What media outlets are you talking about as I've just spent 10 minutes searching for the ones that you suggest we were outplayed, but they all seem to say different to what you suggest; Evening Standard - Yet despite the visitors dominating the possession, it was Watford who enjoyed the better of the first-half chances Goal.com - Eden Hazard's two goals saw Chelsea leave Watford with all three points after a tough test at Vicarage Road. Guardian - Chelsea edged out Watford. Chelsea's own website - we secured a hard-fought victory against Watford as we were made to work hard for the three points. Plenty more similar to that. Which media outlets are suggesting we were outplayed?
I replied to UEA before and admitted so much that I shouldn’t have referenced ‘outplayed’. We gave them a stern test but we were deserved losers. So I admit the fault in my reply to you.
We more than held our own against one of the best teams in the League and, at times, were the better side. A draw wouldn't have flattered us. Doucoure and Capoue once again outstanding. Deeney's all-round contribution to the team is immense - but perhaps not easy to recognise on a live stream or TV screen, hence the armchair critics getting on his back. A win on Saturday will take us to 30 points - which would be an awesome achievement for this stage of the season.
Also, our period of momentum (both on the pitch and in the crowd) was partly generated by deeney winning the ball a few times like a terrier right up by the corner flag, which put the willies uip Chelsea and lit a fire under everyone's a rse
Deeney immense? Doucoure outstanding? Although I don’t think they were as bad as some have made out, those two words certainly aren’t ones I’d use to describe their performances!
I thought it was a nailed-on pen from the other end of the UGT, but on seeing the replay it looks like an "I've seen them given". But, as we know, not to us - even though Atkinson is one of the best refs around
Fair comments, but I wish Pereyra had been subbed rather than Del. Pereyra always disappears in the second half, however well he's played before that, while Del's pace and skill cause confusion and panic in the opposition defence even though his decision-making is terrible and his final ball is often wasteful
OK. Thanks for letting me know. Going forward, don't hesitate to draw my attention to any other adjectives I use that you're unhappy with
Same old story. You don't take your chances, you don't win games First half i thought we did well, apart from not taking our chances. The second half we started sluggishly. It took a Deeney tackle and charge down to set the intensity and get us going again. I couldn't understand why we put so few crosses in their box, against two very dodgy centre backs Jorginio looks absoloute quality I feel we can still play better, but desperately need a quality striker to play along side Deeney
This is a problem right now. We seem to be reluctant to play with a quick tempo at the vital time. You have to get the crosses in quickly or else the opposition has time to get into position to defend it. I lost count of how many times we had a good opportunity to get an early cross in, but we've passed the ball back or tried to get the perfect opportunity. We need to take more chances by playing blind passes. Just sometimes being less considered. Shoot early, instead of that extra pass or that extra touch. It's these things that prevent us from scoring. Trying to make the opportunity perfect, actually is counter-productive as it reduces the time in catching the opposition out.
Well all teams flap around trying to get the perfect pass rather than shooting (which some of our guys are good at when they do ..) or crossing (what has happened to Jaamatt?!) just some do it better than others! It's why people like GT and former players (going by what they all say at the TFTV shows ) got/get a bit fed up with modern top flight football .. Tip tap with no end product .
I do love a media myth. Rudiger might be the most improved centre back in the Prem this year. Goals against this season: Liverpool - 7 Manchester City - 15 Chelsea - 16 Spurs - 18 Luiz will make one mistake every five games and some clown like Danny Murphy will spend 10 minutes analysing it because Luiz is an easy target.
Well yeah. That's the main problem. It's fine spectulatively getting the ball into the box but completely pointless if there's no one on the end of it.
Nothing to do with what the media has said. Deeney seemed to win teh majority of headed duels in the first half and even Capoue out jumped Luiz at one point. They were far from convincing in the air
Which is why we bypassed central midfield and played so many long balls. Didn't look very pretty but was the right tactic.
The adjectives were fine, the full stops less so. Corrected/improved for you. (And anybody who writes 'fewer' underneath shall go directly to jail and not collect £200. )
This game was pretty much the poster child for a 2-1 defeat and the score pretty much reflected the game perfectly. For starters the “experts” all seemed to predict 2-1 Chelsea before the game and were all correct which is pretty unique I’d suggest. Chelsea had 2-1 possession, 2-1 (actually 4-2 but you know what I mean) shots on target, 3-1 “clear chances” but as this is Sky we’ll call it 2-1. It was a decent performance by us but we do need to up the pace of play more frequently. Do like our ever improving ability to retain possession but often take the speed out of the game at the wrong time. We also, rather obviously, need to cut out the errors when passing in our own half. It’s no coincidence we tend to go longer against the better teams more often to limit the chances of this happening as you will get punished. Having watched the highlights I also have changed my mind about our penalty claim. Wrote it off when I saw it live but Luiz clearly puts his arm across Deulofeu and I have seen them given for far less than that. It, for me at least, turned a fair barge into a foul.
When it comes to penalties or any decision for that matter, they fall into two categories. The actual incident is largely irrelevant, but for Watford to be given a penalty it has to be stonewall, 100% without 1% doubt. The rules are different for our opponent. It's on a sliding scale depending on the relevance of the team we're playing. If it's a top 6 side then anything remotely close to a penalty will be given, even if there is huge doubt. In other words, had the Deulofeu incident occurred to a Chelsea player it would have been given, but because it's Watford it has to be far more certain before it's given. It's extremely unfair, but there you go, it's the way it is.....and it's always been that way. I'm just hoping VAR will level the playing field next season. I'm sure it will help in a lot of cases.
Exactly. It's just going to be the refs that hate us and cheat us now doing the VAR. We don't get no penalties now so we ain't getting any even with VAR fml
I saw it as obstruction, Luiz played the man not the ball. Assume the ref didn't see Luiz put his arm across Delafoo, so at best an indirect free kick in the box. The only way a penalty would have been given would be a clear arm push or falling onto Delafoo's legs.
