16 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Just realized that if we beat Newcastle and Liverpool beat Arsenal, Arsenal are only 1 point ahead of us with them having to face Newcastle (who is their bogey team) and we face a United side that will likely field their B/C team.

There's a possibility we could finish above Arsenal 💀

That IF we beat Newcastle is a huge if.

Judging by our celebrations in the dressing room post Liverpool the players may we'll feel the job is done already.

Arsenal esc...

Eze puts Palace ahead against Nottingham at 60mins.

1-1 Murillo 64 mins

Record V Newcastle...

https://www.11v11.com/teams/chelsea/tab/opposingTeams/opposition/Newcastle%20United/

On 05/05/2025 at 08:51, evissy said:

So many teams are 'imploding' because the league is at its height on its level. Every relegation fodder side has a coach that actually knows football and has tons of quality. Use data to prepare the team and learn the opponent.

I would say City is the only side that really dropped off but they lost their Ballon dor winner in Rodri and DeBruyne was off most season.

This is the Prem now.

We lost 4 points to Ipswich. On a day any team can lose to Ipswich. The margins are so small.

I think Newcastle, Arsenal and Villa held on to their levels. All have great squads and tons of experience.

Liverpool were above and beyond everyone else and they had a perfect season in the Prem.

Ipswich has 4 wins all season, so no not any team can lose to Ipswich. We sh*t the bed (twice) against one of the poorest PL sides ever.

This explains a lot.

2 hours ago, dansubrosa said:

This explains a lot.

Any longer with them and we would have shat the bed!!

5 hours ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Ipswich has 4 wins all season, so no not any team can lose to Ipswich. We sh*t the bed (twice) against one of the poorest PL sides ever.

They can. We have lost to the same side both fixtures many seasons. With much more experienced and successful sides. Not sure if you got the sentiment of my post. But it doesn't matter. The negativity in most of your posts here is something I am not bothered to battle with. Not my problem.

1 hour ago, evissy said:

They can. We have lost to the same side both fixtures many seasons. With much more experienced and successful sides. Not sure if you got the sentiment of my post. But it doesn't matter. The negativity in most of your posts here is something I am not bothered to battle with. Not my problem.

Actually i don't think negativity in posting by @Ukraine Bolt is relevant or accurate here. I think he was making specific comments which you responded to with a generalisation that any team on any given day can lose to Ipswich, which appears to be a play on the old adage that so and so can beat anyone on their day. Your comment however isn't factually correct in this instance as Ipswich have only won four games all season and Charity FC have been major benefactors for them.

9 hours ago, WhiteWall said:

Actually i don't think negativity in posting by @Ukraine Bolt is relevant or accurate here. I think he was making specific comments which you responded to with a generalisation that any team on any given day can lose to Ipswich, which appears to be a play on the old adage that so and so can beat anyone on their day. Your comment however isn't factually correct in this instance as Ipswich have only won four games all season and Charity FC have been major benefactors for them.

Where you and UB are coming from is we should be beating Ipswich because we are Chelsea FC. I know the sentiment and back in the day (Roman era) I would have agreed with that 100%. Today no.

The league itself is massively tough and we have the circumstances we have. No need to repeat them. I have my view on it people here might have another one.

I love to compare us to MU because there are parallels. First being both sides use massive amounts of money on the squad. Absolute fortunes. On both cases that is the reason media and outsiders mock on the two clubs. Why not. Easy target. When you don't win or win everything money is brought up. If you win everything it was because of the money.

Manchester United uses the money on the players in the way Roman used it on our side. Get a new coach in, he brings Mazraoui to the squad because he knows him. Get sacked, Mazraoui stays. That ilk. We did it quite successfully but it is not very sustainable. We won a lot less we could have done. Premier League trophies to be exact.

Why do you think Manchester United is doing so horribly? Because they spent on the squad? They have immense talent in the squad? One reason for sure is they don't have easy games in the league. They can't coast one game here and there. They lose every one of those games. At their hayday they could coast to victories. As did we. Those days are well and truly behind.

