5 hours ago, Slojo said:

I want to believe that but I'll refrain from saying it just yet, because it's far too early and I don't want to eat my own words. 

But it's refreshing not having to rely on the same player over and over again, its become more of a team effort. 

There's was already signs we could cope without him under both Conte and Sarri, just the most pessimistic Chelsea fans and rival fans thought we were in denial saying it.

I thought we’d struggle to score without Hazard, I’m pretty sure no one saw Abraham becoming top goal scorer, Mount getting a few goals already, etc.

I really thought it would take the young players some time to settle in the team but oh man I’m so glad to be wrong.

1 hour ago, Argo said:

There's was already signs we could cope without him under both Conte and Sarri, just the most pessimistic Chelsea fans and rival fans thought we were in denial saying it.

Considering Hazard was involved with 90% of our goals in the last 5 years it's not really that pessimistic to assume we would definitely be far behind without him. 

1 hour ago, dansubrosa said:

I thought we’d struggle to score without Hazard, I’m pretty sure no one saw Abraham becoming top goal scorer, Mount getting a few goals already, etc.

I really thought it would take the young players some time to settle in the team but oh man I’m so glad to be wrong.

I didn't though was not sure how effective Abraham would be yet though Willian on the left and Pulisic would create goals.  Hasn't quite worked that way, Abraham was been good, I didn't allow for Mount and to date neither Willian or Mount have been that prolific though that looks like changing form this weekend.

1 hour ago, Slojo said:

Considering Hazard was involved with 90% of our goals in the last 5 years it's not really that pessimistic to assume we would definitely be far behind without him. 

Yeah but that was when he was playing. There seemed to be a element of safety net with the other players knowing they can pass the baton onto Hazard, but when that option wasn't there they pulled their socks up more.

The signs that we could cope better without him came as early as the start of 17/18 where we were scoring goals for fun without him. Then last season we won like 21/22 he didn't start, admittedly he came on in a few and helped seal the deal and for the most part it wasn't the greatest opponents but you still don't have stats like that if you can't breathe without the player.

While I didn't expect us to take losing him in our stride quite like this, I saw enough that convinced me it wouldn't be close to a Liverpool/Suarez or Spurs/Bale scale loss.

Edited October 30, 20196 yr by Argo

There's two things that really put Lamps in a good light and make me convinced he's destined to be a top manager.

1. His coaching staff. He has picked appropriate coaching staff, given he wants to the play the youth and a ingrane a modern approach to football who better to bring in next to him than the two managers that got the very best out of these boys? This could also give us continuity if Lampard decides he needs a new challenge and/or gets burned out as Jody or Joe could seemlessly slot into the job, like Tito did after Pep left Barca. The signs of a great manager is one who's willing to accept he needs help, look at what happened to Moyes when he walked into United and thought it was a good idea to get shot of Fergie's coaching staff (who were all willing to stay and ease the process for Moyes).

2. How he does it his own way. Despite him citing Jose as a mentor in his career he couldn't be further from him as a manager in terms of tactical approach, media handling, ego and selection patterns. Compare that to OGS at United who's basically saying "I want to emulate Fergie" every chance he gets.

Played: 16

Wins: 9

Draws: 3

Losses: 4

Winning % = 56.25%

I was a bit baffled by the midfield selection last night. I don’t think the mix of Kovacic & Gilmour as the other two midfielders brought enough of a goal threat, and you need a mid to pop up with a goal when it’s not working for your wingers. I think he was hamstrung by our options though. I don’t think Barkley would have done anything and of course RLC is out. 

2 hours ago, rtwelch said:

I was a bit baffled by the midfield selection last night. I don’t think the mix of Kovacic & Gilmour as the other two midfielders brought enough of a goal threat, and you need a mid to pop up with a goal when it’s not working for your wingers. I think he was hamstrung by our options though. I don’t think Barkley would have done anything and of course RLC is out. 

Could have started for example Pedro and played him or Pulisic as a 10?

A lot of the managers we've had usually had a team they struggled against and the luck just didnt favor us against that particular opposition, it seems like Lampard's bogey team is Man U.

Jose had his struggles against Newcastle

Conte seemed to have a hard time beating Arsenal

Ancelotti I think struggled against Everton

 

I hope it gets it third time because he's been done twice by Ole, granted it may Keep Ole in a Job longer and that's a good thing in my eyes

I would say that's far fetched given that it's just two games but it's absolutely criminal how we didn't win that game. I'm trying not to think about it too much but it actually winds me up how they managed to win a game, score two goals without having a single chance in the game... How does that work? 

They've got lucky, and on top of that everyone is licking Ole's ass hole just like that, fickle media, if you think that was a good United performance you need your head checking, 19/20 we win that game. 

10 hours ago, Slojo said:

I would say that's far fetched given that it's just two games but it's absolutely criminal how we didn't win that game. I'm trying not to think about it too much but it actually winds me up how they managed to win a game, score two goals without having a single chance in the game... How does that work? 

