GWT: CL Matchweek 2

[bleedblue1223]

What's the fun in that?

Just a little sarcasm, but it seems I always have 1 or 2 of the loads in the years I buy FIFA. My Chelsea loads never last long. The enjoyable ones are taking the lower-tier clubs and placing some sort of restriction on yourself. I liked my African load that I did a few versions back, played with guys that I don't typically play with.

 

[YNWA14]

Also I don't think Matip is better than Gomez, and this game shouldn't be used as some kind of measuring stick anyway as though Gomez was the sole scapegoat once Salzburg started firing, especially since he was doing very well up to that point. The whole team fell asleep after we went up 3-0 and I don't think there's any single culprit. van Dijk had a horrorshow and was turned inside out for their first goal (and Gomez very nearly got back to cover for him), Robertson was way out of position and the whole team had collapsed to the middle of the pitch for their 2nd and Gomez was slow to get back/lost his man for their 3rd which was pretty much a pinpoint perfect cross that the keeper couldn't collect and that van Dijk couldn't stop (which he normally would get to as well). The midfield was being walked through pretty easily (Fabinhoooo) and in possession we were far from convincing.

I think it was a combination of fatigue and complacency after having such an 'easy' time of things early on in the game. Luckily it didn't come back to bite us and there were some poacher's goals to be had. If finishing is a little bit better I think the game is out of reach before they even start scoring anyway, but still. Need to be a little more focused moving forward.

Thought if anyone were going to get MotM it would be Robertson or Mane though.

 

[bluesfan94]

Anyway, back on topic.

Fun matchweek. A couple decent upsets (Napoli, Real Madrid), albeit draws not straight defeats. Obviously a ton of matches left to play.

Just like last year, things are starting out a little dicey for English clubs, excepting City. Tottenham and Chelsea are both third in their group. Tottenham's group would seem to be light enough to still qualify easily. On the other hand, they drew Olympiacos and Bayern may have broke them. More concerns for Chelsea, especially given that they lost at Stamford Bridge, but it wouldn't at all be surprising to watch them qualify, too, if Valencia slips up at all. Obviously there aren't really concerns for Liverpool, who are second in their group, but I think the lost to Napoli is slightly surprising and RB Salzburg made them look human.

Meanwhile, German teams continue to be a mixed bag. Pretty surprising result from Bayern catapults them into command. Dortmund leads their group but hasn't looked all that convincing, struggling away to Slavia Praha, even if the scoreline was comfortable in the end. Meanwhile Leipzig lost to Lyon at home and Bayer has been pretty poor. This matchweek, an away loss to Juve, is at least forgivable, but dropping all the points at home to Lokomotiv likely relegates them to 4th place in the group.

Speaking of Russian teams, they've performed pretty well so far. Zenit sits atop the group and while Lokomotiv likely won't advance, they're in a good position to finish third. There are actually a bunch of smaller country clubs doing well: Brugge, Red Star Belgrade (I just can't spell it yet, Crvena zvezda doesn't roll off the tongue), and Dinamo Zagreb all sit second, RB Salzburg has been one of the most fun sides to watch, and Ajax, which I guess technically qualifies, has looked comfortable.

Biggest surprises: RB Salzburg, Zenit
Biggest disappointments: Tottenham, Real Madrid

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Slander has to be spoken, you mean libel.

I've posted plenty of stats that show Pulisic hasn't performed to a very good level. You ignore or dismiss them because they don't fit your opinion. As I have already posted multiple times, Pulisic isn't producing shots or key passes at close to the same rate as the guys playing over him, and is conceding possession to the other team at a shocking rate compared with them as well. Willian on the flip side is one the the absolute best players on the team at maintaining possession. Like it or not, Chelsea is playing a fluid attack based on a lot of movement and quick forward passes, and the guys who pass the eye test in this area also have the stats to back them up. You can browse all of these yourself if you like: Chelsea - Football Statistics | WhoScored.com

Both Lampard and Pulisic have talked about how Pulisic hasn't been good enough on the training ground, he hasn't worked hard enough. Lampard is playing players who both work hard on the training ground and are contributing on the pitch in games. What makes you an expert on his training ground performances over Lampard and the Chelsea staff? An assessment Pulisic has agreed with by the way.



