So it's Pochettino *Officially Chelsea Manager*

[El regreso]

2 hours ago, Bob stark said:

It is fine to criticize poch but so far I haven't heard anybody come up with alternative plan that even make sense

 

It really doesn’t matter what Poch did yesterday he would have been criticised. Some just want to critique no matter the outcome.

[RMH]

39 minutes ago, Bob stark said:

So what should poch have done then? 

 

Why don’t you tell us? ‘Cause you keep asking questions but provide f**k all answers or explanation as to why you think Pochettino was right. Stop questioning eone and everything without telling us what’s your idea of how we could have beaten City, or how you’d think we could plan for the future.

[Bob stark]

7 minutes ago, El regreso said:

It really doesn’t matter what Poch did yesterday he would have been criticised. Some just want to critique no matter the outcome.

I am personally interested if anyone has interesting idea. With the benefit of hindsight, it should be easier but so far none of the suggestion make sense let alone good.

 

[Gol15]

56 minutes ago, Bob stark said:

So what should poch have done then? 

 

 

19 hours ago, Gol15 said:

Having a real plan with e.g. Mudryk would have given us probably 10 minutes less worries as his threat of pace would be there, Man City would have considered to have at least a bit more caution with their play and maybe they wouldn't just put in crosses as often. 

I understand that we also must think ahead towards our Cup final but Poch could have started with Mudryk replacing Sterling which could have brought us some more energy and attacking threat other than the threat of finishing with Sterling, since Mudryk actually wants to run with the ball.

So instead of putting Nkunku solo up front, you would still have for a few minutes Mudryk and Jackson that in the past have managed to create something together and then Poch could have the first less attacking sub on paper with Casadei replacing Palmer.

The last sub of the three would have been Nkunku for Jackson then since Nkunku wouldn't have provided a lot of effort without the ball if he had been given more minutes since he's obviously afraid of not getting injured again.

Chalobah literally just played his first 20 minutes of the season and you're talking about not trusting Mudryk to try and run with the ball and win us some minutes on the opposition half, that's way more likely to happen than Chalobah saving us from conceding a goal...

 

 

[Bob stark]

20 minutes ago, RMH said:

Why don’t you tell us? ‘Cause you keep asking questions but provide f**k all answers or explanation as to why you think Pochettino was right. Stop questioning eone and everything without telling us what’s your idea of how we could have beaten City, or how you’d think we could plan for the future.

Imo if this is a final then I will leave the 3 attackers longer but we have a final next week. So you need to take them out. 

Nkunku sub was more of he was the only option of the bench. 

Chalobah sub was about helping  gusto who was running on fumes. So the choice was between Chalobah or Alfie. 

Cassedei was all about adding more height. 

All make sense. What poch could have done differently? I don't know, if Madueke n mudryk are not 😵‍💫😵‍💫, they would have been obvious solution. 

Plan for the future? I think the only one who can answer this is the board.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bob stark]

12 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

 

 

Why would city play with more caution? 

They were losing 1-0, there is no difference between losing 1-0 or 2-0 and you are bringing on mudryk not mbappe. 

 

 

[Sconnie Blue]

20 hours ago, Gol15 said:

Having a real plan with e.g. Mudryk would have given us probably 10 minutes less worries as his threat of pace would be there,

 

You can make that claim if you wish but there is enough evidence to suggest Mudryk would have given us 10 minutes of frustration the way he loses possession and poorly times his runs.
 

If you want Mudryk to play along the defensive line for the counter then Chilwell has both Foden + Walker to deal with by himself, with Enzo having to cover centrally to prevent the cut backs like he was doing all game. 
 

Chalobah sub made sense as it provided an extra body in the box when KDB shifted out wide crossing it in. 

[Drogba1]

I don't think Poch deserves to be criticised over yesterday, it was a good result

 

That being said, we're still 10th, so I don't think he deserves too many plaudits either. 

[Gordon Bennett]

33 minutes ago, Bob stark said:

Imo if this is a final then I will leave the 3 attackers longer but we have a final next week. So you need to take them out. 

That makes zero sense. They've got over a week to recover. Playing a few extra minutes wouldn't make a difference to them physically.

[axman2526]

43 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Chalobah sub made sense as it provided an extra body in the box when KDB shifted out wide crossing it in. 

