A year ago to the day we lost 2-0 in the same fixture. Our balls seemingly glued together in the sack.
All change for Forest since then. New manager and practically a whole new squad. From our starting 11 only Cash features regularly, followed by Carvalho (started) and Smith, Robinson, Yates and Lolley on the bench. The remaining twelve either sold, loaned or cemented in the bomb squad.
Lamouchi has said he’s going to give it a go and whilst Johnson and Mighten might make the squad, we might not see as many changes as initially expected. Ribeiro is fit to return so we could see him gain some valuable minutes. Maybe a start for Dawson and Jenkinson as well.
Chelsea have a few injuries and a bout of illness hovering around Stamford Bridge, but this just means that players like Callum Hudson-Odoi get a go. He’s just the guy who set-up both of Morata’s goals last season!!
I’m more confident than last season, but not confident enough for a win. Losing only 2-0 with the team last year was a minor miracle. I’d be happy for a traditional (this season anyway) Away performance against a Chelsea side who have lost the last two at home.
2-1 loss would be perfectly acceptable, 3-0 loss is extremely probable and of course a draw or win is possible...if not...bloody unlikely!
With Reading drawing and Brentford Winning that’s added congestion and a to be re-arrange fixture for us and Brentford. Potentially assisting our priority, the league.
With players expected to come in for both sides then an FA Cup run isn’t the worst idea to blood new players. However, Chelsea are surely eyeing up the CL and a top four finish as a priority, but it’s a little outside a very tough run they have coming up, so I don’t see them gifting us a win.
It’s a 1am kick-off tomorrow for me, so lots of work prep for the upcoming week, an early night and ESPN embarrassingly discussing our European success and our continuous 20 year failure to do anything of note.
Chelsea v Forest - Match Thread
posted on 6/1/20
well it would have been an even bigger talking point had the pen been given. never a penalty in a million years. So in a way thank god for var.
It needs to be improved but it is not being helped by our farcical officials.
How anyone could say the reece james "foul" was a foul was ridiculous, yet its what the ref gave.
posted on 6/1/20
Have to disagree with that Nick. James got nothing on the ball but definitely got something of Mighten's ankle.
I've seen many penalties given for less than that.
posted on 6/1/20
comment by El Bosque [Basoa in Euskara] (U1617)
posted about a minute ago
Have to disagree with that Nick. James got nothing on the ball but definitely got something of Mighten's ankle.
I've seen many penalties given for less than that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Admittedly without VAR though...
posted on 6/1/20
comment by El Bosque [Basoa in Euskara] (U1617)
posted 17 minutes ago
Have to disagree with that Nick. James got nothing on the ball but definitely got something of Mighten's ankle.
I've seen many penalties given for less than that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
what? mate have a look again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kr3YsckfYgg&t=432s
7:07.
Clearly gets the ball.
posted on 6/1/20
I think it was a penalty, whether he got the hall or but, he definitely took some of the guys ankle
But the issue I have is the way VAR is being used, a foot or kneecap ahead of the defender should not be offside
The rule of the offside law need changing IMO - I think if there a clear and obvious advantage like the whole person being ahead of a defender then offside should be given, of any part of the striker is in alignment with the defender then it should be allowed
Offside should be if there is daylight between attacker and defender - that would clear the whole mess up
posted on 6/1/20
im talking a the free kick,you are talking about the penalty?
The penalty was Tomori I believe and not reece james.
The penatly imo was a coming together and not much in it at all.
The free kick I was referencing was for your second goal, which again, wasn't a foul.
Offside for me is if a usable part of the player is obviously offside.
posted on 6/1/20
OK sorry - my mistake
posted on 6/1/20
Yeah, just seen it, and you’re right - he obviously got the ball - I wonder why VAR then didn’t pick up on that foul then, would the goal have stood if he wasn’t offside? Makes a mockery of the whole VAR setup really
posted on 6/1/20
comment by ThE ReVoLuTiOn Is HeRe (U22182)
posted 3 minutes ago
Yeah, just seen it, and you’re right - he obviously got the ball - I wonder why VAR then didn’t pick up on that foul then, would the goal have stood if he wasn’t offside? Makes a mockery of the whole VAR setup really
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yeah they choose as and when to use it, makes me wonder aswell if they would have looked to var had it been chelsea who got the penalty etc too. Its all a farce and spoiling the game. I have season tickets and feel I cannot celebrate a goal half the time.
posted on 6/1/20
My mistake as well, Nick. Sorry I was confused because originally you said it wasn't a penalty in a million years.
I've now looked at the "penalty" incident frame by frame from the side that the lino would have seen it and the defender definitely kicked Mighten's ankle which made Mighten accidentally knock the ball to the right, which would lead to folk thinking that the defender got to the ball first.
Agreed that the incident in the second half was not a foul. He got to the ball first and Ribeiro ran into his outstretched leg (and made a real meal of it!!!).
Also agree that VAR is not being used correctly in the UK. Here in Spain, there doesn't seem to be half of the problems that VAR is creating in the Prem.