What they do still have is the feeling they should be doing that as they are the mighty Manchester United. Media and fans give you that extra pressure. While pressure is good, too much pressure does what we are witnessing there. That of course and bad leadership. Manchester united never had bad coaches but the club is not aligned from the bottom up. That includes fans and the perception of the club from outside. We are in a similar situation here where things are a bit delicate on that part. We need to be unified.

Ipswich young coach uses every bit of information and data he could have to hurt the opponent. He does the same work Jose did on opponents when he was the rare case in that. He worked more than his counterparts and used his intelligence to do so. Now the bar is much higher. Everyone of these young coaches have learned all from the likes of Jose and Pep.

Back in the day you had to be there to learn. Now you can have all (most) the information on the palm of your hands. This is where the old school differs from the new school. The new school will bulldoze the old faster than you think. Brighton has a 31 year old coach. They are not thinking about hiring the Ginger Mourinho.

We have had bogey teams as everyone always talks about them. We didn't do well against Ipswich this season. That is for sure. Many things can be the reason but as the levels are so high that can happen. Enzo Maresca will learn what he did wrong preparing the team against Ipswich for sure.

We shouldn't have lost to Ipswich but it can happen in 2025. Times have truly changed and we have to adapt to it.

30 minutes ago, evissy said:

Where you and UB are coming from is we should be beating Ipswich because we are Chelsea FC. I know the sentiment and back in the day (Roman era) I would have agreed with that 100%. Today no.

The league itself is massively tough and we have the circumstances we have. No need to repeat them. I have my view on it people here might have another one.

I love to compare us to MU because there are parallels. First being both sides use massive amounts of money on the squad. Absolute fortunes. On both cases that is the reason media and outsiders mock on the two clubs. Why not. Easy target. When you don't win or win everything money is brought up. If you win everything it was because of the money.

Manchester United uses the money on the players in the way Roman used it on our side. Get a new coach in, he brings Mazraoui to the squad because he knows him. Get sacked, Mazraoui stays. That ilk. We did it quite successfully but it is not very sustainable. We won a lot less we could have done. Premier League trophies to be exact.

Why do you think Manchester United is doing so horribly? Because they spent on the squad? They have immense talent in the squad? One reason for sure is they don't have easy games in the league. They can't coast one game here and there. They lose every one of those games. At their hayday they could coast to victories. As did we. Those days are well and truly behind.

What they do still have is the feeling they should be doing that as they are the mighty Manchester United. Media and fans give you that extra pressure. While pressure is good, too much pressure does what we are witnessing there. That of course and bad leadership. Manchester united never had bad coaches but the club is not aligned from the bottom up. That includes fans and the perception of the club from outside. We are in a similar situation here where things are a bit delicate on that part. We need to be unified.

Ipswich young coach uses every bit of information and data he could have to hurt the opponent. He does the same work Jose did on opponents when he was the rare case in that. He worked more than his counterparts and used his intelligence to do so. Now the bar is much higher. Everyone of these young coaches have learned all from the likes of Jose and Pep.

Back in the day you had to be there to learn. Now you can have all (most) the information on the palm of your hands. This is where the old school differs from the new school. The new school will bulldoze the old faster than you think. Brighton has a 31 year old coach. They are not thinking about hiring the Ginger Mourinho.

We have had bogey teams as everyone always talks about them. We didn't do well against Ipswich this season. That is for sure. Many things can be the reason but as the levels are so high that can happen. Enzo Maresca will learn what he did wrong preparing the team against Ipswich for sure.

We shouldn't have lost to Ipswich but it can happen in 2025. Times have truly changed and we have to adapt to it.

I see it slightly differently.

You insist the levels are high ; I think the total opposite. Standards of the big clubs have sunk to the lowest levels I can remember, which then enables the rest of the PL to compete.

