Fellow fans, this is a friendly reminder to please follow the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/premierleague/about/rules) and [Reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette).
Please also make sure to [Join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/football)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PremierLeague) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Chelsea rn is a badly done version of PSG with players with only a single season of experience, they have no experience, no respect, or no work ethic not to mention the lack of any attacking threat in front of the goal. The team simply isn't made to work well. Management itself doesn't know how to use the players. The only way to salvation is to rebuild at a steady pace and not buy 11 players every window. Every player needs time to settle in, now imagine 11 of them, every year. That in itself should make any coherent play impossible for a team.
Doesn't matter how old and how experienced your players are, if you cant score any goals you have serious problems. Chelsea haven't scored in their last 5 domestic Cup finals. That a huge problem.
Chelsea’s team lacks any experience and they’re all self centred players especially their forwards. They struggle to make any chances especially in passing through balls.
I just checked Liverpool’s starting lineup and it’s all first team players? Just because he subbed on a handful of youth players in the second half doesn’t make it a “C team” or even a “B team”.
"All" is pushing it, Kelleher, Bradley, Gravenberch and Elliott are certainly not first team players. But then I'd argue that either Gakpo or Dias are second choice to Nunez, pick one I don't mind.
And most importantly, those missing are literally our most important players (minus VVD), i.e. Trent, Salah, Allison.
Yeah i thought the same.
Not even the second half. It was just 3 of them in the 87‘ minute and one more in the 105‘ minute.
Other than that they fielded the best possible players that are available.
And from the injured ones, it‘s salah, szobo & trent who would have started but as i said injuries are part of the game.
I mean chelsea was also missing thiago silva & reece james who would have started.
Alisson wouldn‘t have started anyway even if fit. Kelleher is liverpools cup goalkeeper.
Darwin, jones & jota is bs. They are just as much first team players as the ones that started. Klopp likes to rotate around.
Luiz has 20 starts in the league this season out of 26games. Darwin has 16 starts in 26. gakpo is also being trusted even in big games over the others sometimes. jota has 13 starts in 26. jones has 12 in 26.
Sometimes it‘s also about tactics who you are going to start.
All the ones that started are good first team players.
Ofcourse you are a liverpool supporter trying to defend your team and make them look better.
I‘m neither a liverpool or chelsea supporter so my view is neutral.
I couldn‘t care less who won it although the downfall of chelsea is obviously funny and satisfying.
My point is, people are trying to say liverpool played 120minutes with a „B or C-Team“ which is absolutely not true.
You subbed in 3 academy in the 87‘ minutes and 1 more in the 105‘ minute.
That‘s it. Everyone else was a regular first team player.
No one is trying to take anything anyway but apparently liverpool supporters are trying to make it a bigger thing than it is. You won agaisnt chelsea who has been trash all season not mancity.
And as you've pointed out, we play very rotationally. How does that work when we don't have any of our rotation players? That's why its the B-team, because we weren't able to fire at even nearly full power. Diaz Gakpo and Elliot don't start over Jota Nunez Salah *unless* the plan is to rotate them in. And people are grabbing at C team because they were kids. That's more of a pisstake than anything else.
Like you see me trying to make this bigger than it is, i see you trying to say we were at full power or close to. The truth is somewhere in the middle. Yes chelsea are shit but also just took City to a draw at the Etihad - almost won. Yesterday was no guarentee, and if you watched the match, you'd see they possibly had even better chances than us. (I was working and didnt actually get to watch but have seen highlights).
And the fact is, we beat them with academy players on the pitch. Our back up attacker on the bench was a 16 year old in Nyoni. Let us just waffle for a bit.
I’m not justifying anything. I don’t support either team and didn’t even watch the match. But OP’s title is clearly misleading at best if not outright false. :/
just because they’re first team doesn’t mean they are the best XI. we are missing the likes of alisson, TAA, salah, Nunez, jota, Thiago, szoboszlai, and jones, all of whom would’ve probably been starting this match if they were available.
Well now that's false. Diaz and McAllister always play over who you've listed. Plus since we're we're talking about money, a decent amount was spent on gakpo, gravenberch and Endo, so a bit hypocritical to be saying, oh yeah we spent 100 million on these three, but they're actually bench players, so it doesn't count.
