Jump to content

Official Thomas Tuchel


coco
 Share

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Deino said:

The thing is Burnley's plan was to soak pressure and hit us on the counter which they did in the first half. They lacked a good midfield to exploit the spaces. When the first goal came, it was because we countered them at just the right moment. 

Dyche being the negative manager that he is chose to sit in their own half rather than attack us. 

I credit the win to the way we play but we always win against Burnley nowadays and they didn't attack as much. I am reserving expectations to when we actually beat a team higher than us on the table. 

I think your'e a bit confused with how Burnley played yesterday, they did try to get as many men behind the ball quickly when we took possession in midfield, but when they had the ball they pushed up the pitch, when they lost the ball in our half they had 3-4 players facing our back 3, it was a night and day difference between how they played and how Wolves played.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


19 minutes ago, coco said:

I think your'e a bit confused with how Burnley played yesterday, they did try to get as many men behind the ball quickly when we took possession in midfield, but when they had the ball they pushed up the pitch, when they lost the ball in our half they had 3-4 players facing our back 3, it was a night and day difference between how they played and how Wolves played.

Yeah Burnley had a go which I didn't expect. Wolves took parking the bus too the extreme and were hoping to steal a goal with some Traore or Neto run. We had 97% percent possession over a ten minute period against them. That's unheard of but obviously it's difficult when they park 11 men inside 35 meters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 31/01/2021 at 14:32, Argo said:

But out of out last four managers none of Lampard, Sarri or Mourinho were removed as soon as they hit a bad patch. Mourinho got removed because it went on for months, Conte was removed because of his behaviour, Sarri played his way out of it and would have got a second season but decided to leave and Lampard won 4 in 14 (losing 7) during the middle of last season.

I don't think last season comes into it, that was such a weird situation with the transfer ban and all the other factors that have been rehearsed in here ad nauseam. 

But, as soon as we hit a minor blip this season the knives were out, people in here and in the press started whining and eventually that pressure affected the board.

Edited by yorkleyblue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

I don't think last season comes into it, that was such a weird situation with the transfer ban and all the other factors that have been rehearsed in here ad nauseam. 

But, as soon as we hit a minor blip this season the knives were out, people in here and in the press started whining and eventually that pressure affected the board.

Roman/the board can be accuses of many things but bowing to pressure and/or doing the easy thing isn't one of them. They resisted relentless fan and media pressure to sack Sarri yet we're suppose to believe a few posters on a forum swayed them this time (the media were by in large pro Frank). If they are even factoring our views into consideration I'll be worried, while we all have opinions and to a varying degrees know our stuff there's a reason we're in the stands and not the boardroom or training ground.

He took amoung other things the decision with Lamps, the decision to fire Mou, the decision to appoint Benitez and even the decision to fire Ranieri knowing full well it was against the wishes of the majority at best and would cause major unrest at worst.

If he wanted an easy life the latter would have been celebrating his 20 year anniversary as Chelsea coach September just gone.

Edited by Argo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re TT - I thought he would go three at the back though didn't think CHO would be a wing back.

Alonso coming in made perfect sense and I didn't understand him being frozen out due to getting on the bus early after being subbed.  Surely that is pretty minor, is there more to it?

It does raise a question about Chilwell and Ziyech as both of these might lose out.

Havertz I would expect to be a sub for Mount.

Not sure now how or where Kante comes back in, it is not that the others are better players more about the systems being utilised and how the player fits into that.

TT has started with a three he might go to a four defensively against certain sides though I think he will mainly favour the 3 Cbs until the summer at least.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Argo said:

Roman/the board can be accuses of many things but bowing to pressure and/or doing the easy thing isn't one of them. They resisted relentless fan and media pressure to sack Sarri yet we're suppose to believe a few posters on a forum swayed them this time (the media were by in large pro Frank). If they are even factoring our views into consideration I'll be worried, while we all have opinions and to a varying degrees know our stuff there's a reason we're in the stands and not the boardroom or training ground.

He took amoung other things the decision with Lamps, the decision to fire Mou, the decision to appoint Benitez and even the decision to fire Ranieri knowing full well it was against the wishes of the majority at best and would cause major unrest at worst.

If he wanted an easy life the latter would have been celebrating his 20 year anniversary as Chelsea coach September just gone.

