For the third goal, I'm not that happy with us ending up so deep, and then losing three headers in a row. Yes the goal was offside, but how many times this season are we going to put bad results down to bad luck?
-
Turn On Christmas Radio
Bah humbug - to turn off the snow, visit your preferences and select a style that isn't Christmas.
- Status
Whistlin' Dixie
Player Valuation: £50m
Mate, we weren't that cosy. They were getting some dangerous balls in - and, yes - some were easily dealt with; but it was stark contrast to the first half when we were completely comfortable.
I agree they looked far more dangerous once they got (given) their first goal. Fact is, they built up steam, and we allowed it to happen.
Watched the RS v ManUre on Sunday - at times the way Klopp's team played a la 'Gegenpressing' reminded me of a TV comedy sketch from the 1990's/2000's (Harry Enfield?) when all the players run around the pitch in a little huddle, chasing the ball around like Jack Russell's on speed.
4737carlin
Player Valuation: £90m
haha Primary school tactics, be good if they way he plays wont work over here, lets hope he doesn't know anything else.
Ihaters
Player Valuation: £35m
First goal.. poor by the defender, poor by the keeper
Second goal.. Chelsea players completely outnumbered, not one challenge comes in as per usual, we just stand around in space hoping they give up or shoot wide.. This is my issue with the defense, we don't go for the ball, just stand there and try to match their runs, then intercept the pass or shot. Hands the entire initiative to the attackers and the result is not a new one.
Third goal... Ball from the half way line, 3 up in the air headers and Chelsea are on the end of them all.
On the flip side... Mirallas!!.. that turn at 43 seconds is peach, had a tremendous game.
Saint Domingo
Player Valuation: £90m
Like anything if it happens once it's bad luck, if there's a reoccurring pattern it's not. Our defence has been poor for 18 months now. Terry being on side or not doesn't change that.
Also my view on deflections is that when they keep going in your defending is wrong. The odd one might go on if your defence rushes up quickly to close down the shot full on but most don't. If you're hanging back hesitating then turning your back on a shot or sticking a half hearted leg out then that is far more likely to send a shot already goal bound into the net past the keeper. We're not decisive enough in the box, we don't close down shots quick enough, we're not aggressive in the air and we have a poor keeper. Dress it up anyway you want, it's a rubbish defensive unit.
Also my view on deflections is that when they keep going in your defending is wrong. The odd one might go on if your defence rushes up quickly to close down the shot full on but most don't. If you're hanging back hesitating then turning your back on a shot or sticking a half hearted leg out then that is far more likely to send a shot already goal bound into the net past the keeper. We're not decisive enough in the box, we don't close down shots quick enough, we're not aggressive in the air and we have a poor keeper. Dress it up anyway you want, it's a rubbish defensive unit.
deipnosophist
Player Valuation: £80m
Here in NZ, an old rugby saw declares : forwards win games, the backs determine by how much. In football, I guess you could say that things are switched around ,whereby the backs (i.e. defenders) win games and the forwards (strikers etc) determine by how much.
We have won 6 out of 22 games, so are our backs doing their job well? Well, only if you're into abductive reasoning can you propose anything other than a resounding NO.
After all: if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
We have won 6 out of 22 games, so are our backs doing their job well? Well, only if you're into abductive reasoning can you propose anything other than a resounding NO.
After all: if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
zirc
Player Valuation: £40m
No one would say anything if it were a one off. It's happening almost every week though.
Either we are the unluckiest in the history of the universe and possibly the next ten universes as well, or our defence is actually crap. Which is more probable?
LAToffee
Player Valuation: £20m
His one "principle" I entirely disagree with. Part of the game.
abelard
Player Valuation: £35m
for a team whose entire philosophy is apparently to maintain possession, you'd think we could have managed to keep the ball for more than 5 seconds at a time after pulling ahead. every time we took the lead we effectively became courier service for delivering it right back to them in our half
Jags
Player Valuation: £10m
Haha true!
The truth lies somewhere in between for me. Closing down should be done to pressure the man with the ball, not just to look busy, and when you are closing down a shot or a cross, it should be body on the line stuff. Not the step forward and lean back move that Baines specialises in
Jags..class
Player Valuation: £70m
This is what I don't get, why can't we pass the ball around for the last few minute's. Against Chelsea we didn't have Barkley who is good at this tbf
That sounds like pretty good defending to me.
The defence had cast a net and there was nowhere for Chelsea to go so they were forced into taking a speculative shot which only went in due a very lucky deflection.
You cannot legislate for that.
No need to rush in and tackle a player when he has nowhere to go.
That way you risk conceding a free kick in a dangerous position or give Fabregas an excuse to dive.
The defence has tightened up considerably since Stoke.....only one of those goals on Saturday, the first, was due to defensive error.
- Status
Welcome
Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.
Shop
