Football Soccer Football Soccer Football Soccer

[Sparked_26]

I don't think Kante is just a specialised ball winner. He drives forward with the ball at times and obviously him turning over ball high up the pitch a good platform to actually score goals.

I think all El Fenomeno's criticism comes from the fact Chelsea have 33.3333% less players in midfield than most teams. Of course they are gonna pass around Kante at times. They counter point is they likely can't get around the back of Chelsea in a system that turns into a back 5.

It's a system thing. And likely a 3-5-2 will need to be the alternative against elite European teams.

Remains to be seen if there are any of them in the premiership

System-wise only Spurs showed real weakness in Chelsea's system and personell.

There was stray average performances which is normal but nothing that ever made Conte revise tactics. It will happen in the CL at least. Plenty of better teams than Chelsea in there but that's not to say Chelsea can't beat them.

[El Fenomeno]

I don't think Kante is just a specialised ball winner. He drives forward with the ball at times and obviously him turning over ball high up the pitch a good platform to actually score goals.

I think all El Fenomeno's criticism comes from the fact Chelsea have 33.3333% less players in midfield than most teams. Of course they are gonna pass around Kante at times. They counter point is they likely can't get around the back of Chelsea in a system that turns into a back 5.

It's a system thing. And likely a 3-5-2 will need to be the alternative against elite European teams.

Remains to be seen if there are any of them in the premiership

System-wise only Spurs showed real weakness in Chelsea's system and personell.

There was stray average performances which is normal but nothing that ever made Conte revise tactics. It will happen in the CL at least. Plenty of better teams than Chelsea in there but that's not to say Chelsea can't beat them.

The same thing has happened playing for France in a 3! I'm actually confident he's gonna look a bit out of his depth this year against top sides, if not fair play I'll hold my hands up.

Your game against us at the Etihad was one of the most one sided games I saw us play in last year. We should've been 3 up and Luiz sent off before you had your first shot.

[*OG Wenger*]

It is deffo your year

Are you the guy that sent dick pics to a tranny?

[Sparked_26]

The same thing has happened playing for France in a 3! I'm actually confident he's gonna look a bit out of his depth this year against top sides, if not fair play I'll hold my hands up.

Your game against us at the Etihad was one of the most one sided games I saw us play in last year. We should've been 3 up and Luiz sent off before you had your first shot.

I disagree on your assessment of that game to some extent. Chelsea played poorly and scored 3 and probably could have scored more and there were multiple break outs where a poor pass was played. I don't think it was a game that could be flagged up to say City were a particularly strong side. They didn't defend at all.

Academic as De Bruyne missed from an inch and that would have been that. But City left Costa on on one with defenders all day long and at that point of the season City were doing stuff like that every week like that Lukaku goal for Everton.

Chelsea would have had to not turn up not to score at last 3 that day but timing of goals changes everything or rather missed chances. That game was done the moment Costa got his goal. And towards the end of that game it was open season for 10 minutes. Strange game, you say it was one sided. The flow of that game might have meant Chelsea absolutely smashed City.

I don't think City can play like that and beat anybody really good.

Debatable whether Chelsea are a really good side but I think Chelsea would take that same pattern of game against City every time. It was Spain vs Italy at the Euros. Like Amir Khan looking great and then pushing out one two many shots and getting chinned.

Conversely, Spurs dominated Chelsea in all 3 games physically. Which means that a personell change or system change needs to happen or that will keep happening and the results will have to change in their favor.

Chelsea will go again against City with the same system. City will blow Chelsea of the park now and again because that's football and they have good players but that pattern of game suits Chelsea. City have to be superb to win. Chelsea can be crap but have the wide open spaces to attack and they're bound to score at some stage.

[El Fenomeno]

I disagree on your assessment of that game to some extent. Chelsea played poorly and scored 3 and probably could have scored more and there were multiple break outs where a poor pass was played. I don't think it was a game that could be flagged up to say City were a particularly strong side. They didn't defend at all.

Academic as De Bruyne missed from an inch and that would have been that. But City left Costa on on one with defenders all day long and at that point of the season City were doing stuff like that every week like that Lukaku goal for Everton.