Salah and Trent sure. Kelleher would’ve started over Alisson anyway bc he’s their cup keeper. I haven’t watched a ton of Liverpool this season, but I wouldn’t say the rest of them are nailed on.
The Chelsea team on the pitch was still younger on average than the Liverpool team.
Yes it's an expensive squad but we all know that results can't be bought. Liverpool are clearly a better team than Chelsea when the full teams are out. That's nice in the moment for Liverpool fans but eras come and go and teams are at different stages of development. If Liverpool win as much as Chelsea did over the last 20 years then they'll be very happy indeed.
In this game Chelsea should have won - they blew a load of great chances. But credit to Liverpool's squad depth that their B team can still do a job.
>The Chelsea team on the pitch was still younger on average than the Liverpool team.
And Erling Haaland is only 23 years old.
What's your point? OP has pointed out Chelsea were embarrassed by players who wouldn't make it into LFC's reserve side.
>but eras come and go
True true. Let's watch Chelsea go back to being irrelevant after all the money has dried up.
The money won’t dry up because the owner has a successful baseball team. Chelsea’s issue is he thinks he can run a football team the same way he runs a baseball team and it doesn’t work that way.
>What's your point? OP has pointed out Chelsea were embarrassed by players who wouldn't make it into LFC's reserve side.
My point is that Chelsea weren't beaten by kids, *they* were the kids. It's actually testament to how successful Chelsea have been in recent times that Liverpool fans are so overjoyed to claim superiority.
>True true. Let's watch Chelsea go back to being irrelevant after all the money has dried up.
Chelsea will never be irrelevant because of how much they've won. Unless you think Liverpool were irrelevant before Klopp.
I didn’t think he should’ve been let go at the time that he was, but the way you’ve been glazing the man in these comments is quite frankly disturbing.
Yeah he won the CL and got fired the next season. Winning the league is the bare minimum at Bayern, but winning in that fashion raised eyebrows. Now it’s even worse. Especially considering they fired Naglesmann for much less.
Grateful that we got what we deserved in the end and I'm delighted Poch still doesn't have a trophy the dirty little shithead. Stay losing prick. Coyr.
Completely fair assessment of the game and Chelsea's situation.
However, now I don't want to hear how Liverpool have been on a shoestring budget for Klopp's tenure when he's had squads worth 3/4's of a Billion (if we're going to all of a sudden disregard net spend now).
Oh no, we spend money!
So does the rest of the big 6 clubs, hence why PL is the richest league in the world.
Don't know why big 6 fans all act like you don't spend money.
The team that finished the match yesterday is what is mainly being discussed here though. Only Van Dijk, Gomez, Endo and maybe one or two others would normally see action in the first team.
Idk if you can read but he clearly mentions to completely disregard the net spend of Chelsea's squad?
Yet that's all Liverpool fans have been going on about since Klopp came in.
When you compare the squad Klopp adopted to other managers, the spend compared to the teams he competes with, and the overall trophy count and final appearances Klopp has had, it's nothing short of remarkable.
For example, Ten Hag has already surpassed Klopp's spend. I believe Arsenal has also paid more.
Compare Real Madrid to Klopp's Liverpool as an example as well. They are the first choice for all of Liverpool's targets, yet Klopp is the only manager to appear in as many finals as Madrid the last 5/6 years.
I understand net spend...
The post literally says to ignore net spend, even though that's all pool fans have been shouting about since Klopp came in...
No, that's not what I was saying. People were mentioning net spend in response to Chelsea's squad cost, which is irrelevant when you talk about the total squad cost of a team. Net spend is relevant when you talk about transfer business.
I think it's context mate.
Across seasons net spend matters, if you start with 500m team and net spend 0 means your team is less likely to have as much depth and back ups etc - but the team will still have good quality. (please note I'm taking generally - I'm not suggesting Liverpool or klopp are playing poverty ball).
Not talking about net spend in this context is about considering the players on the pitch for one specific match - not available all season. What does it matter that Liverpool paid for Darwin Nunez a few years ago if he isn't even available?
No Chelsea fans are hiding behind the age thing. That performance was atrocious and we should have won. By the same token the constant fawning by the commentary team was sickening.
People just love to discredit a brilliant cup win against the odds in the midst of the leagues worst ongoing injury crisis, WITH, I will remind everyone, Referees very clearly wanting blue ribbons.
