Well yes exactly. Maybe that was what Cathcart was getting at in a diplomatic way. One analysis I read elsewhere suggested that it was us stopping attacking which really released the shackles from Chelsea and left them free to attack at will.
I think you may be confusing cause and effect. Up until 70 minutes the stats were much closer. From then on they had 80%.
I dont see how Chelsea's depth of squad should make any difference at this stage of the season. If it was "match fitness" Cathcart was alluding to then, as I said, they should've organised a more competitive pre-season. For me, we have a multi million £ state of the art training ground and we seem to have started the season in poorer shape than others.
I doubt it was that intense really. In the long run maybe we won't fade after Xmas this time, but it does not appear spot on.
Totally agree, why are we always, season after season, apparently less fit to last 90 minutes than most teams we play? If our style of play requires us to be fitter, then we bloody well should be. It's not an option to wait 10 games until our conditioning is at the required level. Poor training methods and not enough hard work IMO....Troy has come back ridiculously out of shape and it's costing us.
Considering he went Florida on his hols, he looks remarkably lean. When I went, I gained four ****ing stone in a fortnight!
You don't get significant match fitness from pre-season. In fact 'competitive pre-season' is basically an oxymoron as there's simply no match for the intensity of league football outside of the competition itself. As for the impact of squad depth just look at who they were able to bring on. Fabregas won the game with a world class pass that relied 90% on skill over fitness.
We were unlucky because for 70 minutes we were the better team, Chelsea looked to be running out of ideas, then we were caught out by a mistake and a killer defence splitting pass, which was converted by a player that should have been sent off. If Walter had made changes and we had still lost you would be on his back for making un-needed changes. We played a team of very good players off the park for most of the match, and still people whine like little spoilt *****es.
I dont know what you are getting at. You suggest that Cathcart was talking about Chelsea's superior "match fitness" and you also suggest that pre-season does not help match fitness significantly as that can only be improved in the Premiership. Yet Chelsea have only had 2 prem games like ourselves. Make your mind up! Personally, I think pre-season can help build match fitness and Chelsea's games against, Rapid Vienna, Liverpool, Real Madrid, AC Milan and Werder Bremen better prepares for the season than playing the likes of Woking and SC Paderborn. Obviously Fabregas was a good sub, but Costa (after being on for 86 minutes) had a 1 yard head start in his own half on Cathcart, yet ran onto the pass, miss-controlled it slightly making him run a bit wide, and was still a couple of yards ahead of the chasing Cathcart when shooting on goal. Strangely, Gomes was still in his 6 yard box - but that is a different matter.
This is spot on. Gueds error was nothing to do with tiredness and everything to do with carelessness. There was no need to make subs before they scored (though you could make a case for vydra coming on for one of our ineffective forwards)
It's the difference between a good team and a great team, it's of no surprise that the games we've lost in the last 10-15 minutes since promotion have been against United (twice), City, Spurs and Chelsea
i think lack of match fitness is a poor excuse,if its due to that then surely they should be alerting Walter so he can make a substitution.It was two careless mistakes that cost us,on the plus side i thought amrabat was brilliant.
No need to give up, I am just trying to understand the point you are making. You said this... Then you said this... As Chelsea have only played two games in the prem like us, I am wondering where you think they get their extra match fitness as you say it doesn't come from pre-season games.
Well the writer in the Sunday Torygraph didn't think Costa did anything that was contentious! What a didlo as Terry would say!
The general "professional" opinion (and I mean ex-players, managers, ex-refs getting paid for media expert explanations) is that there was the hint of sufficient contact between Britos & Costa to mean that Moss could not be "certain" that he should issue a card. Apparently, refs have to be "absolutely certain" that it was "simulation" if the player is already on a yellow....which, by logical extension, means that if a player has already been booked, as long as he makes the dive "vaguely credible", he has carte blanche to attempt a game-changing act of simulation. I bet Costa is licking his lips for the rest of the season.
Regardless of result and the baffling lack of subs, I'd have been quite happy to have paid to watch both the last two games. I haven't been able to truthfully say that for ages.
I remember the joyless attrition we were served under Quique. Seeing us attack with width and players expressing some of their ability, even when the performance has faults, is a start for me. I could not have sat through a full season of our post Xmas performances and, indeed, didn't go to games towards the end of the season, so horrible was it to watch us. Now, we're not perfect but at least we're trying to win again.
Could not agree more with you. I have enjoyed watching our highlights in the 2 games we've had so far, and am really looking forward to going to my first game of the season this weekend!
Post the New Year last season was hard on the eyes. So far Wally's only really used players that QFS had at his disposal yet we look like a proper team, great to watch. Impressive start from the new bloke.
