Jump to content

Is playing attractive football more important than winning?


PloKoon13

Aesthetics or Results?  

60 members have voted

  1. 1. Aesthetics or Results?

    • Attractive football
    • Winning football


Recommended Posts

Despite our lofty position in the League (albeit alongside a relatively poor showing in Europe), there has been much criticism on the forum of late of the style of play we have been employing recently. Our performances clearly haven't been what they were in the first half of the season, and we certainly haven't had the swagger of the early games, but we still maintain a healthy six-point lead with a game in hand. We have only lost three games in all competitions this season, and haven't lost in the league since the catastrophe of New Year's Day, however we have drawn four of our last six in all competitions, and haven't scored more than two goals in a game since beating Swansea in the middle of January.

 

Either way, we are certainly no longer in the imperious form which saw fans and pundits alike speculate that Chelsea might stroll to the title, with talk even of us going the season unbeaten or winning a treble. The frustration with our recent struggle to get goals probably isn't helped by our general reputation for playing defensive football in our recent history, even taking it to extremes in the bigger games (case in point CL 2012). Recently I have seen criticisms from posters on here who have accused of being 'turgid', even 'clueless', with several people asking why we can't still win but while playing more attractive football.

 

This, to me, begged the question - what if you had to choose between them? Which do you consider more important out of winning and playing attractive football?

 

This is a flawed question I know, as 'attractive' is an entirely subjective term, the specifics of which no one will agree on, but let us assume for argument's sake that it consists of playing a more attacking style which will result in us scoring more goals, but in all probability, run a greater risk of conceding more goals. Would you prefer a slow grind to a title or an expansive style of football which ultimately leads to nothing, in the fashion of Arsenal over the last decade?

 

So, assuming they are mutually exclusive, which would it be for you? Attractive football or winning football?

 

Edit: forgot to actually attach the poll

Edited by PloKoon13
Link to comment
Share on other sites



For what it's worth Mourinho has defended our style of recent weeks, arguing that reduced scorelines are not a result of seemingly over-cautious tactics, but merely a matter of us not taking our chances, or in some cases, suffering bad luck:

 

 


“Imagine West Ham [in the 1-0 win on 4th March] with the last corner of the game, they score to make it 1-1 and we lose two points. We did nothing to score the second goal? Ramires didn’t hit the post? Willian didn’t have a shot off the line? We did nothing to kill the game? We did. We tried. We wanted to. You don’t see Chelsea score a goal and suddenly give the ball to an opponent and say now we are going to defend. We don’t do that.

 

 

But if you don’t score against Burnley, independent of what happened with the red card and so on, how many chances we missed in the beginning of the second half. We left the dressing room at half-time convinced to go and to kill. How many chances we missed. Diego in front of the goal. Another one, the keeper made a save. Sometimes football is not the way you project things.

 

 

Against West Ham, Ramires scores those two goals – one against the post and one with a header that the keeper makes a fantastic save. Then Eden makes a fantastic touch and Willian has an open goal, Cresswell takes the ball. We can score three goals and win 4-0 or at least score one and win 2-0. We didn’t – in the last minute, they go and score. 1-1.

 

 

Did we play defensively? We didn’t. I don’t see much difference between our 5-0 against Swansea and other matches we played away. The difference I see is that every time we shot we scored. First shot, 1-0, second shot, 2-0, third shot, 3-0, goodbye. I think this is a phase. In one of these games we will score three or four goals.”

Edited by PloKoon13
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Of course not.

However if the style of play you have is starting to have a negative impact in terms of results then in needs to be looked at.

Winning is the most important thing in football, the two do not need to be exclusive though. There are plenty of examples of teams who have both won things in the game while playing great football.

There of course is a balance to reach between the two but it’s not impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course not, but we don't seem to be playing too much 'winning football' either at the mo. 

 

What's important is that you have a gameplan and go for it this season, but I don't think anyone expects us not to step up our performances next season on a more consistent basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



If you pick top ten European sides now, and we're certainly among them, Chelsea will probably be dead last when it comes to attacking approach. Atletico and Juve may be close, but they're probably more adventurous than us.

 

As for winning football vs attractive football, of course everyone in their mind would pick winning. Point is, you don't have to choose one or the other, as the likes of Real, Bayern, Barcelona, etc. prove on a regular basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think that we haven't been playing as 'unattractive' or unattacking (word ?) football as some would like to make out.. we are after all the league's top scorers !!
I thought i'd like to point that out. 
I'll take winning everyday.. i had thirty years of getting thumped thank you very much !!!!

Edited by chelseablueboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Playing all out attack football can look great but it leaves you vulnerable, remember the time we played Arsenal under AVB? 3-5. Bloody entertaining stuff, but we lost.

There is a happy medium, Jose hates that sort of risk though.

The team evidently needs a couple of tweaks to make it tick better, which I hope we put right in the summer. I think one or two guys will go from midfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chelsea Megastore Away Shirt
Chelsea Megastore Away Shirt

Chelsea Megastore Away Shirt

Point is, you don't have to choose one or the other, as the likes of Real, Bayern, Barcelona, etc. prove on a regular basis.

 

Thing is sides don't roll over and let us tickle their bellies and give them a ruddy good spanking like Real, Barca and Bayern's league opponents do on a regular basis. 

 

Bayern are just far beyond the level of anyone else in their league. 

