see what I did there?
Chelsea let a few squad players go in the summer. Carvalho, Deco and Ballack weren't exactly setting the world alight but they were reliable pros who could step in and do a job. Their squad isn't as deep as it used to be and the signs are that it's already starting to creak. They've dealt well with Lampard's prolonged absence, but losing Essien was a Bridge too far and their impressive home record this season was obliterated by an adventurous Sunderland team. Fair play to them. It's all very well saying Chelsea were under-strength but it still needed a team with the balls to exploit it.
As well as their midfield problems, Chelsea were without Terry and Alex, and Gyan and Wellbeck were breaking their makeshift backline almost at will. Cech actually kept the score down, and Ivanovic should have seen a red card for a blatant professional foul, only for a gutless Chris Foy to wield a wimpy yellow one.
Sunderland's first two goals were great efforts, a slalom and scuff from Onuoha and a sweeping move finished confidently by Gyan. Their third was slotted by Wellbeck from a beautiful Ashley Cole cross.
Fortunes are changing so regularly this season. Arsenal's season felt doomed to mediocrity last weekend. Liverpool thought they'd turned a corner. Now the gloom has returned to Merseyside and optimism will rise again in North London. Chelsea were until recently seen as hot favourites to retain their crown; today has raised serious questions about that assumption.
But who will push them closest? United are still struggling to win away games. Arsenal will hope to lay down a marker in the North London derby next weekend.
Showing posts with label Essien. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Essien. Show all posts
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Wenger: Hypocrite?
It's a legitimate question.
Arsenal have gotten a bit holier-than-thou at times when players have been injured by bad tackles. But their own players make some bad tackles too. Fabregas could have done some damage to Ward lastnight and if a tackle like that was made against Arsenal, a lot of their fans, their manager and players would be up in arms.
I was listening to the Guardian's podcast just there and one of the journalists was insistent on Wenger's hypocrisy. He said that Arsenal fans he'd spoken to used Karl Henry's bad tackle in the same game in defence of Fabregas, and his response was "so what?".
Here's what: Karl Henry is a repeat offender. Cesc Fabregas's bad foul deserved attention, but so did Karl Henry's. In fact, Karl Henry's deserved MORE criticism because he seems to do it every second game. He's made more of these tackles in a year than all the Arsenal players put together. Instead, it seems, the Arsenal player gets all the negative scrutiny. It's understandable in a way because they want to portray Arsenal's stance as hypocritical, but what is the more pressing agenda? Ridding the game of the attitude that it's ok to do what the likes of Henry and De Jong do, or making fun of Arsenal?
They make big news out of bad fouls by Arsenal players. Only twice a year or so, because it doesn't happen much. And they gloss over the habitual thuggery of a talentless nutcase who never even acknowledges he's in the wrong.
Dangerous fouls happen. With th modern game played at such a high speed, the players are always at some risk. But Danny Murphy hit the nail on the head: some managers encourage a kind of systematic recklessness. How can anyone suggest that Arsenal are not deliberately subjected to rough treatment? Diaby, Eduardo and Ramsey all suffered leg breaks in recent years. It can't be a coincidence.
Fabregas's foul was petulant, but that's human nature. Anger, flashes of temper will lead to mistakes. Dangerous tackles will never be completely eradicated but I don't think that's what Wenger calls for. There are players at other teams who seem to be in a state of constant recklessness and that is surely more worth criticism than Arsenal's perceived double standards.
I find it sickening that on a night when Henry and Michael Essien, repeat offenders both, made shocking tackles, Cesc Fabregas and Arsenal were condemned for what was, on the whole, an aberration.
Arsenal have gotten a bit holier-than-thou at times when players have been injured by bad tackles. But their own players make some bad tackles too. Fabregas could have done some damage to Ward lastnight and if a tackle like that was made against Arsenal, a lot of their fans, their manager and players would be up in arms.