The big clubs still have the huge financial advantages they have always had, but there has been a modern trend (which I saw in corporate business as well) to insist that the directors are the real "top talent" and so a lot of rather mediocre "football" executives have been trusted to spend huge amounts of money on signings that are mostly duds. Manchester United have been the benchmark here, but they are far from alone. The problem seems to be that the more money goes into the game of football, the lower the standards seem to fall. In parallel to the low quality of the directors, the player talent pool for the big clubs to spend their cash on has also shrunk significantly, which is why we are all scrabbling about for names for the "world class" goalkeeper, central defender, and striker that we need. There just aren't that many out there any more, particularly strikers.

Edited May 7, 20251 yr by Sexyfootball

1 hour ago, Sexyfootball said:

I see it slightly differently.

You insist the levels are high ; I think the total opposite. Standards of the big clubs have sunk to the lowest levels I can remember, which then enables the rest of the PL to compete.

The big clubs still have the huge financial advantages they have always had, but there has been a modern trend (which I saw in corporate business as well) to insist that the directors are the real "top talent" and so a lot of rather mediocre "football" executives have been trusted to spend huge amounts of money on signings that are mostly duds. Manchester United have been the benchmark here, but they are far from alone. The problem seems to be that the more money goes into the game of football, the lower the standards seem to fall. In parallel to the low quality of the directors, the player talent pool for the big clubs to spend their cash on has also shrunk significantly, which is why we are all scrabbling about for names for the "world class" goalkeeper, central defender, and striker that we need. There just aren't that many out there any more, particularly strikers.

Well, you can see in Manchester United for example that they have in fact purchased good/great players. Many of them even of late have shown to be so by moving away from there. I probably don't even have to mention Rashford, McTominay and with a stretch Antony. While the Prem was probably a place too deep for them (excl Rashford) anyway the working environment at MU is far from optimal. They live in the past.

I think in general football is in the crux of leading with data instead of the old school way. This is why we have these young bucks coming into new surprisingly high positions to clubs as they are very comfortable with using data in a smart way. This is something that is apparent in the business world as well. My colleagues are getting fired left and right who are not that tech savvy. You have seen that probably yourself as well.

I am sure their new coach is as good as he has shown to be in Sporting but the environment is a mess and the opponents as well as their own history won't give them a minutes time to rest.

I am afraid we slip into something like this if we are not unified as a club. We have the means but not the way.

If this was 2002 MU could just crush opponents with superior resources in every department of the club. Now only their players are superior in skill or at least should be related to their market value.

I think in general the value of a single player is pretty world wide knowledge because they are scouted by thousands of people.

Anyway...it is an interesting topic to me at least

2 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

I see it slightly differently.

You insist the levels are high ; I think the total opposite. Standards of the big clubs have sunk to the lowest levels I can remember, which then enables the rest of the PL to compete.

I agree with this entirely. I don’t believe there is an ‘elite’ Premier League side anymore and the level has dipped dramatically from 10/15 years ago.

The overall product is drastically worse by quite a margin and the players that are playing are levels below what we’ve been previously accustomed to.

This isn’t just a Chelsea issue but a Premier League wide one, football is deteriorating.

2 hours ago, The Boehly Babes said:

I agree with this entirely. I don’t believe there is an ‘elite’ Premier League side anymore and the level has dipped dramatically from 10/15 years ago.

The overall product is drastically worse by quite a margin and the players that are playing are levels below what we’ve been previously accustomed to.

This isn’t just a Chelsea issue but a Premier League wide one, football is deteriorating.

Hmmm...level of players and coaches to me is an all time high level. The brand of football to me is not and has never been at the level some European Giants play and for example we see in the Champions League. But English sides have done pretty well in the CL so if that is any indication....

If you look at even the lowest sides in the Prem you have brilliant players here and there. Just look at the squads of Wolves, Spurs and Manchester United 😁.

