AVB will he last the season ?

Instead of putting all of the money into paying off managers, Roman should just give the manager the funds to make a team he wants.


AVB will last the season, but I have a feeling he will be gone by next season. Which will solve nothing unless Mourinho returns.

Giovanni10 wrote:

The Franchise wrote:Bizzare comments.

The Chelsea of old? You mean prime Makelele, Cech, Gallas, Cole, Carvalho, Terry, Lamps, Essien and Drogba...sorry, which of these players do Chelsea have and still at that level?

David Luiz? Malouda? Im sorry, who else did AVB have at his disposal?

David Luiz didnt even do anything wrong lol

Romeu? Who else did they have? In fact, it doesnt matter, it was a great idea. Chelsea were coming under pressure and they needed to keep the ball better...a guy with defensive skills and ability in possession..whats wrong with that?

Exactly.

1) The Chelsea of old, yes. Last time I checked, Abrahmovic was still a billionaire.. i.e. buy some players of the quality Chelsea fans have become used to in the 21st century.

2) David Luiz? Malouda? Yes, he didn't have anyone else at his disposal but that is mostly his own fault for going into a season thinking those players were adequate in the first place.

3) David Luiz, full culpable for the Chicharito header, find a pundit who didn't agree with that. One minute he is watching the Mexican, next moment he's wondered off... did he hear the ice-cream truck driving past? He has the attention span of a 5 year old, you cannot play someone like that in the heart of your defense.

4) Romeu? Basically what Zealous said, Cr@pped his pants and died. He put him on to sure up the midfield but the kid crumbled and handed them the momentum. In that case he should have just left Sturridge on because defenses fear him and Man United wouldn't have felt they had the licence to throw everyone forward.

You remove Sturridge from the front 3, you're left with Malouda and Torres who will not trouble ManU if they have to start a counter from inside their own half.

The substitution was a mistake, bad management.

What is Roman not buying players got to do with AVB? Also, he spent alot of money of David Luiz, Tores and then Cahill..aswell as some youngsters. Rubbish arguement with no link or logic to anything.

Again, its AVB´s fault for not having better players going into the season? Do you how football works? Clearly AVB cant just pick and choose who he likes from anywhere around the world.

I dont care what the pundits say, they dont know more about football than anyone else. Mole has already talked about the goal, I dont need to. Of course pundits blame Luiz though, like you, you hate on the guy for no apparent reason.

Already expained the sub, your lack of knowledge offends me. Chelsea werent even playing a front 3, shows how much you know.

Gil wrote:Sturridge is/was utterly useless defensively and he was brought off to shore up things at the back. I would have taken Malouda off instead of him but unless you have an obvious agenda surely you have to understand why he was taken off.

It's easy saying this or that player should have been brought off but did you see our bench? Only Paulo *bleep* Ferreira (excluding the GK) had more than 10 app for us.

We kept attacking when the score was 3-0. After Webb's assist we sat back and we were pushed back more and more as the game went on so to claim Luiz etc were still going forward is ridiculous.

As I said in the Chelsea section are squad is ridiculously unbalanced. At the start of the season we had 13, 30+ players, 8 20 and younger and only 5 in between those age groups. It's a miracle we're still holding on to fourth. I mean we have to pidgeon-hole our best player out wide because our two best wingers are Malouda and an inexperienced striker ffs.


EDIT: The people blaming Luiz for the goals we conceded btw.

Obvious scapegoat is obvious.

Again the whole shore up approach was BS. If anything Romeu was a bigger defensive liability than Sturridge

You don't give United the momentum, you pressure their mediocre back line into making mistakes and losing concentration. If Chelsea were still an attacking threat United probably wouldn't have gone for the game the way they did.

As for blaming Luiz I think that's stupid. Whenever a goal is conceded (unless it's in extraordinary circumstances) the entire back four share the blame. Looking at chachadorito's goal it's pretty clear there is an obvious case of miscommunication.

Zealous wrote:

The Franchise wrote:

Zealous wrote:

The Franchise wrote:Again, who was he supposed to put on instead of Romeu?

They needed more defence and more possession...who better?

