Chelsea v Arsenal - EPL - Sun 7th Feb 2010 - 16:00

[Mbaki Mutahaba]

We were the better side? Wow.

What's wrong with that? We did play well. They took their chances, we didn't. This defeat is very hard to take but some of the comments on here are way OTT.

Unfortunately for most here and the football media in general the team that wins is always considered to have been the better side on that day. I think we played well enough to have won the game.We didnt they did. They got breaks and took their chances we created our chances and fluffed them. But overal the performance was very encouraging from the lads. Buried the whole stupid nonsense of boys vs men, which was never the case anyway.

 

[SA Gunner]

We were the better side? Wow.

What's wrong with that? We did play well. They took their chances, we didn't. This defeat is very hard to take but some of the comments on here are way OTT.

When Ali pulled the "rope-a-dope" against Foreman you could say George was the better boxer, because he had the power, strength and attacked, and for a lot of the game Ali was being body pummeled on the ropes.

However Ali won the fight and is remembered as the champion, Ali walks away with the honours because when it counted.. Ali struck and scored the crucial points.

Same situation here. Sure we made the play and provided a lot going forward, bossed midfield but it was Chelsea who tactically out muscled us, it was Chelsea who landed the killer blow.

At the end of the day, Chelsea pulled the rope-a-dope on Arsenal.

 

[gstew]

And another thing.

As I am watching this I am struck for a third time that Diaby and Song totally dominated Chelsea all over the field. Diaby is defending better and better. IMO, if Denilson had played we would have been taken apart and I would be far more depressed.

Also, I have to agree with those who have come to the conclusion that Nasri cannot play wide. Our primary five central midfielders (if no one is bought) for next season should definitely be Song, Diaby, Cesc, Nasri and Ramsey. I am even starting to believe that Diaby may be able to learn Song's position and be his back up.

 

[gstew]

We were the better side? Wow.

What's wrong with that? We did play well. They took their chances, we didn't. This defeat is very hard to take but some of the comments on here are way OTT.

When Ali pulled the "rope-a-dope" against Foreman you could say George was the better boxer, because he had the power, strength and attacked, and for a lot of the game Ali was being body pummeled on the ropes.

However Ali won the fight and is remembered as the champion, Ali walks away with the honours because when it counted.. Ali struck and scored the crucial points.

Same situation here. Sure we made the play and provided a lot going forward, bossed midfield but it was Chelsea who tactically out muscled us, it was Chelsea who landed the killer blow.

At the end of the day, Chelsea pulled the rope-a-dope on Arsenal.

If letting attackers in 1 v 1 against your keeper is a successful rope-a-dope strategy, then yes Chelsea was successful.

Actually, that is exactly how I would describe their first game against us at the Emirates. We had a bunch of wasted movement that led to nothing. We never came close to hurting them. It was about as impotent as one could be considering all of our possession.

In this game, on the other hand, it was down to our own profligacy that we did not score, not their great defending.

 

[Big Poppa]

Clichy and Vermaelen both anticipated the first time cross/shot but Drogba "did them" so to speak. We're all over the place defensively as a unit, so all of them are to blame. It's much easier to deal with those situations if you are already in the correct position, and not constantly running back towards your own goal. There's no need to assassinate Clichy. A little discipline is all that's needed.

 

[Gurgen]

I heard on SSN this morning of reports from Italy suggesting that Mourinho is preparing to buy himself out of his Milan contract in order to move back to the EPL. Would love him to be our manager next season.

You should be ashamed.

 

[law90026]

I think you confuse possession with playing better.

We may have had more of the ball, it doesn't mean we played better. We may have had more corner, but it doesn't mean we played better.

Our real chances: Arshavin's attempt, Nasri's non-shot and a Cesc freekick. Other than that, we had maybe a half chance with the Cesc header and were restricted to long range shots and terrible crosses.

It doesn't matter how much we "boss" the midfield because that's precisely what Chelsea wanted us to do. They were perfectly comfortable letting us have all the possession and hitting us on the break. We were not outplaying them.

Lest you forget, they had other chances besides the 2 Drogba goals. Cole broke through in the first half and Almunia had to make that save, they hit the bar via a Drogba freekick, Anelka skied the ball from just outside the 6 yard box.

I mean, it's one thing to say that the performance was better compared to the Man Utd debacle. It's quite another thing to say we were the better side.

 

[gstew]

I think you confuse possession with playing better.

We may have had more of the ball, it doesn't mean we played better. We may have had more corner, but it doesn't mean we played better.

Our real chances: Arshavin's attempt, Nasri's non-shot and a Cesc freekick. Other than that, we had maybe a half chance with the Cesc header and were restricted to long range shots and terrible crosses.

