Chelsea 1 Fulham 0

[Siidi]

The question about Poch should be about whether  there's enough progress to get us where we need to be and in good time, since even a managerless  team is capable of progress. 

Any improvement seems random and too slow, . We still can't control a game against any opposition at the moment. And yet when you look at Aston Villa or Wigan, you see the manager's impact from their first match.

In Chelsea's post RA history, I can't think of a manger who turned into a top achiever after a start like this, and  more damning is the fact that Poch didn't get much better at PSG. 

[Dwmh]

36 minutes ago, boratsbrother said:

It's impossible to predict how quickly players and a team might progress. Arsenal last season and Villa this season both jumped a couple of levels in one year. If we find a striker who starts putting more of our chances away and our defenders settle down and  stop making silly mistakes (quite possible come next season) then we might also jump a couple of levels next over the next year. The potential to do so is there imho.

Villa is another great example against the trend, but it too has had a core of mature players who have been added too post promotion, not replaced.
Jacob Ramsey is the only significant contributor to the last 2/3 seasons (he is now 22)
 

[Siidi]

2 hours ago, Mark Kelly said:

How have you in any way managed to concoct that response to what I'd written. 

No mention from me anywhere about Gusto whatsoever and what has nobody else suggesting we should have scored two got to do with it? 

The reason we never scored two is the coach deciding to play it safe once again. 

Or the coach trying to play safe. Because whatever they were doing out there,  it didn't look safe at all. 

I don't believe many football theories, but one that makes sense to me is the block theory,; that you move your team as a block. So, whether you're attacking or defending, your midfield is always about the same distance from your defence or your frontline, and you always have the numbers to do the job anywhere on the pitch. 

It seems to me  the block theory hasn't yet made it to Poch. We looked scattered in that final 25 min, not enough players in any part of the pitch. Our midfield looked short of bodies, which made it too easy to overrun. 

[blueandproud]

22 hours ago, Dwmh said:

You will - this is the reason people hate xg.

XG?  XB more like (the b rhymes with Jane Horrocks).  If you're going to rely on XG,  then prepare to lose or draw.

[Dwmh]

11 minutes ago, blueandproud said:

XG?  XB more like (the b rhymes with Jane Horrocks).  If you're going to rely on XG,  then prepare to lose or draw.

No one is relying on xg except to help explain what was going on. 

Some people like an independent objective measure of which team had the better chances. 

And others like a wholly dependent measure that matches their personal prejudices called "what I saw".

[asvaberg]

The draw today showed how important our win was yesterday. We gained 2 points on two of our main rivals. Great weekend 😁

[NoblyBobly]

6 minutes ago, asvaberg said:

The draw today showed how important our win was yesterday. We gained 2 points on two of our main rivals. Great weekend 😁

Perfect result. Not sure we can make up 9 points on Arse and Spuds ( especially with our erratic nature) but we can take United, Hammers and Brighton in the run in. 

[xceleryx]

7 hours ago, Siidi said:

The question about Poch should be about whether  there's enough progress to get us where we need to be and in good time, since even a managerless  team is capable of progress. 

Any improvement seems random and too slow, . We still can't control a game against any opposition at the moment. And yet when you look at Aston Villa or Wigan, you see the manager's impact from their first match.

In Chelsea's post RA history, I can't think of a manger who turned into a top achiever after a start like this, and  more damning is the fact that Poch didn't get much better at PSG. 

Development isn't a linear process, and from a data driven perspective we're fairing reasonably well in a lot of what are deemed important areas. Our biggest short falls tend to lie in our chance creation and finishing, which end up compounded further by some of the silly defensive mistakes we've made. All of which, for me at least, is reflected in the eye test as well. I think Poch is doing as well as one could expect given the circumstances.

Also important to note that we're in mid January and still not been able to field our best eleven once this season, and aren't likely to get that opportunity either. When we finally do get players back, we go ahead and lose a couple more, making it hard to build continuity. 

