We Go Again! The 2014/15 Premier League Thread

[Ent]

First topic message reminder :

Missed the game today great result!

City have bought terribly since they won the title in 11/12, 100s of millions and no real certain starters or class players introduced.

They've prospered in a relative decline of the pl, picking up the top players from the non top 4 and the sub elite Europeans was good enough as a base but they didn't kick on and it has showed in Europe and this season.

6 wins in a row for United, city, Spurs and Liverpool in that run.

Top 4 all but secured, big test next week against chelsea.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Fergie did that in the big games. Annoys the hell out of me that people ignore that

[Hammersmith harrier]

Fergie did that in the big games. Annoys the hell out of me that people ignore that

He may have done away Dolph but at home we attacked even in Europe, i'd be interested to hear in what big games he parked the bus, I can't remember us doing it against any of Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal or City. He screwed up the tactics spectacularly against Barcelona twice by but in the semi final the previous year we went after them, we then went after Chelsea in the final.

[FootballLight]

I think they'd be more boring if they did beat teams by 3/4 goals every week tbh. That's be awful viewing week in week out

I do see what you mean but I think the main point is the entertainment value. Obviously, Chelsea won't care as long as they are winning games and trophies but the fact of the matter is that just from a neutral perspective it is so boring to watch. You only get a handful of games with Chelsea that do provide good watching which is why I almost never watch them on TV really because it almost puts me to sleep.

[Guest]

Embarrassing this criticism of Chelsea, pure sour grapes from United fans, that they are no longer winning the titles & someone else is. I've seen plenty of attacking football from Chelsea this season, who's scored 65 goals this season, the most in the PL? When big games come around, Mourinho knows you can't play with the same style & with the same freedom or risk, as you do against minor sides. It's quite embarrassing that you think Mourinho would do so & risk jeopardising his teams chances.

[GSC]

Mourinho knows how to win big games. I think we'd all rather win 1-0 and take a big step towards the title than lose 4-3.

[FootballLight]

First of all, I am no United fan.

Secondly, I'm not disagreeing with the fact that Chelsea have a certain style and a certain way of playing against teams, I understand that it is good tactically. The only thing about it is, its boring for a neutral, like me. I fell asleep watching the QPR v Chelsea game last week, why? Because it was that boring.

Chelsea don't even play with high intensity o freedom against smaller sides either. Take the teams in the bottom half of the table as the "minor" teams lets say. How many of them have they hammered/provided good entertainment?

QPR 0-1 Chelsea - Boring
Hull 2-3 Chelsea - High scoring, so not bad
Chelsea 1-1 Burnley - Boring
Chelsea 1-0 Everton - Boring
Aston Villa 1-2 Chelsea - Boring
Chelsea 2-0 Newcastle - Boring
Chelsea 2-0 Hull - Boring
Newcastle 2-1 Chelsea - Not that bad because at least there's a surprise that they didn't grind out a 2-0 result
Sunderland 0-0 Chelsea - Very boring
Chelsea 2-0 West Brom - Boring
Chelsea 2-1 QPR - Boring
Crystal Palace 1-2 Chelsea - Fairly boring
Everton 3-6 Chelsea - About time we saw a good quality game, an exception
Chelsea 2-0 Leicester - Boring
Burnley 1-3 - Chelsea - Decent

Chelsea have the best attack in the league because they score 2 goals in almost every game they win bar 2/3. If you score 2 goals in every of your 38 games then you will have scored 76 goals, which is quite a lot. There have been games where Chelsea have scored 3 and 6 in a few as well so that just adds to the tally. So scoring 2 goals a game will give you a good attack by the end of the season. That doesn't mean to say they aren't boring. They typically grind teams down by defending and playing on the break.

Not going against them winning games/trophies, its just the style of play I can't stand from a neutral perspective, it just bores me. I can't watch Chelsea and I know quite a lot of other fans can't either.

[FootballLight]

Mourinho knows how to win big games. I think we'd all rather win 1-0 and take a big step towards the title than lose 4-3.

Look at Liverpool from last season. They were so close to the title last season and they put on good entertainment value because everyone wants to watch them. Why do you think they are always on TV? They provide good entertainment value, people will watch the games and more money for BT/Sky or whoever. Obviously, we would rather win than lose so I don't see how that is valid in anyway because Chelsea don't lose that many games. But, I'd rather see Chelsea win 4-3 than win 2-0.

[Guest]

As far as Mourinho is concerned, boring = 3 pts & a job well done & the league title delivered to his door.

Seriously, get over it, go & get laid or something.