It doesn't matter how much we "boss" the midfield because that's precisely what Chelsea wanted us to do. They were perfectly comfortable letting us have all the possession and hitting us on the break. We were not outplaying them.

Lest you forget, they had other chances besides the 2 Drogba goals. Cole broke through in the first half and Almunia had to make that save, they hit the bar via a Drogba freekick, Anelka skied the ball from just outside the 6 yard box.

I mean, it's one thing to say that the performance was better compared to the Man Utd debacle. It's quite another thing to say we were the better side.

We had two 1 v 1 on their keeper in the first half. And Song put Nasri through again for another non shot where he actually let Cole shut him down. It was in the 60th minute and that should have been a third 1 v 1. For the life of me I still can't figure out what he was thinking.

Cole was at the byline when Almunia made his "save". That wasn't even half a chance.

Cesc should have scored with a wide open header from 8 yards. That was a total of four chances that were far easier than Drogba's 2nd, Drogba's free kick or Anelka's miss (where he was running across goal and had players between him and the goal). We had the far better chances and we dominated the midfield. They finished, they deserved the win. It is that simple.

 

[SA Gunner]

If letting attackers in 1 v 1 against your keeper is a successful rope-a-dope strategy, then yes Chelsea was successful.

Actually, that is exactly how I would describe their first game against us at the Emirates. We had a bunch of wasted movement that led to nothing. We never came close to hurting them. It was about as impotent as one could be considering all of our possession.

In this game, on the other hand, it was down to our own profligacy that we did not score, not their great defending.

You right,

The rope-a-dope strategy is a perfect description of the corresponding game at the Emirates in November.

However, what is different to this game? We played the football, we took the initiative, we had a good showing in midfield. Chelsea took their gaps and capitalised, we faulted when Chelsea turned on their heat.

The fact that we didnt take our chances doesnt soften the blow mate, it doesnt make it more credible. Foreman had many chances to knock Ali out during that match but Ali absorbed him and when Ali countered he made it work. All Foreman's defences were up to **** when Ali countered, just like how ours were.

At the end of the day we were rope-a-doped. Sure we put up a bigger fight this time, but it was the same tactic.

 

[gstew]

If letting attackers in 1 v 1 against your keeper is a successful rope-a-dope strategy, then yes Chelsea was successful.

Actually, that is exactly how I would describe their first game against us at the Emirates. We had a bunch of wasted movement that led to nothing. We never came close to hurting them. It was about as impotent as one could be considering all of our possession.

In this game, on the other hand, it was down to our own profligacy that we did not score, not their great defending.

You right,

The rope-a-dope strategy is a perfect description of the corresponding game at the Emirates in November.

However, what is different to this game? We played the football, we took the initiative, we had a good showing in midfield. Chelsea took their gaps and capitalised, we faulted when Chelsea turned on their heat.

The fact that we didnt take our chances doesnt soften the blow mate, it doesnt make it more credible. Foreman had many chances to knock Ali out during that match but Ali absorbed him and when Ali countered he made it work. All Foreman's defences were up to s**t when Ali countered, just like how ours were.

At the end of the day we were rope-a-doped. Sure we put up a bigger fight this time, but it was the same tactic.

Foreman never had a chance to knock Ali out. He never came close to hurting him and Ali never game him a single real opening. Ali was always in control even when it appeared otherwise.

We didn't have a single real chance in November. Today we had two (really it would have been three if not for Nasri's strange decision-making) 1 v 1 with Cech. That is the equivalent of letting someone hit you multiple times with your guard completely down. Ali never did that.

 

[Cruisio]

Oh please, for all the possession we had, how many saves did Cech actually have to make? One from Arshavin, and one from Fabregas. Dominating the ball does NOT equal dominating the match. Had we had chance after chance then you could make an argument for us being the better team, but we didnt. The reason we got so much of the ball was because Chelsea allowed us to. It's the easiest way for big teams to beat us, to let us attack, keep it narrow, and counter us, Utd did it, and now Chelsea have done it. As soon as they went 2 goals up there was no need for them to push forward with the ball anymore. The rope-a-dope analogy is a spot on one

 

[SA Gunner]

If letting attackers in 1 v 1 against your keeper is a successful rope-a-dope strategy, then yes Chelsea was successful.

Actually, that is exactly how I would describe their first game against us at the Emirates. We had a bunch of wasted movement that led to nothing. We never came close to hurting them. It was about as impotent as one could be considering all of our possession.

In this game, on the other hand, it was down to our own profligacy that we did not score, not their great defending.