We also have a crop of best coaches although many of them are young. Pep and Emery the top dogs and below them emerging pack of young and very promising coaches such as our Enzo, Arteta and Amorim. I am pretty sure clubs go to these young guys because they see the world differently and are willing to use data and work inside the club structure. Even the oldest and very traditional club like Bayern went for Kompany. Times are changing.

But in terms of the optics of the football I don't like this up and down muscle league style. Not the best football I have seen and the style I like.

I am guessing pacy football and a ton of goals is going to attract more new fans so it is bound to change.

18 minutes ago, evissy said:

Hmmm...level of players and coaches to me is an all time high level. The brand of football to me is not and has never been at the level some European Giants play and for example we see in the Champions League. But English sides have done pretty well in the CL so if that is any indication....

If you look at even the lowest sides in the Prem you have brilliant players here and there. Just look at the squads of Wolves, Spurs and Manchester United 😁.

We also have a crop of best coaches although many of them are young. Pep and Emery the top dogs and below them emerging pack of young and very promising coaches such as our Enzo, Arteta and Amorim. I am pretty sure clubs go to these young guys because they see the world differently and are willing to use data and work inside the club structure. Even the oldest and very traditional club like Bayern went for Kompany. Times are changing.

But in terms of the optics of the football I don't like this up and down muscle league style. Not the best football I have seen and the style I like.

I am guessing pacy football and a ton of goals is going to attract more new fans so it is bound to change.

If you did a poll of Big Six supporters for the best/manager coach in their history, I suspect only Man City would come up with the current incumbent as their best ever, so I really can't see how you can claim that the current crop of coaches is at an all time high ...

Seriously, you'd take Arteta over Wenger ? Amorim over Ferguson ? Maresca over Mourinho, Ancelotti, Conte ? (LOL LOL LOL) Postecoglou over Pochettino ? etc etc

17 hours ago, evissy said:

They can. We have lost to the same side both fixtures many seasons. With much more experienced and successful sides. Not sure if you got the sentiment of my post. But it doesn't matter. The negativity in most of your posts here is something I am not bothered to battle with. Not my problem.

Who can they beat anyone of their day? They have 4 wins all season.

The only teams to have less in a premier league season are Derby (07/08), Sunderland (05/06), Huddersfield (18/19), Sheff Utd (23/24) and Southampton (24/25).

Ipswich are one of the worst PL sides ever and they beat us. Without coming up with an excuse to avoid the question like "wah your posts are negative i don't want to get invovled", please explain how they can beat anyone when evidently they cannot. They couldn't even beat this Southampton team in either fixture FFS.

Waffle.

I agree with the concept - that the premier league is competitive and in theory, any team can beat any other on any given day. They are only ever a goalie error, a dodgy pen or a mm VAR call away.

Whilst this works in theory, in reality there has been a drop. Ipswich, Saints and Leicester were poor. UTD, city, arsenal and spurs have dropped off. Wolves and west ham have been inconsistent.

Chelsea had a chance. Maresca blew it

12 hours ago, evissy said:

Where you and UB are coming from is we should be beating Ipswich because we are Chelsea FC. I know the sentiment and back in the day (Roman era) I would have agreed with that 100%. Today no.

The league itself is massively tough and we have the circumstances we have. No need to repeat them. I have my view on it people here might have another one.

I love to compare us to MU because there are parallels. First being both sides use massive amounts of money on the squad. Absolute fortunes. On both cases that is the reason media and outsiders mock on the two clubs. Why not. Easy target. When you don't win or win everything money is brought up. If you win everything it was because of the money.

Manchester United uses the money on the players in the way Roman used it on our side. Get a new coach in, he brings Mazraoui to the squad because he knows him. Get sacked, Mazraoui stays. That ilk. We did it quite successfully but it is not very sustainable. We won a lot less we could have done. Premier League trophies to be exact.

Why do you think Manchester United is doing so horribly? Because they spent on the squad? They have immense talent in the squad? One reason for sure is they don't have easy games in the league. They can't coast one game here and there. They lose every one of those games. At their hayday they could coast to victories. As did we. Those days are well and truly behind.

