Everton 2 Chelsea 0

[asvaberg]

7 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

 

 

Only if they win on Sunday.  As per today, no, they would still be behind us.

[Mark Kelly]

8 hours ago, east lower said:

But it is his fault, that he’s not improved any of them. It could be realistically argued that a good number have regressed.

Wasn’t it muted that improving younger players was one of his strengths? He sure as heck isn’t showing that or doing simple things like Moyes did tonight - they couldn’t beat Spuds press, so he got his team to stop playing out from the back and went a bit longer, supporting Bowen with Kudus. Simple really, but even that seems beyond our fella.

It does seem that if you buck the trend and don't play tippy tappy bollocks in your own eighteen yard area you are seen as a lesser coach , it's the football version of "The Emperor's new clothes"  

[Thiago97]

They are going to bully us. They are functioning well as a team under Dyche. I only saw the first half but f their game last night, but we will really struggle to handle this direct approach up to Calvert Lewin with players supporting him and good delivery.

I doubt Poch will, but I think we need to go three at the back for this game. We have the CBs available to play this way.  I would also go with Broja to add some extra height and strength up again their CBs.

 

[east lower]

30 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

It does seem that if you buck the trend and don't play tippy tappy bollocks in your own eighteen yard area you are seen as a lesser coach , it's the football version of "The Emperor's new clothes"  

Horses for courses for me. There's no right or wrong way............but you cut your cloth to suit - meaning that if you've got players with the correct skill-sets then play out from the keeper, no matter if the opposition does use their own tactics to try and stop this.

We try and do this with a goalkeeper that struggles to pass the ball to one of ours beyond 10 yards. That the people doing the buying must have known struggles in that area. It gets more incompetent, the more you contemplate it.

We try to do it and are pressured into the ball going into a deep wide area, where even the best naturally sided player would struggle to get the ball out of there. It doesn't help when the coach decides to play a very one-sided left-back at right-back - or Sanchez gives it away.

It's taken just a few weeks for Angeball to get figured out by other coaches, long may that continue. But his we do it my way without variation thus far shows up the inflexibility of him, our one isn't any better.

Edited December 8, 2023 by east lower

[east lower]

44 minutes ago, asvaberg said:

Only when they win on Sunday.  As per today, no, they would still be behind us.

There, thats probably more like it! 😉

[My Blood Is Blue]

29 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

It does seem that if you buck the trend and don't play tippy tappy bollocks in your own eighteen yard area you are seen as a lesser coach , it's the football version of "The Emperor's new clothes"  

Yeah, this playing out from the back constantly every week is doing my head. It is quite clear we don't have the players for it, so why stick with it? I couldn't care less what our football looks like at the moment, I'm just desperate for us to start getting a decent run of results that we can build from.

[ROTG]

9 hours ago, east lower said:

But it is his fault, that he’s not improved any of them. It could be realistically argued that a good number have regressed.

It would seem the word regress has been used a lot since the takeover

IMO if Pochettino gets 54pts or greater out of this squad he's done a good job proving the team is no better than the Southampton team he coached.

I have a feeling Poch is  using the season as a pre-season for a back me or sack me challenge to the board in the summer

[ROTG]

32 minutes ago, Thiago97 said:

I doubt Poch will, but I think we need to go three at the back for this game

maybe Poch will go with 4 CB as he did against Brighton, push james on the right wing and move sterling to the left with mudryk benched. On the striker side does not make a lot of difference who plays because they are both poor strikers

[east lower]

23 minutes ago, ROTG said:

It would seem the word regress has been used a lot since the takeover

IMO if Pochettino gets 54pts or greater out of this squad he's done a good job proving the team is no better than the Southampton team he coached.

I have a feeling Poch is  using the season as a pre-season for a back me or sack me challenge to the board in the summer

I think that even the most optimistic person could see that we would go backwards before getting even in the vicinity of where we were challenging for league titles again. However did anyone truly believe we'd have been speaking about potential relegation (very hushed tones admittedly) last season and doing no better points wise thus far this season?

The money spent is a stick for others to beat us with, but the club (owners and THEIR appointments) have had their pants taken down and ripped apart. We've got long-term liabilities on a number of players who, let's face it are well-off being proven in the PL and who we will struggle to move on without massive impacts commercially. 

Quite frankly the new owners have been a disaster in pretty much all they've tried to do. They've Hicks & Gilette type of incompetence about them. The only positive I see is that they did get us out of the Politically motivated hole we were in, but back then I advocated that theirs wasn't the proposal I favoured, should have gone with the Ratcliffe late bid. Frankly speaking, would it have been worse? 

The coach will have a personal damage limitation exit strategy lined-up. Blind man can see he's a goner, just a matter of when now.

[thevelourfog]

58 minutes ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Yeah, this playing out from the back constantly every week is doing my head. It is quite clear we don't have the players for it, so why stick with it? 

