Liverpool would have beaten Arsenal but for the sun in Reina's eyes and a mishap which led to the Arsenal equaliser. Left me very cold that.
The phrase I think is 'swings and roundabouts'.
Premier League: 02/03 October
- Thread starter Ivor Ballokov
- 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.
Liverpool would have beaten Arsenal but for the sun in Reina's eyes and a mishap which led to the Arsenal equaliser. Left me very cold that.
The phrase I think is 'swings and roundabouts'.
Yeh, but we're not the best team in the country, officially. Maybe I expect too much, but we've been beaten by the Champions today, but they just don't offer very much, and the 2-0 flattered them immensely. Tactically they're very good, but I do find that they just lack something which makes them memorable as champions.
What like the 100+ goals they scored last season?
You're putting me in the shade with that comment. I call imposter on this WUM.
Jesus there's some complete and utter bollocks talked in here sometimes
Actually we played alright without four of our biggest players here - took the game to Chelsea which probably only three other sides will do in the entire league and have come out of it with nothing due to not being able to balance 'up' the squad injuries and most importantly of all beat a fking tremendous side on their own patch with arguably the best striker in the world in top form
What the fk are you lot talking about ?! you're talking like Chelsea are a fking conference side! they 're not, they're one of the best sides in the world for fksakes - they possess the best world class striker, the best world class full back, the best central midfielder and a back to form keeper - That's forgetting Mamouda, Alex etc etc
We were equal to them more than for the first half but their impressive power, physicallity, creativity got the justified result
I expected worse
1 / It's been ages since I could say one of the top two sides beat us without our own keeper inflicting massive psychological damage on us that we could never recover from and
2 / they were simply better
......although with a huge injury list we gave imo a fking good effort
No complaints from me and actually quite pleased with some aspects of that showing. For once we did not roll over and look for the tunnel 25 minutes from the end - we turned up and gave it a shot - a good one
Actually we played alright without four of our biggest players here - took the game to Chelsea which probably only three other sides will do in the entire league and have come out of it with nothing due to not being able to balance 'up' the squad injuries and most importantly of all beat a fking tremendous side on their own patch with arguably the best striker in the world in top form
What the fk are you lot talking about ?! you're talking like Chelsea are a fking conference side! they 're not, they're one of the best sides in the world for fksakes - they possess the best world class striker, the best world class full back, the best central midfielder and a back to form keeper - That's forgetting Mamouda, Alex etc etc
We were equal to them more than for the first half but their impressive power, physicallity, creativity got the justified result
I expected worse
1 / It's been ages since I could say one of the top two sides beat us without our own keeper inflicting massive psychological damage on us that we could never recover from and
2 / they were simply better
......although with a huge injury list we gave imo a fking good effort
No complaints from me and actually quite pleased with some aspects of that showing. For once we did not roll over and look for the tunnel 25 minutes from the end - we turned up and gave it a shot - a good one
How is this a WUM? All I'm saying is that I'm left cold by Chelsea, despite their obvious goal scoring and defensive qualities. It's hardly a wind up is it?
Ffsakes Pete no they were not
We had plenty of possession and more than held our own for the first 5o minutes but as usual did'nt make that count, hardly surprising as the 'teeth' of our side, Walcott and moreover RvP were not present.
We keep looking to make up for it with goals from midfield but with the likes of Arshavin looking like a different player from the one who joined a year and a half ago even that is too much pressure against a quality side like Chelsea
We did well but we never even remotely outplayed them and they always looked likely to score through Drogba Mamouda Cole etc etc
What the feck were you watching man ?!
I was taking the pss out of myself alastair. It might leave you feeling cold, that's just the sense of being beaten and you probably not winning a trophy for a 6th season in a row. It is indeed a cold feeling and I share your pain as a Liverpool fan.
Doesn't take away from Chelsea's 'glory' at the moment. They are indeed an outstanding team and deserve all the accolades they're getting right now. They tactically took you to the cleaners, and I'm sure you'll see this in a few days time.
Doesn't take away from Chelsea's 'glory' at the moment. They are indeed an outstanding team and deserve all the accolades they're getting right now. They tactically took you to the cleaners, and I'm sure you'll see this in a few days time.