Chelsea would have had to not turn up not to score at last 3 that day but timing of goals changes everything or rather missed chances. That game was done the moment Costa got his goal. And towards the end of that game it was open season for 10 minutes. Strange game, you say it was one sided. The flow of that game might have meant Chelsea absolutely smashed City.

I don't think City can play like that and beat anybody really good.

Debatable whether Chelsea are a really good side but I think Chelsea would take that same pattern of game against City every time. It was Spain vs Italy at the Euros. Like Amir Khan looking great and then pushing out one two many shots and getting chinned.

Conversely, Spurs dominated Chelsea in all 3 games physically. Which means that a personell change or system change needs to happen or that will keep happening and the results will have to change in their favor.

Chelsea will go again against City with the same system. City will blow Chelsea of the park now and again because that's football and they have good players but that pattern of game suits Chelsea. City have to be superb to win. Chelsea can be crap but have the wide open spaces to attack and they're bound to score at some stage.

I disagree. We had 2 of the worst fullbacks in the prem last year and that was the reason we struggled at times with allowing so much space, it nulled the whole system. Even still we more than matched up, even at the bridge we were average and should've taken something if not for Stones missing a free header from about 4 yards out with the last kick.

The reason the last 10 mins at the Etihad were the way they were is because we were pushing ridiculous numbers of bodies forward (even more so than usual) and spaces were being left everywhere. Up till an hour in it was a game we were in complete control of, same as the Spurs game last season.

[Sparked_26]

I disagree. We had 2 of the worst fullbacks in the prem last year and that was the reason we struggled at times with allowing so much space, it nulled the whole system. Even still we more than matched up, even at the bridge we were average and should've taken something if not for Stones missing a free header from about 4 yards out with the last kick.

The reason the last 10 mins at the Etihad were the way they were is because we were pushing ridiculous numbers of bodies forward (even more so than usual) and spaces were being left everywhere. Up till an hour in it was a game we were in complete control of, same as the Spurs game last season.

Well, yeah goes without saying that if all the full backs you bought are a roaring success then you'll be a much better side.

The game at the Bridge was your standard tetchy end of season title chasing encounter.

I feel City have to be that much better than disciplined, top sides to win. Your new full backs are still going to have the same starting positions as the crap ones you had so I feel getting caught like you do is just the trade-off of the whole system. All systems have one.

I do think there is a pride thing with Pep too. Common sense said several times he could have went to a 5 against Monaco and they might have won that tie.

Those scenarios will rinse and repeat through out his whole tenure at City imp which is the price to pay of having that particular super coach.

We'll see what happens next season but I don't expect Chelsea to win it anyway so how City match up to us might not be decisive

[The Ox]

Talk to me about how y'all will replace coutinho bro.

100% not happening bro, ban me if I'm wrong. My source is legit, Coutinho is going nowhere.

[Sparked_26]

Barca are being such babies about that Neymar transfer.

Yeah, it's a grotesque fee by PSG and has likely ruined the transfer market forever but Barca and Real Madrid have been hiding from the tax man, cooking the books, getting funded by not only the Spanish government but also the EU tax payer. In many ways some Sheikh rocking up with his petrodollars is more legit than most of their transfer dealings.

I do think the money is such now that from a taxpayers perspective and British citizen we need to part nationalise the game and the English players.

City would spend £50 million on a toilet seat, Man U would spend £40 million, Chelsea would spend £30 million and so on. Local communities could benefit from that aside from agents. Let's say whatever local council in Barnsley had a 10% stake in future transfers and signing on fees of John Stones in exchange for providing training costs when he as a kid, that's £5 million pounds to build a leisure centre or some crap or affordable housing in Barnsely. I'm completely serious.

That money would only go into the pocket of some agent whose job could be done be a child. Neymar has it right by giving his dad the gig.

The transfer market is broken to such an extent that it could actually be useful.

[JJRod]

Barca are being such babies about that Neymar transfer.

Yeah, it's a grotesque fee by PSG and has likely ruined the transfer market forever but Barca and Real Madrid have been hiding from the tax man, cooking the books, getting funded by not only the Spanish government but also the EU tax payer. In many ways some Sheikh rocking up with his petrodollars is more legit than most of their transfer dealings.

