• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The Official 2014/15 Premier League Thread

Jurgen the German said:
Still not convinced Fabregas should have won a penalty. Yes there was contact, but not enough for Fabregas to go down like he did.
Click to expand...

the problem is theres hardly any challenges made in football (especially in the box) that can really force players to fall over. try to think of the last time a player got tripped up and could do nothing about falling over inside the box. it just doesnt happen. but players almost never get a foul unless they go over, so in almost all occasions, players have to exaggerate the contact and fall (simulate it).

this applies to cazorla/fabregas today. but what you cant deny is that the contact has put fabregas off. so on that basis, its a penalty for me.
 
if that isnt deemed a penalty, you are effectively advocating little niggles and digs in football
 
Jurgen the German said:
I am condoning little niggles, it's a part of the game. Football is a contact sport. You can't give every little foul, the ref would have to blow every 5 seconds.
Click to expand...

thats a fair enough point of view to have.

but on a side note, i think this is the real reason why england somewhat underperform as a national team. children in england basically play a different game to the rest of the world because of this attitude. and so england produce a different type of player, suited for a slightly different refereering criteria/game. england produce a steven gerrard as opposed to a pirlo or xavi. and these players inevitiably struggle when they have to play under a different refereeing criteria (to the one they are good at). i think its really hard to produce a passer like xavi or a dribbler like neymar when defenders are allowed to obstruct/niggle you. hence england produce players who are good at an attrition game. right through the spine of the team, england have always produce battlers rather than players who are rely more on technique. rooney, gerrard, terry etc etc are all more about physicality compared to their other world class counterparts.
 
Jordinho said:
“You know, ‘boring’ I think is 10 years without a title: that’s very boring,” said Mourinho, who also pointed to a perceived lack of ambition with the home side’s substitutions.

“You support a club and you’re waiting, waiting, waiting for so many years without a Premier League title, so that’s very boring. But maybe they aren’t singing at us. Maybe, when you’re the home side and you want to win a game but you take your No9 off [with six minutes remaining] … maybe the home fans want to see [Danny] Welbeck and [Olivier] Giroud up front together.

“We had a very good experience. The ‘boring’ team are the second highest scorers in the Premier League, and the team with the best goal difference. Only Emirates Marketing Project have scored more goals than us. So I think we scored a lot of goals and, in a period where we don’t have Diego Costa or Loïc Rémy available and we have only one striker – who we have to rely on to help us with all the matches we have – we changed a bit our dynamic and we are not scoring so many goals as before. But, even so, we are the second-highest scorers.”


Said the man who started the game without a striker.
Click to expand...
What a dingdong. It is Mourinho himself that has become the biggest bore about Chelsea. He's almost a a parody of himself now.
 
Mr_B said:
I disagree, so much of top class sport is mental, there's a reason Wenger has NEVER won a game against him and its not always what happens on the pitch
Click to expand...
That still doesn't preclude him from being a dingdonghead. Whether or not his 'mind games' make his team more effective is a different discussion.
And if you are honest most of the time he just speaks utter garbage, a complete distortion of the truth.
 
galeforce said:
I think he's bloody brilliant, a supreme pragmatist
Click to expand...
In his first stint at Chelsea I found him amusing. It was obvious that he really didn't take serious himself the crap he was spouting to the media, and they lapped it up without question. His interviews made me chuckle. I wouldn't have been surprised if he'd laughed his head off at how gullible some folks can be walking out of those briefings. But in the intervening period that has been replaced by a bitterness for whatever reason, and for me that makes him an extremely unlikeable character now. Each to their own I suppose though.
 
Last edited:
Rorschach said:
In his first stint at Chelsea I found him amusing. It was obvious that he really didn't take serious himself the crap he was spouting to the media, and they lapped it up without question. His interviews made me chuckle. I'd wouldn't have been surprised if he'd lauged his head off at how gullible some folks can be walking out of those briefings. But in the intervening period that has been replaced by a bitterness for whatever reason, and for me that makes him an extremely unlikeable character now. Each to their own I suppose though.
Click to expand...