Because we don't have the players for anything else. What are the other options, punting it to Jackson, Mudryk, Sterling and Palmer to hold up? We basically have no choice but to invite pressure and hope we can play out of it into space. Buying Jackson and Sanchez and letting them become first choices in the same window was idiocy. 

[thevelourfog]

22 minutes ago, east lower said:

I think that even the most optimistic person could see that we would go backwards before getting even in the vicinity of where we were challenging for league titles again. However did anyone truly believe we'd have been speaking about potential relegation (very hushed tones admittedly) last season and doing no better points wise thus far this season?

The money spent is a stick for others to beat us with, but the club (owners and THEIR appointments) have had their pants taken down and ripped apart. We've got long-term liabilities on a number of players who, let's face it are well-off being proven in the PL and who we will struggle to move on without massive impacts commercially. 

Quite frankly the new owners have been a disaster in pretty much all they've tried to do. They've Hicks & Gilette type of incompetence about them. The only positive I see is that they did get us out of the Politically motivated hole we were in, but back then I advocated that theirs wasn't the proposal I favoured, should have gone with the Ratcliffe late bid. Frankly speaking, would it have been worse? 

The coach will have a personal damage limitation exit strategy lined-up. Blind man can see he's a goner, just a matter of when now.

Completely agreed, but don't see the Ratcliffe bid was a genuine one. He didn't go through the process and I think, given what he is doing now, it really was just a dry run for the purchase he really wants to make.

I don't want to see anyone talking about this lot "saving" us again until they're gone and we see who they have sold to, whenever that is (no chance it's as long as 8.5 more years away imo). I think they are very much more towards the path of destroying us. Not just as a big club, they've managed that already, but just as a football club at all.

[Mark Kelly]

Just now, thevelourfog said:

Completely agreed, but don't see the Ratcliffe bid was a genuine one. He didn't go through the process and I think, given what he is doing now, it really was just a dry run for the purchase he really wants to make.

I don't want to see anyone talking about this lot "saving" us again until they're gone and we see who they have sold to, whenever that is (no chance it's as long as 8.5 more years away imo). I think they are very much more towards the path of destroying us. Not just as a big club, they've managed that already, but just as a football club at all.

They'll prove you wrong by then as there's a swathe of Ecuadorian pre -teens who we're scouting who will be superstars and save  

[east lower]

32 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

Completely agreed, but don't see the Ratcliffe bid was a genuine one. He didn't go through the process and I think, given what he is doing now, it really was just a dry run for the purchase he really wants to make.

I don't want to see anyone talking about this lot "saving" us again until they're gone and we see who they have sold to, whenever that is (no chance it's as long as 8.5 more years away imo). I think they are very much more towards the path of destroying us. Not just as a big club, they've managed that already, but just as a football club at all.

On Ratcliffe,  I believe his bid was well structured - just too late. But as @Dwmh has suggested an American purchase suited the interested parties - Interested perhaps but completely uninvested (in all meanings of the word).

Was it Ratcliffe's money? Probably not.

On new ownership,  maybe that 10 year undertaking is transferable? - I hope that it is, as this mob are worse than bad.

[Mark Kelly]

1 hour ago, thevelourfog said:

Because we don't have the players for anything else. What are the other options, punting it to Jackson, Mudryk, Sterling and Palmer to hold up? We basically have no choice but to invite pressure and hope we can play out of it into space. Buying Jackson and Sanchez and letting them become first choices in the same window was idiocy. 

I think that maybe he could play Broja upfront as he is more capable than Jackson of  holding the ball up and even (gulp) play Broja and Jackson together to give the opposition centre halves something to do , a bold move and one I'm absolutely certain that Pochettino would never countenance in case Everton at the weekend have big lads turning out for them so he'd need more men in defence. 

[jasonb]

Dyche has only won 1/11 against Pochettino with 7 losses, however that was before Everton and Everton have done well against us recently.

The refs get influenced by the crowd up there so it becomes more physical, so we need the combative type players. 

[Thiago97]

1 hour ago, Mark Kelly said:

I think that maybe he could play Broja upfront as he is more capable than Jackson of  holding the ball up and even (gulp) play Broja and Jackson together to give the opposition centre halves something to do , a bold move and one I'm absolutely certain that Pochettino would never countenance in case Everton at the weekend have big lads turning out for them so he'd need more men in defence. 

I agree this looks more a game for Broja. I think this whole coward think is misplaced though, and its almost like you are looking for reasons to hang onto this coward notion you have developed. I mean each to their own opinion and all that.

This example you are using here. You are suggesting he could play two N09's together and linking that to be cowardly. I mean who actually plays two N09's together up front these days ? It's a rare occurrence and has been for about a decade now, so to suggest he is cowardly and would not consider this, when it is rare that any manager considers this, is stretching this a little far. It probably also plays into the hands of Tarkowski and Branthwaite really, cos they would be much more comfortable facing two obvious N09'S than they would be with wide forwards/attackers playing in pockets and coming from deep.