I was listening to the Guardian's podcast just there and one of the journalists was insistent on Wenger's hypocrisy. He said that Arsenal fans he'd spoken to used Karl Henry's bad tackle in the same game in defence of Fabregas, and his response was "so what?".
Here's what: Karl Henry is a repeat offender. Cesc Fabregas's bad foul deserved attention, but so did Karl Henry's. In fact, Karl Henry's deserved MORE criticism because he seems to do it every second game. He's made more of these tackles in a year than all the Arsenal players put together. Instead, it seems, the Arsenal player gets all the negative scrutiny. It's understandable in a way because they want to portray Arsenal's stance as hypocritical, but what is the more pressing agenda? Ridding the game of the attitude that it's ok to do what the likes of Henry and De Jong do, or making fun of Arsenal?
They make big news out of bad fouls by Arsenal players. Only twice a year or so, because it doesn't happen much. And they gloss over the habitual thuggery of a talentless nutcase who never even acknowledges he's in the wrong.
Dangerous fouls happen. With th modern game played at such a high speed, the players are always at some risk. But Danny Murphy hit the nail on the head: some managers encourage a kind of systematic recklessness. How can anyone suggest that Arsenal are not deliberately subjected to rough treatment? Diaby, Eduardo and Ramsey all suffered leg breaks in recent years. It can't be a coincidence.
Fabregas's foul was petulant, but that's human nature. Anger, flashes of temper will lead to mistakes. Dangerous tackles will never be completely eradicated but I don't think that's what Wenger calls for. There are players at other teams who seem to be in a state of constant recklessness and that is surely more worth criticism than Arsenal's perceived double standards.
I find it sickening that on a night when Henry and Michael Essien, repeat offenders both, made shocking tackles, Cesc Fabregas and Arsenal were condemned for what was, on the whole, an aberration.
Alan Hansen: C***
Alan Hansen's anti-Arsenal bias really takes the biscuit.
Against Fulham, Michael Essien went in over the ball, with both feet, and was rightly dismissed.
"Is there any intent there?", asked the over-the-hill pundit, missing the point entirely for the 1000th time this season.
As Lee Dixon said, regardless of whether or not Essien wanted to hurt Dempsey, he was reckless and endangered his opponent's safety. I hate to bring THAT incident up again, but Ryan Shawcross probably didn't intend to break Aaron Ramsey in two... does that mean the Stoke blunderbus didn't deserve his dismissal?
Essien's been getting away with tackles like that for years. He has a dangerous habit of stamping down into tackles. At best, it's poor tackling technique; at worst, cowardly.
Hansen defending this showed him to be a misguided fool but soon he proved himself a hypocrite as well as that.
First things first, Fabregas' tackle on Ward was very bad. Initially I thought maybe it was one of those where the attacker dives to try to block a clearance and the defender kicks the attacker's foot. But the replays showed that Fabregas went in hard and nastily. It was a dangerous tackle borne out of frustration and a petulance that often darkens his game. He was lucky to get away with just a yellow.
But Hansen, in condemning Fabregas and absolving Essien, showed up his own double standards and his bias against a team that, no doubt, just aren't "British" enough for the prick.
Against Fulham, Michael Essien went in over the ball, with both feet, and was rightly dismissed.
"Is there any intent there?", asked the over-the-hill pundit, missing the point entirely for the 1000th time this season.
As Lee Dixon said, regardless of whether or not Essien wanted to hurt Dempsey, he was reckless and endangered his opponent's safety. I hate to bring THAT incident up again, but Ryan Shawcross probably didn't intend to break Aaron Ramsey in two... does that mean the Stoke blunderbus didn't deserve his dismissal?
Essien's been getting away with tackles like that for years. He has a dangerous habit of stamping down into tackles. At best, it's poor tackling technique; at worst, cowardly.
Hansen defending this showed him to be a misguided fool but soon he proved himself a hypocrite as well as that.