Could we be better, absolutely. We could also be worse, and I think some lose sight of that a little.

There's also little point in trying to take much from what say Emery has done at Villa either. They were horrendous under Gerrard because he's an awful manager himself. They were never that bad of a side as they were under him. So naturally getting a better manager in was always going to see immediate progression made. He's then elevated them further but unlike with our situation, he's also got a squad of proven established players that are conditioned for the environment on hand. We're asking the youngest side in the league to essentially perform beyond their years, and that's inevitably a tough ask in itself and shown with our naivety when it comes to showing composure to close games out.

[xceleryx]

5 hours ago, NoblyBobly said:

Perfect result. Not sure we can make up 9 points on Arse and Spuds ( especially with our erratic nature) but we can take United, Hammers and Brighton in the run in. 

We'll play a few of these top teams again so the opportunity to take a few extra points will be in our own hands a little. Given we've generally performed well in most instances against these sides, it would be a nice little bonus if we do.

[Dwmh]

49 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

Development isn't a linear process,

I certainly hope not.
Lets hope it is U shaped.

[kev61]

15 hours ago, east lower said:

Having been at the game, Chilwell spent as much time in their half as he did reinforcing the LB position. But better than Sterling at that defensive position, but that should be a given. He was almost an ‘out’ ball when we needed to relieve some of the pressure that the coach managed to present Fulham with by allowing us to sit deep.

The only time (generally) that Colwill gets beyond the halfway line is when he carries the ball with him and again that’s natural because he’s a centre-half. He had one of his better games at that left-back position yesterday and it is left-back not a hybrid role.

I suppose I should watch more of our games,but I tend to prioritise things at my age.

The thing that worries me most of all is Poch's lack of consistency and playing players out of position.

Chilwell is a classic example.Imagine playing Gary Neville and Lee Dixon as wingers!.?.

They were wing backs long before the term came into being.

[kev61]

10 hours ago, Siidi said:

The question about Poch should be about whether  there's enough progress to get us where we need to be and in good time, since even a managerless  team is capable of progress. 

Any improvement seems random and too slow, . We still can't control a game against any opposition at the moment. And yet when you look at Aston Villa or Wigan, you see the manager's impact from their first match.

In Chelsea's post RA history, I can't think of a manger who turned into a top achiever after a start like this, and  more damning is the fact that Poch didn't get much better at PSG. 

That my friends sums up Poch and where we are!!. 

[east lower]

14 hours ago, Siidi said:

The question about Poch should be about whether  there's enough progress to get us where we need to be and in good time, since even a managerless  team is capable of progress. 

Any improvement seems random and too slow, . We still can't control a game against any opposition at the moment. And yet when you look at Aston Villa or Wigan, you see the manager's impact from their first match.

In Chelsea's post RA history, I can't think of a manger who turned into a top achiever after a start like this, and  more damning is the fact that Poch didn't get much better at PSG. 

All of the above.

I think if we broaden that last question/statement out to the last 15 years or so for the Premier League there’s Pep Guardiola who had a poor first season and we know what happened after that - and our coach is no Pep.

People may argue that Klopp took his time also, which would be fair - Our current incumbent is no Klopp either.

Then you get to the really arguable, such as Arteta or the mid-table chaps such as Potter and Di-Zerbi.

The other thing about Roman and his management team is that they acted quickly, if the signs were poor. Now there are variables in the coaches favour in this instance - the lack of experience through the spine of the team. However, the lack of discernible player and team improvement has me where I am. But I was sceptical of the appointment, so perhaps I see what I need to see to justify those thoughts and I was and am mindful of that. However, I’m sure I’ve seen enough now to know now.