Ok, that's your view.  I think you're wrong, but, anyway, picking up a losing streak last season as an exemplar isn't really correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, yorkleyblue said:

Ok, that's your view.  I think you're wrong, but, anyway, picking up a losing streak last season as an exemplar isn't really correct.

You have to take experience into account though Yorkley. I get it, some of us are fickle bastards and are spoilt. 

Frank came here with minimal experience or CV, as much as we love him, we must accept the facts that Frank had nothing to fall back on when the going got tough. If Tuchel comes into a sticky patch, we can say, he took PSG into their first CL final when no other manager could. He took Klopps defeated Dortmund that were headed to relegation and made them back into a title challenging side and a force to be reckoned with, all while bringing in youth players through the ranks that went for hundreds of millions in the transfer window. Pulisic for example, excelled under Tuchel. 

It's all good pointing out how much we overachieved last season, but for all we know, we would be putting all of our chips on the line for a man who was never capable of turning this team into title winners in the first place. Ultimately that's what our goal is, to win the league. Out of all our past managers who got the boot, why do give our most inexperienced one the luxury of longevity? Like I was telling others on this forum who were pointing at Ole, look at United now, it's very likely United put all their chips on the wrong man and have wasted time sticking with Ole when they could've gotten a proper competent manager in that would've actually won something during that time. 

Resumes are very important. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Strider6003 said:

TT has started with a three he might go to a four defensively against certain sides though I think he will mainly favour the 3 Cbs until the summer at least.

Basically I agree if you consider this as a basic formation to start with.
But Tuchel will change the system from three central defenders to two defenders during the game when he thinks this is needed.
He did this at Mainz, Dortmund or Paris. Tuchel's teams are very flexible and he loves when they are able to play different systems so that he can change tactics during the game.
Wolves and Burnley both started with two strikers and Tuchel decided to start with three CBs. If Mourinho will start with one striker it is highly probable that you will see only 2 CBs against the Spurs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 31/01/2021 at 09:08, Valhalla said:

He learns quick which is important considering we're over halfway through the season with little room for error. Not a fan of the likes of Alonso/Rudiger but both put in a good shift today. Apparently we've only allowed 1 shot on target in 2 matches now which is incredible. Interested to see if he will use 3-5-2 vs spurs and who he will put up front. Tammy and Werner didn't work out this time. 

I feel like Rüdiger is the type of player that, if you don’t notice him playing or can’t recall anything he did in the match specifically, it means he put in a solid shift. Which I think was the case yesterday. If he continues as such, I won’t be too concerned about him playing more. If he’s standing out, it’s usually for something awful or boneheaded that he’s done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Strider6003 said:

Re TT - I thought he would go three at the back though didn't think CHO would be a wing back.

Alonso coming in made perfect sense and I didn't understand him being frozen out due to getting on the bus early after being subbed.  Surely that is pretty minor, is there more to it?

It does raise a question about Chilwell and Ziyech as both of these might lose out.

Havertz I would expect to be a sub for Mount.

Not sure now how or where Kante comes back in, it is not that the others are better players more about the systems being utilised and how the player fits into that.

TT has started with a three he might go to a four defensively against certain sides though I think he will mainly favour the 3 Cbs until the summer at least.

 

 

Playing poorly, then throwing a fit and leaving the stadium to board the bus after being subbed off seems hardly minor. If I was his teammate you’d had to have held me back from pummeling the f**ker after that. But he had a good shift yesterday!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 hours ago, JM7 said:

https://www.chelsea-news.co/2021/02/thomas-tuchels-objectives-must-meet-order-get-contract-extension/
 

Is anyone else slightly bothered by the club’s performance related clauses? One on hand, I think it’s right (and normal) but on the other hand, I don’t know of managers will be put off. 

Looking forward to when they start integrating performance-related clauses into the player contracts, and I don't just mean a goal bonus  🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JM7 said:

https://www.chelsea-news.co/2021/02/thomas-tuchels-objectives-must-meet-order-get-contract-extension/
 

Is anyone else slightly bothered by the club’s performance related clauses? One on hand, I think it’s right (and normal) but on the other hand, I don’t know of managers will be put off. 

No issues with this, football is a results business to remain an elite club you need to constantly be at the sharp end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JM7 said:

https://www.chelsea-news.co/2021/02/thomas-tuchels-objectives-must-meet-order-get-contract-extension/
 

Is anyone else slightly bothered by the club’s performance related clauses? One on hand, I think it’s right (and normal) but on the other hand, I don’t know of managers will be put off. 