If he was fully fit fair enough, but he was far from it, been out injured the whole season, so I disagree here, the change made no sense when you have a no nonsense defender in Alfie, who has often  played right back in his appearance, who would have been more help as he actually is match fit.

Trev was not ready for what was asked of him.

[axman2526]

52 minutes ago, Bob stark said:

Imo if this is a final then I will leave the 3 attackers longer but we have a final next week. So you need to take them out. 

Nkunku sub was more of he was the only option of the bench. 

Chalobah sub was about helping  gusto who was running on fumes. So the choice was between Chalobah or Alfie. 

Cassedei was all about adding more height. 

All make sense. What poch could have done differently? I don't know, if Madueke n mudryk are not 😵‍💫😵‍💫, they would have been obvious solution. 

Plan for the future? I think the only one who can answer this is the board.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Same time you argue about how useless Noni and Mudryk are, you say Poch had a choice between Trev and Alfie.

There is a choice between an unfit player who has been out injured all season, and a fully fit player for of running. Now that's madness thinking their is an actual choice.

[Mod]

This should all probably be in the match thread but agree with @Gol15 Mudryk should've come on! He really isn't as bad as people make out!

To take Sterling off too was criminal!

[RMH]

1 hour ago, Bob stark said:

Imo if this is a final then I will leave the 3 attackers longer but we have a final next week. So you need to take them out. 

Nkunku sub was more of he was the only option of the bench. 

Chalobah sub was about helping  gusto who was running on fumes. So the choice was between Chalobah or Alfie. 

Cassedei was all about adding more height. 

All make sense. What poch could have done differently? I don't know, if Madueke n mudryk are not 😵‍💫😵‍💫, they would have been obvious solution. 

Plan for the future? I think the only one who can answer this is the board.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That’s better.

You say Nkunku was the only option on the bench, but he was 😵‍💫, as you like to put it. So not better than Mudryck or Madueke.

Also, it was 😵‍💫 to bring on Chalobah, who has been injured all season, instead of Gilchrist who is match fit and has proven to be useful when he’s played.

You don’t go full defensive with no possibility of attacking at Etihad with 20 minutes to play. Simple as. If you don’t trust your bench, he’s had time to find attacking players in Cobham just like he found Gilchrist.

[dansubrosa]

I think Tuchel is most likely sacked after todays result.

Will the owners swallow their pride and admit they f*cked up? Get rid of Poch and get Tommy in…

[Gol15]

1 hour ago, Sconnie Blue said:

You can make that claim if you wish but there is enough evidence to suggest Mudryk would have given us 10 minutes of frustration the way he loses possession and poorly times his runs.
 

If you want Mudryk to play along the defensive line for the counter then Chilwell has both Foden + Walker to deal with by himself, with Enzo having to cover centrally to prevent the cut backs like he was doing all game. 
 

Chalobah sub made sense as it provided an extra body in the box when KDB shifted out wide crossing it in. 

Let's say that Poch leaves the Chalobah sub 10 minutes later, that alone would have helped us in terms of just not playing the "who will clear more balls from our box" game for so long.

So even if you don't agree with me about Mudryk, you should see that the way Chalobah was introduced looked like as if we had gotten a red card and simply had to play ultra defensively for too long. Man City can create a chance every minute if given the space and we did gave them everything they needed in order to score.

Ideally speaking you don't want your defense to be constantly under pressure and Poch chose this to happen for 25 minutes which is more than enough for Man City to score more than once.
So even if Mudryk loses possession, he maybe could have won us a foul somewhere on the middle of the pitch, that alone would have taken the pressure off the defenders for some minutes. I personally rate that more than having an extra body inside our box because we were playing Man City, they are simply too good and you must try to not make it into a game of constant bombardment of your box.

We had 30% possession yesterday, we didn't need to have it so low. We had over 40% in the CL final! and over 40% at home this season where we scored 4 goals! Even this season when we played 4:4, Man City had 15 shots in total, yesterday they had 32 shots on goal!

So even if Chalobah made sense, the timing of it was way too early for a team like Man City. Yes we didn't lose the match but I thought that we could have believed in the team more, I honestly believe that this Man City team isn't unbeatable at all.

Edited February 18 by Gol15

[ozboy]

Could have put casedi in midfield for Palmer and had him help out gusto, leaving the other mids less ground to cover and making city’s mids work harder. 
 