[ROTG]

8 hours ago, xceleryx said:

There's also little point in trying to take much from what say Emery has done at Villa either. They were horrendous under Gerrard because he's an awful manager himself. They were never that bad of a side as they were under him. So naturally getting a better manager in was always going to see immediate progression made. He's then elevated them further but unlike with our situation, he's also got a squad of proven established players that are conditioned for the environment on hand. We're asking the youngest side in the league to essentially perform beyond their years, and that's inevitably a tough ask in itself and shown with our naivety when it comes to showing composure to close games out.

Absolute nonsense

When TT left the building, there was an established side that had qualified for the CL. Unfortunately the owners decided to go and hire a nobody coach and coaching team for 20m along with a nobody scouting team. Rather than someone like Emery or Poch who had an established reputation and would have got those established players to perform. 

From the day TT left the building everything form coaching to recruitment has been one big comedy.   

 

[paulw66]

14 hours ago, Dwmh said:

No one is relying on xg except to help explain what was going on. 

Some people like an independent objective measure of which team had the better chances. 

And others like a wholly dependent measure that matches their personal prejudices called "what I saw".

At least be consistent. In the not too distant past you have claimed we deserved to lose to Wolves and were lucky to beat Palace, despite us having a much higher Xg than the opposition then claim we were lucky to beat Luton, because they had a higher Xg. 

There are serious flaws in Xg (which I listed a few weeks back) on a separate topic, but the issues are compounded if one cherry picks when it is used to suit a position. 

[xceleryx]

37 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Absolute nonsense

When TT left the building, there was an established side that had qualified for the CL. Unfortunately the owners decided to go and hire a nobody coach and coaching team for 20m along with a nobody scouting team. Rather than someone like Emery or Poch who had an established reputation and would have got those established players to perform. 

From the day TT left the building everything form coaching to recruitment has been one big comedy.   

 

The classic ROTG special this one. 

To quote @Mark Kelly - "How have you in any way managed to concoct that response to what I'd written". 

The discussion was about Villa's situation being entirely unrelated to ours currently under Poch, yet here you are discussing Tuchel and football from 12 months ago, none of which has one iota of relevance to the team we've taken into this season.

[Blue Moon]

Seeing as there isn't a Chelsea - Aston Villa forum set up yet, can I ask a question? I've just received an email from the Club:

"Following the draw for the FA Cup fourth round, please see the below update: 

Tuesday 16 January from 10am until Thursday 18 January 9am: Season tickets holders can purchase their own seat. 

Thursday 18 January from 10am until Friday 19 January 9am: As per the ticketing policy, season ticket holders who have not purchased a seat will be able to purchase any remaining seat that has not been taken by fellow season ticket holder in the reservation period.

Displaced Season Ticket Holders

Aston Villa have taken their full allocation in the Shed End for this fixture meaning we have to displace season ticket holders in this area. Therefore, displaced season ticket holders can purchase any of the available seats not taken by a season ticket holder during the reservation period. Alternatively, Season Ticket holders who have been moved from the Shed End can purchase up to 10 tickets on the mover’s day to ensure you sit with fellow supporters who are also displaced. More availability will be available on the movers day, so we recommend season ticket holders displaced purchase on this day."

I'm a displaced person. My question is: what is the "movers day", and when is it?

[east lower]

12 minutes ago, Blue Moon said:

Seeing as there isn't a Chelsea - Aston Villa forum set up yet, can I ask a question? I've just received an email from the Club:

"Following the draw for the FA Cup fourth round, please see the below update: 

Tuesday 16 January from 10am until Thursday 18 January 9am: Season tickets holders can purchase their own seat. 

Thursday 18 January from 10am until Friday 19 January 9am: As per the ticketing policy, season ticket holders who have not purchased a seat will be able to purchase any remaining seat that has not been taken by fellow season ticket holder in the reservation period.

Displaced Season Ticket Holders

Aston Villa have taken their full allocation in the Shed End for this fixture meaning we have to displace season ticket holders in this area. Therefore, displaced season ticket holders can purchase any of the available seats not taken by a season ticket holder during the reservation period. Alternatively, Season Ticket holders who have been moved from the Shed End can purchase up to 10 tickets on the mover’s day to ensure you sit with fellow supporters who are also displaced. More availability will be available on the movers day, so we recommend season ticket holders displaced purchase on this day."