Oh, sorry, I'm obviously a humourless bastard
To be honest, I don't think Chelsea are an outstanding side, in the sense that I think the three United title winning sides in recent history were better than them. I also think the Mourinho Chelsea side was better.
Tactically, they killed us today, as they always do - of that there is no doubt. To beat us, you have to defend stoutly, and force us wide. That's the best way of doing it - Chelsea do it better than most, and hence win. It's pretty simple, and it's obvious to all Arsenal fans that we need a new approach when we play them, but nothing tends to get done about it. Frustrating, but fortunately we only have to play them twice a season.
Good post. It was the same old story really. Chelsea let your lot pass it about prettily and slam the door shut easily in the final third, and have the physical strength, pace and ability in the final third to score a few. It's a simple method and usually works for them against Arsenal. They're just the kind of team that works brilliantly against Arsenal.
Btw, what do you make of Chamakh? He looks a very ordinary football to me. With a better striker you might have had a chance in that game. The focal point was hardly a threat at all.
Oh, sorry, I'm obviously a humourless bastard
To be honest, I don't think Chelsea are an outstanding side, in the sense that I think the three United title winning sides in recent history were better than them. I also think the Mourinho Chelsea side was better.
.
I actually agree with that, they're also an old side. Sadly we've weakened over the last couple of seasons otherwise I would've expected us to start as strong favs this and last this season.
Oh, sorry, I'm obviously a humourless bastard
To be honest, I don't think Chelsea are an outstanding side, in the sense that I think the three United title winning sides in recent history were better than them. I also think the Mourinho Chelsea side was better.
Tactically, they killed us today, as they always do - of that there is no doubt. To beat us, you have to defend stoutly, and force us wide. That's the best way of doing it - Chelsea do it better than most, and hence win. It's pretty simple, and it's obvious to all Arsenal fans that we need a new approach when we play them, but nothing tends to get done about it. Frustrating, but fortunately we only have to play them twice a season.
I agree with this. Chelsea are a good team, but they aren't outstanding for me. Problem is, given the competition they have in the league, they do 'look' outstanding. Noone is really looking like they look capable to challenging them at all. We're shipping goals left right and centre and unable to win a game away from home, Arsenal have the same old 'balls' problem and Liverpool have disappeared off the face of the earth.
Same old Arsenal I'm afraid, just zero penetration and Chelsea didn't really get into any trouble bar that Chamakh header where they lost him for abit.
You can take some positives out of Wilshere though, looks a player of genuine purpose and has the sort of mentality that Arsenal need more of, rather than sideway passers like Diaby.
Oh, sorry, I'm obviously a humourless bastard
To be honest, I don't think Chelsea are an outstanding side, in the sense that I think the three United title winning sides in recent history were better than them. I also think the Mourinho Chelsea side was better.
Tactically, they killed us today, as they always do - of that there is no doubt. To beat us, you have to defend stoutly, and force us wide. That's the best way of doing it - Chelsea do it better than most, and hence win. It's pretty simple, and it's obvious to all Arsenal fans that we need a new approach when we play them, but nothing tends to get done about it. Frustrating, but fortunately we only have to play them twice a season.
kinell mate, how good domestically do Chelsea have to be then ?
During the three years when Utd won these titles Essien was hugely injured and missing for two of them and I for one think they'd have won one of those titles had he been fit and playing - No disrespect, Utd have been good, very good but Essien is the man for Chelsea - basically if he can be fit and string together 30 league performances a season they will win the league - that's how good he is and that's how important he is to them
In the last 6 years Chelsea have been brilliant under all their managers except big Phil. Even under Grant they were very very good almost won the top PL and CL double but for the width of a post
C'mon give them some credit - they are a tremendous outfit
I think you're happy with top 4 every season, Jo.
Has Jopub wished death upon Wenger yet?
Drogba - mmm I wish he'd just fk off !
Well I reserve judgement on Chamakh. When players are coming into the English league from Europe its always a baptism of fire. They're not on the pace physically and mentally and as we all know it takes time to bed into the demands of probaly the quickest league in the world.
