SydneyChelsea

I thought that was exactly what undid us under Maresca. He was obsessed with that "baiting the press" sh*t that no one fell for past December each year. Teams used to give Caicedo and the defenders all the time in the world, especially when they realised our "outlet" was Malo Gusto playing as #10. Horsesh*t football.

He spoke about that in an interview actually. He trains for pleasure and to keep up with his kids, rather than because someone forced him too. His mental space is just completely different. He may have been at one point among the top 3 football players in the world, but it was just a job to him. Lot to admire about Hazard.

It is in both parties interest to ensure that the club's valuation reached their £5bn target. It ensures that Boehly and Walter cash out at a profit, while maintaining the facade that the club is worth more than the £4.3bn they paid for it in the first place. The latter is necessary because they have a ~£700m loan due in 2027 that needs to be repaid or renegotiated. Even more importantly, the PIK loan from Ares would likely have some penalty triggers that might apply.

It was a clear foul on Maguire. Pretty obvious Batshuayi knocked him down with his big dick energy.

I'm so glad many more people are coming around. VAR, DRS, The Bunker... whatever you dress it up as, video refereeing is a disaster for sport

Only because the ones that were there (Rick Damelian) went bust circa 2011!

Just on this, given our famously low possession stats I think that's a natural consequence of simply lacking the opportunity to play against low blocks and deep defences. Pretty much every team we've come against (except Arsenal and Hull) have allowed us to play openly in transition, and of course we absolutely murdered them. I actually though we were pretty good at creating against Hull for the 20 mins after HT up until Pedro's equalising goal. Then the attacking momentum quickly evaporated after that, bar that chance at the end for Rogers. Also, we were terrible after going 1-0 up and should have killed the game much sooner. Between Arsenal and Hull, still some work to do against low blocks but the potential is there. I'm more concerned that we aren't actually making the best of our transitions. Too much reliance on getting Neto/Gusto in behind on the overlap, neither of them are able to cross. We've got to do better than trying to get the overlapping player to make a cut back and we need to create more 1v1 chances.

Honestly, third at this time is looking already sewn up for. Anything less should be considered a failure since as bad as we think we are, Villa, United and Liverpool are worse. One positive thing about our results is that we have done better than expected against 'form' teams. Fulham, Leeds, Arsenal, Brighton and Hull are peaking right now, and we only lost to Arsenal which was largely expected in truth. With Brentford up next we're yet to play an underperforming team, whereas almost all our top 5 rivals have had unexpected results against them.

It's an odd thing to say given his assist for Pedro's equaliser was exactly him driving down the left wing, beating the fullback and putting in a cut back. It's doubly-odd since even in this 'quiet' game he assisted the equaliser and put the ball on a silver platter for Rogers to score a winner at 85mins. If Rogers scores that we wouldn't be having this conversation, but that has nothing to do with Palmer. Rogers is a brilliant athlete who is able to carry the ball upfield or through traffic in a split second, and we have been crying out for a player like that. They're different players with different strengths and weakenesses, hardly a revelation. It certainly doesn't make Palmer any less capable.

Garnacho will be back. If the terms were "highly likely" to be met it would be considered a swap deal with Rogers under UEFA's rules and limited Villa's ability to bank Rogers' full fee to fulfil their sanction agreement. Romano, as per usual, is full of sh*t. Secondly, there is no way to compel a club to sign a player. The best case scenario is we get paid some compensation from Villa for reneging on the agreement.