[Fernando]

As far as Mourinho is concerned, boring = 3 pts & a job well done & the league title delivered to his door.

Seriously, get over it, go & get laid or something.(Inflatables don't count) (Im looking at you FL & Nick)

That's better

[NickisBHAFC]

Me? Not sure what I have to do with any of this, but pretty immature bringing a stranger involved into an argument! 

In other news, Nigel Pearson 3 wins out of 3. Absolute scenes.

[Guest]

Man C 2-0 WHU - Colling OG & Aguero

Like a pre season game, WHU have no motivation for this game.

[hampo17]

Can't imagine Mourinho really cares what any fan thinks, especially a neutral. Doubt the Chelsea fans care too much either.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

God this is dull.

[GSC]

Mourinho knows how to win big games. I think we'd all rather win 1-0 and take a big step towards the title than lose 4-3.

Look at Liverpool from last season. They were so close to the title last season and they put on good entertainment value because everyone wants to watch them. Why do you think they are always on TV? They provide good entertainment value, people will watch the games and more money for BT/Sky or whoever. Obviously, we would rather win than lose so I don't see how that is valid in anyway because Chelsea don't lose that many games. But, I'd rather see Chelsea win 4-3 than win 2-0.

I'd rather be the team that won the title than the team that choked it away personally.

[Guest]

We lost again, truly awful. I hope 35 points is enough.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

I really hope this defeat is enough to see triggers pulled

[Guest]

Are you talking about WHU or NUFC

Six straight defeats, it's an absolute shambles from top to bottom

[GSC]

Survival secured though. Imagine McClaren will come in if Derby fail again, cheap to buy him out I guess.

Ashley has his business model, remaining static is an unsexy goal

[GSC]

Only way it'll change is if fans vote with their feet on season tickets. Unlikely though

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Are you talking about WHU or NUFC

Both, sadly, both. Both clubs deserve better

[Ent]

History is written by the victors, but giving up 70% possession to a depleted inferior rival at home along with several good goal scoring chances isn't tactical genius - it is luck.

Many people saying that performance sums up why chelsea will win the league, it probably highlights why they didn't win it last year and haven't progressed in Europe despite having the best starting 11 and squad.

[GSC]

Its happened a few too many times for it to be luck

[mystiroakey]

History is written by the victors, but giving up 70% possession to a depleted inferior rival at home along with several good goal scoring chances isn't tactical genius - it is luck.

Many people saying that performance sums up why chelsea will win the league, it probably highlights why they didn't win it last year and haven't progressed in Europe despite having the best starting 11 and squad.

Watch a pulis team , watch a mourinhio team v Barca or munich.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Yeah, there's no luck to it. In fact, to be able to defend so that a team can have that much of the ball but not really look like beating you is a skill. Don't get me wrong, when you watch it too often its boring as hell, but having had Allardyce as our manager for a few years I've seen us embarrass teams by letting them have the majority of the ball without threatening us.

[Ent]

When you don't give up many chances it isn't luck, when you do and the opposition misses them it is- simple really.

Contrast United barca 08 and chelsea Barca 12 for the difference.

Look, chelsea didn't need to win- they are miles ahead. A draw for them would have been fine.

Mourinho is becoming a caricature of himself, which is a shame as he is a great manager.

[GSC]

Barca in 2012 were also miles better than 2008 if we're comparing

[Crimey]

It's the next big tactical shift in football, counter-football. It has long been held that more possession=more likely to win, and this generally has been true, but in recent years innovative managers like Mourinho and yes Tony Pulis have discovered that if your strengths lie in different areas it is actually better for you to not keep possession, that allowing the other team the ball is better for you.

Football tends to work in this way: Attacking innovation - Defending innovation - Attacking innovation - Defending innovation etc. It's about responding to the new tactics.

[Ent]

That hasn't been true since 3 points for a win was introduced.

[Crimey]

That hasn't been true since 3 points for a win was introduced.

What do you mean?

It's been shown that the move to 3 points for a win has changed very little.

[CFCNick]

When you don't give up many chances it isn't luck, when you do and the opposition misses them it is- simple really.

Contrast United barca 08 and chelsea Barca 12 for the difference.

Look, chelsea didn't need to win- they are miles ahead. A draw for them would have been fine.

Mourinho is becoming a caricature of himself, which is a shame as he is a great manager.

Barca in 2012 were also miles better than 2008 if we're comparing

You can say all you want about missed chances but also have to factor in Barca were 2-0 up at home with the man advantage for nearly an hour.

[Hammersmith harrier]

When you don't give up many chances it isn't luck, when you do and the opposition misses them it is- simple really.