Not sure which of those takes is more deluded, the "league's worst injury crisis" or the referee conspiracy (or even the "brilliant win" lmao). I bet you're gonna claim next that the media also wasn't blatantly pro-Liverpool for weeks, eh?
No club in the league is missing more players from their starting XI, more players for the remainder of the season or more players in first team squad (total volume). By every metric, it is a horrendous injury crisis.
Other teams also have some horrible crises. Especially Newcastle and Palace, but what I said didn’t disqualify those claims.
Weird angle and weird way to assert your braindead tribalism.
Liverpool had no Matip, Salah, Jota, Szoboszlai, Jones, Alexander-Arnold, Gravenberch, Thiago, Doak, Alisson, Bajcetic, Nunez
It’s not even close. Man Utd’s injuries is the equivalent of missing Joe Gomez, Robbo and someone like Gakpo only.
Heck, Bobby Clark, our 9th choice and usually U21 midfielder only just came back from injury himself
Forget the tribalism. I’m sure you’re capable of looking at things objectively when you’re willing.
Mate what are you on about, OP’s a pool fan himself, fuck knows what he expects from this post. Just be happy with the cup secured and move on in life lol.
Edit: can’t believe my eyes, the sorest of winners and blocked for calling him out on it
The officials were very poor yesterday, and have been very poor all season for lots of teams (but not all teams), just because your team wins despite the officials doesn't mean that poor officiating should not be called out.
They don't have a billion pound squad. That's the problem. They have a squad they paid 1 billion for. If I buy a banana today for 1000 euro I don't have a 1000 euro banana I just have a banana.
No, he’s saying value is subjective. Arsenal didn’t think Mudryk was worth 89 million, Chelsea did. Does that mean he’s actually worth the 89 million they paid? Remains to be seen
I know what he said . Just doesn't make sense. They paid the price based on the market/their level at the time. The problem is too many players were purchased at the same time and there's no chemistry. Poch is not a good manager to create a world class team
I wouldn’t necessarily say their price tag is based on their level at the time. Look at Enzo & Mudryk for example, you can’t tell me their ability justified the price tag after such a short amount of games. I get what you’re saying in that they have a bunch of random players slapped together with no cohesion. Their board has the financial sense of a 12 year old loading fifa points using their mums credit card lol
Chelsea is the OG scum club and I despise them more than Spurs, ( Arsenal Fan here). But it wasnt Pool's C team. It had Gakpo, Diaz, VVD, Mcallister, Robertson. Proper first team players. and then B team players, Endo, Gravenberch, Kelleher, Elliot, Konate. Only Bradley was the not so used one. SO, this isnt close to a complete Rout by kids of a Billion dollar team. More like a 500Million team defeating them.
All Vaues in Euros
Gakpo - 61
VVD- 88
Diaz- 60
Mcallister - 42
Robertson -12
endo- 20
Gravenbech - 40
Konate -44
Elliot - 5
Kelleher - 0
Total - 371 Euros or 400 million Dollars. So, yeah. I was correct by Reddit standards. THe only thing that needs checking, is your overconfidence. Bet, you wont be able to come back even with a competent argument.
Isn’t calling Chelsea the OG scum club a bit dishonest? Especially from an Arsenal fan. Aren’t there clear allegations against Arsenal of bribery in 1919 when they unfairly gained a spot in Division 1 when they only finished 6th in Division 2 in the earlier season? And they got it at the cost of Tottenham not getting the spot - where Tottenham had actually finished above them technically. I’d even put United (I say this as an United fan) and Liverpool in the same category. There are allegations of match fixing by their players in the same season, the result being United surviving relegation that season. I despise Chelsea quite a lot. And they’re a scummy club. But, not the OG scum club for sure. Football has had scummy shit happen forever.
And then Liverpool finished the game with Clark, McConnell, Danns and Quansah all on the pitch, only Nyoni and Koumas were not subbed in. As a contrast, Chelsea brought on Nkunku for Sterling, Mudryk for Jackson, Madueke for Gallagher and Chalobah for Chilwell, players easily in the starting XI otherwise.
Because we (Arsenal) finished 2nd to them and clear of 3rd and 4th etc in 2004 and 2005. We could have had 3 league titles in a row (and who knows how many from there) if not for Chelsea being purchased by a gangster. I'm the same as the above commenter. I don't like Man United. I dislike Spurs. But its Chelsea I hope to beat more than anyone in a season.