I don't get this squad excuse. The only player that AVB wanted but couldn't get was Modric and he got a decent midfielder in Raul M. Unless there was someone else he wanted he seems convinced he can do his thing with the guys he currently has.

If he knew he wasn't going to get much support he should never have taken that job in the first place. No sympathy from me in that regard. Even then he took off Mata and Sturridge and gave United all the momentum. If what happened yesterday at the Bridge happened at the Camp or the Bernabeu white hankies would be out. They were 3-0 up Dani at home. No amount of excuses will wash that away.

Now Chelsea could have a long term thing going and that's OK but so long as AVB thinks he can get away with some half assed tactical moves like forcing Sturridge deep where he wasn't comfortable and letting Rooney go unmarked in the hole then Chelsea won't improve.

Ramires was injured, so was Mikel..thats my point. You can only use the players he has available. Raul M cant defend, thats why he wanted Romeu on in the first place.

How do we know what AVB can and cant get? Its all guesswork, we dont know whats going on inside the club.

3-0 up at home and then they came back...because of two bs pens. Everyone is saying how bad it is, but nobody has succesfully pointed out what AVB could of done.

The momentuum was already with Utd, Mata and Danny coming off didnt hand it over.

I bet if he kept Sturridge on and another goal came down that side, AVB would of got blame. If he took him off (and he did) people say they lost attacking threat. Cant win.

He has to leave Rooney in the hole, they dont have a DM. Another cant win situation. Start Romeu, people say he is too young and got caught like a deer in the headlights (like people are doing) dont start him and you leave Rooney free.

Sturridge had to go deep, because he cant play 433 which again, was because he had no DM.

Well management isn't easy I never said it was but AVB had two options, try to shore up or try to peg United back, and tbh the chances of the former happening were slim when looking at how Chelsea have defended this season. Especially since Rooney was always available for the pass. Romeu completely failed at his job and while AVB shouldn't really take all the blame for that he should for taking Sturridge off and forcing Mata wide. Scholes was given all the time in the world on the ball.

A better change would have been to take off the ex-player Fernando Torres. At least that way Chelsea still have some form of attacking threat that was capable of putting Evra (who was on a yellow) and Rio (who hasn't been good since lord knows how long) under pressure. Mata in the middle could have put some sort of pressure on Scholes as well.

Arm chair tactics aside no well lead and set up side gives up a 3-0 lead at home. Whenever that happens the coach takes full responsibility. (Webb takes some blame for the blatant Welback dive though)

Fully agree with this. What motivation do you have for taking off your most dangerous forward when he could relieve some pressure as an outlet?



Mole,

NO! Luiz's fault. At the start of the move, he assigns himself Chicharito and then leaves him, why? because he gets confused when he sees Wellbeck? Irrelevant. your man is your man. If Wellbeck had of scored then he could have been within his rights to say "Well I had Chicha, I can't be in two places at once." Sure Ivanovic and Cahill are not entirely blameless, but Luiz leaves him, when its obvious he should be the primary concern ffs. At most Wellbeck is a distraction with the late run.

Sorry, rule number 1, don't leave your man.. marking one person is at least better than standing in the middle of nowhere at the crucial moment.

Zeal, how were they going to peg Utd back? Once Man Utd had the goal, they had all the momentuum. Before the goal, they were sloppy in possession and missed too many balls. Thats not AVB tactics, thats players making mistakes.

Its very to easy now to say what AVB could have done, but at the time it wasnt a problem.

Daniel cant defend and cost Chelsea a pen, which wasnt a pen, but he showed a lack of defensive ability which is normal for a striker. So he took him off.

Torres could of come off instead, so could have Flo-Mo, but that didnt cost Chelsea the game at all.

Scholes was always going to get time on the ball, Chelsea had to defend deeper because Hernandez came on and therefore the lines were pushed back. Its logical the deepest lying mids are going to get time on the ball now.

I agree with that in a sense but the question has to be asked wtf is Cahill doing leaving Luiz to deal with 2 forwards by himself?

