Just now, RMCM said:

Why can't he be dropped? And he's played in a back 4 for the other 10 years of his pro career. . . . 

You really aren't making sense with this 

So when Luiz was at Chelsea the first time they played a back 3? Luiz wasn't exactly successful then. It's why most fans was laughing all the way to the bank. Playing in France with PSG is no big achievement.

Did Chelsea keep a clean sheet with Luiz in a back 4 since his return? Makes plenty of sense to me.

After signing a CB at the age of 29 for 30m, no he cannot be dropped.

 

Just now, Ernie_blue said:

So when Luiz was at Chelsea the first time they played a back 3? Luiz wasn't exactly successful then. It's why most fans was laughing all the way to the bank. Playing in France with PSG is no big achievement.

Did Chelsea keep a clean sheet with Luiz in a back 4 since his return? Makes plenty of sense to me.

After signing a CB at the age of 29 for 30m, no he cannot be dropped.

 

Can you point out to me where I stated that Chelsea played with a back three? We played a back 4. We won the Champions league with Luiz playing in our back 4, only the most successful night in the history of our club. People were laughing all the way to the bank because the market when we sold Luiz was significantly less inflated, 50 million then would be similar to 70 million at the moment, any centre back going for that price would have fans laughing to the bank, even if it was a prime Cannavaro / Maldini. 

You're chasing at shadows here, Luiz was not at fault in our losses, I seem to recall his partner at centre back and our right back making chronic errors to give away goals. We kept one clean sheet with Cahill playing in the back 4 since the beginning of the season and that was against Burnley. It's an irrelevant statistic. 

Centre backs can play into their mid 30s without much issue. Why is his age relevant? 30m is not a significant amount of money in the current market. We paid 20 million for Carvalho 12 years ago, what would that be in the current market? A lot more than 30 million. If Luiz wasn't performing well he could be dropped, but he's performing like a champ, so he plays. 

Luiz can certainly be dropped but it would almost be stupidity to drop him in his current form and play a back 4 instead.

The reason behind the inflated price for Luiz is mainly down to his versatility, he covers numerous positions in a playing 11 and assumes responsibility in dead ball situations and I've not even mentioned his leadership skills.

I think we may have diverted away from the original question which was if Luiz was unavailable due to suspension/injury would we replace him in a back 3 or revert back to a back 4. I dont believe the system without him would be as effective. We may find out more about Conte's plan B tomorrow night in the League cup.

4 minutes ago, RMCM said:

Can you point out to me where I stated that Chelsea played with a back three? We played a back 4. We won the Champions league with Luiz playing in our back 4, only the most successful night in the history of our club. People were laughing all the way to the bank because the market when we sold Luiz was significantly less inflated, 50 million then would be similar to 70 million at the moment, any centre back going for that price would have fans laughing to the bank, even if it was a prime Cannavaro / Maldini. 

You're chasing at shadows here, Luiz was not at fault in our losses, I seem to recall his partner at centre back and our right back making chronic errors to give away goals. We kept one clean sheet with Cahill playing in the back 4 since the beginning of the season and that was against Burnley. It's an irrelevant statistic. 

Centre backs can play into their mid 30s without much issue. Why is his age relevant? 30m is not a significant amount of money in the current market. We paid 20 million for Carvalho 12 years ago, what would that be in the current market? A lot more than 30 million. If Luiz wasn't performing well he could be dropped, but he's performing like a champ, so he plays. 

Your changing your point of view everytime and I can't be bothered to keep arguing. Mentioning playing with a back 3 was being sarcastic because I knew Chelsea didn't play with a back 3. By the way it's harder to win the premier league than the champions league, Liverpool just show that. Chelsea was laughing because of Luiz's defensive errors, wasn't one of there best defenders and PSG was willing to pay silly money. If he was one of the worlds top defenders he would of been sold for more or most likely kept.

Your making out I am talking about age or form, I'm not. Luiz deserves to play but to get the best out of Luiz you have to play a back 3, pretty simple to understand really. Age has nothing to do with it apart from if you sign someone of that age they won't be sitting on the bench.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/15116/10630125/how-chelseas-switch-to-3-4-3-helped-them-beat-manchester-united

Might make it easier for you to understand.

4 minutes ago, Imran_CFC said:

Luiz can certainly be dropped but it would almost be stupidity to drop him in his current form and play a back 4 instead.

The reason behind the inflated price for Luiz is mainly down to his versatility, he covers numerous positions in a playing 11 and assumes responsibility in dead ball situations and I've not even mentioned his leadership skills.

I think we may have diverted away from the original question which was if Luiz was unavailable due to suspension/injury would we replace him in a back 3 or revert back to a back 4. I dont believe the system without him would be as effective. We may find out more about Conte's plan B tomorrow night in the League cup.