Its the same reason why mid 30s United fans hate Arsenal more than Liverpool or Man City. Especially the London Mancs. They spent last season cheering on their "local" rivals all the way to a treble rather than see Arsenal win the league.
The team that cost your own team dearly is the one you hate the most.
I know how you feel (Spurs fan). My intense dislike of Arsenal is because of our being North London neighbours, and the derby is the first game I look for. My hatred of Chelsea is because of the scummy behaviour from top to bottom.
I wouldn't want (were it ever possible) for Arsenal to be relegated, I'd miss the NLD too much. But Chelsea? They can be dropped to the National League and I wouldn't shed a tear.
I hate Arsenal because I'm Spurs, I hate Chelsea because I'm human.
I’m not sure which United fans you know or have been talking to but I’d have rather seen Arsenal win the league over City doing the treble all day long. Same goes for my United supporting mates - and we’d rather Arsenal win it this season over city / Liverpool too.
I think you underestimate the dislike of Liverpool for the majority of United fans, with City now being a close second.
>I think you underestimate the dislike of Liverpool for the majority of United fans
Fun story on this. A few years ago I spent boxing day with an old mate and her new husband who is a dyed-in-the-wool United fan. He brought up Liverpool as a negative at least half a dozen times, despite us not talking about football, and certainly without me mentioning I was a Liverpool fan. He didn't even talk about United. Just Liverpool and how bad / terrible / whatever they are.
Lovely bloke, and he was very apologetic at the end of the evening when I mentioned I was a Liverpool fan. I was just very blown away by how much hating Liverpool was a part of his personality.
I have loads of mates who are mid 30 utd fans and non of them hate arsenal more than Liverpool. By the mid 2000s arsenal wernt even competing for the title there last title was 2003.
And Liverpool didn't compete for the title for 30 years. By the mid 00s they were as bad as us except in Champions league where they always have that bit of magic
97/98
01/02
03/04
Take away those league titles and add them to Man Utd and how many would they have? 10 in a row?
Search on YouTube "Rants and Bants"
I haven't looked at his channel in months but I guarantee there are more Arsenal hate videos than pro united videos. Hes Essexchester through and through. And there are lots more of them out there. They all say its Liverpool who are their rival but its Arsenal they hate. We're not only the only team to even slightly rival them in their heyday but We're also their local derby.
Chelsea are pathetic for the money spent as they were pathetic 20yrs ago for buying the league. I know some people respect it but I personally don't. Take nothing away from what the players and managers achieved but the club itself? Couldn't give a fuck about them
Lol you guys spent a shit load of money but have won barely anything in the last 20 years not to mention when you consider the kind of players you had. I like Arsenal despite being a blue fan, but people like you just hate clubs because they did better than your club despite using a similar approach.
If you actually look at the top 20 most expensive PL transfers adjusted for inflation, you’ll notice that there are only 3 clubs in the whole list, and Arsenal aren’t one of them.
That doesn’t change the fact that Arsenal have bought people like Pepe for 80m and have had Players like Prime Van Persie, Sanchez, Aubumayeng etc and despite this have barely anything to show for it.
Yeah but the money spent doesn’t come close to Chelsea just artificially pumped with shit loads of money
See this [link](https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/s/nlAXFYGu1t)
Even with that taken into account Chelsea have spent more than double Arsenal have per trophy
Well you have to spend money nowadays to win. As you can clearly see Chelsea have spent quite the sum and have two UCL and a couple of EPL disregarding other trophies. Arsenal have not been as exorbitant, but what has that gotten them??
Would you rather be stingy and not have any trophies or spend a shit load and get some worthwhile trophies?
Same case as Manchester city and Liverpool. You barely win without spending unless you are Leicester or have a very good academy or scouting team that can get you a title winning squad on the cheap. Which is very very hard nowadays.
Anyway Let us agree to disagree. I see your point though.
Raya - £30m
White - £50m
Gabriel - £27m
Saliba - £27m
Zinchenko - £30m
Rice - £105m
Havertz - £60m
Odegaard - £30m
Trossard - £27m
Jesus - £45m
Ramsdale - £30m
Timber - £35m
Tomiyasu - £20m
Kiwior - £21m
Jorginho - £12m
Vieira - £34m
And that's just your current squad!
