I don't agree. CL spot is more important than the FA Cup from monetary standpoint (you could argue from prestige FA Cup is more important, but not sure this is what he had in mind). I also wouldn't look into City's result as it was a pointless match for them, so I doubt they bothered much. Also, knowing how HT would set up, our 2nd string was definitely not good enough to beat them. We had Pedro out there as our most creative player for crying out loud. Granted if Ruduger scores early on, the result might have been different.
I think Conte (and maybe the club) are putting their eggs in the FA cup bucket. Seems true after Conte's comment yesterday that we will know his future in 2 weeks. In any case, even if we had won yesterday, top 4 was still out of our hands while winning the FA cup is 50-50. That said, with a little more luck and without Willy's brain-fart, we should have still won comfortably.
i actually don't have that much of an issue with the rotation. pedro for hazard was maybe the only one, but bring hazard off the bench in a game like this isn't really that bad of a strategy, knowing HT could have tired legs in the second half. in hindsight, Giroud should have started over Morata, but at face value Morata should be good enough to impact HT. by the end of the game we were all out attack and had all relevant players on the pitch and still couldn't get the goal. it's just the season in a nutshell, couldn't finish chances. the problems are and were always more than one game.
Morata should be good enough, agreed. But we all know that against a side that is going to be backs against the wall, he isn't. Someone needs to take that boy to Vegas and show him a real good time - he's SO timid. Other than choice of forward, I didn't really have an issue with the lineup. Substitutions were poor though.
Cheer up, nothing lasts forever. But then, if you're old enough to have seen Kerry Dixon, you know that.
*expresses continued frustration everytime chelsea was on top nothing was done to strengthen and consolidate.....
Grats on top 4. It honestly would have been a travesty if we'd displaced either you or Liverpool. An enjoyable one, but still, not reflective of our seasons. Time for us to take stock and enjoy Thursday Nights! Channel Five!
They were in the middle of a relegation battle. I know what one is tougher. The point is we needed to win, and we didn't play the players that we needed. We can debate it all we want.
Yep. What's done is done. But if we had played the same team and not won, comments would have been for more rotation. Generally easy in retrospect.
Again I don't disagree. What i do know, in retrospect, is this didn't work out. Granted we never should have been in this situation.
I know I wouldn't have cared if we drew with our strongest squad. I saw a draw coming no matter what. Besides, what the ******** is our strongest side anyway? The squad is just not good enough or deep enough. City can sub in Mendy, Bernardo Silva, and Gundogan. We have Zappacosta and Ross Barkley.
I don't disagree but the club probably sees it more as us having won 2 titles in 4 years while having positive net spend for the most part (right?). City needed to invest 600 mil
that's a really good point, however, i wonder if they also see how the competition has changed in those last 4 years. quite honestly, the leagues top clubs have all been rebuilding to a certain extend over those years. Leicester won in that timeframe, which, let's be clear, that's amazing. but that doesn't happen after the money spent that last two seasons. i mean CHELSEA shouldn't have let that happen, let alone the other top teams.
For sure. A good example of spending going wrong is United. We haven't hit that truly perfect balance but we've experienced good success while not going nuts like City and also not investing poorly like United. (don't get me wrong, I am so ********ing frustrated with this club and am unsure why I'm playing devil's advocate. I think I just understand why or am trying to understand the board's mentality)