Chelsea 1-0 Norwich - Tuesday 14th July, 2020

[Cicero]

11 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

End of the day, the two managers that used him correctly won the league. 

And where are they now? That style of football isn’t sustainable 

[LFCMadLad]

1 minute ago, Cicero said:

And where are they now? That style of football isn’t sustainable 

Kante is perfectly suited to a high pressing game, winning the ball back quickly, which is what all the best teams currently do. 

Granted, he isnt suited to a slow, methodical team.

[Spike]

12 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

End of the day, the two managers that used him correctly won the league. The two who didn't won fuck all. 

I think there is more nuance than that. Sarri won the Europa League.

[Cicero]

1 minute ago, LFCMadLad said:

Kante is perfectly suited to a high pressing game, winning the ball back quickly, which is what all the best teams currently do. 

Granted, he isnt suited to a slow, methodical team.

Or a team that needs its players to break down opposition that sit back 

[LFCMadLad]

45 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Or a team that needs its players to break down opposition that sit back 

Any team needs a player that can press really well and win the ball back when its lost. Thats how you spring quick breaks against teams that sit back. Kante is elite in that department. 

Thats why we have players like Fabinho, Hendo and Milner in our squad. 

You can't just have 11 players all trying to break down a low block. I thought everyone knew that? 

He's a two time league winner, a world Cup winner. Are you saying he's surplus to requirements at Lampards Chelssa? Not having that 

[Dr. Gonzo]

17 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

Any team needs a player that can press really well and win the ball back when its lost. Kante is elite in that department. 

Thats why we have players like Fabinho, Hendo and Milner in our squad. 

You can't just have 11 players all trying to break down a low block. I thought everyone knew that? 

He's a two time league winner, a world Cup winner. Are you saying he's surplus to requirements at Lampards Chelssa? Not having that 

I agree with this. When Kante's at his best, any side in the world would have him starting for them imo. He's not a holding midfielder, for sure, but he's probably the best person in the world (when he's fit and in form) at going box to box and winning the ball back.

There is 100% a way to play progressive football and still get the most out of one of the world class players in that Chelsea side. Having said that, if injuries have taken something from his legs... then it's up to him to adapt and change his game.

[Devil-Dick Willie]

Tim Borowski played 33 games for Germany, won the league and cup, played for Bremen and Bayern his whole career. Played at an excellent level between 2001 and 2010. At age 30, he woke up one morning and he just didn't have it anymore. At all. He'd had a couple of injuries but nothing too major. But between the 2009-2010 season and 2010-11 season it was like he was a completely different human being.  After being instrumental for the club he became absolutely useless on the pitch, then got injured and retired at 32. 

Now that's an extreme example, but one that illustrates how quickly things can turn for top level players. Fernando Torres is a less extreme example, and at least he had a big injury. Borowski just woke up shit one day. And not everyone loses it slowly and gracefully in their mid and late 30s. The hammer strikes faster for some

[LFCMadLad]

10 minutes ago, Devil-Dick Willie said:

Tim Borowski played 33 games for Germany, won the league and cup, played for Bremen and Bayern his whole career. Played at an excellent level between 2001 and 2010. At age 30, he woke up one morning and he just didn't have it anymore. At all. He'd had a couple of injuries but nothing too major. But between the 2009-2010 season and 2010-11 season it was like he was a completely different human being.  After being instrumental for the club he became absolutely useless on the pitch, then got injured and retired at 32. 

Now that's an extreme example, but one that illustrates how quickly things can turn for top level players. Fernando Torres is a less extreme example, and at least he had a big injury. Borowski just woke up shit one day. And not everyone loses it slowly and gracefully in their mid and late 30s. The hammer strikes faster for some

Thats a reasonably fair comment. Much more understandable than "he can't break teams down that defend". 

Its not even like chelsea dominate possession in most games. 

[Cicero]

55 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

Any team needs a player that can press really well and win the ball back when its lost. Thats how you spring quick breaks against teams that sit back. Kante is elite in that department. 

Thats why we have players like Fabinho, Hendo and Milner in our squad. 

You can't just have 11 players all trying to break down a low block. I thought everyone knew that? 

He's a two time league winner, a world Cup winner. Are you saying he's surplus to requirements at Lampards Chelssa? Not having that 

We have several players who press well now.  Our pressing as a unit has improved ten fold since the Conte era.  Lampard is now asking our players to do more than that, particularly when we have the ball.