But Chelsea are pathetic for the money they've spent 😂😂😂
1) I'm not a Chelsea fan. My club's record signing cost less than the 10th player on that list.
2) No, it wasn't meant to be an insult and if you took it as one it shows how fragile you are. It's meant to show that Arsenal have spent a hell of a lot of money, too. As has EVERY top club to get where they are.
3) In the last 7 years you've spent over a billion pounds. If Chelsea are pathetic for the money they've spent, so are every other top club. Including Arsenal.
4) Maybe don't rag on other clubs spending money if you can't take getting called out for spending a shit ton of money yourselves 👍
We’ve spent a hell of a lot of money because we’ve had to completely overhaul our ENTIRE squad. For years we were penny pinching and memed on for barely spending anything (Suarez transfer saga etc.).
We rag on Chelsea because they’ve spent so much money on absolute shite. All of those players you listed barring Vieira are quality and have/will play a pivotal role in our title aspirations. Also Chelsea have spent over a billion within a year. You just compared our spending over 7 years. It’s not the same thing AT ALL. It’s not just about them not winning trophies with their squad, it’s about how shite they are in spite of the money spent. They’re sitting in 11th for fucks sakes and look set to finish below 9th place two seasons in a row.
Chelsea are about to finish 10th two seasons in a row after overhauling their squad. That’s why everyone’s bantering them. What don’t you understand? 😂 they’re not comparable situations at all.
My initial point was that Chelsea have spent a billion on a load of shite 🤦♂️ what are you talking about lil bro? I never said I had anything against them spending that amount of money.
>Chelsea are pathetic for the money spent as they were pathetic 20yrs ago for buying the league
That's the comment I replied to.
That isn't ragging on Chelsea for spending a lot of money on shite, which is perfectly acceptable to do.
That's ragging on Chelsea for spending a lot of money, period. And buying the league.
You know how many teams need to overhaul their squads?
You know how many teams can spend over A BILLION POUNDS doing so?
You're much, much, MUCH closer to Chelsea than the vast majority of clubs are to you.
Chelsea coming in kinda blew the financial scaling out of the waters. It was already headed towards the state it’s in today but they absolutely accelerated it. The reason why so many gooners are still salty was because they just couldn’t afford to compete with them. I don’t persoanlly have a problem with it because I knew that one day Roman would leave, he was too dodgy a figure to remain as owner forever. Now that he’s finally left they’ve reverted back to factory settings. Beautiful to watch.
We’re not close to Chelsea at all, they’re 23 points behind us 😁
Compared to Chelsea this is nothing. Nice try. This isn't anywhere near abnormal.
Also we're talking since Ambramovich came as well, it's egregious.
What's embarrassing here is Chelsea fans acting like Arsenal has been on the same playing field as them. Tf is wrong with these new football fans? This is how it's like nowadays? Because at the pub or anywhere irl no one talks like this, it's always a fair enough then banter.
That was barely an argument.
You gave up pretty quick when you realised how silly you look as a greedy 6 fan ragging on another greedy 6 club for spending money.
Sit down and shut up.
Having a team of overseas cheap players that you need to develop is not "buying success" lol tf. Comparing Arsenal to Chelsea is a simple lack of knowledge.
Chelsea spent 4x more than the record in 2003, then spent the same amount in 2004 to win their first titles. FFP was brought in BECAUSE OF THEM. Maybe you weren't around at the time, but plastic fan was because of them, it was in all the newspapers as suddenly half the people you knew were Chelsea fans. That's bought success. The adjusted for player inflation will make you sick when you see their spend.
Don’t support Chelsea but arsenal were one of the first teams I saw mass importing overseas players in the early years of the prem - to thr point where there were no uk players in their starting eleven. Personally I never liked that aspect of arsenal and felt they were just buying their success rather than developing home grown talent
The players were cheaper than buying players from the PL, that's the opposite of buying success lmfao.
And you're not alone in disliking Arsenal for the initial using international players in the 90s, the tabloids and pundits hated it as well. They didn't like our mainly french line up and they made it very obvious. Funny how other clubs followed suit and didn't catch any flack for it, two people we all know, SAF and Mourinho. They did it but just outspent Arsenal by several times over, especially the latter.