How does that make sense? That's like saying David Silva was poor because he was not Yaya Toure or Leroy Sane

The thing that stands out to me about this still is showing how the team fails to defend the space. They are ball-watching and in proximity to a man, but they have no line of sight to the vacant space the man behind them is going to run into. Watch a similar clip of Arsenal, Bayern, PSG hell even Brentford or Sunderland and you will see their central players box out the central space, facing the players not the ball, so that any runner in their is tracked and obstructed. Rather than the old zonal-marking vs man-marking debate the best defensive teams are now executing a hybrid of both, with a box of 4-5 central players defending the space and wide players/attackers going man-to-man. This can and should have been a nothing situation. Gusto's defending is soft, but there is a legitimate argument that the worst possible scenario is him giving away a needless foul in a dangerous place for a free kick. The cross itself was aimless, looping and should have been routinely dealt with by Martinez (risky) or Hato (obvious). I can't see much directly wrong with the centre backs; Fofana has just contested the header with McBurnie but that ball evaded them both and so Fofana has to turn. He's still in the right spot because he cannot leave McBurnie unmarked as he is their most obvious and biggest goal threat. Fofana is well-placed to deal with any cutback attempt to find him. Colwill similarly has his man marshalled. It's James, Lavia and Neto that I have problems with. Lavia is the obvious one for me as he is ball-watching with no awareness of the chasm in front him, leaving Hato as the only one defending the space. Bellaoumi is their only other attacking outlet other than McBurnie so Lavia should have moved into that central space as soon as possible, which would have allowed him to contest either Bellaoumi or #25 Crooks if they made a run towards the box. Neto is not contributing anything to this defense. He's on his heels instead of helping out Gusto by making the recovery tackle. The difference between this system and Tuchel's is that in the latter, you had about a second to make a play before either James or Chilwell were breathing down you for the recovery tackle. We just don't give attackers that much cause for concern. Alternatively, Neto could pick up James' player since he is of little threat, allowing James and Lavia to flood the centre and form a block of four. I think everyone is hesitant and disorganised. I don't think that "better" defenders move the needle all that much and in fact even more new signings just delays the organisation even more. And Gusto shouldn't be playing.

Arteta's comments: "It's a judo roll from the opponent. Ezri does nothing. We have to take responsibility to protect the game. Today the game was unprotected and it could have cost us the game and our momentum. It's really serious. It should never have happened. It's not fair." Thought it was interesting that he used the words "judo roll" because that is certainly one way you could teach attackers to deal with the MMA-style grappling taught to Arsenal defenders. Rugby league had a similar crisis in the mid 2000s, where traditional tackling was pushed aside in favour of grappling that was more effective at slowing down attacking play despite not actually meeting the rules for a tackle. It works because it more than doubles the amount of time the attacking player is engaged by the defender, prevents offloads etc and basically kills attacking momentum. Because the referees called it, it legitimised the tactic. Regarding the other defenders in the still above. That is identical behaviour to 'screening' in basketball and it is now well-known that Arsenal have been implementing this tactic. Calafiori and Rice have no intention of contesting for the ball, as is traditionally expected, but their movement is intended to impede their opponents from jostling the goalkeeper. Remember the controversy when Terry headed in the winner against Barcelona in 2005, Carvalho was accused of a basketball-style screen. It takes corners away from being an aerial duel to a competition for space which is biased against attacking players, since defenders cannot be punished until the ball is "in play".

This is actually Lewisham, which is much, much, much nicer than Parramatta.

I'll take it given the only other Sydneysider you know from these forums was a gay pirate

No, they had a massive and sole impact. The protests themselves did not create pressure on the day but the digital column inches spent explaining the rationale for them sure did. The first set of protest, as small as they seemed, sowed the seeds for what would later drive a wedge between Boehly and Clearlake's "sides". The fallout from the latest protests inspired a reckoning on the 22 Holdco accounts that uncovered the true nature of Clearlake's investment funding. It's a mistake to think that Clearlake (in particular) operate based on profit, since their goal is capital growth not profit. The only thing that matters to them is valuation and the only way that goes up is if the reputation and the 'brand' go up. Protests are an attack on the owners' reputation, which is why it is effective.