 

The Premier League is much more competitive with a lot more teams pushing for the title or European places, it's what makes it such an entertaining league.

 

Results always come first but I do think that off the back of good results and success as a team you should look to become the best footballing side they can be.

 

When I look at Jose's first league title success, I would say that was pretty close to perfection with regards to ability. Only 15 goals conceded in whole season, just the one loss, brilliant stuff. 

 

The 09/10 team under Carlo wasn't as good, 6 losses as champions is quite a lot in my opinion but we did score for fun that season. 

 

Maybe fans are looking for a middle ground between those two sides? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



In football the ends definitely justify the means. Not to mention the fact that we do play good football.

 

Ends definitely justify the means and we should've parked the bus over the last two months, but we didn't.

 

We also didn't attack teams. That's why we keep on scoring goals and then conceding. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Winning football, definitely.  I'm not too bothered if we're 'boring' - I'd rather win and play as a unit rather than just looking good and drawing 3-3.

 

It makes me mad when people are so into the attacking play, they forget that putting up a good defensive display is just as important and just as much a part of football as the flair and attractiveness of attacking football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the question should of been...

 

Is playing entertaining football more important than winning?

 

1. Entertainment.

2. Winning.

 

Defining entertaining football is a lot easier than defining attractive football.

 

I still think you would get similar landslide results in the ^ poll though.

Edited by coco
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Maybe the question should of been...

 

Is playing entertaining football more important than winning?

 

1. Entertainment.

2. Winning.

 

Defining entertainment is a lot easier than defining attractive.

 

That is certainly not a bad idea and perhaps better addresses the issue than 'attractive'.

 

That said, I think the concept of what different people find entertaining is equally subjective...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great opening post and all good points follow.

 

It makes us sound spoilt and wanting to have our cake & eat it if we say, "winning is not enough - I want to be entertained too"! But as Abramovic rightly says, you shouldn't have to choose one or the other.

 

When we went f**k knows how many years without winning anything than a promotion and the Full Members Cup, then of course I would have bitten your arm off to win a proper trophy and not given a toss at how we achieved it. But once you start winning trophies and get successful and become seen as a Big Club, then you have to progress. For me it isn't enough to just win but play "dull" football in doing so. NO, I wouldn't rather we were Arsenal, but it's all about finding a balance. I think we found that early in the season but we seem to have gone back to bad habits. I'm all for grinding out the odd result like we had to do when we won the CL, but if that becomes the norm, then no, it's not how I want my club to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Thing is sides don't roll over and let us tickle their bellies and give them a ruddy good spanking like Real, Barca and Bayern's league opponents do on a regular basis. 

 

Bayern are just far beyond the level of anyone else in their league. 

 

The Premier League is much more competitive with a lot more teams pushing for the title or European places, it's what makes it such an entertaining league.

 

Results always come first but I do think that off the back of good results and success as a team you should look to become the best footballing side they can be.

 

When I look at Jose's first league title success, I would say that was pretty close to perfection with regards to ability. Only 15 goals conceded in whole season, just the one loss, brilliant stuff. 

 

The 09/10 team under Carlo wasn't as good, 6 losses as champions is quite a lot in my opinion but we did score for fun that season. 

 

Maybe fans are looking for a middle ground between those two sides? 

 

Those teams have also won the champions league playing the same style. Man City have won the premier league playing a more attacking style than us, so it is definitely possible. But ultimately it comes down to whatever style of play suits the players that we have and which gives US the best chance of winning. 

 

With the current set of players we have, I would say that an attacking style suits our midfielders and forwards and maybe a more organized and counter attack oriented style suits our defenders, which makes me feel that we are still a team in transition towards a proper style of football. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not a question of one over the other, we should play teams on merit, as just recently we have treated ever team like they are Barcelona once

we go a goal in front, yes every team deserves respect, but not every team is Barcelona, RM or Bayern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great opening post and all good points follow.

 

It makes us sound spoilt and wanting to have our cake & eat it if we say, "winning is not enough - I want to be entertained too"! But as Abramovic rightly says, you shouldn't have to choose one or the other.

 

When we went f**k knows how many years without winning anything than a promotion and the Full Members Cup, then of course I would have bitten your arm off to win a proper trophy and not given a toss at how we achieved it. But once you start winning trophies and get successful and become seen as a Big Club, then you have to progress. For me it isn't enough to just win but play "dull" football in doing so. NO, I wouldn't rather we were Arsenal, but it's all about finding a balance. I think we found that early in the season but we seem to have gone back to bad habits. I'm all for grinding out the odd result like we had to do when we won the CL, but if that becomes the norm, then no, it's not how I want my club to play.

 

I think the comparisons to Arsenal are odd. Over the last five years we've had a net spend of around THREE TIMES as much as them so are they really the yardstick by which we should measure ourselves?

 

I really don't think many of those people expressing concerns with the way we've been playing for the last two months care that much about 'attractive football' which is why I think the whole point of this discussion is a little bit off. It's the fact that we've been playing some turgid football whilst also struggling to get results that is the issue.

 

I'd take 1-0 wins in every game to the end of the season with us sticking 11 men behind the ball but we're not doing that. We're bottling leads over and over again or failing to capitalise on advantages.

 

City are doing their very best to give us the title and we're stuttering to take it off them. Just be decisive, take control and the supporters will be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...
Please Sign In or Sign Up