Conte been complaining about fixture congestion?
Chelsea under Conte | Let's sign the next Hazard, literally.
- Thread starter Gandalf Greyhame
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
No.
Not at this season but in the future I think he will. Mourinho did complain about the fixture this season and I think there was nothing with that - because in England the FA just never cares about teams fighting for Premier League pride in Europe. They arrange the fixture which help them make most money and that's all.
The first two losses were earlier in the season (no championship talk then) while the last two gave no room for excuses).
Before the game, Conte made sure to point out that Spurs were not under dogs (i.e. if we lose, we didnt lose to a weaker team)
"There is a moment you have to finish considering yourself an underdog. I think this is the right moment,'' Conte said. "Tottenham now is a really great power in English football. This is the third year for them [under Pochettino] and I think it's the right moment to finish [talking about being] considered [an] underdog and to find his excuse.''
What has the number of season under Poch got to do with being under dogs? I guess since Howe has been in charge for 4 seasons, Bournemouth are no longer underdogs against Chelsea!
Costa has been poor for several games and yet Conte did not drop him but Hazard was marked out for one game and was dropped. Hazard had the excuse of being marn-marked but what was pedro's excuse for being absent against United? why wasnt he dropped too?
After the game
"Our plan was this," Conte said. "I tried also to tell our players to stay in the game, because [if] we pass more time [on the clock], it was better for us. Then I decided last 30 minutes to put Eden and Diego in, and then Cesc [Fabregas], because don't forget Cesc was very important also for us.
"I must be pleased because in this game I involved all my players in our idea, in our football," the manager added. "I think it's very important in this part of the season that everyone, every single player, feels a part of this project.
"In this part of the season when you know you have to play three tough games [in a week], you must make strong decisions and take responsibility to make these decisions. It's not easy to decide to start the game without two important players, Hazard and Diego, but I think you must take this responsibility and you must involve your players in your plan and then take this risk."
Those statements implied he didnt drop Hazard and Costa for performance reasons but as part of some game plan - that was a load of nonsense.
Funny still is he wax lyrically about everyone feels part of the project, when he had refused to start Batshuayi (outside of weaker opposition in LC and FA) even when he was benching Costa. Conte has likely fielded the most consistent starting XI this season of any top flight club in Europe.
I have no problem with a manager spinning lines for the direct/indirect benefit of his team (that is his job), but I do dislike the artificial portrayal of Conte. Same was done with Pep at Barca, until he started losing and he showed us his ugly side.
With the red sentence highlighted as above, I have no reason to argue with you anymore. You dislike him - that's your right and others would only have to respect it.
I don't think it had anything to do with performances (both players are indispensable for Chelsea anyway), but with priorities for the remainder of the season.
Losing the semis against Tottenham would have been unpleasant but acceptable, but losing out on the PL title would be an absolute disaster. So I'm sure Costa & Hazard weren't actually dropped but simply rested for the PL run-in. I think he referred to that quite openly in the statement you quoted:
Last edited:
Dislike him? Do you have a problem with English comprehension?
first match Jose was sabotaged by Smalling. Even so he learned from that loss and as he said he may have got the better of Conte in the FA Cup if not for idiot Oliver.
I stand by what I said. Pep is not as good as the other 3.
Let's me clarify here. You do dislike the artificial portrayal of Conte but I think Conte himself and the portrayal of him are nothing different. He will get angry when he loses but he is not going to show his good side when winning and ugly side when losing. That is my opinion.
In your opinion, he will show his ugly side when he starts losing as Pep at Barca. However, it has not happened yet and I actually don't really know much about Pep as I think he is a nice guy. Thus, I have nothing to do but accept your personal opinion.
I think you're misinterpreting it. When he says "plan", he doesn't mean Hazard and Costa were benched for some tactical masterclass. He's just saying that general idea was to rest Hazard and Costa with upcoming game(s) in mind. In fact what he said seemed to imply he wanted the team to ride it out as best as they could until the cavalry came in ("I tried also to tell our players to stay in the game, because [if] we pass more time [on the clock], it was better for us.").
Any other Chelsea fan decided to agree with me about Batshauyi being useless yet?
The flaw with that narration is that their last game was the previous Sunday (almost a week) and the next game is 3 days later against a much weaker opposition in Southampton (so resting hazard and costa for Southampton?). After that Chelsea has 6 games in the next 5 weeks with most of them being at home and against teams in the lower half of the table. It is not what anyone should deem a demanding schedule.
The flaw with your argument is that Southampton has a 10 day rest before our game, and we have 3. Southampton might not be Spurs, but they are a very good side. Remember your cup final?
Yeah. I think Conte's plan was to reach 60 mins at 0-0 and then blow a tired spurs team away with Hazard, Costa and Fabregas. We got lucky by not being 2-0 down by then.
If only...
I think Hazard or one of the players even mentioned it in their post match presser.
Actually not true. Most CFC understand that the squad needs a serious shake up. Everyone wants at least 4 big signings next year.