If Cahill was doing his job and marking Welbeck or Hernandez like he should have been and not being nowhere to be seen like he was the goal doesnt happen.

Cahill and Ivanovic are more at fault than Luiz IMO.

Look at this video from 5:49 watch when Giggs crosses the ball and Luiz is marking Hernandez then Dorito makes the run to connect with the ball and Luiz stands there watches. Imo it was Luiz's fault. Watch and decide for yourself.

EarlyPrototype wrote:Look at this video from 5:49 watch when Giggs crosses the ball and Luiz is marking Hernandez then Dorito makes the run to connect with the ball and Luiz stands there watches. Imo it was Luiz's fault. Watch and decide for yourself.

he was marking Wellbeck

2 vs 1....

He was no where near Welbeck when Giggs made the cross. There were 2 other Chelsea players closer to Welbeck who should have tracked his run. Luiz was marking Dorito its obvious from the video just watch from 5:40.

The Franchise wrote:Zeal, how were they going to peg Utd back? Once Man Utd had the goal, they had all the momentuum. Before the goal, they were sloppy in possession and missed too many balls. Thats not AVB tactics, thats players making mistakes.

Its very to easy now to say what AVB could have done, but at the time it wasnt a problem.

Daniel cant defend and cost Chelsea a pen, which wasnt a pen, but he showed a lack of defensive ability which is normal for a striker. So he took him off.

Torres could of come off instead, so could have Flo-Mo, but that didnt cost Chelsea the game at all.

Scholes was always going to get time on the ball, Chelsea had to defend deeper because Hernandez came on and therefore the lines were pushed back. Its logical the deepest lying mids are going to get time on the ball now.

1) I don't know but it's just a thing I believe in, when the other team respects your attacking threat they don't attack as much, even when they don't have anything to lose. I bet you anything that after Torres's chance at goal was fluffed United felt they could handle whatever Chelsea had going forward and focused on attacking. Again I don't know how right I am when I say that you should peg them back but what I do know is that giving them all the momentum was definitely the wrong thing to do.

2) Before taking Sturridge off, AVB tore him a new one from the sidelines for not tracking back. Sturridge follows the coach's orders and on the next United attack Sturridge tracks back into his own box and gives away the penalty. AVB then takes him off. If I were a player I would be pissed off if that happened. How is that anything but bad management?

Romeu was brought on to shore up the midfield but instead was giving the ball away to Yanited with various turnovers including one pretty silly pass where he tried to act clever. All in all AVB tried the let's crawl back into our shell approach and it failed.

Unrealated but did anyone catch his post-match interview on Sky? They cut him off mid-ramble It was hilarious.

EarlyPrototype wrote:He was no where near Welbeck when Giggs made the cross. There were 2 other Chelsea players closer to Welbeck who should have tracked his run. Luiz was marking Dorito its obvious from the video just watch from 5:40.

It's also quite obvious that Cahill was doing f*ck all and leaving Luiz to deal with two players.

It was Cahill's fault as well, but at the end of the day the guy who Luiz was marking was the one that scored.................

EarlyPrototype wrote:It was Cahill's fault as well, but at the end of the day the guy who Luiz was marking was the one that scored.................

He was marking him due to the fact, Cahill was oblivious and not marking anyone...... He was'nt even in the 6 yard box ffs.......

While Luiz was caught in between Hernandez and Welbeck.....

As i said earlier if Cahill was doing his job and marking one of the players and instead of jumping in the air on the edge of the bloody box the goal doesnt happen.

I dont think that applies here. Man Utd were going full pelt for that game, Daniel being on or not isnt changing that.

Again, I didnt see Chelsea giving up momentuum TACTICALLY. That being the key here.

Sloppy passing and then poor pen calls was the change in momentuum, not tactics.

There is nothing wrong with what AVB did to him. He is right telling him to track back, it was needed. However, just because he did that doesnt mean he is excuseD from being subbed. He doesnt have defensive ability, when they were winning thats not o bad but when they are under pressure they cant have that. If AVB kept him on the pitch and he made another mistake, then what? AVB would of got blamed..just like I said before, cant win either way.