Pulisic is a player with a ton of potential, he has shown enough in the past to make anyone reasonable believe that he can be a star quality player, but he's young and still has a lot to learn. He's being asked to play a certain way at Chelsea, a way that other players here have either been playing for years or even for Lampard last season, so it's going to take him time to adapt and work his way into minutes. Might not even happen a lot this season, who knows? He's only 20 though, so it's not like anyone but the overhyped US media expected him to walk into Chelsea and be a star.

Rubbish.

You want to pick and choose which games can count because it doesn't fit your anti-Pulisic narrative. I don't know why all games wouldn't be counted and the most influential stats in winning games wouldn't count. This would be like if you tried telling me that we have to judge Mitch Marner compared to Andrei Svechnikov based on goals and shots per game and production in games against only in Conference teams. You are blatantly ignoring the most widely used and objective measures and instead trying to find underlying measures that favor your anti-Pulisic narrative. It's transparent, and I'm not going to argue further about it if you are going to try to mislead about the statistical picture. It certainly favors Pulisic. End of story.

You keep coming up with these cliches about him not playing the right way at Chelsea or not doing well in training or more empty rhetoric like that. Explain this in detail. Stop with your empty rhetoric and explain this in detail. I'm not the one who has made these claims. You are, and others who are trying to defend Lampard are. If it's so clear, explain it without using cliches and slogans. Use details.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Have you even noticed that it's people of every single nationality weighing in against you?

Have you noticed that I said I'm not worried about HF credibility? I know many here are very worried about their HF credibility. I'm going to say what I believe. If I see something said with regularity that is unfair, blatantly not true and is grounded in a deep-seeded dislike of what someone represents, I'm going to call it out. If you don't like it, you know where to find the ignore button.

 

[maclean]

Crvena zvezda doesn't roll off the tongue

It actually kinda does, you barely even have to open your mouth!

 

[bleedblue1223]

Rubbish.

You want to pick and choose which games can count because it doesn't fit your anti-Pulisic narrative. I don't know why all games wouldn't be counted and the most influential stats in winning games wouldn't count. This would be like if you tried telling me that we have to judge Mitch Marner compared to Andrei Svechnikov based on goals and shots per game and production in games against only in Conference teams. You are blatantly ignoring the most widely used and objective measures and instead trying to find underlying measures that favor your anti-Pulisic narrative. It's transparent, and I'm not going to argue further about it if you are going to try to mislead about the statistical picture. It certainly favors Pulisic. End of story.

You keep coming up with these cliches about him not playing the right way at Chelsea or not doing well in training or more empty rhetoric like that. Explain this in detail. Stop with your empty rhetoric and explain this in detail. I'm not the one who has made these claims. You are, and others who are trying to defend Lampard are. If it's so clear, explain it without using cliches and slogans. Use details.

Look, he just hasn't been performing well, even when he has been on the pitch in PL games. He needs to press better to fit the system and he needs to get stronger on the ball. Those are things that many people struggle with when coming to England initially.

Yes, Grimsby Town should not really be included. The hockey comparison there would be a NHL club playing an ECHL club. It's an absurd gap in ability.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

t's same thing as Pulisic. Both are bench level players or starters for Everton.

You are just proving my point. Thank you.

 

[maclean]

Have you noticed that I said I'm not worried about HF credibility? I know many here are very worried about their HF credibility. I'm going to say what I believe. If I see something said with regularity that is unfair, blatantly not true and is grounded in a deep-seeded dislike of what someone represents, I'm going to call it out. If you don't like it, you know where to find the ignore button.

I'm too lazy for the ignore button, but by all means have fun viewing yourself as a martyr!

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Look, he just hasn't been performing well, even when he has been on the pitch in PL games. He needs to press better to fit the system and he needs to get stronger on the ball. Those are things that many people struggle with when coming to England initially.

Yes, Grimsby Town should not really be included. The hockey comparison there would be a NHL club playing an ECHL club. It's an absurd gap in ability.