Of course he can, anyone could be dropped in reality but you don't sign a 29 year old defender at the end of the transfer window for 30m to sit on the bench. 

1 minute ago, Ernie_blue said:

Of course he can, anyone could be dropped in reality but you don't sign a 29 year old defender at the end of the transfer window for 30m to sit on the bench. 

All the price tag/age gets you is the "opportunity" to show your worth, from there on everything is performance related regardless of price tag or age 

As soon as we bought Alonso and Luiz so late in the window, it was obvious we were going to go 3 at the back at some stage. Playing in the middle of a 3 suits Luiz because he's involved a lot which means he doesn't have to go looking for the ball and losing his positional discipline, as he's wont to do. He's been superb since he returned, and, lest it be forgotten, when we were playing a back four earlier this season, with Ivanovic, Dave (on the left), Luiz and Cahill, he was still easily our most impressive defender. Under Conte, he's playing quite conservatively, keeping his position, staying focused, and proving what a good player he can be, defending very well, showing a lot of leadership, showing amazing spirit, and distributing the ball well. One thing that often gets overlooked when discussing Luiz, he's pretty tough and he's pretty brave, as well as being able to play. His performances have been overlooked by the media but as soon as he has a howler you can bet they'll be all over him like a rash.

1 hour ago, Ernie_blue said:

Your changing your point of view everytime and I can't be bothered to keep arguing. Mentioning playing with a back 3 was being sarcastic because I knew Chelsea didn't play with a back 3. By the way it's harder to win the premier league than the champions league, Liverpool just show that. Chelsea was laughing because of Luiz's defensive errors, wasn't one of there best defenders and PSG was willing to pay silly money. If he was one of the worlds top defenders he would of been sold for more or most likely kept.

Your making out I am talking about age or form, I'm not. Luiz deserves to play but to get the best out of Luiz you have to play a back 3, pretty simple to understand really. Age has nothing to do with it apart from if you sign someone of that age they won't be sitting on the bench.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/15116/10630125/how-chelseas-switch-to-3-4-3-helped-them-beat-manchester-united

Might make it easier for you to understand.

Please go back to your first posts and understand why you and RMCM were not saying the same thing. Is English your first language? If it is, I for one will find it really difficult to take anything you say seriously if you continue to be this disingenuous.  

3 hours ago, Ernie_blue said:

You have basically said the same thing there.

Chelsea play a back 3 because that's the best position for Luiz. Luiz has to  play when you have spent 30m on a defender. What you said was the same

In what world are these two the same?

6 hours ago, RMCM said:

I don't think we're playing a back three because we spent money on Luiz, we are playing a back three because it's a system that's getting the best out of our entire squad

17 minutes ago, ashwin said:

In what world are these two the same?

The point is Luiz has to play because he is a new summer signing for 30m, to get the best out of Luiz you have to play a back 3. Luiz will always play this season. To say well Luiz played in a back 4 all his career isn't exactly a big positive. Luiz wasn't brilliant defensively before he left for PSG, France is a poor league then when Luiz came back he was apart of a collective group who couldn't keep a clean sheet.

If Chelsea signed a defender with better defensive attributes then a back 3 probably wouldn't of happened. 

Regarding form I have watched every game and think he has played well. Hopefully he keeps it up till the end of the season.

I wouldn't be surprised if Luiz plays every game with no European football.

So we're saying we bought a player that fits well within the system that the new manager wanted to implement and that said signing who plays well in this system is likely to play a lot since being signed by the new manager to play in his preferred system? 

 

Cool. 

2 hours ago, Davey Baby said:

As soon as we bought Alonso and Luiz so late in the window, it was obvious we were going to go 3 at the back at some stage. Playing in the middle of a 3 suits Luiz because he's involved a lot which means he doesn't have to go looking for the ball and losing his positional discipline, as he's wont to do. He's been superb since he returned, and, lest it be forgotten, when we were playing a back four earlier this season, with Ivanovic, Dave (on the left), Luiz and Cahill, he was still easily our most impressive defender. Under Conte, he's playing quite conservatively, keeping his position, staying focused, and proving what a good player he can be, defending very well, showing a lot of leadership, showing amazing spirit, and distributing the ball well. One thing that often gets overlooked when discussing Luiz, he's pretty tough and he's pretty brave, as well as being able to play. His performances have been overlooked by the media but as soon as he has a howler you can bet they'll be all over him like a rash.

BUT HE CAN'T DEFEND M8

Conte will turn Luiz into Bonucci who was just as erratic as Luiz before Conte's arrival.

48 minutes ago, Adam said:

BUT HE CAN'T DEFEND M8

Over 4000 posts and you still don't know the forum guidelines ? Let me remind you.

12. Don't use 'Text Speak' in your posts. It is horrific! 

Boys done well since he came back, why bother slagging of your own when there's plenty of 'targets' at other clubs - like Manchester United's starting 11 on Sunday.