Romeu playing crap isnt AVB´s fault. He cant be blamed for him giving the ball away. He can only make a decision based on the facts. The facts

1. Chelsea were giving the ball away
2. Rooney was getting very involved in the game.
3. Both need to be stopped
4. Romeu is the best option they have in that position.
5. Romeu is a good passer and defensive player

What is the problem?


If people want to say Chelsea did X, Y and z wrong thats fair...but tactically he didnt do anything majorly wrong.

Everything he could of done different was MORE likely to come undone than what he did.

Yeah Franchise,

stay true to yourself. It offends me that you're always telling people they don't know what they're talking about.

I don't care what it said on paper, Malouda was operating the left, Torres through the middle (occasionally pulling wide right) and Sturridge down the right (occasionally cutting inside), looked like a 3 pronged attack to me.

The Chicha goal I have nothing more to say on it... Luiz had Chicha, lost him at the crucial moment. Wellbeck, is a non entity and only enters the area late in the move.

My point about Roman is not that he is to blame, but that AVB didn't strengthen the squad adequately and there is no excuse for that. No Essien, and you go into the season thinking Obi Mikel is ok to play the DM in a possession midfield. Have you lost your mind AVB? Then you want a kid to bail you out until Essien is fit?

He falls out with Anelka, who is 10 times the player Malouda is, yet Malouda is still flying under the radar. I'm sorry thats BS.

The opinions I've shared today, I share with my Dad, who has been a Chelsea supporter for the last 20 years. They're credible opinions.

What logic is it to say that you take off Sturridge because he is bad at defending, of course he is, he is a striker ffs. If you're going to remove someone, why not Malouda, who is rubbish at everything.

Zeal, your words are truth yet again mate. For the simple reason that you have stated that United's backline is littered with useless defenders like Evans, you keep the pressure on them. Putting on more DMs against United at that moment is a defeatist mentality... especially a kid (who granted is highly rated but was never going to get to grips with the game).

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:

EarlyPrototype wrote:It was Cahill's fault as well, but at the end of the day the guy who Luiz was marking was the one that scored.................

He was marking him due to the fact, Cahill was oblivious and not marking anyone...... He was'nt even in the 6 yard box ffs.......

While Luiz was caught in between Hernandez and Welbeck.....

As i said earlier if Cahill was doing his job and marking one of the players and instead of jumping in the air on the edge of the bloody box the goal doesnt happen.

Welbeck ran past 3 Chelsea players from outside the 18 yard box without a single one of them picking him up. Cahill was out of position so Luiz was covering for him marking HERNANDEZ (who went on to score). Luiz was not even aware of Welbeck making the run behind him. He was left flat footed when the cross was made for Dorito.

Nope. Torres was up front alone, Malouda, Mata and Sturridge were in the same band and Torres in a different one. It was 4231. Very often, Mata was the closest player to Torres defensively because Utd attack through the wings therefore taking Flo and Daniel up the pitch. Watch the game ffs.

The fact that your saying its Luiz fault and not saying anything about Cahill says it all really. If you want to say its Luiz fault, so be it, but look at you pinning the whole blame on him while aying "thank god for Cahill"...load of crap.

Again, you dont know what AVB could or could not do in the summer..so why blame him? Your talking about things you have no idea about.

Anelka is finished, just like Malouda....what makes you think Anelka is the difference between winning and losing..get a grip, it s 33 year old Anelka with no pace.


Taking off Malouda or Sturriage is unimportant, show me where that exact no change cost Chelsea a goal?

People keep talking about putting the pressure on Utd...are you saying, Chelsea should of pressed high up the pitch despite being 3 nil up and with Hernandez and his speed down the other end of the pitch? Seriously, thats your logic?

The Franchise wrote:I dont think that applies here. Man Utd were going full pelt for that game, Daniel being on or not isnt changing that.

Again, I didnt see Chelsea giving up momentuum TACTICALLY. That being the key here.

Sloppy passing and then poor pen calls was the change in momentuum, not tactics.