Explain to me as to why when Kante is in the side, we are arguably worse based on results and metrics? Why do we have a 30% win ratio this season when Kante is in the team? You mentioned Fabinho, Henderson, and Milner, yet these are players who are much better than Kante on the ball.

It seems like you are suggesting we should completely toss our manager's system in favor of tailoring to only Kante's needs, which is a system that has proven time and time again to be unsustainable.   

46 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I agree with this. When Kante's at his best, any side in the world would have him starting for them imo. He's not a holding midfielder, for sure, but he's probably the best person in the world (when he's fit and in form) at going box to box and winning the ball back.

There is 100% a way to play progressive football and still get the most out of one of the world class players in that Chelsea side. Having said that, if injuries have taken something from his legs... then it's up to him to adapt and change his game.

Kante isn't better than Jorginho as a holding midfielder, Kante isn't better than Kovacic as a technician, and Kante isn't better than Mount in our overall build up.

Square peg in a round hole. Again, we have improved tremendously in our press as a unit. 

35 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

Thats a reasonably fair comment. Much more understandable than "he can't break teams down that defend". 

Its not even like chelsea dominate possession in most games. 

Only yourselves and City have done better than us in possession this season. You lot only slightly better. 

Compare that to the Conte Era and we are 6th and almost out possessed by Southampton. 

 

 

[Spike]

26 minutes ago, Cicero said:

 

Explain to me as to why when Kante is in the side, we are arguably worse based on results and metrics? Why do we have a 30% win ratio this season when Kante is in the team? You mentioned Fabinho, Henderson, and Milner, yet these are players who are much better than Kante on the ball.

 

 

 

 

 

Come on mate, you know very well there is more to it than that simple cause-effect.

[Cicero]

1 hour ago, Spike said:

Come on mate, you know very well there is more to it than that simple cause-effect.

So why are we better when Kante isn’t in the side? Why is it we've only lost one league game all season when Kante isn't in the team?

Is it perhaps we have better options when we approach games taking the initiative? 

 

[Spike]

2 hours ago, Cicero said:

So why are we better when Kante isn’t in the side? Why is it we've only lost one league game all season when Kante isn't in the team?

Is it perhaps we have better options when we approach games taking the initiative? 

 

Or maybe the other team is better? The other 10 players didn't play as well? Individual mistakes? Acts of brilliance by opposition? Poor team instructions? A lucky deflection? An unlucky deflection? Poor refeereeing? You know very well that is a reductive argument and without context relies on conjecture and is a simple answer to a complex question. What if during all those games the grass was slightly wetter than usual? With that evidence you could make the same argument you've made, a statement backed by a single fact that ignores other factors. I believe this logic is called a faulty generalisation or some sort of fallacy because you've found a pattern in a sample and extrapolated a conclusion from that pattern.

'If Chelsea lose when Kante is playing, is it because of Kante.' The statement in a vacuum might be true but it doesn't necessarily mean it is a correct method of reaching that conclusion, there is more nuance to this sport than that.. You are smarter than that argument, you are only using it because it suits your narrative. 

Now if you were able to show me that every single loss was due to an individual mistake from Kante, I'd rescind my statement.

 

[MUFC]

10 hours ago, LFCMadLad said:

You used to wank furiously over Kante?

Any evidence?

[Stan]

Oh Chelsea, what have you done to N'Golo .

You can always send him back if you're not satisfied with the product any more. 

[Cicero]

9 hours ago, Spike said:

Or maybe the other team is better? The other 10 players didn't play as well? Individual mistakes? Acts of brilliance by opposition? Poor team instructions? A lucky deflection? An unlucky deflection? Poor refeereeing? You know very well that is a reductive argument and without context relies on conjecture and is a simple answer to a complex question. What if during all those games the grass was slightly wetter than usual? With that evidence you could make the same argument you've made, a statement backed by a single fact that ignores other factors. I believe this logic is called a faulty generalisation or some sort of fallacy because you've found a pattern in a sample and extrapolated a conclusion from that pattern.

'If Chelsea lose when Kante is playing, is it because of Kante.' The statement in a vacuum might be true but it doesn't necessarily mean it is a correct method of reaching that conclusion, there is more nuance to this sport than that.. You are smarter than that argument, you are only using it because it suits your narrative. 

Now if you were able to show me that every single loss was due to an individual mistake from Kante, I'd rescind my statement.

 

So you take the time to read and identify non-existing fallacies on my part, yet simultaneously exhibit a case of a false cause? Define irony. 