TBH, with hindsight, it's a blessing in disguise. With all the major injuries now, compete seriously in FA is risky for us
Try having that all season. Like United. Then you can complain.
Signing 4 new starters seems excessive to me. I would definitely keep Moses in the starting XI and I don't agree with the point about Luiz not reaching these levels again. He's the leader in that team at the peak of his career and can only get better with more quality added to the defence.
Who is even complaining? I'm just replying to people who saying there was no reason to "rest" players before Southampton game and that it was some sort of PR spin.
Long term you need to look at career achievements so comparisons can vary. Guardiola has created wonderful teams but he was also lucky to get some of the best talent in the history of football at some point.
Mou, who tbh I dislike very much as a person, has had an amazing career and is a great leader and motivator but not a great tactician IMHO.
This season Conte is hands down the best of the lot considering the team he had to work with, good but not great yet with lots of room for improvement, the new language and the new league.
I think he will end up being the best also career wise, but I am biased
What is quite sure is that Chelsea next season will win more and end with more points than this season, if this year they end with 87-88 points, next year they will very likely make more than 90. So the competition will have to step up its game considerably to fill the gap.You're right. How dare we manage our game because a different team has had a tougher schedule...
I think Jose is probably the best tactician in football to be honest. The reason he has such an incredible record isn't man management, it's because he obsessively studies the game and his opponents and devises tactical solutions to counter their strengths. Guardiola is basically the anti-Jose, trusting that his own strategy will be too strong for others to beat.
pretty much this.
The top two in the world are Mourinho and Conte. Next season will be really a contest between those two.
Oh. I really like Mourinho as person. He says it like it is.
Not setting the place on fire yet, but still haven't seen enough of him on the pitch yet.
Plus, he's still quite young. Needs more game time though. Thought he was okay on Saturday, if a little isolated!
No they aren't.
Life as a footballer looks fun (if you're not Moses). Then again, this could be why Diego's always moving away from the ball when a cross is about to be drilled in.
Yes how dare you. You're talking about English footballing Royalty. Show some respect you cockney peasants!
I want this fecker to fail miserably. He's been running his mouth about how cash isn't everything. It's ironic a Chelsea manager would say that. Surely, he knows how Chelsea got here?
And He spent 124m quids for christ sake!
And He spent 124m quids for christ sake!
What did he say?
He said, "I think this season it's very important to understand that it's not always about who spends more money who wins,"
You can see the rest here.
http://m.espn.com/soccer/story?storyId=3111783&top&wjb=
Chelsea manager moaning about money spent, just wait and watch how few Chelsea fans lap it up.
not sure why you find this controversial, he has just stated an obvious truth ie: money is important but even more important is how you spend that money. Plenty of examples everywhere of teams that have wasted huge amount of money on average players (Inter, City, Milan, MU or even Juve before Agnelli came back are good examples of that)
It would been correct if Ranieri said it last season, not Chelsea this season. Chelsea also spent so much money and in this decade only Madrid spent more than them.
to some extent you are right but Leicester was an exception rather than a proof of some theory. I do not think that anybody is claiming that money is not important or that Chelsea is a poor club, but for sure Chelsea's net spend in the last season (but if I am not wrong also in the last 3 seasons combined) is well below the one of City and MU who have spent incredible amount of money on good or average players (City's investments on defenders come to my mind). It is not normal that you spend 300£ million plus and you still have an incomplete team with several positions that require an upgrade, it means that management has not done their job properly and have wasted lots of money on some "name" buys due to lazy scouting
Net spend doesn't tell full story without context and putting any time frame is also flawed method as players like Hazard, Cahill, Azpi, Courtois and few others were all signed before 3 years.
There is no doubt ManUtd didn't do well with money spent but what Conte said is wrong. He is deluded if he thinks Chelsea are in the same bracket as Spurs when it comes to money spent. They spent around 120 Million this summer.
It's clear that we have spent poorly the last few years but who do you blame? The board and Woodward seem to have taken the stance of fully supporting the manager. Van Gaal wasted an insane amount of money and left us with a dysfunctional squad. Should the board have interfered? That's easy to say in hindsight. They appointed him and trusted him to make the footballing decisions, after all he should be better qualified than anyone else. Mourinho is now trying to undo the damage done by Van Gaal, which costs time and money.
Either you fully support the manager in the transfer market or you appoint a director of football. Each method has its own advantages and disadvantages. The club chose the former route and it hasn't worked out so far. In my opinion, clubs that anticipate changing managers frequently have everything to gain by appointing a director of football to have at least some measure of continuity. But it's not like we were expecting to have three different managers in the four years since Ferguson's retirement. Only thing we can do now is give Mourinho an opportunity to provide that continuity.
It's easy for Conte to say this. He inherited a squad that completely underperformed last season but was still extremely functional at its core. That squad has been built over a lengthy period of time and a lot of money was spent along the way. It's easy to ignore that now.