You right,

The rope-a-dope strategy is a perfect description of the corresponding game at the Emirates in November.

However, what is different to this game? We played the football, we took the initiative, we had a good showing in midfield. Chelsea took their gaps and capitalised, we faulted when Chelsea turned on their heat.

The fact that we didnt take our chances doesnt soften the blow mate, it doesnt make it more credible. Foreman had many chances to knock Ali out during that match but Ali absorbed him and when Ali countered he made it work. All Foreman's defences were up to s**t when Ali countered, just like how ours were.

At the end of the day we were rope-a-doped. Sure we put up a bigger fight this time, but it was the same tactic.

Foreman never had a chance to knock Ali out. He never came close to hurting him and Ali never game him a single real opening. Ali was always in control even when it appeared otherwise.

We didn't have a single real chance in November. Today we had two (really it would have been three if not for Nasri's strange decision-making) 1 v 1 with Cech. That is the equivalent of letting someone hit you multiple times with your guard completely down. Ali never did that.

Did we score any goals mate?

Just because we got through to Cech doesnt necessarily mean we had Chelsea on the ropes, sure we can say that but at the end of the day Cech won those battle with some saves (they may have been lucky at times but he won them)... i.e. Foreman seemed to be breaking Ali but Ali was in control all the time.

Contrary to popular belief I do think that Foreman had a chance to knock Ali out. There were times during the fight that Ali seemed to be just holding on to the onslaught from George, and he masked it pretty well with his obvious commentary (I watch ESPN Classic quite a bit ).

 

[Mbaki Mutahaba]

Oh please, for all the possession we had, how many saves did Cech actually have to make? One from Arshavin, and one from Fabregas. Dominating the ball does NOT equal dominating the match. Had we had chance after chance then you could make an argument for us being the better team, but we didnt. The reason we got so much of the ball was because Chelsea allowed us to. It's the easiest way for big teams to beat us, to let us attack, keep it narrow, and counter us, Utd did it, and now Chelsea have done it. As soon as they went 2 goals up there was no need for them to push forward with the ball anymore. The rope-a-dope analogy is a spot on one

Watch the game again.even when they were up by 1-0 they were not able to push up or keep possession for long, we had them pinned. Its always very easy to claim the other team "allowed us willingly" to keep the ball. It shows basic lack of understanding in what exactly Wenger is trying to do or for this case has accomplished doing. We are a possession type football team.

Love it or hate it we are good in keeping the ball and i believe it works more than it backfires. All great teams had it in them to keep the ball (England is still trying to figure how to do that ). Creating few chances against Chelsea and dominating possession is all you will get and it takes a lot to even get that at their home turf.

You keep forgeting those very teams that cant keep the ball well look extremely ordinary against a ball possession team that has taken the lead. You will be chasing shadows. We get so immersed in the EPL we take it as blueprint on how to play football.

But we still salivate at Barca..whose philosophy is keep the ball at all costs. The rest will come.

 

[fabo]

Barca are a different animal.

Look at the shape of our midfield in the build-up to the second goal. No discipline whatsoever. Committing so many players at the 20 minute mark in a match is laughable really.

We got what we deserved.

 

[albakos]

Few points after coming back to reality from last night:

- The moment I saw Dean as a ref, I knew there will be no decisions going our way.

- As in most matches, keepers have blinders against us. Cech was unbelievable. It's no wonder to have a great defence when you have a commanding goalkeeper behind your back.

- Theo is clearly not match fit yet. He is probably under immense psychological pressure that he WILL miss the WC, ****ley had him for breakfast. Eboue was much more dangerous on the wing durign that cameo than Walcott was during the whole time he was in.

- Unfortunately, the ACN curse strikes again. Song is nto the one we all craved to have him back ASAP. He is probably too tired and is not at the same form as before he left.

- Wenger still makes the same mistakes. You will never score against Chelsea by walking the ball in the net. Even a fantastic Barca side failed to do that, only for a last gasp wonderstrike by Iniesta to score. Our only chance ws to have someone who could hold the ball (Bendtner) so we might've get a chance to score from outside the box (Cesc, Nasri or Arshavin)

- Same undisciplined defensive errors coming back to bite us in the arse once again. Their second goal was textbook counterattack. It's pathetic because in two games we conceded three such goals (Rooney, Park and Drogba), which even the likes of Pompey should be ashamed to concede in such a manner.




Arsène wake the **** up.

