Butch
First Team Squad
- Messages
- 1,480
- Reaction score
- 21
[i always enjoy reading his essays. You can always rely on him to lift your spirits. This time, he has a few choice words, well, jabs, for City's manager, as well as for Liverpool:]
As the title race heats up, columnist and Chelsea fan Giles Smith comes to the defence of his team in the face of questions over its challenge…
'It would be very disappointing for football, for the fans, for everyone. I think the most attractive football, the most goals you can score, should be rewarded. Big teams must play as big teams.'
The words, there, of Manuel Pellegrini, regarding the still highly plausible prospect, with just four games to go, of Chelsea (rather than Manchester City or Liverpool) winning the league.
Disappointing for everyone, note - including, presumably, you and me. Well, I guess we'll just have to cope with that disappointment as manfully as we can, if it happens. You and I have coped with worse, I'm sure, than the disappointment of Chelsea winning the league. We'll find a way to deal with the worst of it. Of that I'm certain.
But what about Mr Pellegrini? How will he cope with his disappointment? And how will football cope? We're a big team but we don't play like one, is the City manager's argument. And we don't play like one because we don't score enough goals.
Now, I don't suppose anyone around here would claim that goals have always come easily to us this season. Except against Arsenal, of course. And Tottenham. And Manchester United. And Sunderland. And Cardiff. And Norwich. And West Ham. And Southampton, twice. And Newcastle. And Fulham. And Stoke. And Steaua Bucharest. And PSG. And Schalke, twice. To name only the games in which we have scored three goals or more.
Nevertheless, irrespective of our struggles in front of the posts, it's an odd view of football, isn't it, that Mr Pellegrini is offering here? One that seems to be saying that sheer quantity of goals is what it's all about. One that sets more store by, for example, a one-sided caning of Fulham than a carefully plotted, narrow victory over a fellow title-contender when it really matters.
On the subject of which, what about that performance of ours against City at the Etihad earlier this season? Looked like a big team playing like a big team to me. Looked like a big team really stepping up, actually. Same when we beat City again at home. Big as you like. Big as it gets, frankly. But not big enough for Mr Pellegrini's tastes, apparently.
And yet those two results are part of the reason City now find themselves third in the league and praying for favours from the humble likes of us - those two results and, of course, the recent defeat by Liverpool.
Now, if ever there was time for a big team to play like a big team, it was last Sunday at Anfield. Unfortunately, City didn't quite go big enough.
If ever there was another time for a big team to play like a big team, it was when City went to the Emirates a couple of weeks ago, charged with taking three points off an Arsenal side who were, at that point, not so much on the ropes as half hanging out of the ring. Unfortunately, City didn't quite go big enough.
If ever there was another time for a big team to play like a big team, it was when City were at home to Wigan in the quarter-final of the FA Cup. Unfortunately, they didn't quite go big enough.
If ever there was another time for a big team to play like a big team, it was when City faced Barcelona in the Champions League Round of 16. Unfortunately, they didn't quite go big enough. Twice.
Playing like a big team last night against Sunderland might have been quite a smart idea, too. But, once more, no.
In fact, over and over again this season, when it was time for City to play like a big team, they slightly underestimated the bigness required. I'm not saying they haven't scored lots of goals along the way, of course. But I am saying that they didn't necessarily score them when it really mattered.
Which is why the once bold talk of a possible quadruple now seems such a long time ago, and why Mr Pellegrini is now in the position in which he finds himself - needing a little team to do what his big team couldn't: get a result at Anfield, just to keep his title hopes anywhere near alive. (And ours even more so.)
Will we oblige? Will we big enough? Well, let's see.
And now there are just four games to go. For Liverpool, at any rate. For us, it's a minimum of six, with the magical possibility of a seventh, if the two Champions League semi-finals against Atletico Madrid go the right way.
But that's pretty much the story of the season, in a nutshell. Four games for Liverpool, six or seven games for us. Many have spoken about Brendan Rodgers' side as the season's dark horses; the season's lightly raced horses would surely be more accurate.
Liverpool went out of the Capital One Cup in the third round and the FA Cup in the fifth. They had failed to qualify for Europe. So, add those four cup matches to their 34 league games and you've got a season which has thus far seen Liverpool in action just 38 times.
We passed the 38-game mark more than two months ago, on the 11 February. We're now up to 51 in all competitions - 13 more matches than Liverpool, or just slightly more than a third of a league season. It's April for them, but, if we were playing at Liverpool's rate, we would already be quite deep into next November.
It's a method that has worked for that club before, of course. In 2005, you may dimly remember, they successfully took a season off to concentrate on winning the Champions League. This season, varying the theme, they have effectively taken a season off in order to have a stab at winning the Premier League.
And why not? 'One thing at a time' has always been good advice. It's not Chelsea's preferred way of going about things, of course - probably because we have a greater respect for the history of the competitions that we're involved in, and throw ourselves into them accordingly. However, that's just a cultural thing. The point is, one day Liverpool may muster the nerve and the ability to compete to the best of their ability across all platforms, as we invariably do. I, for one, look forward to seeing them do so.
Original link to this article (you can catch his columns on the official Chelsea site every week.): http://www.chelseafc.com/news-article/article/3771635/title/giles-smiths-thursday-thoughts
[chortle, chortle, snigger, snigger...]