Not at all. Tuchel accepted these terms, I think it's obvious that Tuchel wants another chance at top after his reputation was damaged from getting the sack at PSG, which definitely lowers a managers stock. He's not in a position to bargain for a 3 year contract when we can just say no, and get an interim and look for other options in the Summer. 

If anything, this is a great move by the club, if it doesn't work out with Tuchel, I doubt we'll have to compensate him as much as other managers, and if it does, then great?? We've got a good manager. 

I must admit he wasn't my first choice at all, I wanted an interim then I wanted us to push for Zidane in the summer because I don't think he's going stay at Madrid and I think he's a very capable manager. But Tuchel all things considered, did a good job at Dortmund, and to his credit he got PSG into their first CL final (Or first final since the new owners took over, I'm not sure), so he has to get some credit for that. I think the biggest thing people are looking at though is down the line, if he does well, him falling out with the board could be a possibility, given his track record at Dortmund and PSG. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


17 hours ago, Slojo said:

You have to take experience into account though Yorkley. I get it, some of us are fickle bastards and are spoilt. 

Frank came here with minimal experience or CV, as much as we love him, we must accept the facts that Frank had nothing to fall back on when the going got tough. If Tuchel comes into a sticky patch, we can say, he took PSG into their first CL final when no other manager could. He took Klopps defeated Dortmund that were headed to relegation and made them back into a title challenging side and a force to be reckoned with, all while bringing in youth players through the ranks that went for hundreds of millions in the transfer window. Pulisic for example, excelled under Tuchel. 

It's all good pointing out how much we overachieved last season, but for all we know, we would be putting all of our chips on the line for a man who was never capable of turning this team into title winners in the first place. Ultimately that's what our goal is, to win the league. Out of all our past managers who got the boot, why do give our most inexperienced one the luxury of longevity? Like I was telling others on this forum who were pointing at Ole, look at United now, it's very likely United put all their chips on the wrong man and have wasted time sticking with Ole when they could've gotten a proper competent manager in that would've actually won something during that time. 

Resumes are very important. 

When we hit the rough patch in December nobody was saying give Lampard another 5 years, majority of fans who supported Frank wanted the board to show courtesy to a club Legend and give him the opportunity at least until the end of the season to see if he can turn the ship around. I think its a false narrative stating that he was sacked because because he was the wrong man and we shouldn't have wasted time with him, we just didnt back him during a tough period.

How on earth is he going to create something to fall back on if the rug is going to be pulled out from under him the moment he hits a rough patch. Lampard is a special case because he has done so much for this club as a player but even if Tuchel hit a spell such as the one Lampard hit I would still want the Manager to be given the opportunity to turn things around.

Resume is important but a resume is their to get you a job, the club knew all about Frank and his lack of experience when they offered him the job. What were they expecting that Frank will sail through his Managerial position at Chelsea and not hit a rough patch. Nobody would've moaned if Frank didn't get the job after he was interviewed but once he got the job they should've backed their man to turn things around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Imran_CFC said:

 

How on earth is he going to create something to fall back on if the rug is going to be pulled out from under him the moment he hits a rough patch. 

Sarri didn't despite relentless fan pressure for his sacking so why would Tuchel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Imran_CFC said:

When we hit the rough patch in December nobody was saying give Lampard another 5 years, majority of fans who supported Frank wanted the board to show courtesy to a club Legend

Well that's where you're going wrong. I'm sorry but Lampard being a club legend should be irrelevant when it comes to his role as manager, or at the very least a tiny bit relevant. What matters is that he's capable of doing his job and he's making good progress. Unfortunately for him, he hit a big snag and he had no bargaining power to buy himself more time because of his lack of experience and past accomplishments. 

People need to see this from the boards perspective not just see this as a fan. Lampard being a legend has nothing to do with his managerial ability, it shouldn't be viewed that way. We're a club, there's millions of pounds at stake, we can't hinder progress and waste money for the sake of giving a legend more time just because he's a legend, that makes no sense from a business point of view.

Other managers have had more time while being in a similar slump, the reason they got more time is because they had more credibility. Are we harsh as a club? Absolutely, there's criticism to be handed out, but I'm not going to draw the line now because they sacked a manager who's only previous experience was a year at Derby. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh but it's true, people need to look at it from the Boards perspective. 

