6 Responses

  1. Thomas
    Thomas
    September 16, 2009 at 12:26 am | | Reply


    I agree. Chelsea are a very strong side. They are powerful through the middle, from the Center Halves, to the Midfield, up to the top with Drogba. Speed and width comes from the FBs and the Wingers…Stays true weather they played Mikel/Essien/Ballack/Lamps in midfield or Maka/Lamps in earlier years.

  2. The Fat Panda
    The Fat Panda
    September 16, 2009 at 1:15 am | | Reply


    could it also be attributed to playing a certain way for about 9 games a certain way (including preseason) and then all of a sudden shifting to a setup with Anelka, Malouda, and Kalou as a three-pronged attack up front? After all, it took time but Anelka eventually did his thing.

    comparatively, chelsea has netted most of their goals in stoppage time so far on set pieces and lucky shots.

    let’s not crown Drobga the queen prince just yet please.

  3. nikesb
    nikesb
    September 16, 2009 at 1:23 am | | Reply


    The Fat Panda…where have you been the past 3 years?
    Drogba +Lampard+Terry are the backbone of Chelsea
    When Drogba isn’t functioning…it’s very difficult for Chelsea to win…the same cannot be said about Lampard/Terry.

  4. Guilherme Lessa
    September 16, 2009 at 9:07 am | | Reply


    I agree on most of what you’ve said. But as for Scolari’s term, I think the real problem wasn’t exactly the absence of Drogba. Essien was thoroughly injured during the Scolari times, and Mikel was still considerably unexperienced. Of course, Drogba was missed by the team, but the lack of a good DM was the real reason behind Chelsea’s poor results under the Brazilian coach.

  5. nikesb
    nikesb
    September 16, 2009 at 10:19 am | | Reply


    Drogba is the only striker of his kind in the Chelsea squad, and as such takes on a vital importance. While other strikers can score the goals he has often provided — as Nicolas Anelka did last night, and the majority of last season — only the Ivorian has the physical presence to truly lead the line for his side like a typical No. 9.

    He stretches opposition defences with his strength and aerial presence, even when he is not on the ball, and creates the time and space for his midfield to build their intricate attacks.

    Without him, as was the case last night against Porto, Chelsea’s attacking intent becomes easier to stifle. Anelka and Salomon Kalou are both players who prefer the ball on the deck, but it is difficult to play that way when opponents are able to flood the defence and midfield.

    Both men took turns in playing Drogba’s role through the centre, but neither experienced much joy.

    http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2603/chelsea-special/2009/09/16/1504627/alex-dimonds-chelsea-comment-suspension-shows-didier-drogba

  6. charms
    September 8, 2010 at 2:21 am | | Reply


    could it also be attributed to playing a certain way for about 9 games a certain way (including preseason) and then all of a sudden shifting to a setup with Anelka, Malouda, and Kalou as a three-pronged attack up front? After all, it took time but Anelka eventually did his thing.
    thomas sabo schmuck
    comparatively, chelsea has netted most of their goals in stoppage time so far on set pieces and lucky shots.

Leave a Reply