What they do still have is the feeling they should be doing that as they are the mighty Manchester United. Media and fans give you that extra pressure. While pressure is good, too much pressure does what we are witnessing there. That of course and bad leadership. Manchester united never had bad coaches but the club is not aligned from the bottom up. That includes fans and the perception of the club from outside. We are in a similar situation here where things are a bit delicate on that part. We need to be unified.

Ipswich young coach uses every bit of information and data he could have to hurt the opponent. He does the same work Jose did on opponents when he was the rare case in that. He worked more than his counterparts and used his intelligence to do so. Now the bar is much higher. Everyone of these young coaches have learned all from the likes of Jose and Pep.

Back in the day you had to be there to learn. Now you can have all (most) the information on the palm of your hands. This is where the old school differs from the new school. The new school will bulldoze the old faster than you think. Brighton has a 31 year old coach. They are not thinking about hiring the Ginger Mourinho.

We have had bogey teams as everyone always talks about them. We didn't do well against Ipswich this season. That is for sure. Many things can be the reason but as the levels are so high that can happen. Enzo Maresca will learn what he did wrong preparing the team against Ipswich for sure.

We shouldn't have lost to Ipswich but it can happen in 2025. Times have truly changed and we have to adapt to it.

Your first sentence shows that you've actually got the wrong end of the stick, certainly from my point of view anyway. The original response was not making an assertion of what i think Chelsea should be doing. It was a response to your comment that anyone can lose to Ipswich which on the evidence of them wining only 4 games all season clearly hasn't been true this season.

12 hours ago, evissy said:

Where you and UB are coming from is we should be beating Ipswich because we are Chelsea FC. I have already posted that this was not my sentiment at all. Looking at @Ukraine Bolt's subsequent post he is of a similar opinion to me. I know the sentiment and back in the day (Roman era) I would have agreed with that 100%. Today no.

The league itself is massively tough and we have the circumstances we have. No need to repeat them. I have my view on it people here might have another one. I actually agree more with @Sexyfootball that the converse is true that there has been a major falling off of quality throughout thus making the league more competitive but weaker. This is illustrated by the fact that a reasonable Liverpool side has cruised to the title without ever really setting the league alight. Their biggest challenger have built their foundation upon being good at set pieces, and that's about it.

I love to compare us to MU because there are parallels. First being both sides use massive amounts of money on the squad. Absolute fortunes. On both cases that is the reason media and outsiders mock on the two clubs. Why not. Easy target. When you don't win or win everything money is brought up. If you win everything it was because of the money. This bit i do actually agree with

Manchester United uses the money on the players in the way Roman used it on our side. Get a new coach in, he brings Mazraoui to the squad because he knows him. Get sacked, Mazraoui stays. That ilk. We did it quite successfully but it is not very sustainable. We won a lot less we could have done. Premier League trophies to be exact. This is a strange comment. Every club does exactly the same. I don't really understand this. Whenever managers get sacked by any club their players are left behind. When Everton sacked Sean Dyche he didn't take his players with him. Maybe i am mis-reading your point.

Why do you think Manchester United is doing so horribly? Because they spent on the squad? This is exactly the reason they are doing so horribly. They spent major money on the likes of Casemiro, Mount, Anthony, Erikson, and expected that to form the core of their midfield. The only player with any legs and strength, McTominay, they cashed in on. They have immense talent in the squad? Genuinely struggling to think of any one of their players that i would want at Chelsea. Possibly that Diallo lad, that's it. One reason for sure is they don't have easy games in the league. Of course there are no easy games in the league but that's a bit of a reductive comment. Its elite sport. The reason why the lose constantly is that they are a poorly constructed team of aging and aged players who do not have the energy in critical areas to compete. They can't coast one game here and there. They lose every one of those games. At their hayday they could coast to victories. As did we. Those days are well and truly behind.