They've got lucky, and on top of that everyone is licking Ole's ass hole just like that, fickle media, if you think that was a good United performance you need your head checking, 19/20 we win that game. 

Don't stress, I'm very happy we have exited the competition. Liverpool and citeh still in it, hard ask for us to win, so what's the point. I'd rather we focus on the other 3 competitions. 

43 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

Don't stress, I'm very happy we have exited the competition. Liverpool and citeh still in it, hard ask for us to win, so what's the point. I'd rather we focus on the other 3 competitions. 

I can’t get behind this attitude, we have to go for every trophy we’re involved in. That’s the attitude Lampard & co had in his playing days and it seems like the attitude he’s taking in to management.
 

Winning breeds winning, the League Cup won in 2005 was the catalyst for our most successful period ever. 

2 hours ago, Munkworth said:

I can’t get behind this attitude, we have to go for every trophy we’re involved in. That’s the attitude Lampard & co had in his playing days and it seems like the attitude he’s taking in to management.
 

Winning breeds winning, the League Cup won in 2005 was the catalyst for our most successful period ever. 

Yeah I remember Jose Mourinho, the winningest winner of winning, saying how winning the league Cup gave the squad a huge confidence boost which helped massively in the title run. 

13 hours ago, Slojo said:

I would say that's far fetched given that it's just two games but it's absolutely criminal how we didn't win that game. I'm trying not to think about it too much but it actually winds me up how they managed to win a game, score two goals without having a single chance in the game... How does that work? 

They've got lucky, and on top of that everyone is licking Ole's ass hole just like that, fickle media, if you think that was a good United performance you need your head checking, 19/20 we win that game. 

Take the prestige out of the equation and is facing this United any different to facing, for example, O Neil's Villa side? 

Just now, Argo said:

Take the prestige out of the equation and is facing this United any different to facing, for example, O Neil's Villa side? 

Yes and no, just look at the Liverpool v United game, Liverpool were nervous for a great portion of that game you could tell. 

Plus they played more of their first team players than we did so they had more experience. 

5 minutes ago, Slojo said:

Yes and no, just look at the Liverpool v United game, Liverpool were nervous for a great portion of that game you could tell. 

Plus they played more of their first team players than we did so they had more experience. 

Yeah the likes of us and Liverpool tend to play the club whereas City and a lot of lesser sides tend to play the team if that makes sense.

Don't know when we started flaking against them so badly though as didn't United go on their longest run without a win against one opponent against us now that long ago.

Just now, Argo said:

Yeah the likes of us and Liverpool tend to play the club whereas City and a lot of lesser sides tend to play the team if that makes sense.

Don't know when we started flaking against them so badly though as didn't United go on their longest run without a win against one opponent against us now that long ago.

I think we were just unfortunate and that's it really. They scored a wonder freekick and a questionable penalty. 

We struggled in the first half and that's it, United did nothing in that game.

6 minutes ago, Slojo said:

I think we were just unfortunate and that's it really. They scored a wonder freekick and a questionable penalty. 

We struggled in the first half and that's it, United did nothing in that game.

Yeah i agree that they were poor but I also feel some players looked over whelmed by who we were playing against, Christian and Callum especially.

One that didn't look overwhelmed though was Reece, looks so much more well rounded than Wan Bissaka.

4 hours ago, Munkworth said:

I can’t get behind this attitude, we have to go for every trophy we’re involved in. That’s the attitude Lampard & co had in his playing days and it seems like the attitude he’s taking in to management.
 

Winning breeds winning, the League Cup won in 2005 was the catalyst for our most successful period ever. 

If that was the attitude we wouldn't have started gilmour in midfield. Lampard didn't lose any sleep about going out. We played a weaker team, we went out. He said as much afterwards. 

I'd have preferred we won and got to the final. But realistically I'm also happy we don't have to play those additional 3 or 4 games. Remember last year January was a weak spell for us in the league. Might have been different if we weren't in the league cup and Europa league. 

1 hour ago, bisright1 said:

If that was the attitude we wouldn't have started gilmour in midfield. Lampard didn't lose any sleep about going out. We played a weaker team, we went out. He said as much afterwards. 

We have 4 fit midfielders at the moment and play with 3. They can’t play every minute of every game. We needed to rotate and Gilmour was the only option. If he didn’t give a sh*t he’d have left out one of the two experienced players. 

Best attacker from last season, gone.

Best midfielder from last season, in and out of the team because of injury's, more out than in.

Best defender from last season, played one half of football under the new regime.

Yet despite that we've improved, let that sink in.

^ It's simply outstanding.

I read on BBC Sport that "Chelsea have won seven consecutive away games in all competitions - their joint-longest winning run on the road in the club's history (also seven between February-April 1989 under former boss Bobby Campbell)"

Played: 17

Wins: 10

Draws: 3

Losses: 4

Winning % = 58.82%

Edited November 3, 20196 yr by Jezz