*Official OMT* - The day before a cup semi vs Chelsea and no OMT?

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Funny how we see games, I was worried every time he got the ball.

Thought he was very good.

35 million? No but that’s the market

I think thats Nayims point though, he certainly looks like he's got something about him which is why you was concerned whenever he got the ball.

But ultimately what did he really create? He lacked that punch, end product which at this level at his age is completely understandable....

Sort of.

I think theres a big difference between 'looking' good, and 'doing' good.

He was looking the part, but what did h actually do?

 

[Glenda's Legs]

Cardiff
Tranmere
Chelsea

sorry, I read your post as 3 clean sheets against Chelsea (in which case I was still wrong, as I had last season's away game as a clean sheet in my memory).

 

[Legohamster]

Sort of.

I think theres a big difference between 'looking' good, and 'doing' good.

He was looking the part, but what did h actually do?

Hit the bar, but in a few good balls and there was a couple of runs that were unlucky, showed quick feet as well.

He was miles better than Willian and Pedro

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Hit the bar, but in a few good balls and there was a couple of runs that were unlucky, showed quick feet as well.

He was miles better than Willian and Pedro

He hit the bar with a deflection
Willian was shocking but as good as most of their attacking players

 

[elltrev]

We struggled as Kane lost most of the physical duels when we played it long and we weren't accurate enough passing through their pressing. So not a lot of good options for us. Long ball over the top worked well at times, but often we couldn't find it.

A struggle, but we came up on on top. Happy with that and hopefully we'll play better against United and in the return leg.

I agree with your assessment. What's weird is that things went such a different way when we beat them 3-1, despite same formations / similar lineups / similar possession split!

----

Any fellow analysis geeks want to go back and watch the 3-1 game, and explain why things went such a different way?!

 

[Gazza Dazzla]

Hit the bar, but in a few good balls and there was a couple of runs that were unlucky, showed quick feet as well.

He was miles better than Willian and Pedro

I think you are reaching if you are saying hitting the bar from a deflection where the ball deviated about 15/18 yards away from where it was originally intended to go, was down to Hudson’s ability?

 

[BrainOfLevy]

Seemed a deliberate ploy to me. Not sure why, to be honest, because we nailed them in the November game.

It was most noticeable in how Sanchez, Alderweireld and Gazzaniga were splitting wide and playing keep ball for ages. We seemed to want to draw them in and hit them, but they werent exactly biting. And, of course, it then means we are 20 yards deeper than usual as a unit - makes it harder to establish a foothold in their half.

I think they identified the left side as a win, because I lost count of the times that keep ball resulted in working Rose an opportunity to try and knock it up the line and dash onto it (which failed more often than not).

Its a weird one.

I think it's because we nailed them in the November game so comprehensively that this game was going to be different, and it's one of the things that I think makes Poch ready for the big-time, is that he gets strategy at a broader level, not just in the game.

We beat them comprehensively, so what we can know for certain is that Sarri would have done everything he could to work out the kinks from that game, get any weaknesses from them away to ensure that we wouldn't be able to beat them in the same way again. And most likely, they would have a plan for us that means we'd be on the back foot slightly.

The options were to keep doing what we were doing, just with less chance of it working, or contain and assess as the match progresses. I think we got done what we needed to get done to the point that a draw at the Bridge will be good enough, and we are more than capable of that. We will also play better in an attacking sense there, I am sure of it.

The games between the top 6 are so important that almost always its about springing a surprise in your approach to swing the pendulum the way they want. Sometimes it doesn't work, like Son at LWB, but I think more often than not it shows we are real players at the top. By keeping it tight, it keeps our powder dry for whatever we may choose to do in the second leg, only now we have the advantage that we don't need to win. Of course if they score early it's going to be immensely frustrating, but then we only need one back.

 

[harr1984]

I agree with your assessment. What's weird is that things went such a different way when we beat them 3-1, despite same formations / similar lineups / similar possession split!

----

Any fellow analysis geeks want to go back and watch the 3-1 game, and explain why things went such a different way?!

Things were always going to be different this time - Chelsea didnt turn up in the last game at Wembley, that was never going to happen again. Hazard said pre match how they werent aggressive last time, and you could see they were much more so this time. No need to over analyse, no two games are the same - except that we won them both....

 

[Finney Is Back]

Agree with this mostly and particularly the questions. Disappointed when returned home after the match and the Son/Christensen incident was not even covered in the Sky highlights and the Lamela challenge glossed over.

Actually thought Hudson-Odoi was pretty decent though for an 18 year old although Rose had worked him out by the 2nd half.