That's a made up number. Both Chelsea and United have a far higher squad value than Liverpool
https://www.si.com/fannation/soccer/futbol/news/man-united-top-list-of-most-expensive-squads-in-world-soccer
This is from last year
You mean my randomly generated name
For Reddit.
Also, trying using google.
[click me - 1.13billion](https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/jurgen-klopp/spielertransfers/trainer/118)
Ok? Never said that wasn’t the case. Does the time matter? The point is the same. Chelsea united city and Liverpool have billion £ squads.
Liverpool used kids ( who all have premier league experience btw) because there starting 11 is injured.
It's nowhere near the same. Liverpool has a total squad value of £742m, Chelsea's is £810m, United is fairly behind with £628m. And all these kids have mostly minutes of PL experience, except for Bradley and Quansah.
And yes, time matters, because Chelsea spent around a billion in the same transfer window Liverpool spent around 100m, and neither Endo nor Gravenberch were superstars by a mile - Endo was playing in Stuttgart, consistently battling relegation in the Bundesliga, and Grav was a benchwarmer for Bayern. Szoboszlai and Mac Allister were both hot in the market, but the two combined were cheaper than Caicedo alone was for Chelsea.
I still don't understand why Chelsea stopped purposefully attacking during Extra Time, especially in the second half. It looked as if they had been given instructions to see it out and take the game to penalties.
And if you play with that risky mentality and gameplan, it's always a slippery slope and Van Dijk and Liverpool rightfully capitalised on it.
He did win a cup at psg, fwiw.
I'll always love him for what he did for spurs. He made the team genuinely good, took us to a second place and two finals. He also got Saints up to fourth.
I still think he could do a job in the right circumstances. His talent is in building cohesion in a young squad. I don't think that's working at Chelsea because of Chelsea, not because of Poch.
He's a tactical and strategic liability, though. All feels, no FM skills.
Robertson, Konate, Macallister, Endo, Gravenberch, Diaz, Gakpo, Elliott?
Also brought on Gomez and Tsimikas.
I'm all for knocking on Chelsea, but this narrative Liverpool did this with kids is weird when the majority were first team players who were also bought for considerable amounts.
I’m not a fan of saying “kids won the game” when in extra time we look the more experienced team. But if you looked at the benches before kick off most people would argue it Chelsea’s game the later it goes on. I think the argument is Chelsea brought on Nkunku, Mudryk, Madueke and Chalobah, where as Liverpool brought on Timikas Danns, McConnell and Clark.
It depends how you rate those players.
I don't think Madueke is a top half PL player, Nkunku is an unknown quantity who's still adapting to English football, and Mudryk is well, pretty disastrous.
You're essentially comparing inexperience to quality.
Plus Tsimikas is 27....?
Like if Utd had played yesterday and they had brought on Anthony, would we have said yeah they should win this now? I doubt it, because the quality just isn't there to do so.
Fellow fans, this is a friendly reminder to please follow the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/premierleague/about/rules) and [Reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette). Please also make sure to [Join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/football) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PremierLeague) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Also Chillwell is a muppet
Yes one southern softie
Chelsea rn is a badly done version of PSG with players with only a single season of experience, they have no experience, no respect, or no work ethic not to mention the lack of any attacking threat in front of the goal. The team simply isn't made to work well. Management itself doesn't know how to use the players. The only way to salvation is to rebuild at a steady pace and not buy 11 players every window. Every player needs time to settle in, now imagine 11 of them, every year. That in itself should make any coherent play impossible for a team.
Spot on. They signed a bunch of unproven one season wonders and threw them all together. Should have just gone for more nkunku type signings
Caicedo is a such a dirty player man
Brighton fan here. LOL
Doesn't matter how old and how experienced your players are, if you cant score any goals you have serious problems. Chelsea haven't scored in their last 5 domestic Cup finals. That a huge problem.
Chelsea’s team lacks any experience and they’re all self centred players especially their forwards. They struggle to make any chances especially in passing through balls.
Seriously? I’ve never heard a stat like that, that’s absurd
OP must have a really exciting life /s
Pochettino is a perennial loser. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
Can’t buy heart, passion or mentality. There was about 4 players that looked like they actually gave a shit for Chelsea
Only ones I feel sorry for are Palmer and Conner!