What they do still have is the feeling they should be doing that as they are the mighty Manchester United. Media and fans give you that extra pressure. While pressure is good, too much pressure does what we are witnessing there. That of course and bad leadership. Manchester united never had bad coaches but the club is not aligned from the bottom up. That includes fans and the perception of the club from outside. We are in a similar situation here where things are a bit delicate on that part. We need to be unified. This is also a bit of an odd comment. I don't have enough insight of the workings of Man Utd to fully comment and i will gladly admit that SAF revolutionized the club and elevated them to a level that statistically exceeded that of Matt Busby. However history is now showing that SAF was an outlier because from Frank O'Farrell, through Tommy Doc, Ron Atkinson and then McLaren, Moyes, Van Gaal, OGS, ETH and so on there is a thorough back catalogue of dross mismanagement at that club. Incomparable to us with Jose I and II, Carlo, Conte. Hell our OGS equivalent RDM still picked up the CL.

Ipswich young coach uses every bit of information and data he could have to hurt the opponent. He does the same work Jose did on opponents when he was the rare case in that. He worked more than his counterparts and used his intelligence to do so. Now the bar is much higher. Everyone of these young coaches have learned all from the likes of Jose and Pep. Actually nothing is new under the sun. Development is generally made by evolution, not revolution. They were using Prozone type data analytic software way back when. As an example the routinely mocked "luddite" Sam Allardyce was renowned throughout his managerial career, as far back as Notts County, to be a major proponent of data analytics and data driven team selection and tactics.

Back in the day you had to be there to learn. Now you can have all (most) the information on the palm of your hands. This is where the old school differs from the new school. The new school will bulldoze the old faster than you think. Brighton has a 31 year old coach. They are not thinking about hiring the Ginger Mourinho.

We have had bogey teams as everyone always talks about them. We didn't do well against Ipswich this season. That is for sure. Many things can be the reason but as the levels are so high that can happen. Enzo Maresca will learn what he did wrong preparing the team against Ipswich for sure.

We shouldn't have lost to Ipswich but it can happen in 2025. Times have truly changed and we have to adapt to it.

Sorry, i have read more of your post and I have to say that i disagree with almost every point that you have made. I have commented above. I apologies because it is not intended to be a dig at what you have written i just have a differing view on a substantial number of the points that you have made

I hope Maresca watched PSG and realised that possession football ain't sh*t, unless you have a supremely talented squad.

Counter attack is just so much more effective. Defenders are switched on and attackers are frothing at the mouth launching every attack.

22 hours ago, evissy said:

Hmmm...level of players and coaches to me is an all time high level. The brand of football to me is not and has never been at the level some European Giants play and for example we see in the Champions League. But English sides have done pretty well in the CL so if that is any indication....

If you look at even the lowest sides in the Prem you have brilliant players here and there. Just look at the squads of Wolves, Spurs and Manchester United 😁.

We also have a crop of best coaches although many of them are young. Pep and Emery the top dogs and below them emerging pack of young and very promising coaches such as our Enzo, Arteta and Amorim. I am pretty sure clubs go to these young guys because they see the world differently and are willing to use data and work inside the club structure. Even the oldest and very traditional club like Bayern went for Kompany. Times are changing.

But in terms of the optics of the football I don't like this up and down muscle league style. Not the best football I have seen and the style I like.

I am guessing pacy football and a ton of goals is going to attract more new fans so it is bound to change.

Pacy football and loads of goals, plus the fact that any team was capable on their day of beating another is what made the premier league what it is today.

Modern managers tactics and stats, along with VAR have ruined it IMHO.

Would I be saying that if we’d just won the treble, probably would have said changed not ruined.

I just want to see more energy, more effort. The players a fitter than ever, they have all the nutritional info and sports science. Huge squads, 5 subs etc. they don’t have to play every week with rest and rotation, they have 3 weeks out with a blister ffs. And sometimes they don’t even look like they have broken sweat.