Edited by Slojo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Slojo said:

Well that's where you're going wrong. I'm sorry but Lampard being a club legend should be irrelevant when it comes to his role as manager, or at the very least a tiny bit relevant. What matter is that he's capable of doing it and he's making good progress. Unfortunately for him, he hit a big snag and he had no bargaining power to buy himself more time because of his lack of experience and past accomplishments. 

People need to see this from the boards perspective not just see this as a fan. Lampard being a legend has nothing to do with his managerial ability, it shouldn't be viewed that way. We're a club, there's millions of pounds at stake, we can't hinder progress and waste money for the sake of giving a legend more time just because he's a legend, that makes no sense from a business point of view.

Other managers have had more time while being in a similar slump, the reason they got more time is because they had more credibility. Are we harsh as a club? Absolutely, there's criticism to be handed out, but I'm not going to draw the line now because they sacked a manager who's only previous experience was a year at Derby. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh but it's true, people need to look at it from the Boards perspective. 

Don't give him the job then

If Frank didnt have any credibility in January 2021 then he certainly didnt have any credibility in 2019 when he was appointed. Looking at it from the boards perspective, they hired someone hugely inexperienced for a position, the individual met all expectations in the first year, then all his work is somewhat restarted as he is given 6 new first team signings and is asked to integrate the without a pre-season.

He starts the season well and things go south during the most congested period of the season and you decide to get rid of him.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Imran_CFC said:

Don't give him the job then

If Frank didnt have any credibility in January 2021 then he certainly didnt have any credibility in 2019 when he was appointed. Looking at it from the boards perspective, they hired someone hugely inexperienced for a position, the individual met all expectations in the first year, then all his work is somewhat restarted as he is given 6 new first team signings and is asked to integrate the without a pre-season.

He starts the season well and things go south during the most congested period of the season and you decide to get rid of him.  

He got the job under rare circumstances, because nobody wanted it at the time. Last season was a complete anomaly, and a club doesn't have to honour a contract, you're fixated with the contract despite knowing the likes of Conte, Jose and Ancelotti never saw out theirs, much better managers who won big things at Chelsea. 

In what other time other than last season does Frank get the job? Never, and you know it. There was a big reason the club were very reluctant to give Di Matteo a new contract and he just won the Champions League in the space of 5 months. And as soon as Di Matteo hit a snag, BOOM, he was instantly out of the door. Was that a terrible decision? Look at it now, I don't think so, the club made the right move, I wasn't happy at the time as a fan, but from the Boards perspective it makes sense and it's making even more sense now. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


18 hours ago, Slojo said:

Frank came here with minimal experience or CV, as much as we love him, we must accept the facts that Frank had nothing to fall back on when the going got tough. If Tuchel comes into a sticky patch, we can say, he took PSG into their first CL final when no other manager could. He took Klopps defeated Dortmund that were headed to relegation and made them back into a title challenging side and a force to be reckoned with, all while bringing in youth players through the ranks that went for hundreds of millions in the transfer window. Pulisic for example, excelled under Tuchel. 

It's all good pointing out how much we overachieved last season, but for all we know, we would be putting all of our chips on the line for a man who was never capable of turning this team into title winners in the first place. Ultimately that's what our goal is, to win the league. Out of all our past managers who got the boot, why do give our most inexperienced one the luxury of longevity? Like I was telling others on this forum who were pointing at Ole, look at United now, it's very likely United put all their chips on the wrong man and have wasted time sticking with Ole when they could've gotten a proper competent manager in that would've actually won something during that time. 

You can't appoint an inexperienced manager like Lampard and not show more patience than you have with previous, more experienced managers... Otherwise, why not just appoint an experienced manager in the first place? 

The impression I got from the Lampard appointment was that it was viewed as a three year "project". That's the language that kept getting thrown around at the time of his appointment. It wasn't based on short term, immediate success, it was about building something for the long term. 

That's why Lampard promoted Tammy, James, Mount, Gilmore and put them front and centre of his team. It wasn't about winning a title last season, this season or even the next. It was about laying the foundations for a team that would go on to be competitive year in, year out once they've gained the experience and grown into the role. 

Even last summer's recruitment was seemed to largely reinfornce that with younger, not overly expericed signings coming in Werner, Havertz, Chilwell. They were there to add to and supplement the youthful build Lampard was heading towards and you supplement that with Ziyech and Silva to add just a little bit of seniority and experience to aid that building process. 

And when you entrust young players to learn with an inexperienced coach it's pretty much implied that you'll allow that coach to make some mistakes and grow and learn as they go along. 