Us: We have no midfield Also us: All our midfielders are sh*t - don't play them and sell them all

Absolutely an unhinged take perhaps, but I came away from that game more worried about our attack than our defence. Hull have had a great start and they are a hard-working team in defense, but they are still below the level of your Sunderlands, Brentfords etc meaning we will face sterner tests for our attack. After Rogers' goal we should have absolutely blown them away with the firepower we had off the pitch. Hull actually didn't come out with a strict low block, and I'm wondering if our team just expected to be handed the ball and have to break them down through attrition like we saw under Maresca. Lavia and the CBs were progressing the ball nicely through midfield in the first half but there was little end product, particularly when Gusto was involved. The primary mode of attack is getting an overlapping player - either Rogers/Palmer or Neto/Hato - beyond the defensive line to cut the ball back. There is a big difference in quality and threat between the AMs and the WBs, so we suffer when teams let the WB into that position. The WBs have to have a few more strings to their bow instead of just smashing a ball through the box. We need to create more situations like the one that led to Rogers' goal because we can back any of the front three to finish or create a chance from that scenario. As for the defence, it is disorganised and erratic. That's only something that can be fixed with time and and it is going to take time and then suddenly 'click' for a run of games. Tuchel fixed Lampard's defence because he had a fit Rudiger and fit Kante that destroyed opponents on their own, giving him SIX starting players (James - Azpilicueta - Silva - Rudiger - Chilwell) who were among the best in the world at winning defensive duels and the luxury of Christensen and Zouma off the bench. We don't have that quality in defence or midfield, not because James and Lavia aren't good but because neither see themselves as the recovery defender. Only Caicedo has been given that role and the managers past have just expected him to do that ad infinitum. In all the goals we've conceded from midfield I haven't seen anyone make a defensive recovery run, working with their teammates so that the CB holds up/delays the attacker and the recovery defender nicks the ball off them. The other thing I can't understand is our defensive line, it's in no-man's land at times. Is it high, or is it low, or are we seeing that weird chaotic medium block we saw under Pochettino? Problem is in the PL every club has absolute road-runners in attack so it's easy to beat a medium block, you either have to go high enough to actually cause offside trap problems or park the bus. Anything in-between is just asking for trouble in this league. If there was a stat for "how many times are you defenders turned" I'd want to see how we compare to the rest of the league, because the stronger defensive teams just seem to have everything in front of them at all times.

I have a theory about this, actually. I think they stopped playing him because they realised he is a terrible, terrible footballer.

Clearlake have always held the majority vote/control at 22 Holdco level I believe, but both "parties" have equal voting rights at Chelsea level. Practically speaking I take it that Clearlake have always had veto/control over any decisions regarding investment/finance/borrowing and asset sales. I have said for a while now that Clearlake likely ran the numbers and in the current investment climate have decided a stadium relocation + new build isn't viable. Total costs would be close to £4bn which would only be viable if there was another ten years of this PL unsustainable growth, as the revenue increase is mediocre relative to the cost. Tottenham and Arsenal have profitable stadiums because they redeveloped pre-inflation and lower interest rates, and even then Tottenham nearly got caught out themselves by cost increases. The risk of spending unfathomable amounts of money only never to see a meaningful return and the club saddled with debt is far too risky. A re-development or new rebuild is probably the safest option, a middle ground between increasing profitability without risking the physical future of the club. Maybe they could incorporate the housing into the stadium design so the veterans can watch all the games for free from their living room. Although that would have been considered 'cruel and unusual punishment' under Maresca/Rosenior

"Remember how we bought this thing for a dollar each? What if I sell my share to you for two dollars? That way, I make my two dollars, and you can tell the world you own a three-dollar thing so the banks give you more of other people's imaginary money." - Todd Boehly to Behdad Eghbali, probably. It's in BlueCo's mutual interest for Clearlake to pay as much as they can afford, to artificially inflate the value of the club. Anything below the 4.3bn would effectively represent a loss halfway through their intended investment cycle.

I agree based on the last few games, but Zubimendi is a very different sort of player to Alex Scott. Zubimendi is a world-class controlling midfielder, he allows Rice to get forward but also has the technical ability to carry the ball, beat the press and switch play with accurate passes and through calls.

He's not Malo Gusto and our only other WB is injured?

Nah. f**k modern football, you win by scoring goals. Just asking for a 0-0 draw really. 2-1 win to Chelsea.

Past tense not necessary.