I do think the money is such now that from a taxpayers perspective and British citizen we need to part nationalise the game and the English players.

City would spend £50 million on a toilet seat, Man U would spend £40 million, Chelsea would spend £30 million and so on. Local communities could benefit from that aside from agents. Let's say whatever local council in Barnsley had a 10% stake in future transfers and signing on fees of John Stones in exchange for providing training costs when he as a kid, that's £5 million pounds to build a leisure centre or some crap or affordable housing in Barnsely. I'm completely serious.

That money would only go into the pocket of some agent whose job could be done be a child. Neymar has it right by giving his dad the gig.

The transfer market is broken to such an extent that it could actually be useful.

The transfers have been out of hand for some time.
Barcelona is just upset they didn't do what Madrid did with Ronaldo and set his transfer fee at 1 billion.

[F l i c k e r]

That is nonsense. Every CL winner of this decade (barring Chelsea) have been possession-heavy teams.

Pep is a well known lover of players who can play a variety of positions and aren't limited to 1 specific role (Lahm/Alaba/Kimmich/Fernandinho/Mascherano, even Messi).
Even with signing Danilo to play in multiple positions, literally the opposite of what you're saying is true.

Pep has never played with a pure ball winner and I highly doubt he ever will, simply put his style of play requires a higher caliber of footballer.

Busquets is the best DM of his generation, the complete holding midfielder. You're getting pure DM mixed up with ball winner, winning the ball back is one of many jobs a top DM like Busquets is able to do amongst everything else he brings to the game. Busquets has absolutely no relevance to my previous comments on limited ball winners like Kante.


You said Zidane would celebrate if they had Kante in midfield, so surely there'd be no issue of who fits where and the flow of the team if the introduction of Kante to a side is so seemless?

The reality in my mind is that they'd have to drop Isco and in turn lose so much of their creativity in order to accommodate Kante who'd be rendered useless for the most part anyway as Real Madrid will dominate possession in 99% of instances.

Also feel free to let me know which signings City have made 'for the sake of it'. Bernando Silva is really the only one you could argue but even then, with the rate we're selling midfielders you'd say we would've been signing one either way.

Actually, no. Statistics from UEFA for the CL last season show Real Madrid at 53%, Barcelona at 62% (no surprise), Juve at 52%, and Bayern at 63% (post-guardiola influence).

Here's something interesting for your claim. Tottenham had 63% possession, where is their trophies? Dortmund had 63% possession, not a possession heavy team, what did they win?

You also say "winners" but again, Madrid at 53% last season, winner. Barcelona is possession by design. Bayern under Hyneckes was a counter attacking force. Then there's Chelsea, as you say.

So actually no, you would be wrong. Many of the cases for Madrid etc. to have heavy possession isn't because they want possession by design. its because opponents concede possession. If opponents didn't do this, they would get blitzed right off the park.

As far as Pep, it's really how a person views it. Is it players that can play anywhere or is it highly skilled players (face it, he's never coached subpar players) playing in a specific role? Because if this isn't a specialized role, then we are saying Nathaniel Clyne could play Dani Alves' role and nothing will change. Because he isn't taking Kimmich and moving him to RWB. He may have taken Lahm into midfield but it's Philip Lahm, that is a once in a generation talent. He isn't turning Fernando into a CB because Kompany is fragile and every CB not named Otamendi is suspect as fook.

In regard to Zidane, it is as i've said before. There are many questions that go into taking up a player. Its not just I like x player, I buy x player. Football isn't like that for successful clubs unless its true world class talent. (i.e. Ronaldo, Suarez, Neymar, Bale etc.)

At the end of the day though, Kante is a special player who has incredible discipline and regardless of whether you think he is overrated, good, not good, terrible is irrelevant. Fact is, the only true fact is, he has won 2 Premier League titles playing in an identical role for two different sides. Its undeniable, because of this, even if you personally don't value a player like Kante, he has proven to be a big difference maker in winning a title or not.

To cap this off: Dzeko, Stones, Bravo, Mangala, Bony, Navas etc. etc.