But half way through the Lampard project we bottled it at the first sign of trouble and reverted back to type. 

Perhaps, ultimately, Roman/the board needed the comfort blanket of their tried and tested approach to managerial appointments  but that's their fault, no Lampard's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Slojo said:

Well that's where you're going wrong. I'm sorry but Lampard being a club legend should be irrelevant when it comes to his role as manager, or at the very least a tiny bit relevant. What matters is that he's capable of doing his job and he's making good progress. Unfortunately for him, he hit a big snag and he had no bargaining power to buy himself more time because of his lack of experience and past accomplishments. 
 

Many fans feel that it shouldn't be irrelevant. Specially since he finished top 4 last season as a club legend.

24 minutes ago, Slojo said:

Other managers have had more time while being in a similar slump, the reason they got more time is because they had more credibility. Are we harsh as a club? Absolutely, there's criticism to be handed out, but I'm not going to draw the line now because they sacked a manager who's only previous experience was a year at Derby. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh but it's true, people need to look at it from the Boards perspective. 

Not sure what other managers had more time, the only one that managed to finish the season despite the bad results was Jose and that also due to his connection with the club.

Anyway all other didn't have an empty stadium. Every club lost money due to the pandemic, this is maybe also a factor why the club pulled the trigger because if we don't reach a CL we lose even more money. If the circumstances were normal - if we had 40k people supporting Lampard at every home game, he might have had more time to do his job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ForeverCarefree said:

You can't appoint an inexperienced manager like Lampard and not show more patience than you have with previous, more experienced managers... Otherwise, why not just appoint an experienced manager in the first place? 

The impression I got from the Lampard appointment was that it was viewed as a three year "project". That's the language that kept getting thrown around at the time of his appointment. It wasn't based on short term, immediate success, it was about building something for the long term. 

That's why Lampard promoted Tammy, James, Mount, Gilmore and put them front and centre of his team. It wasn't about winning a title last season, this season or even the next. It was about laying the foundations for a team that would go on to be competitive year in, year out once they've gained the experience and grown into the role. 

Even last summer's recruitment was seemed to largely reinfornce that with younger, not overly expericed signings coming in Werner, Havertz, Chilwell. They were there to add to and supplement the youthful build Lampard was heading towards and you supplement that with Ziyech and Silva to add just a little bit of seniority and experience to aid that building process. 

And when you entrust young players to learn with an inexperienced coach it's pretty much implied that you'll allow that coach to make some mistakes and grow and learn as they go along. 

But half way through the Lampard project we bottled it at the first sign of trouble and reverted back to type. 

Perhaps, ultimately, Roman/the board needed the comfort blanket of their tried and tested approach to managerial appointments  but that's their fault, no Lampard's. 

Personally I didn't get that impression, I don't know what his wages were or clauses etc. 

But when does a manager jump ship after a year in the job after winning a trophy? Especially from here? Besides an Interim like Hiddink, it doesn't happen. Sarri like many others, saw a sinking ship and bolted. Hazard leaving, Transfer ban, no top gaffer wanted to touch this job. Under any other circumstances do you genuinely believe the club gives Frank the job? I don't. 

Believe me when I say this, I fully believed in the Lampard project, even though I was very pessimistic with his arrival. I think he did a great job in his first season, but ultimately I think the club made the right decision, just like they did with Di Matteo, the circumstances are quite similar. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

Many fans feel that it shouldn't be irrelevant. Specially since he finished top 4 last season as a club legend.

Not sure what other managers had more time, the only one that managed to finish the season despite the bad results was Jose and that also due to his connection with the club.

Anyway all other didn't have an empty stadium. Every club lost money due to the pandemic, this is maybe also a factor why the club pulled the trigger because if we don't reach a CL we lose even more money. If the circumstances were normal - if we had 40k people supporting Lampard at every home game, he might have had more time to do his job.

Maybe, but I don't think the board listen to the fans that much. They still hired Benitez despite all the protests. Jose, Conte, Ancelotti, Sarri, they all had terrible slumps and they were given more time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...

Well, this is awkward!

awkward the office GIF

The Shed End Forum relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible without pop ups, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online and continue to keep the forum up, as over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this domain by switching it off. Some of the advert banners can actually be closed to avoid interferance of your experience on The Shed End.

Cheers now!

emma watson yes GIF

Alright already, It's off!