Which was better?
Goalkeepers
Courtois vs Cech - Cech is the winner for me. Courtois is overrated and has a long way to go because he can touch our legendary goalkeeper.
Full backs
Alonso and Moses vs Cole and Ivanovic - Cole and Ivanovic easily. Cole was the best Lb in the world without a doubt and prime Ivanovic was world class. Moses and Alonso are good though
Centre backs
Terry and Alex vs Luiz, Cahill and Azpi - Terry and Alex. Terry was the best CB in the PL at the time and Alex > Luiz imo.
Centre Midfield
Lampard, Ballack and Essien vs Kante and Matic - Essien > Kante and Lampard >>>>>> Matic so yeah. Easy win.
Wide forwards
Malouda and Anelka vs Hazard and Pedro - Hazard and Pedro take this I think even though Malouda and Anelka scored a lot of goals. Hazard is the best player in the PL and Pedro is better than anelka I think. Not sure about Malouda vs Pedro, but Hazard beats both Anelka and Malouda anyway.
Striker
Drogba vs Costa - Drogba easily
So Ancelotti's team better in nearly every way. Do you agree?
Conte Chelsea vs Ancelotti's Chelsea
posted on 26/3/17
Financially Doped v Financially Doped
posted on 26/3/17
comment by jar jar winks (U21185)
posted 46 minutes ago
Could you list the respective transfer prices of Conte's side? And their wages.
Then do the same thing with the Tottenham side they played at WHL.
I have a sneaky suspicion one owner spent hundreds and hundreds of millions more on the losersI mean to the tune of about 500 million
Conte the legend. Most expensive side in the league. No European games. Highest wages. No injuries. Yep - Conte the genius
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess by your logic then Leicester are having a better season than Man City given their result over them? Idiot
Get back to your own board you ignorant khunt
posted on 26/3/17
comment by Billy The Yidd (U3924)
posted 49 minutes ago
Financially Doped v Financially Doped
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Champions v Champions as opposed to comparing two spurs managers - potless v potless
posted on 26/3/17
Whut happened? Lmao, why did this happen?
posted on 26/3/17
Click and wahl are right Carvalho was poor that season, I and a lot of others wanted him dropped for Alex who was impressing in the few cup / European appearances he got. But i was a Ricky injury that eventually led to Alex getting a place in the starting XI.
I really liked Alex, at his best he was definitely better than Cahill, maybe not quite as good as Luiz (perhaps the biggest thing Luiz has over him as a defender in a 2 man partnership is Luiz will always be more vocal and someone the team looks to when losing) . But yeah by the time AVB came think all his injuries caught up with him, made a fair few mistakes and duly sold.
It's an interesting comparison (our team vs Carlo''s) but obvs can't do a player by player comparison with the two very different formations, except comparing Carlo's front three vs Costa, Pedro and Hazard.
posted on 26/3/17
I think player-wise the ancelotti had slightly better players at his disposal (just), but Conte's team is better. We are currently as formidable as Jose's team 04/05 imo. Ancelotti's team scores lots of goals, but I'm not sure if strategically he's the same level as Conte or Jose was. We're on a better points per game as well, although still 10 games left and we've undoubtably benefited from no CL.
I do agree that a game between the two teams would have been an entertaining watch!
posted on 26/3/17
Chelsea's best football came in the 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 that season.
we weren't brilliant in a diamond and had to change it after inter showed it up and teams started holding their own.
also in terms of ability - mikel-lampard-ballack-malouda in a diamond is impressive but i'd say comparable to what we have now.
---------------------------------------------------------------
We wasn't too bad in a diamond, but Essien's injury in combination with teams exposing the formation's natural weakness (being the flanks) lead to the change.
Essien, Lampard, Ballack & Deco (the original selection for it) would've dominated Kante & Matic even with Azpilicueta pushing into midfield. Two many good players in it, Kante would've been pulled apart. But like I said, on the counter Ancelotti's side would've had serious problems. Cole & Ivanovic would've been stretched by the wing backs, Essien would've been harassed by Costa leaving Hazard & Pedro to blow past two slow CB's whatever the combination was.
posted on 27/3/17
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 27/3/17
Cole & Brana. Cole had to get so far forward early in 2009, when those four occupied the diamond, I remember him scoring two goals in a month.
posted on 27/3/17
comment by NPE - The New Romantic (U20804)
posted 1 day, 5 hours ago
comment by The Devil's Advocate's Advocate - I Represent Him (U6522)
posted 2 hours, 13 minutes ago
Ancelotti's team was better, but Conte's the better manager of the two. Pretty much sums it up.
Interesting to know which team would win. Anceotti's diamond would've absolutely owned Conte's midfield (even Kante isn't that good) but Conte's would've destroyed Ancelotti's on the counter attack, particularly down the flanks. Would be a bloody good game actually
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chelsea's best football came in the 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 that season.
we weren't brilliant in a diamond and had to change it after inter showed it up and teams started holding their own.
also in terms of ability - mikel-lampard-ballack-malouda in a diamond is impressive but i'd say comparable to what we have now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Only reason we won the league that year is because mikel got injured and ballack stood into the DM role.