I want to see fast pacy end to end matches. Players running themselves into the ground. Mistakes change games like moments of magic. I remember when a crunching tackle and a 20 man brawl would change a game, they barely tackle anymore.

Things certainly have changed, but nobody can tell me they have changed for the better.

On 07/05/2025 at 15:43, Sexyfootball said:

I see it slightly differently.

You insist the levels are high ; I think the total opposite. Standards of the big clubs have sunk to the lowest levels I can remember, which then enables the rest of the PL to compete.

The big clubs still have the huge financial advantages they have always had, but there has been a modern trend (which I saw in corporate business as well) to insist that the directors are the real "top talent" and so a lot of rather mediocre "football" executives have been trusted to spend huge amounts of money on signings that are mostly duds. Manchester United have been the benchmark here, but they are far from alone. The problem seems to be that the more money goes into the game of football, the lower the standards seem to fall. In parallel to the low quality of the directors, the player talent pool for the big clubs to spend their cash on has also shrunk significantly, which is why we are all scrabbling about for names for the "world class" goalkeeper, central defender, and striker that we need. There just aren't that many out there any more, particularly strikers.

Yah... Classic example of that and how it's failed, Manchester United and Fergy; and maybe us give it a while... albeit Roman did have a revolving door for the manager component previously 😁

I remember reading many people posted how Maresca was fixing our broken offense under Poch.

We scored 77 goals last season and right now we are on 62 goals with 3 games to go.

Bob I swear you are making sh*t up.

1 minute ago, Sexyfootball said:

If you did a poll of Big Six supporters for the best/manager coach in their history, I suspect only Man City would come up with the current incumbent as their best ever, so I really can't see how you can claim that the current crop of coaches is at an all time high ...

Seriously, you'd take Arteta over Wenger ? Amorim over Ferguson ? Maresca over Mourinho, Ancelotti, Conte ? (LOL LOL LOL) Postecoglou over Pochettino ? etc etc

Naturally not in terms of the coaches you mentioned

22 hours ago, C3blue said:

Pacy football and loads of goals, plus the fact that any team was capable on their day of beating another is what made the premier league what it is today.

Modern managers tactics and stats, along with VAR have ruined it IMHO.

Would I be saying that if we’d just won the treble, probably would have said changed not ruined.

I just want to see more energy, more effort. The players a fitter than ever, they have all the nutritional info and sports science. Huge squads, 5 subs etc. they don’t have to play every week with rest and rotation, they have 3 weeks out with a blister ffs. And sometimes they don’t even look like they have broken sweat.

I want to see fast pacy end to end matches. Players running themselves into the ground. Mistakes change games like moments of magic. I remember when a crunching tackle and a 20 man brawl would change a game, they barely tackle anymore.

Things certainly have changed, but nobody can tell me they have changed for the better.

1992 on there has basically been a couple of clubs who have dominated the series. On their hangover they could beat a lower level side..and I am 100% sure many of those games some players were hungover. That would put the unpredictability to certain games.

I like the added professionalism that is in team sports these days. I know players were more relatable those days as you yourself love beer as well. Nowadays they are more like machines.

In terms of tactics in a sense I agree but again I love the idea lower budget sides can beat bigger sides by outfoxing them rather than relying on hangovers or bad days at the office. The mastermind tacticians have taken the joy out of it a bit but if you appreciate intelligence that comes with it and the ideas you can appreciate the games a bit more as well.

My problem with football these days in general in the Premier League is the fittest and the fastest players will dominate. You have one or two exceptions like Cole Palmer who clearly is a bright footballing mind. I love players like Pirlo, Riquelme, Bergkamp (sorry), who slowed the pace down to outfox defensive lines and found pockets of space to players to run into.

I also love the old school Milan for example who Gullit was part of. Intelligent players totally dominating opposition. Even though the football in those games weren't pacy or no one ran themselves to the ground they thought all 90 minutes.