There is nothing wrong with what AVB did to him. He is right telling him to track back, it was needed. However, just because he did that doesnt mean he is excuseD from being subbed. He doesnt have defensive ability, when they were winning thats not o bad but when they are under pressure they cant have that. If AVB kept him on the pitch and he made another mistake, then what? AVB would of got blamed..just like I said before, cant win either way.


Romeu playing crap isnt AVB´s fault. He cant be blamed for him giving the ball away. He can only make a decision based on the facts. The facts

1. Chelsea were giving the ball away
2. Rooney was getting very involved in the game.
3. Both need to be stopped
4. Romeu is the best option they have in that position.
5. Romeu is a good passer and defensive player

What is the problem?


If people want to say Chelsea did X, Y and z wrong thats fair...but tactically he didnt do anything majorly wrong.

Everything he could of done different was MORE likely to come undone than what he did.

If Sturridge is useless at tracking back and AVB is so adamant on that then why didn't he just start Romeu Anyway I said that Villas Boas can't take all the blame for the Romeu change, it's not his fault Romeu crapped his pants.

I see we're dealing in hypothetical's now, if we are going to do that then Sturridge could have created another chance, could have got Evra sent off (he was on a yellow) there was already an indication that he was capable of doing that in the first Chelsea goal.

No one in the "hole" for Chelsea also made things difficult, especially since Valencia was going to play at RB. When that happened I knew the game would be much easier for the mancs, purely because United could handle Chelsea going forward and were capable of attacking more and more easily at the same time. Looks like bad tactics to me.

A united friend of mine who was watching the game with me said he hoped Sir Alex would put on Berbatov, I asked him for who. He paused then said Giggs, I said he would never do that since he trusts Giggs can do something going forward, a few moments later Giggs assists the third goal. Sometimes it's not about who you put in but who you don't take out. I think taking off Daniel was a mistake especially when you have Torres on the pitch who clearly needs a kick up the ass. Add that to the Mata positional change and you're basically letting United have it all their way while hoping you don't concede and Chelsea not conceding is a rarity these days

You could say AVB can't be held responsible for defensive mistakes but what I saw weren't really mistakes, just defenders who weren't sure what to do, it's been the case all season for Chelsea.

Regarding the pressing point, there are varying degrees of pressing, no one was asking for a full court press, just something that meant that Chelsea were still a threat. Something that would keep Valencia cautious about going forward. There wasn't and Valencia had full confidence when attacking, this lead to the 3rd goal funnily enough.

To make things simple AVB had two choices:

1) Bunker and hope for the game to end with a Chelsea victory. Considering Chelsea's defensive organisation this season it was never likely to happen.

2) Try to take United blow for blow and exploit their weak back line.

AVB went for choice number 1, he failed. He should take the blame. 3-0 up at home Dani. That's almost Spuds level lulz

Zealous wrote:

The Franchise wrote:I dont think that applies here. Man Utd were going full pelt for that game, Daniel being on or not isnt changing that.

Again, I didnt see Chelsea giving up momentuum TACTICALLY. That being the key here.

Sloppy passing and then poor pen calls was the change in momentuum, not tactics.

There is nothing wrong with what AVB did to him. He is right telling him to track back, it was needed. However, just because he did that doesnt mean he is excuseD from being subbed. He doesnt have defensive ability, when they were winning thats not o bad but when they are under pressure they cant have that. If AVB kept him on the pitch and he made another mistake, then what? AVB would of got blamed..just like I said before, cant win either way.


Romeu playing crap isnt AVB´s fault. He cant be blamed for him giving the ball away. He can only make a decision based on the facts. The facts

1. Chelsea were giving the ball away
2. Rooney was getting very involved in the game.
3. Both need to be stopped
4. Romeu is the best option they have in that position.
5. Romeu is a good passer and defensive player

What is the problem?


If people want to say Chelsea did X, Y and z wrong thats fair...but tactically he didnt do anything majorly wrong.

Everything he could of done different was MORE likely to come undone than what he did.

If Sturridge is useless at tracking back and AVB is so adamant on that then why didn't he just start Romeu Anyway I said that Villas Boas can't take all the blame for the Romeu change, it's not his fault Romeu crapped his pants.