Had to double check I hadn't written that myself. You nailed it, he had a wit and humour about him then, but now it's just bitter and cynical. The twinkle in the eye has been replace by a poke in the eye.
 
Mr_B said:
I disagree, so much of top class sport is mental, there's a reason Wenger has NEVER won a game against him and its not always what happens on the pitch
Click to expand...

the main reason wenger has never won a game against him is simply due to the interent variance/luck involved in football. anyone who thinks otherwise doesnt have a clue about football
 
Neymar said:
the main reason wenger has never won a game against him is simply due to the interent variance/luck involved in football. anyone who thinks otherwise doesnt have a clue about football
Click to expand...
I think the style of Mourinho's teams just works well against the tika-taka type of football espoused by Arsenal and the like. Against better footballing sides he sets up to not loose first and foremost. His teams retreat into a good defensive shape and play physical and often quite cynical football designed to frustrate the opposition. Eventually the opposition will drop their guard and Chelsea will nick a goal. His previous Cl successes with Porto and Inter were described as tactical master-classes and maybe they were or maybe they weren't, but to me they were very defensive and often physical and brutal affairs. Effective but not pretty is how I would describe it.
 
Rorschach said:
I think the style of Mourinho's teams just works well against the tika-taka type of football espoused by Arsenal and the like. Against better footballing sides he sets up to not loose first and foremost. His teams retreat into a good defensive shape and play physical and often quite cynical football designed to frustrate the opposition. Eventually the opposition will drop their guard and Chelsea will nick a goal. His previous Cl successes with Porto and Inter were described as tactical master-classes and maybe they were or maybe they weren't, but to me they were very defensive and often physical and brutal affairs. Effective but not pretty is how I would describe it.
Click to expand...

thats fair enough, and i would agree with a lot of it. but to say wenger's arsenal are not a massive favourite to win vs a mourinho chelsea side one or more times in 13 attempts is ridiculous whatever the tactics involved are.

for any team in the premier league, its very hard to win vs utd, city or chelsea. for example, we have beaten chelsea only twice in 13 attempts (and 1 in the last 10). arsenal are probably expected win roughly 3/4 times against chelsea in 13 attempts. if in those 3/4 times they couldve won, arsenal run into a bit of bad luck, its understandable that this sort of run can happen. on the other hand, i'm sure arsenal have won more than they would expect to vs other opposition. this isnt because wenger is a tactical genius. its simply how football works. you win some, you lose some. and at the end of the day, your overall results are reflective of how much investment your team has received.
 
Neymar said:
the main reason wenger has never won a game against him is simply due to the interent variance/luck involved in football. anyone who thinks otherwise doesnt have a clue about football
Click to expand...

I disagree, smarter manager with better players, had wenger won one that would be variance
 
Neymar said:
thats a fair enough point of view to have.

but on a side note, i think this is the real reason why england somewhat underperform as a national team. children in england basically play a different game to the rest of the world because of this attitude. and so england produce a different type of player, suited for a slightly different refereering criteria/game. england produce a steven gerrard as opposed to a pirlo or xavi. and these players inevitiably struggle when they have to play under a different refereeing criteria (to the one they are good at). i think its really hard to produce a passer like xavi or a dribbler like neymar when defenders are allowed to obstruct/niggle you. hence england produce players who are good at an attrition game. right through the spine of the team, england have always produce battlers rather than players who are rely more on technique. rooney, gerrard, terry etc etc are all more about physicality compared to their other world class counterparts.
Click to expand...

Having worked in top coaching for most of my life I have to say you are so wrong, the reason why we turn out players who are not as talented in ball play as some from other Countrys is the coaching nothing to do with the refereeing criteria. I have spent time at the Ajax school and also in some of the Germany camps and they teach a different way of playing then the old English style. Most of this is down to a guy called Charles Hughes, he was head of coaching for the FA and also wrote the coaching manual that all FA coaches had to adhere to when going for the badges. Thankfully he has gone now but a lot of coaches in the game were taught with his mantra, times are changing but they are still coaches in the game who work to it.
 
@parklane1 I'd be genuinely interested in what we have done differently over the years if you could condense it into a forum post, is it as simple and close skills and physicality?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back