He looks strong in the air (usually!) and can hit the net and physically could give us a bigger presence - he's certainly no van Persie but as time goes on when the mud and shit up north in February hits us he may come on substantially
Always takes a bit of time
I'm absolutely never happy with top four - ever. When I can see how we could be better with new acquisitions of a keeper and defenders I cant be happy knowing we can do something about it
When you have no other options then you have to be happy with what you get but for me as you know I feel Wenger could put us amongst the very top with a few tweaks but does'nt do it from choice so while that situation remains I'll never be happy with 'just' top four
Course not
We got beat by a fking top top side and given the injury situation put in a creditable performance and for once dire suicidal goalkeeping had no say in the result
You as in Wenger. His lack of spending makes no sense unless you're still paying off the new stadium.
Well, I'll judge their quality on the way in which they won the title last season, because although they were a very good side previous to that, they didn't win the title, and hence were not "outstanding".
I don't rate Essien as highly as you do. I find it ridiculous to suggest that United would not have won all of their three titles if Essien had been fit. That's just ludicrous - at the end of the day, every team has to cope with injuries, and it so happened that Essien spent a lot of time injured for them. Susceptability to injury is a key part of evaluating the quality of a player, in my view. For example, I think RVP is a lesser player because of his injuries. If you were another top side, would you want to sign him, knowing his injury record? No. Essien is one of those players who does get injured a lot - his position doesn't help, I imagine. But even had he been fit, United would still have won the titles they did win, and you are taking a lot away from them in suggesting otherwise.
I'm not convinced by Chelsea. Yes, they beat us comfortably today, because we're set up extremely poorly to play against them, but there is just something missing from them. Their only title victory in the last four years has been in a league where all their competitors have not been at the peak of their powers. United are in transition, and we've had two bob to spend for the last five years. I know they can only beat what they're up against, so it's not their fault in that sense, but this side is really not the all-conquering wonderful powerhouse you're making them out to be, which has been proven time and time again in Europe. Good, but not good enough.
Essien appearances during United's league winning seasons.
06/07: 54 (33 league)
07/08: 45 (27 league)
08/09: 19 (11 league)
So the one season he missed alot of football was the one where Chelsea weren't even our closest competitors.
Oh, and United had their fair share of injuries these years too. You're being a bit of spaz, as usual.
Naa I'll argue with all of that later busy right now but I'll be back
Fair enough. Drogba himself was a laughing stock during his early Chelsea days.
But at first impression, he doesn't look much more than a 'lump'.
I think Alastair is spot on about Chelsea.
I was at the City v Newcastle game today......what a crap set of fans they've got at Eastlands. And the City team wasn't much better....Newcastle were v unlucky to come away empty-handed.
2-3 good games and Walcott along with Rvp is the "teeth" of the Arsenal side?
Had there been even a slightly competent ref today Newcastle surely would have got atleast a point
I was watching the game not the media narrative, Chelsea were outplayed for most of it and got a goal against the run of play as a result of a foul in the build up while we missed some slottable chances (they made none except from long balls when we were chasing the game).
It is amazing how little the foul on Song is being mentioned. It was absolutely blatant, and although Dean had a good game aside from that, that particular decision was a shocker.
Can't really argue with any of that to be honest.
You can judge whatever you want mate
They've been the 'outstanding' club side for the last 6 years along with Utd
I cant help that. Personally I think he's the best central midfield player since Keane / Vieira
I don't - in those times he's been the biggest missing link for Chelsea imo It's obliviously conjecture but I feel he'd have made a difference
No I'm not, thats my opinion. I feel Chelsea have missed Essien when he's been injured massively. You might argue that even we would have had a very very good tilt two years ago had van Persie not missed the last half of the season - some players big players make a massive difference. For example look at Drogba - had he been injured like van Persie do you think they'd have missed him?? Of course they would. Enough to have not won a title? very possible - Of course clubs have to deal with injuries and counter with a big sqaud but some players are more vital to their clubs than others imo Essien is one of them. That also does not detract from Utd winning them anyway. Any side that wins the title deserves it
That's hardly their fault if that is the case
So are we all
No we fking haven't - we've had buckets of money to get at least a half decent keeper etc etc ..but that's another story
Again disagree - they we're certainly good enough to beat Barca two years ago but for some insane officiating and came a post away from a Cl. I'd say they're good enough in Europe to be honest
You're being a prick as usual.
