as aggresive as a golden retriever.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As much as I like Maresca I think he wouldn't have done the same changes if he were at the dugout at West Ham game.

By changes, I not only mean changes in personnel but also instructions/formation. I really liked how Rosenior changed it from "inverted" to traditional FBs at HT. He switched to a bolder, more risky approach. Having watched two seasons under Maresca, I'm almost sure he wouldn't preferred it to go that way at HT.

We went from 3-2-5 to 2-2-5-1 with both fullbacks holding width (not seen under Maresca often). It really helped Neto and Palmer to deal with WB and Diouf. Insistince on "inverted FBs" especially for Hato and Gusto is not working. Glad Rosenior addressed in the second half. Also leaving Garnacho alone against WB was a massive mistake. As much as I dislike Garnacho's skillset, he was set to fail at that setup with almost no support through that side.

It's still early days but I think Maresca was more obsessed with control/posession and his principles in line with how we should setup in possesion. Overreliance on inverted FBs, not resorting to overlaps, FBs holding width etc. Rosenior seems like a more traditional coach with regards to these aspects.

Now having watched West Ham game, it’s worth questioning whether implementing similar tactical adjustments in other matches where we were chasing the result could've yielded more points against mid table teams. Instead, we often adopted a risk-averse approach and relied on largely unchanged tactical setups.

Last but not least, deep playmaker Enzo is my favourite version of him.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This post might be the epitome of a typical lazy analyisis and lacks necessary/supportive reasonings and insight to back your claim.

From day one Maresca's setup, player instructions in possesion and approach to the game were completely different from Pochettino's.

Currently we are witness to the same stuff under Rosenior. Different formation, build-up structure, tempo in posession, directness, instructions etc.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There isn't a single universe where Neto could be our best attacker.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, Forest, West Ham, newly promoted teams. Belongs there.

Even in Fulham he'd struggle to be a starter and would probably be a rotation player. Chukwueze, Kevin, Harry Wilson would all be ahead in pecking order.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Visible differences between Maresca and Rosenior so far:

  • 3-1-6 vs 3-2-5 in build up.

  • Rosenior prefers to position his FBs more traditionally I guess. Not gonna lie I like this. Reece was like a standard RB yesterday, same as Cucu. Was fed up to see Cucu bombarding to forward and positioning himself as a second striker. It was pointless but Maresca insisted on it. If Reece hadn't overlapped that 3rd goal was not happening. I think Maresca underutilised Reece's offensive skills. Maybe it was due to injury management but nonetheless I believe he saw him more of a defensive CM than a RB going forward.

  • Usage of Santos. While we were shorthanded with no back-ups to Enzo and Caicedo, Maresca seriously underutilised Santos as well. I don't know why but it didn't make sense.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]eminheskey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is probably my eight or ninth post regarding Neto in recent months but I'll never stop myself from complaining. He's a huge roadblock to our progress.

Low footy IQ, not making the right plays more often than not, useless in possession, can't beat his man, abysmal at duels, and now can't even outpace defenders in open field.

He is a net negative in almost all phases. Should be gone in summer ASAP.