I am new to watching football (about six months) and I have become a fan of Chelsea.  I have noticed when watching Chelsea games that the players don't seem to have the spacing that I see when I watch other teams.  Most of the champions league teams keep greater distances between their players when attacking.  Is Chelsea not holding proper form or are they playing a different style?  

Nice name

When we play a 4-2-3-1 with the 3 attacking players behind the striker being:

Hazard - Mata - Oscar

All 3 players preferred position is that middle spot where Mata plays, all 3 would consider themselves "number 10's" which is the position just in behind the striker, as opposed to a winger which would normally occupy one of those wider slots like Moses. When we're in possession both of them prefer to cut inside and overlap with Mata as opposed to getting down the wings, that's just the tactics we play with the players we have.

When Moses is playing we have more width but don't hold on to the ball as well, and we'll attack better down the wings but not so well through the middle, it's just about picking the tactics that suit the team we're playing. In buying the likes of Mata/Hazard/Oscar we've been trying to imitate the likes of Barcelona a bit, with agile, quick skillful players that move the ball around well but don't offer much width.

Unfortauntely in the last 2 days we were shown in the Champions League what happens when power and speed and physicality (Bayern & Dortmund) come up against Skill and Finesse (Barca & Madrid), and it looks like we've shot ourselves in the foot by trying to change from being a powerhouse to a team of tricky little buggers.

And even more unfortunately our manager is a fat incompetent fool and knows very little of tactics other than swapping full backs in the 85th minute when we're trailing.

Edited April 25, 201313 yr by Jonty

'My triangle is bigger than your triangle'.

 

Other clubs are taking the piss, frankly.

When we play a 4-2-3-1 with the 3 attacking players behind the striker being:

Hazard - Mata - Oscar

All 3 players preferred position is that middle spot where Mata plays, all 3 would consider themselves "number 10's" which is the position just in behind the striker, as opposed to a winger which would normally occupy one of those wider slots like Moses. When we're in possession both of them prefer to cut inside and overlap with Mata as opposed to getting down the wings, that's just the tactics we play with the players we have.

When Moses is playing we have more width but don't hold on to the ball as well, and we'll attack better down the wings but not so well through the middle, it's just about picking the tactics that suit the team we're playing. In buying the likes of Mata/Hazard/Oscar we've been trying to imitate the likes of Barcelona a bit, with agile, quick skillful players that move the ball around well but don't offer much width.

Unfortauntely in the last 2 days we were shown in the Champions League what happens when power and speed and physicality (Bayern & Dortmund) come up against Skill and Finesse (Barca & Madrid), and it looks like we've shot ourselves in the foot by trying to change from being a powerhouse to a team of tricky little buggers.

And even more unfortunately our manager is a fat incompetent fool and knows very little of tactics other than swapping full backs in the 85th minute when we're trailing.

 

 

How much influence can the manager have in improving the team?  With the talent that Chelsea currently has, can a change to a better manager put them into the top two of the PL?  Assuming a new manager is given time to actually manage the team properly, how long does it usually take to see results from the team?

 

In most sports in the US it takes more than a year to see results.  Curious as to how it works in Europe.

How much influence can the manager have in improving the team?  With the talent that Chelsea currently has, can a change to a better manager put them into the top two of the PL?  Assuming a new manager is given time to actually manage the team properly, how long does it usually take to see results from the team?

 

In most sports in the US it takes more than a year to see results.  Curious as to how it works in Europe.

A lot. Just take this season for example, Manchester City have easily the strongest squad, and i'd say we're then quite easily second, on paper Manchester United have one of the weakest squads they've had in 20 years. Under RDM for the earlier part of this season, we dominated many games and were competing as a top team on all fronts, then since under Benitez we've ended up struggling to battle for 4th spot and have gotten knocked out of just about every cup. United won this season because they have a manager well beyond Mancini (Man City manger) or Benitez, next season if Mourinho returns to coach us we'll be quite optimistic of launching a title bid next season I think.