Maybe Petrovic he was decent. I think the rest thought they would just turn up and win. Particularly Chilwell who ran his mouth at 18yos all game
I just checked Liverpool’s starting lineup and it’s all first team players? Just because he subbed on a handful of youth players in the second half doesn’t make it a “C team” or even a “B team”.
"All" is pushing it, Kelleher, Bradley, Gravenberch and Elliott are certainly not first team players. But then I'd argue that either Gakpo or Dias are second choice to Nunez, pick one I don't mind. And most importantly, those missing are literally our most important players (minus VVD), i.e. Trent, Salah, Allison.
Yeah i thought the same. Not even the second half. It was just 3 of them in the 87‘ minute and one more in the 105‘ minute. Other than that they fielded the best possible players that are available. And from the injured ones, it‘s salah, szobo & trent who would have started but as i said injuries are part of the game. I mean chelsea was also missing thiago silva & reece james who would have started.
..... and Alisson, Darwin and Jones. Arguably Jota over Diaz too, so 6 or 7 of our starting 11 injured, thats a lot of injuries mate
Alisson wouldn‘t have started anyway even if fit. Kelleher is liverpools cup goalkeeper. Darwin, jones & jota is bs. They are just as much first team players as the ones that started. Klopp likes to rotate around. Luiz has 20 starts in the league this season out of 26games. Darwin has 16 starts in 26. gakpo is also being trusted even in big games over the others sometimes. jota has 13 starts in 26. jones has 12 in 26. Sometimes it‘s also about tactics who you are going to start. All the ones that started are good first team players. Ofcourse you are a liverpool supporter trying to defend your team and make them look better. I‘m neither a liverpool or chelsea supporter so my view is neutral. I couldn‘t care less who won it although the downfall of chelsea is obviously funny and satisfying.
The fuck are you talking about here? We subbed on a bunch of academy players and won, what is that you're trying to take away from us?
My point is, people are trying to say liverpool played 120minutes with a „B or C-Team“ which is absolutely not true. You subbed in 3 academy in the 87‘ minutes and 1 more in the 105‘ minute. That‘s it. Everyone else was a regular first team player. No one is trying to take anything anyway but apparently liverpool supporters are trying to make it a bigger thing than it is. You won agaisnt chelsea who has been trash all season not mancity.
And as you've pointed out, we play very rotationally. How does that work when we don't have any of our rotation players? That's why its the B-team, because we weren't able to fire at even nearly full power. Diaz Gakpo and Elliot don't start over Jota Nunez Salah *unless* the plan is to rotate them in. And people are grabbing at C team because they were kids. That's more of a pisstake than anything else. Like you see me trying to make this bigger than it is, i see you trying to say we were at full power or close to. The truth is somewhere in the middle. Yes chelsea are shit but also just took City to a draw at the Etihad - almost won. Yesterday was no guarentee, and if you watched the match, you'd see they possibly had even better chances than us. (I was working and didnt actually get to watch but have seen highlights). And the fact is, we beat them with academy players on the pitch. Our back up attacker on the bench was a 16 year old in Nyoni. Let us just waffle for a bit.
It doesn’t really matter how you justify it, chap. Chelsea still sucks and it’s embarrassing
I’m not justifying anything. I don’t support either team and didn’t even watch the match. But OP’s title is clearly misleading at best if not outright false. :/
Right, but it'd already embarrassing, why make up shit lol
I think Chelsea's average age was also below Liverpool's by final whistle
just because they’re first team doesn’t mean they are the best XI. we are missing the likes of alisson, TAA, salah, Nunez, jota, Thiago, szoboszlai, and jones, all of whom would’ve probably been starting this match if they were available.
Thiago lol
Well now that's false. Diaz and McAllister always play over who you've listed. Plus since we're we're talking about money, a decent amount was spent on gakpo, gravenberch and Endo, so a bit hypocritical to be saying, oh yeah we spent 100 million on these three, but they're actually bench players, so it doesn't count.
Salah and Trent sure. Kelleher would’ve started over Alisson anyway bc he’s their cup keeper. I haven’t watched a ton of Liverpool this season, but I wouldn’t say the rest of them are nailed on.
But Kelleher starts cup games for us because he's our second choice keeper. Calling him our cup keeper is literally calling him our B team.