Mudryck would be risky but his pace also would have carried the threat of a breakaway goal. Madueke was the natural replacement though. He could easily have come on and added strength and energy and also would have kept Chelsea in the same shape and same plan as before. 
 

attack is the best form of defence. Bringing on chalobah was like running up the white flag. It’s the same safety first  approach that has characterized the team all season. It destroys self belief and sows doubt. We were back in the same boys against men as at Liverpool.

im sure I’m not the only person here who thought chalobah for Palmer was the wrong thing to do as soon  as it was announced.ypu just knew it would lift city. Other choices would have been hard because city were getting on top but I was sure it was the wrong choice from the get go. 
 

Edited February 18 by ozboy

[axman2526]

50 minutes ago, dansubrosa said:

I think Tuchel is most likely sacked after todays result.

Will the owners swallow their pride and admit they f*cked up? Get rid of Poch and get Tommy in…

[WhiteWall]

3 hours ago, Bob stark said:

So what should poch have done then? 

 

Your old trick again. He asked you the question.

[El regreso]

Waiting on this same discussion when Poch does the opposite but also gets slated for doing what most are saying he should of done 🤣

[ozboy]

1 minute ago, El regreso said:

Waiting on this same discussion when Poch does the opposite but also gets slated for doing what most are saying he should of done 🤣

I wasn’t against the nkunku change. 

[WhiteWall]

3 hours ago, Bob stark said:

I am personally interested if anyone has interesting idea. With the benefit of hindsight, it should be easier but so far none of the suggestion make sense let alone good.

 

Bollocks, as usual   

[axman2526]

El regreso right now:

[El regreso]

2 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

El regreso right now:

lol thing is a know we would have the exact same discussion if he had gone attacking and lost 2-1. Fans would arguing the opposite that he should of brought Alfie or Trev on to sure up the back had be brought on Mudryk or Noni and they f**ked up.

Its a lose lose for Poch in some fans eyes, they are just waiting to find a fault.

He hasn’t been faultless far from it but yesterday’s game wasn’t one where he made a mistake. He got it spot on and had Jackson or Sterling score their 1v1 and we go two up we win that match.

Small details but it will come what I have seen in the last few games is encouraging.

[Gol15]

1 hour ago, El regreso said:

lol thing is a know we would have the exact same discussion if he had gone attacking and lost 2-1. Fans would arguing the opposite that he should of brought Alfie or Trev on to sure up the back had be brought on Mudryk or Noni and they f**ked up.

Its a lose lose for Poch in some fans eyes, they are just waiting to find a fault.

He hasn’t been faultless far from it but yesterday’s game wasn’t one where he made a mistake. He got it spot on and had Jackson or Sterling score their 1v1 and we go two up we win that match.

Small details but it will come what I have seen in the last few games is encouraging.

I can think that there was certain specific move that was a mistake while actually not waiting or searching to find a fault at all.

You're making a mistake for putting everyone in the same basket here, I knew that we need to score twice in order have a chance to win since I was sure that Man City is scoring at least once. The problem was that Pochettino's sub effectively made that impossible and thus the only favorable outcome for us was a draw.

We already showed that we can put 4 behind Ederson so for me it's about how we want to play, Conte was losing 1:0 to Man City and refused to play, Sarri was losing 6:0 and kept insisting that we should actually play... I'm the type of person that prefers to see the manager trying to make a team compete and this season is a good opportunity for that, winning one point or none isn't making or breaking our season.

[Bob stark]

4 hours ago, RMH said:

That’s better.

You say Nkunku was the only option on the bench, but he was 😵‍💫, as you like to put it. So not better than Mudryck or Madueke.

Also, it was 😵‍💫 to bring on Chalobah, who has been injured all season, instead of Gilchrist who is match fit and has proven to be useful when he’s played.

You don’t go full defensive with no possibility of attacking at Etihad with 20 minutes to play. Simple as. If you don’t trust your bench, he’s had time to find attacking players in Cobham just like he found Gilchrist.

You can't just play some random attacker that will be useless. You need an attacker who can keep the ball high, that will be difficult to find straight from academy unless you have a crazy level talent. 

"Madueke was trying his best to make us lose vs Luton after we were 3-0 up

Mudryk invited triple team in our own half vs boro and tried to dribble through them" 

Let me be frank, if our manager is TT or Pep these two won't ever touch the field

Did Chalobah lose us the game? 

 

Edited February 18 by Bob stark