Sometimes the difference made by a manager is evident from the very beginning, I assure you as soon as Benitez is out of Chelsea and anyone else, but especially Mourinho, returns we'll improve dramatically, far too much poison around the team right now.

I sense a bit of a wum here.

There are two schools of thought within football, the first being that managers are merely highly paid overseer's and that success largely depends on the inherent talent of a squad.

 

The second, which most subscribe to, is what I would term the 'cult of the manager'. In this school, the importance of the manager cannot be emphasised enough.

 

I think the truth lies somewhere in between, reasonably competent managers should, by and large, get the same out of similar groups of players. For example, swap the managers of two mid-table teams and they will more than likely both end up mid-table at the end of the next season. You cannot put in what God's left out, etc.

 

There are, however, incompetent managers, and then there are exceptional managers. Rafael Benitez is a case and point over the last few years, dragging down two European Cup winning clubs in quick succession. Incompetent managers and exceptional managers can have a pronounced affect on the fortunes of any team, no matter how talented.

I sense a bit of a wum here.

I don't. Imagine you're new to the sport and you've just watched the two clinics put on by Dortmund and Munich this week. If you were to then compare those games to the rubbish football routinely served up by Chelsea you would no doubt be asking the same questions.

Unfortauntely in the last 2 days we were shown in the Champions League what happens when power and speed and physicality (Bayern & Dortmund) come up against Skill and Finesse (Barca & Madrid), and it looks like we've shot ourselves in the foot by trying to change from being a powerhouse to a team of tricky little buggers.

 

Dortmund are power, speed and physicality when compared to Madrid, the side famed for fast counterattacking football, whose talisman probably epitomises those traits?

 

 

Also cause it's relevant to this managerial discussion: remember how 6-7 months ago when there was speculation about Pep coming to Chelsea, and half the posters on here were writing him off, saying that it is easy to do what he did with Barca? What a surprise it is that without him they're a shadow of the team that has dominated CL ties over the past 5 years.

Have we ever had any proper width since Duff and Robben? Even with Anelka and Malouda on the wings back in the 4-3-3 days we relied on our full backs for width.

We can make the midfield trio a success but we need the right two in the DM role to make it work. That's currently our weakest link.

Edited April 25, 201313 yr by Huttsey

I am new to watching football (about six months) and I have become a fan of Chelsea.  I have noticed when watching Chelsea games that the players don't seem to have the spacing that I see when I watch other teams.  Most of the champions league teams keep greater distances between their players when attacking.  Is Chelsea not holding proper form or are they playing a different style?  

I think the difference is the speed of build-up/transitions - because our build up is slow, it allows the opposition time to get back into shape. When the opponents are holding their defensive shape, our players can't really make long passes as they'll be intercepted, so they have to move closer together in order to keep the ball moving. Dortmund (and Madrid) are both very good at transitions and are known for very quick build up play, so they encounter this problem less. That said, with all of Dortmund's goals Madrid's defence were in position and Dortmund's players were relatively close together. 

 

Bayern got a lot of space because Barca play high up the pitch and dominate possession, and Bayern were good at their transitions. Barca have become accustomed to facing deep, packed defences and their play is based around having players in close proximity to each other, making triangles and quick passing.

 

 

How much influence can the manager have in improving the team?  With the talent that Chelsea currently has, can a change to a better manager put them into the top two of the PL?  Assuming a new manager is given time to actually manage the team properly, how long does it usually take to see results from the team?

 

In most sports in the US it takes more than a year to see results.  Curious as to how it works in Europe.

It generally takes a while. Often with a new manager the team will have an initial "bounce" and do well - eg. Sunderland under Di Canio. This is usually put down to mental factors, but it could be that there's an immediate change in style which is more suited to the team. Fergie, for example, took 4 years to win a trophy with Utd and the rest is history.