He hasn't been on the pitch in a month in the Premier League. And I'm not going to stand for the distortion of his play either. He had two bad games. Mount or Tomori could have two bad games, and they wouldn't drop to the bench, not play in the Premier League for a month, and then drop out of the 18. We both know that. We both know why. Why is the proven player the one who gets treated like shit by the coach? Before that, Pulisic started the season well. The short-memory of some people is remarkable. Maybe its purposeful. He can only produce in the games he plays. If you want to know how he'd play against better teams, maybe you should question why your coach doesn't use him. He's proven for years against good teams that he produces.

I never said he doesn't need to play better or improve. When people state "he'd be a bench player at Everton" or is overrated, it proves my point. I'll call out anyone who wants to continue with this anti-Pulisic nonsense or is going to throw Pulisic in the mud to defend their coach. I've never said to heap praise on him or anything like that. I have my own opinion about the player, but thats irrelevant to what is happening here where a bunch of haters pour hate into a player week after week. Unlike the majority of people here who have relatively low knowledge about the player they hate and are just relying on what they read on twitter or hear from British pundits, I have watched the player with regularity, and don't need to be told by amateur psychologists what I think about a player or that I have bias towards a player. I would know that. None of you would.

 

[YNWA14]

I just really don't understand the outrage. Could he have been a bench option? Sure, but at the end of the day I'm sure he's working toward being a starter and right now he hasn't justified being one. Chelsea are performing well without him and they don't really have any reason to be forcing him into the side while he adjusts to a new team, league and manager. Robertson, despite being 10x the player Moreno is, still needed an injury to get into the team. Fabinho nor Keita played consistently for most of last season and both were/are more proven and talented than Pulisic.

I'm not going to bother to respond to your "didn't show anything special when he was given a chance at Chelsea, and others have performed at a higher level" because its the same empty rhetoric that others have thrown out that no sane person would believe if they analyzed the situation objectively. Clearly some of you have no intent to do that.

This is the biggest part about why people are calling you biased, and why your obvious bias is showing. It's not 'empty rhetoric' it's a fact; he didn't stand out as particularly good when he did get a chance. Chelsea have looked very fluid and strong as a team without him in the line-up. There's no rush to get him back in there especially when they've got CHO coming back who is straight up better, younger, more talented, and has been with Chelsea forever. You're not going to find a 'sane analysis' that shows Pulisic was lighting up the world as a Chelsea player. If there's anyone that clearly has no intent of looking at this situation objectively it's you.

 

[Cassano]

You are just proving my point. Thank you.

I don't think it's an outlandish claim.

Pulisic is a bench level player for top 6 club. He would probably start at Everton.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I believe that person was saying he'd be a bench player on a top team or a starter at a team just below that level. A Richarlison type caliber. That's a fair assessment.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I don't think it's an outlandish claim.

Pulisic is a bench level player for top 6 club. He would probably start at Everton.

I don't know if you noticed, but you changed your claim in the span of a matter of hours. You went from bench or starter to starter, so you are already moving the goalposts.

And the top six is not created equal. Liverpool/Man City is not the same as Spurs which isn't the same as Man United/Arsenal/Chelsea/Leicester/West Ham/Everton

As to the team he currently plays for that might get into the top six this season, I would say the starters should probably be Pulisic, CHO and Mount. Would you disagree with that?

Pedro and Willian are bench players at best, but I guess they know the system so well having been in in for all of the same amount of time as everyone else and are practice-all stars. If I'm a Chelsea fan, I want those players replaced when they can next spend money, and then you buy some more competition for those younger players mentioned above.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I don't know if you noticed, but you changed your claim in the span of a matter of hours. You went from bench or starter to starter, so you are already moving the goalposts.

And the top six is not created equal. Liverpool/Man City is not the same as Spurs which isn't the same as Man United/Arsenal/Chelsea/Leicester/West Ham/Everton

No, you just misinterpreted what he said.

 

[YNWA14]

No, you just misinterpreted what he said.

I think he can tell you whether or not he interpreted something properly without some kind of unlicensed psychoanalysis, thanks.

 

[Cassano]

I don't know if you noticed, but you changed your claim in the span of a matter of hours. You went from bench or starter to starter, so you are already moving the goalposts.

And the top six is not created equal. Liverpool/Man City is not the same as Spurs which isn't the same as Man United/Arsenal/Chelsea/Leicester/West Ham/Everton

??