 

[xcdude24]

same old arsenal really drogba is a different class and we have all the possesion with no real pentration and cant f****g defend..
not even that gutted to be honest.
whoever bought that flare in today deserves a lifelong season ticket.. talk about galvanising the atmosphere.
the 5-10 mins after that flare went off was absolutely eletric in the away end.. so much so that im not even that fussed we lost.. seeing those chelsea wankers faces to our right as the flare was lit was priceless they were so s**t scared it was laughable..

nice to see theo start a big game he defenitely desrevres his big chance

were you downstairs?

 

[Cruisio]

Oh please, for all the possession we had, how many saves did Cech actually have to make? One from Arshavin, and one from Fabregas. Dominating the ball does NOT equal dominating the match. Had we had chance after chance then you could make an argument for us being the better team, but we didnt. The reason we got so much of the ball was because Chelsea allowed us to. It's the easiest way for big teams to beat us, to let us attack, keep it narrow, and counter us, Utd did it, and now Chelsea have done it. As soon as they went 2 goals up there was no need for them to push forward with the ball anymore. The rope-a-dope analogy is a spot on one

Watch the game again.even when they were up by 1-0 they were not able to push up or keep possession for long, we had them pinned. Its always very easy to claim the other team "allowed us willingly" to keep the ball. It shows basic lack of understanding in what exactly Wenger is trying to do or for this case has accomplished doing. We are a possession type football team.

Love it or hate it we are good in keeping the ball and i believe it works more than it backfires. All great teams had it in them to keep the ball (England is still trying to figure how to do that ). Creating few chances against Chelsea and dominating possession is all you will get and it takes a lot to even get that at their home turf.

You keep forgeting those very teams that cant keep the ball well look extremely ordinary against a ball possession team that has taken the lead. You will be chasing shadows. We get so immersed in the EPL we take it as blueprint on how to play football.

But we still salivate at Barca..whose philosophy is keep the ball at all costs. The rest will come.

Theres a few things that Barca have over us - The ability to be able to defend as a unit, from front to back

A much higher work ethic than us off the ball

Special players darted all over the final third

Without these things, it really doesnt matter how much possession we have, as teams will eventually counter us. I'm pretty confident that had we got one back, Chelsea wold have upped it a gear or two and gone on to get another one. However, they didnt have to, they were more than comfortable letting us have it out wide and have Terry and Carvalho head out any limp crosses we threw into their box to our aerially dominant 5 foot nothing striker

 

[sabret00the]

The blame for this is all on Wenger who seems to believe that as long as a player is able to pass within two touches, he's fine wherever he is on the pitch. We need some positional discipline.

I'll call a spade a spade: Song is a good central midfielder but he's a **** defensive midfielder. He provides a lot of presence and is quick to make those cheeky tackles, but he has no positional discipline or tactical nuance and in a team such as ours, that's exactly what you need. It's time to buy a DMC, ideally a playmaking DMC who can sit deep and spray balls when it's on but ultimately has a man crush on defending everything. Let Song and Denilson battle it out for the other midfielding spot and make the sale of Diaby finance the acquisition.

 

[dreamLord]

We dominated Chelsea?

Don't be deluded, honestly. Ancelotti had Wenger out-witted again. It was the same Chelsea, with the same tactics. Clog the box with all players, put 3 players on Arshavin, let Arsenal have all the possession and play their unexciting passes at the edge of the box, let them cross all they want. The difference was not only them taking their chances and us not taking ours. Do you really believe that had we scored 2, we would have managed to hold on to a 2-2?

The thing is, even with our current team we could still have beaten them if the tactics were right. You don't go all guns blazing with a weak defense and dodgy goalkeeper away to the league leaders. You bide your time and defend like your life depended on it.

 

[sabret00the]

I know Song is tired, but he's been terrible since coming back from the ANC. What the f**k is up with his positioning? Every time a team break on us, he's ahead of the ball. He's a f****g DMC for f**k sake, just side back and make sure the defence is in position. Your job is to expect the attack will break down and that you'll have to save the day and reinitialise the attack, it's not to f****g join in on attacks you f****g *****.

If you thing Song is a big problem then you are clearly more out of your mind then I thought.

Agreed.....Song was heroic today. He ran his ass off, he attacked and defended and met his covering responsibilities. If an opponent gets a favorable odd man counterattack against us then it is likely that Song is at least partly at fault (Rooney for ManU, e.g.). But Song is not a defender, he is a midfielder. He must take part in attack also. It is when a defender takes a part in attack that he is responsible for covering. All four defenders were back for Chelsea's second. Song did absolutely nothing wrong for that goal. And he was excellent throughout. Sometimes I wonder what game people watch.

Song is the fifth defender. He's a glorified defender who's job is to be the first line of defence when the opposition break on us. He's consistently failed at doing that against big teams because he's been exposed as an egoist who wants to be involved in attacks.