Essien was injured at vital parts of those times and was for the most part in much of it coming back from injury as well.
You know he was significantly missing during a couple of those campaigns but obviously want to argue the toss.
I'm not saying you'd have lost one two or any of those titles as you were deserving winners but don't try and tell me a club losing its powerhouse best midfielder fully fit and up and running will not suffer for it.
I happen to think it made a tangible difference to the outcome of one of those titles but that's just an opinion
You're as usual getting your nickers in a twist because somebody dares to suggest Utd maybe could have lost a title they won
Fkk nows what your problem is
I was just pointing out that Essien played plenty of games in those title winning seasons. The only season he missed a considerable amount of games was 08/09 when Chelsea were a shambles all over the pitch, not just midfield, and Liverpool were United's challengers.
In 07/08 he played 27 games, which is a decent tally. The exact same amount of league games that Wayne Rooney played for United, for example. And in 06/07 he played the whole season.
So on the whole I think you're talking bollocks, that's all. That's why I took you to task. It matters not what your opinion is, because it's been shown to be worthless time and time again. This is no different. I was just using figures to prove it.
I'm not buying this argument that Chelsea need Essien to win the title, last season he barely played through injury and we won it whilst in 06/07 he had an absolutely astounding season and was voted player of the year at the club and Man United won the title. Incidently that season Chelsea had an injury crisis like the one Man United had last year, I recall going to Liverpool that season playing Essien and Ferreira at centre back.
Secondly I feel sorry for Arsenal fans because our meetings have become so very predictable, all Chelsea fans know how Arsenal will play against us and how we'll play accordingly. It is difficult to gauge how good they actually are because you felt how the way through the game that if we needed to go and score we could which applies when all top sides play Arsenal, even given very clear frailities in the Man United side you'd expect more of the same.
Secondly I feel sorry for Arsenal fans because our meetings have become so very predictable, all Chelsea fans know how Arsenal will play against us and how we'll play accordingly. It is difficult to gauge how good they actually are because you felt how the way through the game that if we needed to go and score we could which applies when all top sides play Arsenal, even given very clear frailities in the Man United side you'd expect more of the same.
For me you're a very different proposition with a fully fit Michael Essien playing in his strongest position - not anywhere else
For us we have a manager who has not done enough about our obvious frailties for a long long time so we 'll get what we deserve for that
Saying that I thought we played well today but as ever no cutting edge - to get the early goal our play deserved and then to see how you played under that pressure. As usual it could have been a different game had we done that but we did'nt so came away with nowt.
Chelsea deserved the 3 points and how anyone can conclude we 'outplayed' you is completely mystifying to me
Are you talking about the header in the first minute? Chelsea are very like Arsenal in that sense that we don't panic and change our gameplan if we go a goal down, though it would have certainly put a different complexion on things given you had many half chances that could have become fully fledged such as Nasri shooting wide in the first half and Chamakh heading wide in the second.
Even though Chelsea didn't score more than two or have much possession in the second half you felt when we had the ball we could take it all the way, we were very unlucky with the Ashley Cole chance for instance and Essien should have buried his chance straight after the second goal.
It works for us that Wenger is more puritan than it is healthy to be but over the last few seasons you have only been a couple of sensible decisions away from an excellent side.
Even though Chelsea didn't score more than two or have much possession in the second half you felt when we had the ball we could take it all the way, we were very unlucky with the Ashley Cole chance for instance and Essien should have buried his chance straight after the second goal.
It works for us that Wenger is more puritan than it is healthy to be but over the last few seasons you have only been a couple of sensible decisions away from an excellent side.
Considering we were without RvP, Fabregas, Theo and Vermaelen I don't our general play was too bad. For much of that game we did have good control but there was a real lack of cutting edge and much of that was due to the first three of those mentioned missing. We don't have a huge amount of depth in the team but I think we did a lot better than I thought. I thought we were gonna get overun and bullied about and that didn't happen at all imo. In the second half I thought an equaliser was imminent at times but when it counted didn't have what it takes to open them up.
I also watched the game - Chelsea v Arsenal - 3/10/10
I dont know which one you watched
Like you really mean it