39 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

So there is no thoughts that actually the players just weren't very good, possibly through fatigue and they basically got outplayed and overrun and therefore couldn't get out.

I agree with the timings that you have identified. As an example they brought on Nico Gonzalez on 64 minutes and i don't think we could really cope with him along with everything else that was coming at the team. Personally, i think key to the result was the fact the Rice clearly was still not fully up to speed and we had no back up to pack that defensive midfield area, thus making us go deeper and deeper.

I do agree that TT tried to rely on a ploy that worked against the Mexicans and would never work here, but i just wonder whether his hand was being forced by the direction of play and the bluntness of our midfield and attack.

That was my take but the fashionable stance seems to be that it was 100% Tuchel's fault LOL

Up to the Gordon goal we had only one attempt on goal in 55 minutes (the Stones header wide) - we were ineffective in attack all game basically. Our 5 "chances" were in minute 33, 55, 66, 66 and 79.

Having watched the game again this morning, they were clearly better than us and we were probably lucky that they opted to kick us in the first half rather than play football as I think the margin would have been a lot wider otherwise. They are FIFA's #1 ranked international team for a reason ...

Did the club really post Enzo's celebration in their social medial?

They get dumber and dumber and softer each passing day... first the Arsenal and the red card mockery debacle and now this...

1 hour ago, WhiteWall said:

So there is no thoughts that actually the players just weren't very good, possibly through fatigue and they basically got outplayed and overrun and therefore couldn't get out.

I agree with the timings that you have identified. As an example they brought on Nico Gonzalez on 64 minutes and i don't think we could really cope with him along with everything else that was coming at the team. Personally, i think key to the result was the fact the Rice clearly was still not fully up to speed and we had no back up to pack that defensive midfield area, thus making us go deeper and deeper.

I do agree that TT tried to rely on a ploy that worked against the Mexicans and would never work here, but i just wonder whether his hand was being forced by the direction of play and the bluntness of our midfield and attack.

Up until our goal we matched them all over the pitch. If the players weren't good enough, we wouldn't have been 1-0 up.

Tuchel picked these players, Tuchel decided to hook every attacker and sit everyone in our box.

We have winners throughout this team with the likes of Kane, Bellingham, James, Stones, Rice etc. and Tuchel killed us with his cowardice, not for the first ime in his career. He's done this multiple times going ultra defensive and losing big games in the dying minutes. Unacceptable and the blame lies solely with the German. Get him gone.

3 minutes ago, GarnachoCheese said:

Up until our goal we matched them all over the pitch. If the players weren't good enough, we wouldn't have been 1-0 up.

Tuchel picked these players, Tuchel decided to hook every attacker and sit everyone in our box.

We have winners throughout this team with the likes of Kane, Bellingham, James, Stones, Rice etc. and Tuchel killed us with his cowardice, not for the first ime in his career. He's done this multiple times going ultra defensive and losing big games in the dying minutes. Unacceptable and the blame lies solely with the German. Get him gone.

I don't want to argue the point because a) its all a bit academic now and b) i like a lot of the stuff you post and i generally agree with most of it, but you have lost me here a bit tbf

The only forward player i see here having been removed was Gordon (which i did disagree with by the way as he was our only effective forward). The rest stayed to the end.

What i did see was a double substitution by them on 72 and us reacting on 82. James had to come out, he was being overrun and his hamstrings were going. But we couldn't just leave Gonzalez free and clear.

Key for me is the Rice substitution and in fairness to TT he couldn't have predicted the guy to get the sh*ts at the most critical point. Where he should be hammered is taking a carthorse in Henderson as the back up who then broke his bloody arm, so we were so limited in the crucial DM position to protect the back line, break up play and spring counter attacks.

I think there were a lot of mistakes and shortcomings. I am not saying your wrong but i just doesn't think its black and white

2 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

I don't want to argue the point because a) its all a bit academic now and b) i like a lot of the stuff you post and i generally agree with most of it, but you have lost me here a bit tbf

The only forward player i see here having been removed was Gordon (which i did disagree with by the way as he was our only effective forward). The rest stayed to the end.