I think I've demonstrated, multiple times in fact,  how our football is ultimately better without Kante. To think i base my opinion entirely on statistics and have come to the conclusion all our faults as a team lie with Kante, really goes to show you haven't read anything I've posted. To amuse you and your intentional or unintentional cherry picking, I'll go over it again. 

We've been in the top 4 since October, and a large reason for that was our ability to dominate the midfield with players who are great on the ball. IE Jorginho, Kovacic, and Mount. In terms of build up, fluidity, balance and technical nous, this midfield three has led us to gather as much points as we did given how cohesive they were. Under Lampard, we look to take the initiative in games. We not only see more of the ball, we look to create chances constantly with our direct approach. With those three, we got to see exactly how Lampard wants his football to be played, and it in turn led to us having our best period of the season and has helped keep us in the Top 4 as long as it had.  

Kante's main influence is his energy. His press off the ball and ability to win the ball back. This attribute is not really missed as much as we used to, given how well we have improved as a unit in our press. Does Kante put in good performances when he does play? Of course. But only if we were to measure his ability as a footballer alone. My entire point however, is that playing Kante is a trade off. Sure we get a little more defensive bite in midfield (although this is looking no longer be true), but we sacrifice our fluidity and build up play in transition when either Jorginho, Mount or Kovacic are not playing. This in turn hurts us against sides that are organised and difficult to break down.

Kante isn't better than Jorginho as a holding midfielder. He doesn't retain possession as well and doesn't do the basics, like dropping with the centre backs to help transition when we are being pressed. Kante isn't better than Kovacic as a technician. He doesn't have Kovacic's close control and ability to dribble out of pressure via space he unlocks through channels. Kante also isn't better than Mount in our build up. Mount is not only an engine, it's the fact that the one thing that makes him absolutely vital is his ability to simply take the ball and move it. Quickly. Not giving the opposing defence any time to organise. When Mount isn't playing, you can feel it. 

This is what I've seen and noticed from watching. My own two eyes. Kante does have a role to play, however the more progressive we become, the more I see little use for him. 

 

 

 

[Spike]

18 minutes ago, Cicero said:

So you take the time to read and identify non-existing fallacies on my part, yet simultaneously exhibit a case of a false cause? Define irony. 

I think I've demonstrated, multiple times in fact,  how our football is ultimately better without Kante. To think i base my opinion entirely on statistics and have come to the conclusion all our faults as a team lie with Kante, really goes to show you haven't read anything I've posted. To amuse you and your intentional or unintentional cherry picking, I'll go over it again. 

We've been in the top 4 since October, and a large reason for that was our ability to dominate the midfield with players who are great on the ball. IE Jorginho, Kovacic, and Mount. In terms of build up, fluidity, balance and technical nous, this midfield three has led us to gather as much points as we did given how cohesive they were. Under Lampard, we look to take the initiative in games. We not only see more of the ball, we look to create chances constantly with our direct approach. With those three, we got to see exactly how Lampard wants his football to be played, and it in turn led to us having our best period of the season and has helped keep us in the Top 4 as long as it had.  

Kante's main influence is his energy. His press off the ball and ability to win the ball back. This attribute is not really missed as much as we used to, given how well we have improved as a unit in our press. Does Kante put in good performances when he does play? Of course. But only if we were to measure his ability as a footballer alone. My entire point however, is that playing Kante is a trade off. Sure we get a little more defensive bite in midfield (although this is looking no longer be true), but we sacrifice our fluidity and build up play in transition when either Jorginho, Mount or Kovacic are not playing. This in turn hurts us against sides that are organised and difficult to break down.

Kante isn't better than Jorginho as a holding midfielder. He doesn't retain possession as well and doesn't do the basics, like dropping with the centre backs to help transition when we are being pressed. Kante isn't better than Kovacic as a technician. He doesn't have Kovacic's close control and ability to dribble out of pressure via space he unlocks through channels. Kante also isn't better than Mount in our build up. Mount is not only an engine, it's the fact that the one thing that makes him absolutely vital is his ability to simply take the ball and move it. Quickly. Not giving the opposing defence any time to organise. When Mount isn't playing, you can feel it. 

This is what I've seen and noticed from watching. My own two eyes. Kante does have a role to play, however the more progressive we become, the more I see little use for him. 

 

 

 

The false cause cause came from this ‘Why is it we've only lost one league game all season when Kante isn't in the team?‘. I thought you were simply saying Kante playing made the team lose

No need to be all sensitive about it!