Contrast United barca 08 and chelsea Barca 12 for the difference.

Look, chelsea didn't need to win- they are miles ahead. A draw for them would have been fine.

Mourinho is becoming a caricature of himself, which is a shame as he is a great manager.

Woah you can't mention pre Pep Barcelona, they were an awful team in meltdown, that our defence managed to keep them out for 180 minutes while our attack well attacked doesn't count.

I can however understand why a team even Chelsea would go to the nou camp and sit on a lead or first leg advantage but doing it at home against a depleted team whoever it is, is unacceptable for a top team.

I am entertained watching Man United play well and win, I am not entertained when they scrape wins on the back foot, think it sums up Chelsea fans that they just don't care as long as they win; glory hunting at it's finest.

[Ent]

That hasn't been true since 3 points for a win was introduced.

What do you mean?

It's been shown that the move to 3 points for a win has changed very little.

Generally teams try to win. Chelsea didn't need to die to the lead they had built up, that is their right and what they had earned by their play/results this season. But let's not pretend they would play like that if they needed to win.

If not having possession worked then the best sides would average under 50%, chelsea average 55% this season. If sticking extra defenders on and camping out in your own half was they way to do things the likes of palace etc would be top 4.

[Ent]

When you don't give up many chances it isn't luck, when you do and the opposition misses them it is- simple really.

Contrast United barca 08 and chelsea Barca 12 for the difference.

Look, chelsea didn't need to win- they are miles ahead. A draw for them would have been fine.

Mourinho is becoming a caricature of himself, which is a shame as he is a great manager.

Woah you can't mention pre Pep Barcelona, they were an awful team in meltdown, that our defence managed to keep them out for 180 minutes while our attack well attacked doesn't count.

I can however understand why a team even Chelsea would go to the nou camp and sit on a lead or first leg advantage but doing it at home against a depleted team whoever it is, is unacceptable for a top team.

I am entertained watching Man United play well and win, I am not entertained when they scrape wins on the back foot, think it sums up Chelsea fans that they just don't care as long as they win; glory hunting at it's finest.

It is simply to contrast the difference between defending properly and luck, use mourinhos inter side vs barca if you want a different example.

[mystiroakey]

It really was guting to watch Palace getting done by WBA/Pullis with 65% possession. but I can only congratulate WBA/Pulis for doing it. He knows his players inside out and he knows ours, so he won the game. Pards is much more of a man manager than a master tactician as is Cockney Tim. But Cockney Tim did them twice- TP didn't do his homework on Tims Villa put probably the old Villa.

[westisbest]

Looking at the table our gap is now down to 4 points.

Back to the league saturday and a very tough game ahead v Man City.

Before 2 home games v Everton & West Ham,

[GSC]

When you don't give up many chances it isn't luck, when you do and the opposition misses them it is- simple really.

Contrast United barca 08 and chelsea Barca 12 for the difference.

Look, chelsea didn't need to win- they are miles ahead. A draw for them would have been fine.

Mourinho is becoming a caricature of himself, which is a shame as he is a great manager.

Woah you can't mention pre Pep Barcelona, they were an awful team in meltdown, that our defence managed to keep them out for 180 minutes while our attack well attacked doesn't count.

I can however understand why a team even Chelsea would go to the nou camp and sit on a lead or first leg advantage but doing it at home against a depleted team whoever it is, is unacceptable for a top team.

I am entertained watching Man United play well and win, I am not entertained when they scrape wins on the back foot, think it sums up Chelsea fans that they just don't care as long as they win; glory hunting at it's finest.

It amazes me that United fans still have this holier than thou approach after last season.

[Hammersmith harrier]

What has last season got to do with it, a season in which the fans weren't happy with the results or the style of play but that somehow vindicates Chelsea.

[GSC]

A season where prior pledging to give Moyes time and patience they rather predictably kneejerked and demanded he be sacked when things went downhill. So cut the holier than thou crap about how United fans prefer to be entertained and Chelsea fans are glory supporters who only care about winning, on the evidence of last season its complete garbage.

[CFCNick]

How is being entertained by a win more than the performance "glory hunting at it's finest"?

Rather scrape a 1-0 win than play pretty and lose. I don't see how that's "glory hunting at it's finest".

[mystiroakey]

We all know what its like- we are all hypocrites- I didn't want Pulis at palace, but when he started winning as everyone told me i would be happy. Everyone else was right.

winning is allways the most important thing.

From a neutral perspective I would watch Arsenal over any other team- but if I was a fan then I wouldn't be so pleased ..