Cheers,
Butch
As the title race heats up, columnist and Chelsea fan Giles Smith comes to the defence of his team in the face of questions over its challenge…
'It would be very disappointing for football, for the fans, for everyone. I think the most attractive football, the most goals you can score, should be rewarded. Big teams must play as big teams.'
The words, there, of Manuel Pellegrini, regarding the still highly plausible prospect, with just four games to go, of Chelsea (rather than Manchester City or Liverpool) winning the league.
Disappointing for everyone, note - including, presumably, you and me. Well, I guess we'll just have to cope with that disappointment as manfully as we can, if it happens. You and I have coped with worse, I'm sure, than the disappointment of Chelsea winning the league. We'll find a way to deal with the worst of it. Of that I'm certain.
But what about Mr Pellegrini? How will he cope with his disappointment? And how will football cope? We're a big team but we don't play like one, is the City manager's argument. And we don't play like one because we don't score enough goals.
Now, I don't suppose anyone around here would claim that goals have always come easily to us this season. Except against Arsenal, of course. And Tottenham. And Manchester United. And Sunderland. And Cardiff. And Norwich. And West Ham. And Southampton, twice. And Newcastle. And Fulham. And Stoke. And Steaua Bucharest. And PSG. And Schalke, twice. To name only the games in which we have scored three goals or more.
Nevertheless, irrespective of our struggles in front of the posts, it's an odd view of football, isn't it, that Mr Pellegrini is offering here? One that seems to be saying that sheer quantity of goals is what it's all about. One that sets more store by, for example, a one-sided caning of Fulham than a carefully plotted, narrow victory over a fellow title-contender when it really matters.
On the subject of which, what about that performance of ours against City at the Etihad earlier this season? Looked like a big team playing like a big team to me. Looked like a big team really stepping up, actually. Same when we beat City again at home. Big as you like. Big as it gets, frankly. But not big enough for Mr Pellegrini's tastes, apparently.
And yet those two results are part of the reason City now find themselves third in the league and praying for favours from the humble likes of us - those two results and, of course, the recent defeat by Liverpool.
Now, if ever there was time for a big team to play like a big team, it was last Sunday at Anfield. Unfortunately, City didn't quite go big enough.
If ever there was another time for a big team to play like a big team, it was when City went to the Emirates a couple of weeks ago, charged with taking three points off an Arsenal side who were, at that point, not so much on the ropes as half hanging out of the ring. Unfortunately, City didn't quite go big enough.
If ever there was another time for a big team to play like a big team, it was when City were at home to Wigan in the quarter-final of the FA Cup. Unfortunately, they didn't quite go big enough.
If ever there was another time for a big team to play like a big team, it was when City faced Barcelona in the Champions League Round of 16. Unfortunately, they didn't quite go big enough. Twice.
Playing like a big team last night against Sunderland might have been quite a smart idea, too. But, once more, no.
In fact, over and over again this season, when it was time for City to play like a big team, they slightly underestimated the bigness required. I'm not saying they haven't scored lots of goals along the way, of course. But I am saying that they didn't necessarily score them when it really mattered.
Which is why the once bold talk of a possible quadruple now seems such a long time ago, and why Mr Pellegrini is now in the position in which he finds himself - needing a little team to do what his big team couldn't: get a result at Anfield, just to keep his title hopes anywhere near alive. (And ours even more so.)
Will we oblige? Will we big enough? Well, let's see.
And now there are just four games to go. For Liverpool, at any rate. For us, it's a minimum of six, with the magical possibility of a seventh, if the two Champions League semi-finals against Atletico Madrid go the right way.
But that's pretty much the story of the season, in a nutshell. Four games for Liverpool, six or seven games for us. Many have spoken about Brendan Rodgers' side as the season's dark horses; the season's lightly raced horses would surely be more accurate.
Liverpool went out of the Capital One Cup in the third round and the FA Cup in the fifth. They had failed to qualify for Europe. So, add those four cup matches to their 34 league games and you've got a season which has thus far seen Liverpool in action just 38 times.
We passed the 38-game mark more than two months ago, on the 11 February. We're now up to 51 in all competitions - 13 more matches than Liverpool, or just slightly more than a third of a league season. It's April for them, but, if we were playing at Liverpool's rate, we would already be quite deep into next November.
It's a method that has worked for that club before, of course. In 2005, you may dimly remember, they successfully took a season off to concentrate on winning the Champions League. This season, varying the theme, they have effectively taken a season off in order to have a stab at winning the Premier League.
And why not? 'One thing at a time' has always been good advice. It's not Chelsea's preferred way of going about things, of course - probably because we have a greater respect for the history of the competitions that we're involved in, and throw ourselves into them accordingly. However, that's just a cultural thing. The point is, one day Liverpool may muster the nerve and the ability to compete to the best of their ability across all platforms, as we invariably do. I, for one, look forward to seeing them do so.
Original link to this article (you can catch his columns on the official Chelsea site every week.): http://www.chelseafc.com/news-article/article/3771635/title/giles-smiths-thursday-thoughts
[chortle, chortle, snigger, snigger...]
Cheers,
Butch