2 minutes ago, General said:

Boys done well since he came back, why bother slagging of your own when there's plenty of 'targets' at other clubs - like Manchester United's starting 11 on Sunday.

Yeah I'd almost forgotten how much I hat Fellaini until Sunday.

9 hours ago, Ernie_blue said:

Chelsea play a back 3 because they spent 30m on Luiz and he has to play. Luiz can't play in a back 4 so you have to play a back 3 and there's the protection of Matic and Kante.

On his performances he has played very well.

1. Nobody ever has to play. 

2. He can play in a back 4.  

3. Even if he was reliant on the protection of Kante & Matic, this could still be provided playing 4-2-3-1, so we wouldn't have to play a back 3. 

 

20 minutes ago, mclovin83 said:

1. Nobody ever has to play. 

2. He can play in a back 4.  

3. Even if he was reliant on the protection of Kante & Matic, this could still be provided playing 4-2-3-1, so we wouldn't have to play a back 3. 

 

1. So a club signs a 30m defender to sit on the bench? Don't ever see that much in football.

2. Of course he can play in a back 4, I can play in a back 4. But does a back 4 get the most out of Luiz, probably no.

3. Same as 2 really. Gets the most out of Luiz as a player with the ball.

 

43 minutes ago, coco said:

Over 4000 posts and you still don't know the forum guidelines ? Let me remind you.

12. Don't use 'Text Speak' in your posts. It is horrific! 

Soz m8, wnt happn agen.

David Luiz needs to mature to keep his spot. That's what Conte's working on now.

10 hours ago, Ernie_blue said:

1. So a club signs a 30m defender to sit on the bench? Don't ever see that much in football.

2. Of course he can play in a back 4, I can play in a back 4. But does a back 4 get the most out of Luiz, probably no.

3. Same as 2 really. Gets the most out of Luiz as a player with the ball.

 

1. No, we signed him to strengthen the squad, which he clearly has done. If The manager doesn't think his current form/contribution mertits a place in the starting 11 for any given game then he won't pick him. We also signed Michy for £30M who has spent most of his time on the bench so far, it happens. 

2. You can't play in a back four for a Premiership football club, otherwise you would do so. 

3. Matter of opinion; plenty of people, myself included, rated David Luiz prior to his 3 successful games in a back 3 for Chelsea. 

Think he did alright in all of his games, people want him to have a perfect match every time he runs out. Just looking for every glimpse of mistake to get on his case. I like Luiz brings something different to the back three and if he keeps his focus we can be pleased with him in the future as well.

31 minutes ago, mclovin83 said:

1. No, we signed him to strengthen the squad, which he clearly has done. If The manager doesn't think his current form/contribution mertits a place in the starting 11 for any given game then he won't pick him. We also signed Michy for £30M who has spent most of his time on the bench so far, it happens. 

2. You can't play in a back four for a Premiership football club, otherwise you would do so. 

3. Matter of opinion; plenty of people, myself included, rated David Luiz prior to his 3 successful games in a back 3 for Chelsea. 

If people can't see when you sign a defender for 30m it's to play football and not to improve the squad then you know very little about football. Signing Williams is to improve the squad, spending 30m is for a first team player.

Using Michy isnt a great example. His young and one for the future. He probably expected less game time. Luiz would never of signed expecting to be on the bench.

Its like saying Utd signed Bailly, Arsenal signed Mustafi, City signed Stones. They were all signed to play.

1 hour ago, Ernie_blue said:

If people can't see when you sign a defender for 30m it's to play football and not to improve the squad then you know very little about football. Signing Williams is to improve the squad, spending 30m is for a first team player.

Using Michy isnt a great example. His young and one for the future. He probably expected less game time. Luiz would never of signed expecting to be on the bench.

Its like saying Utd signed Bailly, Arsenal signed Mustafi, City signed Stones. They were all signed to play.

No. We signed him because we needed a first choice centre back, he's playing because he's performing, well . . . like a £30m centre back . If you think a player can't be dropped just because we spent money on him then you know very little about football. Luiz was signed to fit us, we are not building the team around Luiz, he's not Ronaldo or Messi. 

No one was arguing that Luiz was signed to sit on the bench, nowhere did anyone say that. What everyone is saying, except for you, is that we are playing a back 3 because it fits our team, and Luiz does suit it well, but we aren't playing a back three simply because we signed Luiz and he has to play. Come on, stop being stubborn and admit that you were incorrect.

 

This is quite possibly the most pointless debate in the history of the forum. It's the Euthyphro dilemma all over again - is Luiz a starter because he cost £30m or did he cost £30m because he's a starter?

 

(I am aware that's not the nature of the argument but I can't think of anything funnier right now)