What i did see was a double substitution by them on 72 and us reacting on 82. James had to come out, he was being overrun and his hamstrings were going. But we couldn't just leave Gonzalez free and clear.

Key for me is the Rice substitution and in fairness to TT he couldn't have predicted the guy to get the sh*ts at the most critical point. Where he should be hammered is taking a carthorse in Henderson as the back up who then broke his bloody arm, so we were so limited in the crucial DM position to protect the back line, break up play and spring counter attacks.

I think there were a lot of mistakes and shortcomings. I am not saying your wrong but i just doesn't think its black and white

The same players can stay on the pitch and the game plan completely change. We went from keeping the ball and taking the game to Argentina to 10 sat behind the ball and hoofing it.

5 minutes ago, GarnachoCheese said:

The same players can stay on the pitch and the game plan completely change. We went from keeping the ball and taking the game to Argentina to 10 sat behind the ball and hoofing it.

5 minutes ago, GarnachoCheese said:

The same players can stay on the pitch and the game plan completely change. We went from keeping the ball and taking the game to Argentina to 10 sat behind the ball and hoofing it.

Maybe. Or they also had Gonzalez, Alvarez, McAllister, Fernandez, de Paul and Messi on the pitch, six attacking players and it looked like we only had Anderson in that defensive area.

I think that they became more and more attacking and we struggled to cope. I still think that the link between defence and attack was key and with a fully fit Rice helping Anderson to break up please we may been able to counter better. I think the below par performance of a not fully fit Rice was pivotal tbh

If we couldn’t sell him, I hope he gets a broken leg first game of the season. I really can’t stand the prick. Arrogant c*nt.

17 minutes ago, dansubrosa said:

If we couldn’t sell him, I hope he gets a broken leg first game of the season. I really can’t stand the prick. Arrogant c*nt.

Get to f**k.

Imagine hoping one of our players gets a broken leg! That would create many more problems than it solved

Enzo was excellent last night. I still think he should go but whilst he’s a Chelsea player you can’t state you hope he breaks his leg. It reflects on you rather than anyone else.

You sound a whole lot more arrogant than Enzo by the way.

21 minutes ago, dansubrosa said:

If we couldn’t sell him, I hope he gets a broken leg first game of the season. I really can’t stand the prick. Arrogant c*nt.

If he wins a second his head won’t fit into cobham or Stamford Bridge.

Spain is the last chance to stop these horrible c**ts.

And no we don’t wish our players get hurt or any opposition players that’s not what CFC fans stand for

Edited 22 minutes ago22 min by El regreso

10 minutes ago, El regreso said:

If he wins a second his head won’t fit into cobham or Stamford Bridge.

Spain is the last chance to stop these horrible c**ts.

And no we don’t wish our players get hurt or any opposition players that’s not what CFC fans stand for

I'll take Enzo winning his 2nd than seeing the likes of Saka or Madueke lifting a WC.

Enzo has had an amazing world cup, scored in the last two and good goals too, no tap ins.

Perhaps RM will be back with a big pay cheque yet then again the talk is Mourinho is going there.

19 minutes ago, 19seventyone said:

Get to f**k.

Imagine hoping one of our players gets a broken leg! That would create many more problems than it solved

Enzo was excellent last night. I still think he should go but whilst he’s a Chelsea player you can’t state you hope he breaks his leg. It reflects on you rather than anyone else.

You sound a whole lot more arrogant than Enzo by the way.

Sell him then snap both his legs while he’s walking out the door imo

Very interesting to see people claim he was amazing. He was fouling players and pumping shots into row Z for 85 minutes until he he one down the middle of the goal that Pickford couldn’t get his tiny arms to. A classic Enzo performance of being a complete liability for his dick riders to wax lyrical about the goal. A game is 90 minutes, and he’s a liability for 89 of them. The Chicharito of midfielders.