Was again concerned about how slow Poch was to make the change to midfield as it was clear even in the first half that the diamond midfield was not working. I guess we still don't know if the Kane 'injury' was tactical but we were much better after moving Dele back into midfield.

Still its a win and a lead for the 2nd leg and expect us to at least score at Stamford Bridge

I don't think the midfield not working was anything to do with the diamond shape. The issue was that Chelsea played with no centre forward and therefore were always able to outnumber us in that area and therefore dominate possession. The flip side of that of course was that they typically had no focal point in and around our penalty area, so for all their possession and territorial domination they weren't really able to hurt us in terms of creating goal scoring chances. I have heard a few people saying that had Chelsea played Giroud then they would've won, but that ignores the fact that they then wouldn't have had the extra man in midfield, so would've found it more difficult to dominate possession and territory.

I thought Lamela's reaction to the foul at the end suggested that he did indeed pull their player back. Surely the Son/Christensen incident should've gone to VAR however? It looked as though Son had got in front of Christensen, who then put his arm around Son and dragged him to the floor, but that is just my couple of pints of Camden Hells behind the goal, no replay seen view.

 

[Baleforce]

Sort of.

I think theres a big difference between 'looking' good, and 'doing' good.

He was looking the part, but what did h actually do?

could say the same about Hazard last night

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Hit the bar, but in a few good balls and there was a couple of runs that were unlucky, showed quick feet as well.

He was miles better than Willian and Pedro

I was thinking about Pedro as he came on. Brought in to so much fanfare and has never made it past being a bench warmer. So much for the hype...

He hit the bar with a massive deflection, not intentional. The good balls broadly went to no one. He didnt actually achieve anything, IMO.

Yes he looked tidy, his legs were going 10 to the dozen and he appeared threatening, but after a while I realised he wasnt actually doing anything of note. And so that persisted until he went off.

Good defending by Rose and Alderweireld helped, of course, but at no point was I looking at him and worried about what he was gonig to do.

 

[Baleforce]

I don't think the midfield not working was anything to do with the diamond shape. The issue was that Chelsea played with no centre forward and therefore were always able to outnumber us in that area and therefore dominate possession. The flip side of that of course was that they typically had no focal point in and around our penalty area, so for all their possession and territorial domination they weren't really able to hurt us in terms of creating goal scoring chances. I have heard a few people saying that had Chelsea played Giroud then they would've won, but that ignores the fact that they then wouldn't have had the extra man in midfield, so would've found it more difficult to dominate possession and territory.

I thought Lamela's reaction to the foul at the end suggested that he did indeed pull their player back. Surely the Son/Christensen incident should've gone to VAR however? It looked as though Son had got in front of Christensen, who then put his arm around Son and dragged him to the floor, but that is just my couple of pints of Camden Hells behind the goal, no replay seen view.

the commentary I had said the Son incident had gone to VAR but nothing came of it

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

could say the same about Hazard last night

Indeed. Difference is, of course, we know from prior experience Hazard can absolutely walk the walk. Even if on the occasion he wasnt really pulling up trees.

Perhaps in prior games Odoi has really looked the business, I wouldnt know - but based on last night I really dont see what the fuss is about.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

the commentary I had said the Son incident had gone to VAR but nothing came of it

I’d so that’s poor as he looked like he was flattened

It’s reminds me of the Kompany foul being focussed on and people forgetting the one from Lovren before

 

[Baleforce]

it would be great if they published reports of VAR activity after the game, I'd love to read through those

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I just mentioned in the VAR thread - I think better communication would go a long way to making people feel better about it.

 

[Baleforce]

I just mentioned in the VAR thread - I think better communication would go a long way to making people feel better about it.

to be fair to the ref, he clearly signalled VAR, then clearly signalled the penalty, whilst the footage is being reviewed what is there to say

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

to be fair to the ref, he clearly signalled VAR, then clearly signalled the penalty, whilst the footage is being reviewed what is there to say

Show the footage. Gives people something to see, justifies the decision made, removes any doubt.

They had it up for those of us watching on TV, I dont see why they couldnt put it up at the game.

 

[Baleforce]

Show the footage. Gives people something to see, justifies the decision made, removes any doubt.

They had it up for those of us watching on TV, I dont see why they couldnt put it up at the game.

I agree they could, it is interesting to see it

 

[Legohamster]

Indeed. Difference is, of course, we know from prior experience Hazard can absolutely walk the walk. Even if on the occasion he wasnt really pulling up trees.

Perhaps in prior games Odoi has really looked the business, I wouldnt know - but based on last night I really dont see what the fuss is about.

Shouldn’t really like it when it happens to your team.

But I loved it when he put the spurs defender on his arse with the skill, it was sublime

Can’t wait till he fudges off to Madrid