I guess I should have clarified: Bench level players for top 6 clubs, or starters for Everton. But I think my point was clear on that.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I think he can tell you whether or not he interpreted something properly without some kind of unlicensed psychoanalysis, thanks.

Ok?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

??

I guess I should have clarified: Bench level players for top 6 clubs, or starters for Everton. But I think my point was clear on that.

It wasn't clear. It was missing proper punctuation. I get this is a hockey forum and not a professional medical journal, but surely you can see why what you said would read as starter or bench for Everton? Don't blame me because your sentence didn't have proper punctuation and I took it as if it was properly punctuated.

Anyway, it's very broad to say top six. We all know the gulf in class is enormous between the top two and Spurs, big between Spurs and 4th, and then 4-6 is historically bad for the Premier League this season. Or at least thats the way it looks early this season.

 

[Cassano]

It wasn't clear. It was missing proper punctuation. I get this is a hockey forum and not a professional medical journal, but surely you can see why what you said would read as starter or bench for Everton?

Well, seeing as @bleedblue1223 was able to interpret it, I don't think so.

Anyway, it's very broad to say top six. We all know the gulf in class is enormous between the top two and Spurs, big between Spurs and 4th, and then 4-6 is historically bad for the Premier League this season. Or at least thats the way it looks early this season.

There is a gulf in top 6, but Pulisic regardless wouldn't start for any of them.

 

[Blender]

Rubbish.

You want to pick and choose which games can count because it doesn't fit your anti-Pulisic narrative. I don't know why all games wouldn't be counted and the most influential stats in winning games wouldn't count. This would be like if you tried telling me that we have to judge Mitch Marner compared to Andrei Svechnikov based on goals and shots per game and production in games against only in Conference teams. You are blatantly ignoring the most widely used and objective measures and instead trying to find underlying measures that favor your anti-Pulisic narrative. It's transparent, and I'm not going to argue further about it if you are going to try to mislead about the statistical picture. It certainly favors Pulisic. End of story.

You keep coming up with these cliches about him not playing the right way at Chelsea or not doing well in training or more empty rhetoric like that. Explain this in detail. Stop with your empty rhetoric and explain this in detail. I'm not the one who has made these claims. You are, and others who are trying to defend Lampard are. If it's so clear, explain it without using cliches and slogans. Use details.

It's not empty rhetoric at all, I literally gave you the stats which show that Willian, Pedro, Mount, CHO, and even Barkley have been better for the system that Chelsea is playing. That you choose to ignore or dismiss them without any attempt at disputing them shows your blatant bias in this regard, not the other way around. Address those stats and why they don't accurately reflect why Pulisic hasn't played the system well, or concede the argument.

I'm a Chelsea fan, Pulisic being a great player is the best possible outcome. Stop acting like I have it out for him when I don't at all.

 

[YNWA14]

Ok?

Was meant to be a joke based on this:

Unlike the majority of people here who have relatively low knowledge about the player they hate and are just relying on what they read on twitter or hear from British pundits, I have watched the player with regularity, and don't need to be told by amateur psychologists what I think about a player or that I have bias towards a player. I would know that. None of you would.

Just a little light-hearted fun.

 

[Ivan13]

All you can do is laugh at this Pulisic crap. The woe is me attitude adds to the hilarity as well.

 

[Blender]

Look, he just hasn't been performing well, even when he has been on the pitch in PL games. He needs to press better to fit the system and he needs to get stronger on the ball. Those are things that many people struggle with when coming to England initially.

Yes, Grimsby Town should not really be included. The hockey comparison there would be a NHL club playing an ECHL club. It's an absurd gap in ability.

He got an assist on the 6th goal against Grimsby Town. I don't know in what reality that is equivalent to EPL or CL performance.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Well, seeing as @bleedblue1223 was able to interpret it, I don't think so.

There is a gulf in top 6, but Pulisic regardless wouldn't start for any of them.

143 games in the squad at Borussia Dortmund during his career there, started 78. Thats 55% of the games. We have to take into account that he only started 22% of games in his first season at age 17, so that number went up substantially the last few years. And then you have to take into account that no one starts 100% of the games at a top team anymore, there's always rotation. Sounds like a starter to me.

Or would Dortmund not be a top six club in England?