I'm a displaced person. My question is: what is the "movers day", and when is it?

Looks like this one to me, that's when I'd try and if you don't get in call the Ticket Office or give them a  shout ASAP:

Thursday 18 January from 10am until Friday 19 January 9am: As per the ticketing policy, season ticket holders who have not purchased a seat will be able to purchase any remaining seat that has not been taken by fellow season ticket holder in the reservation period.

 

Edited January 15 by east lower

[Blue Moon]

Doesn’t quite say that, but I agree - it’s the best guess. Bloody Americans - always a thousand words where two will do.

[Dwmh]

2 hours ago, paulw66 said:

At least be consistent. In the not too distant past you have claimed we deserved to lose to Wolves and were lucky to beat Palace, despite us having a much higher Xg than the opposition then claim we were lucky to beat Luton, because they had a higher Xg. 

There are serious flaws in Xg (which I listed a few weeks back) on a separate topic, but the issues are compounded if one cherry picks when it is used to suit a position. 

No - pretty sure I have only said we deserved only a draw with Wolves.
My view is in line with xg which is consistent in this case

I have also talked about xg helping to Explain results and the many times where specific xg scores are different to fan views or fair opinion.  One of those is 50/50 penalties which are graded as 0 or 0.9 according to whether they are given or not.  Another is hitting the woodwork.  A shot from a long distance that hits the bar or post is given the same xg as a shot from the same spot that hits the corner flag (perhaps 0.1) and the same as one that goes in.  

What I said about the Palace game was not we were lucky because of xg.
I said we were lucky because in the 89th min a defender stupidly stuck his leg out to give us a 0.9 xg penalty (which was scored).
In this case I was making the point that the 0.9xg (and so the 1.0 goal) came about only because of a Palace error not because of any great contribution.

Nobody says xg is always the sole piece of evidence to describe a match.  Just that it is consistently better that "what i saw".
The delight is that we no longer have to argue with people who want us to enter their personal version of reality.

 

[ROTG]

3 hours ago, xceleryx said:

The classic ROTG special this one. 

To quote @Mark Kelly - "How have you in any way managed to concoct that response to what I'd written". 

The discussion was about Villa's situation being entirely unrelated to ours currently under Poch, yet here you are discussing Tuchel and football from 12 months ago, none of which has one iota of relevance to the team we've taken into this season.

The difference was about 6 weeks when villa pulled the plug on SG, they had already done there homework and brought in a coach with a top European record for £2m in compensation and with weeks turned there fortunes around. Whereas the Chelsea ship not only hired a nobody coach, along with let a bunch of scouts fire an entire successful football team and replace them with bang average players in two transfer windows  without any input from a coach. 

Hence the top coaches have given the club a wide berth, with the club trying to sell the Poch effect and what he did before, whereas really is has kicked in for Poch with the quality of the squad and seems to have decided to take the money and become a yes man until he gets a lovely pay off from the sporting directors.

[paulw66]

25 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

  One of those is 50/50 penalties which are graded as 0 or 0.9 according to whether they are given or not.  
 

Yes, also, how you win it. A defender randomly sticking his arm up and doing a stupid handball has the same metric awarded to a player going clean through, rounding the GK and getting brought down. One is pure fortune, and one is a proper goal scoring chance created 

25 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

.  A shot from a long distance that hits the bar or post is given the same xg as a shot from the same spot that hits the corner flag (perhaps 0.1) and the same as one that goes in.  

 

surely that is correct. shots from identical positions, in identical situations should have the same Xg, otherwise what is it?

26 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

I said we were lucky because in the 89th min a defender stupidly stuck his leg out to give us a 0.9 xg penalty (which was scored).
In this case I was making the point that the 0.9xg (and so the 1.0 goal) came about only because of a Palace error not because of any great contribution.