[paulw66]

We all know how this will go. They will steam into us from kick off. Their players will be allowed to kick us a few times, despite the ref handing out the odd "warning", then we will pick up a couple of yellows for innocuous fouls. 

They will score from one of the many set pieces they get, and then we're in trouble.

Gallagher back from suspension, and Madueke not on the injured list, so......... 

Sanchez, James, Badiashile, Disasi, Colwill, Enzo, Caicedo, Gallagher, Sterling, Palmer, Jackson

Subs......Petrovic, Silva, Cucurella, Mudryk, Maatsen, Madueke, Broja then 2 kids. 

[Mark Kelly]

24 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

We all know how this will go. They will steam into us from kick off. Their players will be allowed to kick us a few times, despite the ref handing out the odd "warning", then we will pick up a couple of yellows for innocuous fouls. 

They will score from one of the many set pieces they get, and then we're in trouble.

 

At this point I'm absolutely certain that ninety percent of any free kicks they get near our goal will be for challenges that aren't free kicks near their goal. 

[Dwmh]

3 hours ago, east lower said:

Was it Ratcliffe's money? Probably not.

On new ownership,  maybe that 10 year undertaking is transferable? - I hope that it is, as this mob are worse than bad.

Ratcliffe - interesting thought.
Undertaking to whom?  Whoever that is (RA, UK negotiators, FA) can annul it with a pen in 5 mins.
Who is going to say "wait we want Clearlack to stay"

[Mark Kelly]

I'm absolutely certain that Ratcliffe only had a mere 2.5 billion to invest , so was never going to buy Chelsea like he was never going to buy United , he was making a load of noise in the media but when the chips were down he simply didn't have the funds or the backing. 

[Max Fowler]

I have praised Poch continually for his calm head in press conferences, but for the first time I think he has that wet look in the eye, the thousand yard stare, the look of a dead man walking.

 

[Max Fowler]

I have to be honest, it does make me sad seeing Poch like that in the press conference, struggling for reasons and excuses. I really started to believe in him and thought he was the right man for this transition. Now I am convinced footballing reality has bitten and he will be gone before the end of the season.

[chara]

1 minute ago, Max Fowler said:

I have to be honest, it does make me sad seeing Poch like that in the press conference, struggling for reasons and excuses. I really started to believe in him and thought he was the right man for this transition. Now I am convinced footballing reality has bitten and he will be gone before the end of the season.

That was the moment I turned I think......it was not just a "yadda yadda let's get this out of the way and get off home" presser....seemed absolutely done and resigned to the fact that HIS team had been absolute rubbish and hardly bothered to hide his apathy...no identity and no tactical set up apart from maybe run around for the whole game as opposed to GP's fitness level of maybe 65 minutes on a good day...hardly enough to excite and warm our hearts!

A mistake of an appointment..again 20/20 hindsight is easy... not the same mistake as GP but equally as ineffective....at a guess just maybe an average coach with limited influence as opposed to GP totally out of his depth,,the "Peter Principle"on show.

Hurts to write this but as ever if something has to be done do it now..........and I don't have the answer to that but again I'm not banking mega bucks (sorry) every month for my retirement!

[Bigpokey24]

• Chelsea have won only twice in their last seven Premier League games.
• The Blues have lost their last two league matches on the road, following a run of three wins.
• Chelsea have won just one of their last eight Premier League away fixtures played on a Sunday, beating Aston Villa 2-0 last season.
• They have conceded 24 goals in 15 league games, their joint most at this stage of a season, along with 2015-16.
• Chelsea have lost 17 Premier League matches in 2023, one more than they did in 2021 and 2022 combined. It's their most league defeats in a calendar year since losing 20 in 1993.

[east lower]

7 hours ago, Dwmh said:

Ratcliffe - interesting thought.
Undertaking to whom?  Whoever that is (RA, UK negotiators, FA) can annul it with a pen in 5 mins.
Who is going to say "wait we want Clearlack to stay"

They may be able to annul it, I hope they can, because unless the current people have an epiphany we’re jiggered.

Possibly not too many Chelsea supporters right now, to the query regarding the Cupcakes staying on.

7 hours ago, Mark Kelly said:

I'm absolutely certain that Ratcliffe only had a mere 2.5 billion to invest , so was never going to buy Chelsea like he was never going to buy United , he was making a load of noise in the media but when the chips were down he simply didn't have the funds or the backing. 

Net worth of a reported £21billion. Richest person in the UK.

So had plenty of personal wealth but apart from Roman, who sinks billions of their own money into a relatively high-risk investment 

No idea if he meant it but his reported bid seemed structured - probably never will know if he was serious.