I see we're dealing in hypothetical's now, if we are going to do that then Sturridge could have created another chance, could have got Evra sent off (he was on a yellow) there was already an indication that he was capable of doing that in the first Chelsea goal.

No one in the "hole" for Chelsea also made things difficult, especially since Valencia was going to play at RB. When that happened I knew the game would be much easier for the mancs, purely because United could handle Chelsea going forward and were capable of attacking more and more easily at the same time. Looks like bad tactics to me.

A united friend of mine who was watching the game with me said he hoped Sir Alex would put on Berbatov, I asked him for who. He paused then said Giggs, I said he would never do that since he trusts Giggs can do something going forward, a few moments later Giggs assists the third goal. Sometimes it's not about who you put in but who you don't take out. I think taking off Daniel was a mistake especially when you have Torres on the pitch who clearly needs a kick up the ass. Add that to the Mata positional change and you're basically letting United have it all their way while hoping you don't concede and Chelsea not conceding is a rarity these days

You could say AVB can't be held responsible for defensive mistakes but what I saw weren't really mistakes, just defenders who weren't sure what to do, it's been the case all season for Chelsea.

Because they were at home and had to win the game? At 0-0, it was fine to take the risk because they game had not been won yet..but when they had an advantage he took him off. Seems logical to me.

I am not dealing in any hypotheticals. I am saying, if he takes Daniel off there is a risk, if he keeps him on there is a risk..he took the lesser risk with the sub.


Mata was in the number 10 position, he went left and Romeu went to DM. If the plan was to to any sort of pressure and sit off, they didnt need a number 10 defensively. They sat off because of Hernandez. What is Valencia got to do with anything? Again, Utd were going to come forward and press the game forward...regardless of who was on the pitch, that was going to happen.

The goals Man utd scored, only one of them was a mistake..the other two were bs pens..I dont see all the defensive issues you seem to be talking about.

I saw turnover of possession and bad decisions on the ball generally.

Torres not going off instead, its a qustion to be posed. But can you honestly say that is what cost them the game? I dont buy for one second Torres being on the pitch gave Utd confidence to attack more...they were going to do that regardless..they would of done that against Messi still on the pitch.

Zealous wrote:Regarding the pressing point, there are varying degrees of pressing, no one was asking for a full court press, just something that meant that Chelsea were still a threat. Something that would keep Valencia cautious about going forward. There wasn't and Valencia had full confidence when attacking, this lead to the 3rd goal funnily enough.

To make things simple AVB had two choices:

1) Bunker and hope for the game to end with a Chelsea victory. Considering Chelsea's defensive organisation this season it was never likely to happen.

2) Try to take United blow for blow and exploit their weak back line.

AVB went for choice number 1, he failed. He should take the blame. 3-0 up at home Dani. That's almost Spuds level lulz

Valenica was going forward regardless of who was on the pitch..I dont know why
you think differently.

Where should of Chelsea pressed to then? They dropped off to the half way line...thats a reasonable level, sometimes they got a bit deeper which isnt good, but generally speaking is that not a good line for the first line of defence?

Why would anyone got for numbeR 2 when your 3-0 up...why go blow for blow and force a up tempo game when your winning..makes no sense. You want a slow game. They should of kept possession better, but thats not tactics, that excecuation.

I dont care what the score was, it could of been 5-0, you only give blame where it is due.

Just because they have a big lead and then lose it, doesnt automatically mean its his fault. You have to look at exactly what happened and what he did or didnt do.

AVB did very little wrong.

I see your point but meh I guess we'll have agree to disagree. I hope AVB gets a second season and every single player he wants in the summer. Then we'll see how little he does wrong

As do I. Hopefully then they can do well, win more games, get more points and maybe he wont get blamed for things he has no control over.

Don't get me wrong there are things he isn't really responsible for and growing pains are expected during a rebuilding phase, but I do think he has made mistakes this season in some games.

Doesn't mean he can't learn from them and improve. However I still think he has made them.

I think every coach made mistakes every season, I dont think last night was one of those games though.

Certaintly not to the extent Giovanni seems to be claiming.