[Hammersmith harrier]

A season where prior pledging to give Moyes time and patience they rather predictably kneejerked and demanded he be sacked when things went downhill. So cut the holier than thou crap about how United fans prefer to be entertained and Chelsea fans are glory supporters who only care about winning, on the evidence of last season its complete garbage.

That isn't the evidence of the situation at all, Moyes was sacked for two reason; taking the team backwards and setting the team up dreadfully. It wasn't a knee jerk reaction as it was clear to everyone he wasn't up to the job and he took the team slightly more than downhill but somehow that means that Chelsea are beyond criticism for parking the bus at home.

[Hammersmith harrier]

How is being entertained by a win more than the performance "glory hunting at it's finest"?

Rather scrape a 1-0 win than play pretty and lose. I don't see how that's "glory hunting at it's finest".

You lot must have been so entertained on Saturday that it took your voices away.

Man United fans as shown by the various chants when we've been playing crap demand attacking football.

[Stella]

How is being entertained by a win more than the performance "glory hunting at it's finest"?

Rather scrape a 1-0 win than play pretty and lose. I don't see how that's "glory hunting at it's finest".

You lot must have been so entertained on Saturday that it took your voices away.

Man United fans as shown by the various chants when we've been playing crap demand attacking football.

A cliché I know, but at this stage of the season, you just want to win, or get a point which was the important thing, don't you?

[Hammersmith harrier]

Two games always spring to mind when people say that Stella; the 2011 champions league quarter final and the 2011 title decider, we didn't sit back for the draws we need, we attacked and that is why I have a holier than thou attitude to it.

[Crimey]

That hasn't been true since 3 points for a win was introduced.

What do you mean?

It's been shown that the move to 3 points for a win has changed very little.

Generally teams try to win. Chelsea didn't need to die to the lead they had built up, that is their right and what they had earned by their play/results this season. But let's not pretend they would play like that if they needed to win.

If not having possession worked then the best sides would average under 50%, chelsea average 55% this season. If sticking extra defenders on and camping out in your own half was they way to do things the likes of palace etc would be top 4.

Of course I'm not suggesting that the change to "counter-football" is a complete one and that all teams will now play with less possession. It was just the case that it was thought that possession was crucial to winning, that those teams with more possession win more often, which is still true. The difference is that in recent years teams have gone against that. Tony Pulis' Stoke literally changed the perception of possession in football, or at least it should have done, because they showed that it wasn't necessary. 

I'm suggesting that big teams have started to recognise the merits of "counter-football" and the difference in possession in big games is often more vast than it had been say ten to fifteen years ago. So we're seeing a more 75-15, or 60-40 than we are 55-45 or 50-50 in big games now than had been the case. In response to possession football brought by Barcelona and Spain's success, the natural progression in tactical innovation is "counter football".

[mystiroakey]

Man U are slightly different , they have been able to be the dominant force in recent history and played a decent brand of football. Not quite on Barcas or Madrids level. But I suppose close enough. Barca do expect a certain style of play, and maybe Man u fans do- But its so easy to say when you win things....Experience 10 plus years of not winning anything bar maybe the odd cup and your expectations will have to change

[Stella]

Two games always spring to mind when people say that Stella; the 2011 champions league quarter final and the 2011 title decider, we didn't sit back for the draws we need, we attacked and that is why I have a holier than thou attitude to it.

Fair enough. Fergie was a different manager to what Jose is, and in an ideal world, Chelsea fans would have preferred their team to go out, attack, score goals and win, but I stand by the 'result matters' cliché. Chelsea missing their top striker didn't help either. having a well past his sell by date Drogba up front wasn't ideal.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

United fans and this belief they always attacked the big games. Fergie was as dull a manager as anyone when he needed a result. Mr Attacking Football used to play Park just to neutralise passers.

[Hammersmith harrier]

Name me a game then Dolph where Fergie set the team up defensively at Old Trafford?

Park was a little bit more than a neutraliser as he was actually an attacking threat too, just ask Arsenal and Chelsea.

[Guest]

Such sour grapes HH that you're no longer winning PL titles. Who cares about Ferguson, what's been has been, he was at United & dominating at a time when United were the powerhouse, there was no real billionaire owners at City or Chelsea, so he never feared anyone. As times changed, City &!Chelsea grew stronger, he definitely sided on a more cautious approach in some big games, he unearthed the defensive forward, played fletcher & Park, similar to Jose tactics to nullify opposition. Stop banging on about Chelsea & how negative they are, it's boring & tiresome. Chelsea have won the league & have played some great stuff over the season & banged 65 goals. Were you asleep during this or were you too busy crying over YouTube videos of United's distant past?

[Sponsored content]