 

Overall we had something close to a 3-1 Xg position in the Palace, which suggests we merited the victory either way.

I think the Xg from a penalty is actually about 0.75 btw. 

[xceleryx]

2 minutes ago, ROTG said:

The difference was about 6 weeks when villa pulled the plug on SG, they had already done there homework and brought in a coach with a top European record for £2m in compensation and with weeks turned there fortunes around. Whereas the Chelsea ship not only hired a nobody coach, along with let a bunch of scouts fire an entire successful football team and replace them with bang average players in two transfer windows  without any input from a coach. 

Hence the top coaches have given the club a wide berth, with the club trying to sell the Poch effect and what he did before, whereas really is has kicked in for Poch with the quality of the squad and seems to have decided to take the money and become a yes man until he gets a lovely pay off from the sporting directors.

That's nice. Again, nothing to do with the point being discussed at the time.

[Siidi]

6 hours ago, east lower said:

All of the above.

I think if we broaden that last question/statement out to the last 15 years or so for the Premier League there’s Pep Guardiola who had a poor first season and we know what happened after that - and our coach is no Pep.

People may argue that Klopp took his time also, which would be fair - Our current incumbent is no Klopp either.

Then you get to the really arguable, such as Arteta or the mid-table chaps such as Potter and Di-Zerbi.

The other thing about Roman and his management team is that they acted quickly, if the signs were poor. Now there are variables in the coaches favour in this instance - the lack of experience through the spine of the team. However, the lack of discernible player and team improvement has me where I am. But I was sceptical of the appointment, so perhaps I see what I need to see to justify those thoughts and I was and am mindful of that. However, I’m sure I’ve seen enough now to know now.

Roman was proven right in his sacking decisions in that not a single one of those coaches turned out to be a better coach than he projected when sacking them.  The current team might and should improve with time. But I don't see Pochettino improving as a coach. I don't even see rudimentary signs of it.  There should be more to coaching than simply waiting for players to grow older, and  other managers have proven that.

I just do not see in Pochettino a coach that will restore Chelsea to where we used to be or aim to be, I'm afraid .

[Siidi]

12 hours ago, xceleryx said:

Development isn't a linear process, and from a data driven perspective we're fairing reasonably well in a lot of what are deemed important areas. Our biggest short falls tend to lie in our chance creation and finishing, which end up compounded further by some of the silly defensive mistakes we've made. All of which, for me at least, is reflected in the eye test as well. I think Poch is doing as well as one could expect given the circumstances.

Also important to note that we're in mid January and still not been able to field our best eleven once this season, and aren't likely to get that opportunity either. When we finally do get players back, we go ahead and lose a couple more, making it hard to build continuity. 

Could we be better, absolutely. We could also be worse, and I think some lose sight of that a little.

There's also little point in trying to take much from what say Emery has done at Villa either. They were horrendous under Gerrard because he's an awful manager himself. They were never that bad of a side as they were under him. So naturally getting a better manager in was always going to see immediate progression made. He's then elevated them further but unlike with our situation, he's also got a squad of proven established players that are conditioned for the environment on hand. We're asking the youngest side in the league to essentially perform beyond their years, and that's inevitably a tough ask in itself and shown with our naivety when it comes to showing composure to close games out.

We could be worse; with that I agree. But apart from some decent results against some lowly teams, I really don't see the improvement in our game at all.

I have seen managers tweak their teams to affect the game (Wigan against us, for example) and the impact was immediate. I have also seen other teams come out in the second half with a different game plan that took us out the game. I have seen none of that from Pochettino, not when we're clinging on.

I once watched his PSG team in a major CL match, ( I think it was his last CL match for them as they got beat) and I remember thinking, surely, the manager must change something. His team is underperforming relative to the talent they have. It never happened for 90 min. This is the manager we have.