|
|
Post by fca47 on Apr 2, 2011 16:54:16 GMT
Good result and we could have won in the end.
But from the time we scored to half time we almost gave it away. There was no real need as we were playing well up to that point, I think we missed the chance to take all three points.
Though I would have settled for that result before the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by lancer on Apr 2, 2011 16:57:51 GMT
Good result and we could have won in the end. But from the time we scored to half time we almost gave it away. There was no real need as we were playing well up to that point, I think we missed the chance to take all three points. Though I would have settled for that result before the game. Difficult to complain after such a bloody good game, but I do agree with you. We did sit back, and they looked to be in charge up to half time. Second half, different story and we should have won. We were very unlucky, the bloody ball wouldn't go in.Well done, the lads. |
|
|
|
Post by hooftastic on Apr 2, 2011 17:00:21 GMT
FFS it's Chelsea. If you press them back then their fullbacks get in over and over again.
|
|
|
|
Post by fca47 on Apr 2, 2011 17:02:02 GMT
I'm not criticisng the team overall, but for most of the game we were the better side and had more chances, but for that period we lost control of the game and the goal was always coming. The midfield should play in midfield not defence.
|
|
|
|
Post by lancer on Apr 2, 2011 17:04:34 GMT
FFS it's Chelsea. If you press them back then their fullbacks get in over and over again. We know mate, but are still allowed an opinion. We made observations rather than criticisms. We could, and would have won with a little bit of luck, but the comments re the fist half are valid.  |
|
|
|
Post by gamesmaster on Apr 2, 2011 17:04:40 GMT
No team will ever dominate a match for 90 minutes, there is always a period of play when a team who have been dominated have a spell of pressure.
|
|
|
|
Post by kavinoz on Apr 2, 2011 17:05:12 GMT
I'm not criticisng the team overall, but for most of the game we were the better side and had more chances, but for that period we lost control of the game and the goal was always coming. The midfield should play in midfield not defence. I think you are being a bit harsh to say that they "sat"back. In reality it was more a case of they were "forced" back. |
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Apr 2, 2011 17:05:18 GMT
You cant really criticise - we are playing a team that can dictate their owm terms on how a game is played. Even when we dropped back I think the defence did well and it might well have been the best option. If we pushed up a through ball to Drogba/ Anelka would have killed us and I had little or no faith in the linesman !
|
|
|
|
Post by heavysoul on Apr 2, 2011 17:08:22 GMT
I think yet again the Stoke fans made a brilliant atmosphere. We could have won that game but said that i would settle for a draw.
|
|
|
|
Post by BoxxyTheLost on Apr 2, 2011 17:08:55 GMT
FFS it's Chelsea. If you press them back then their fullbacks get in over and over again. We know mate, but are still allowed an opinion. We made observations rather than criticisms. We could, and would have won with a little bit of luck, but the comments re the fist half are valid. Are they bollocks valid, if you expect us to go an entire game against the Premier league champions without getting pinned back for a short period then you're off your head. |
|
|
|
Post by fca47 on Apr 2, 2011 17:11:33 GMT
TP said the same thing on Sky, just been on. "We sat back and watched them pass"
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2011 17:14:12 GMT
And if Ric put that simple header in this thread would never have been started. (I am not blaming Ric by the way, just picking one example as to why we did not pay the price for sitting back etc)
|
|
|
|
Post by Red and White Eyes on Apr 2, 2011 17:14:40 GMT
We didn't SIT BACK! They are an absolute quality side with £55 million pound substitutes for christ's sake! They are going to have periods of the game when they are in the ascendency. I thought that was part of the reason that todays performance was so AWESOME - Chelsea actually played well but we still deserved to beat em....... - But then again my glass is half full!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by lancer on Apr 2, 2011 17:14:52 GMT
We know mate, but are still allowed an opinion. We made observations rather than criticisms. We could, and would have won with a little bit of luck, but the comments re the fist half are valid. Are they bollocks valid, if you expect us to go an entire game against the Premier league champions without getting pinned back for a short period then you're off your head. Looked closely at my earlier posts, and can't see where I said I expected to go an entire game without getting pinned back. Relax, bud, and enjoy the result, I am. But I am open to other peoples views of the game. We do, most of us, watch the game regularly and know what the game is about.  |
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Apr 2, 2011 17:30:06 GMT
Chelsea had a good 15 mins, but they scored just when it looked like we had weathered the storm.
From the moment they equalised, we looked the more likely team to win.
|
|
|
|
Post by Smudge_SCFC on Apr 2, 2011 17:38:29 GMT
Are you calling TP a liar? He just said that's exactly what we did ;D Stoke really were excellent though! |
|