 

We've been guilty of not giving managers enough time. I'm gonna say only Jose and Carlo got enough time to get the team playing the way they wanted, and the sackings of both were really stupid.

Dortmund are power, speed and physicality when compared to Madrid, the side famed for fast counterattacking football, whose talisman probably epitomises those traits?

 

 

Also cause it's relevant to this managerial discussion: remember how 6-7 months ago when there was speculation about Pep coming to Chelsea, and half the posters on here were writing him off, saying that it is easy to do what he did with Barca? What a surprise it is that without him they're a shadow of the team that has dominated CL ties over the past 5 years.

Dortmund dominated them by playing such a high tempo the whole game, so that the likes of Xabi Alonso had no time to get Madrid going forward properly.

But yeah Dortmund/Madrid are far more similar than Barca and Bayern.

Edited April 25, 201313 yr by Jonty

I sense a bit of a wum here.

 

Had to look that up to see what it meant!  Just trying to understand tactics and enjoy watching the matches more.  

 

I appreciate all the explanations.  I see all the talent that Chelsea has but didn't understand why the results were not there.  

 

Is there any worry that a new manager won't fit with the players currently with the team? Or should the new manager be able to succeed with the current players?  

 

I understand there are positions of need that have to be addressed.  But would you expect or worry about a formation change?

Edited April 25, 201313 yr by bogey77

A formation change is unlikely, given the wealth of talent we have in attacking midfield. 4-2-3-1 is the only system capable of accommodating our three best players, although Oscar is capable of playing in a deeper role.

 

Any new manager will likely look to address our main weak points, striker and central midfield.

Had to look that up to see what it meant! Just trying to understand tactics and enjoy watching the matches more.

I appreciate all the explanations. I see all the talent that Chelsea has but didn't understand why the results were not there.

Is there any worry that a new manager won't fit with the players currently with the team? Or should the new manager be able to succeed with the current players?

I understand there are positions of need that have to be addressed. But would you expect or worry about a formation change?

Hi mate

Welcome to the forums, I trust you are indeed not a WUM! Glad you have chosen Chelsea as your team. The bits in bold -

Yes there is always that risk, but Roman has a decent track record of choosing a high caliber manager. Sadly his track record is worse for binning them too hastily - even the great ones.

A new manager will nearly always bring in one or two players that they like and there will more than likely be adaptions to the team formation and strategy. I think our team has lots of flair, but lacks a physical presence which has helped us for so many years. There is a bit of an imbalance, which I think will be addressed in the summer, hopefully along with a top coach who is capable of doing the job (Not Benitez).

Regardless of who is at the helm next season, it will be much better and we will all be able to enjoy watching our team again.

(We can only hope)

Edited April 25, 201313 yr by Zola

I still think we have the habit of playing really slow football, it's been going on for ages now and i just don't get it. It's like our players tire themselves out before the start of every game.

the only thing you need to know bogey77 is that Jose Mourinho = success. if he's appointed manager, you will soon be able to say you support the PL champions.

Had to look that up to see what it meant!  Just trying to understand tactics and enjoy watching the matches more.  

 

I appreciate all the explanations.  I see all the talent that Chelsea has but didn't understand why the results were not there.  

 

Is there any worry that a new manager won't fit with the players currently with the team? Or should the new manager be able to succeed with the current players?  

 

I understand there are positions of need that have to be addressed.  But would you expect or worry about a formation change?

 

The general consensus is that we need a new striker to replace Torres (who fingers crossed will leave in the summer), and a new midfielder to be a more physical presence in the midfield similar to what Yaya Toure currently is doing at Man City. 

 

That said, with a top manager like Mourinho he may be able to win even without these changes, I mean under Di Matteo we were storming the league with the current group of players.

 

A formation change is unlikely as we've gone out and bought a bunch of players in the same position and now we're already playing 2 of them out of position (Hazard & Oscar wanting to play in Mata's position), so any change would just make it more ridiculous.