First things first, Fabregas' tackle on Ward was very bad. Initially I thought maybe it was one of those where the attacker dives to try to block a clearance and the defender kicks the attacker's foot. But the replays showed that Fabregas went in hard and nastily. It was a dangerous tackle borne out of frustration and a petulance that often darkens his game. He was lucky to get away with just a yellow.
But Hansen, in condemning Fabregas and absolving Essien, showed up his own double standards and his bias against a team that, no doubt, just aren't "British" enough for the prick.
Monday, April 12, 2010
United Held- Chelsea Hot Favourites Now
United are suffering the poorest sequence I can remember them having in quite a while.
After the first leg defeat to Bayern came the summit meeting with Chelsea, where they were largely outplayed and beaten 2-1. Then despite a riproaring opening half hour in the second leg against those 'typical Germans', United faded, the naive Rafael GOT HIMSELF sent off, and Arjen Robben's wondergoal squeezed Bayern through. And now, without Rooney, United's deficiencies were exposed again in a scoreless draw at Blackburn.
This leaves Chelsea potentially four points ahead, should they beat Bolton midweek, with just four games left through which to seal it. The momentum is theirs now, and they also have an FA Cup final to look forward to after beating Villa 3-0- Martin O'Neill's one-dimensional, tired-looking side have run out of steam just as they did last season. Chelsea's opponents will be Portsmouth. Heartwarming to see them beat their old manager, Harry Redknapp, and Spurs, in an extra-time thriller.
And if Arsenal rouse themselves to beat Spurs away on Wednesday, we can leapfrog United and apply some pressure to the leaders, although because of our inferior goal difference, Chelsea will have to drop points twice to let us in- and that's assuming we win every remaining game. Realistically, it's not going to happen... But realistically, we didn't have a chance after the consecutive defeats to United and Chelsea in February... You never know.
One has to admit, although I'm no fan of them, Chelsea have done well to ignore the absence of Michael Essien, probably their most influential player. There is now an irony to Alex Ferguson's earlier assertions that Chelsea are too old, as it is United who look over-reliant now on their experienced players. United gathered momentum in the time that the Champions League was in hibernation, but Giggs and Scholes cannot play twice a week, and United's younger players aren't up to the task yet either. Most of their defeats in the league have come after European games.
After the first leg defeat to Bayern came the summit meeting with Chelsea, where they were largely outplayed and beaten 2-1. Then despite a riproaring opening half hour in the second leg against those 'typical Germans', United faded, the naive Rafael GOT HIMSELF sent off, and Arjen Robben's wondergoal squeezed Bayern through. And now, without Rooney, United's deficiencies were exposed again in a scoreless draw at Blackburn.
This leaves Chelsea potentially four points ahead, should they beat Bolton midweek, with just four games left through which to seal it. The momentum is theirs now, and they also have an FA Cup final to look forward to after beating Villa 3-0- Martin O'Neill's one-dimensional, tired-looking side have run out of steam just as they did last season. Chelsea's opponents will be Portsmouth. Heartwarming to see them beat their old manager, Harry Redknapp, and Spurs, in an extra-time thriller.
And if Arsenal rouse themselves to beat Spurs away on Wednesday, we can leapfrog United and apply some pressure to the leaders, although because of our inferior goal difference, Chelsea will have to drop points twice to let us in- and that's assuming we win every remaining game. Realistically, it's not going to happen... But realistically, we didn't have a chance after the consecutive defeats to United and Chelsea in February... You never know.
One has to admit, although I'm no fan of them, Chelsea have done well to ignore the absence of Michael Essien, probably their most influential player. There is now an irony to Alex Ferguson's earlier assertions that Chelsea are too old, as it is United who look over-reliant now on their experienced players. United gathered momentum in the time that the Champions League was in hibernation, but Giggs and Scholes cannot play twice a week, and United's younger players aren't up to the task yet either. Most of their defeats in the league have come after European games.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)