venom2011

That was a poor squad. We went into 1 or 2 seasons with very little depth as well. Malouda in his prime was definitely good. I'd still go with the Willian though.

Oscar and Willian offer a similar style really so the two of them should be in rotation. It would be great to be able to rest Matic or Fabregas or Hazard and not have a major drop in quality.

I agree, backing off is the better option in certain situations but not at the edge of the area BD. On a counter your midfield have the time to get back but near the box I believe it's always better to have the player make a decision. Allowing him to run and get off a shot is higher risk. In the main I think Cahill's done well but this one situation has popped up quite a few times now and I think he fails on occasion. I've watched Kompany handle it numerous times and almost always making the right choice.

I think Willian was a similar case if I remember correctly. But people still flamed him after just 6 months in a new league and new position.

Agreed. Some freshening could have helped. And hopefully we see quite a bit of it against Bradford.

I find that a bit strange though. I thought Costa didn't look leggy at all. Except for the final 10/15 mins because he worked his socks off. His hold-up play was good, but when he had a run at goal though - not so good. And Ramires is absolutely the last person you want to bring on when you're struggling for control and can't string two passes together.

'Random' stat: Ivanovic pass success - 59%

What Cahill was supposed to do is have Sterling make a decision. You simply don't drop back and allow a forward to have a free shot inside the box. And he does it time and time again.

#CahillBackTrack

Forget the result. That was absolutely horrible. Not one good defensive performance from any of the back 6. Cahill being Cahill. Ivanovic, Mikel and Matic absolutely woeful passing. And all this with only 1 change. Phew.

I've only seen him at the World Cup as well, but according to WhoScored he's had a good season. 16 apps. 4 goals. 4 assists. Played mainly as a no.10 or on the right flank. Good dribbling and passing stats.

I would say that he's a better fit for the side than Salah or Schurrle. Technically a strong player so would fit in seamlessly.

You mean the discussion in the PAUL POGBA thread about why we shouldn't forgo signing him because we have youngsters like RLC? My argument was related to the that, and to the problem with trying to rely on youth potential to sustain a title challenge. The finer aspects of RLC as a player were not relevant to that. But I also would like to apologise for some earlier snide comments. It's been a rough day for me.

A key pass is a pass which leads to a direct chance on goal. Think of it as an assist without the resulting goal. If there is a goal it just becomes an assist of course.

The fact that you can't comprehend what I wrote and still ask me to point out your mistakes means that any argument is actually futile. And yes I don't enjoy speaking about things irrelevant to the argument. Stats are indeed useful in supplementing one's thinking but it is useless if that thinking is flawed.

Fair enough FC. But the day when it's a draw or loss and we see the same thing from him, that's when people call for his head and I find that strange. Why the focus on him - because it has been (or should be) more noticeable to those that study the game due to his position and scope of influence on the game. But again, I agree he's had a very good season and is a major contributor to our title challenge.

But just for a laugh, let me breakdown the problems with your argument: "Sigurdsson is Swansea's main playmaker" "the playmaker tasked with making 'key passes'" Your opinion of his designated role within the team. which is why he has more key passes than Oscar (by 0.9 per match) and more assists.....specifically ONE more assist. An inference based on your assumption - Because Sigurdsson is tasked with making key passes, that is why he has more. Oscar is not the main playmaker for Chelsea. Again, your opinion of his role as designated by Mourinho Cesc Fabregas is, hence the 15 assists and 3.2 key passes per game. Cesc is naturally a more creative and technically gifted player, but again you're confusing what the players are able to do with what you think their roles are. I could go on but it's quite tedious.

Absolutely. I don't think anyone can deny that he's had a good season and I certainly don't question how invaluable he is to the side. He is improving and long may it continue. Here's a comparison between players who play in a similar position. Yes we are all aware of Oscar's good qualities, those aren't being questioned. He is not a typical no.10 but there are matches and situations within matches where he is required to be more creative: Now these are of course face-value stats. Any mention of who the better passer is, who the better player is, would be mostly subjective. But my argument is that if you look at the key passes (chances at goal created), combined with the fact that I've seen many occurrences of attacks breaking down with the ball at his feet, then he does need to do better in the regard. The same goes for Willian. *Hypothetical* - If Oscar makes 100 passes in a game, with 85% pass completion, but 10 of the other passes were all during the crux of counter-attacking moves - I am going to be disappointed regardless of the scoreline or his goals/assists because the TEAM PERFORMANCE *could have been better. These are two examples before the 10 min mark against Swansea. Both could have led to good chances. One with our players breaking their midfield line, and the other a good chance for Hazard. Two poor passes and two attacks broken down. He misplaces a simple pass a bit later and Mourinho is fuming because he expects better.

Then please enlighten me as to this relevant 'context' which you keep harping on about. A fundamental misunderstanding of football statistics? I am an economist by profession and I can assure you there is no misunderstanding regarding statistical inferences. You are making assumptions as to Oscar's and Sigurdsson's function within the Swansea and Chelsea teams and then using that as the basis for their statistical differences - cognitive bias. I did not make illogical inferences from Oscar v Sigurdsson stat and took it at face value. Sigurdsson having more key passes (leading to chances) is an undeniable fact, but in previous posts I have argued why I believe Oscar is the better player. So before you go on another tangent and criticise the opinions of others, I urge you to employ more careful consideration as it will save us all from having to endure such BS.

This is unfortunately what I do, regardless of whether I post it here or not. And it's what coaches do as well. But you shouldn't take it as being unhappy with the result/performances. It was a great victory, everyone had a good game, but that doesn't mean you should refrain from discussing the possibility of improvements just because everything is rosy.

Absolutely. His general play during the Newcastle game was woeful at times but he scored so we can paper over those cracks. There's no need to be apologetic for your opinion as it is a sensible argument. It seems many people on the forum have two standard responses - praise or flame, without due consideration. As I've said, Oscar is probably my favourite player at the moment, but if I feel he should improve in a certain aspect I will say as much. It doesn't need any other context because eventually all you end up doing is making excuses for poor play. Watching the game against Swansea, he fluffed two counter opportunities in the first 10 mins. And then I thought to myself - How many memorable through-balls (key passes) has he played this season? And I couldn't think of one. Fabregas played 2 in just that game. Then I saw the Sigurdsson v Oscar stats and Sigurdsson has twice as many key passes as him this season. A pretty damning stat considering the respective teams. And this is not undue criticism. It's just a fact that he must improve in this area, considering his ability. And I expect him to.

So when you're winning everything is great? Problems only show up if/when results go south? There is also a big difference between critical analysis and complaining/moaning. Learning to recognise this difference could be beneficial in the long run.

Stats without context won't exactly scream anything. 85% was also the lowest of the 5 starting midfielders.

Well done.

I understand your point, but I value the overall performance over 'moments'. He had a good game undoubtedly, but he was sloppy. What I find even more strange is that if you strip his goals away you'd have 10 posters flaming on this thread about how we need Sigurdsson instead of him, but apparently there's nothing a goal can't fix. It's fair to be critical (with respect) of any performance if you're striving for perfection and no one should ever apologise for that. When we signed Oscar the first thing I said was: 'He is going to be my favourite ever player because he combines his talent with immense work rate'. But that will never stop me from highlighting flaws in his performances. None of it is displayed in any highlight package so I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. And lastly, what does any of that have to do with my point.