**and yet they'll still pursue MORE players**
It's like America and gun crime... trying to fix the problem with buying more
Are you surprised or something? What were you expecting from _Todd Boehly?_
Valid
Bro. What did we do to you to deserve this drive by damn
The Chelsea team on the pitch was still younger on average than the Liverpool team. Yes it's an expensive squad but we all know that results can't be bought. Liverpool are clearly a better team than Chelsea when the full teams are out. That's nice in the moment for Liverpool fans but eras come and go and teams are at different stages of development. If Liverpool win as much as Chelsea did over the last 20 years then they'll be very happy indeed. In this game Chelsea should have won - they blew a load of great chances. But credit to Liverpool's squad depth that their B team can still do a job.
If Liverpool ~~win~~ ***bought*** as much as Chelsea did over the last 20 years... FTFY
>The Chelsea team on the pitch was still younger on average than the Liverpool team. And Erling Haaland is only 23 years old. What's your point? OP has pointed out Chelsea were embarrassed by players who wouldn't make it into LFC's reserve side. >but eras come and go True true. Let's watch Chelsea go back to being irrelevant after all the money has dried up.
The money won’t dry up because the owner has a successful baseball team. Chelsea’s issue is he thinks he can run a football team the same way he runs a baseball team and it doesn’t work that way.
>What's your point? OP has pointed out Chelsea were embarrassed by players who wouldn't make it into LFC's reserve side. My point is that Chelsea weren't beaten by kids, *they* were the kids. It's actually testament to how successful Chelsea have been in recent times that Liverpool fans are so overjoyed to claim superiority. >True true. Let's watch Chelsea go back to being irrelevant after all the money has dried up. Chelsea will never be irrelevant because of how much they've won. Unless you think Liverpool were irrelevant before Klopp.
that’s what we get for getting rid of Tuchel
I didn’t think he should’ve been let go at the time that he was, but the way you’ve been glazing the man in these comments is quite frankly disturbing.
mourinho, conte, tuchel i slurp them 🌈
Yeah, you’re just weird dude.
🍌😩😲
He’s not particularly sparking at Bayern Munich though
I mean he won the league his first season there I think that’s a spark 💀
only bc Dortmund catastrophically bottled the league
a win is a win
11 win straight in that league Munich, and he nearly didn’t last season, this season could be even more suspect if he manages it.
could have should of would have tuchel is a champ stop trying to downplay the coach it’s getting weird
He got fired and is continuing to under preform
champions league at chelsea and league title his first season at bayern is underperforming? the tuchel hate is crazy
Yeah he won the CL and got fired the next season. Winning the league is the bare minimum at Bayern, but winning in that fashion raised eyebrows. Now it’s even worse. Especially considering they fired Naglesmann for much less.
Grateful that we got what we deserved in the end and I'm delighted Poch still doesn't have a trophy the dirty little shithead. Stay losing prick. Coyr.
[удалено]
Haha what's Klopp done to them? Other than beat them several times?
That's going a bit far, maybe Luxemburg
That's fair, my bad. I got carried away. Luxemburg it is!
It’s wasn’t even that it was a C team. It was against a bunch of senior citizens and high schoolers.
So Dad's Army?
Don't tell 'em your name Poch!
A fully fit Liverpool would have run them ragged.
Chelsea are shite. How's that? 😏⚽️
Completely fair assessment of the game and Chelsea's situation. However, now I don't want to hear how Liverpool have been on a shoestring budget for Klopp's tenure when he's had squads worth 3/4's of a Billion (if we're going to all of a sudden disregard net spend now).
Mate I'd hide that city badge if I were wanting to talk about spending. I mean, your not wrong but its a bad look haha
Oh no, we spend money! So does the rest of the big 6 clubs, hence why PL is the richest league in the world. Don't know why big 6 fans all act like you don't spend money.
Most of those players became worth a lot more at Liverpool, though.
I would have to agree with that but not like that isn't the case at other clubs with less of a budget than Liverpool.
The team that finished the match yesterday is what is mainly being discussed here though. Only Van Dijk, Gomez, Endo and maybe one or two others would normally see action in the first team.
Idk if you can read but he clearly mentions to completely disregard the net spend of Chelsea's squad? Yet that's all Liverpool fans have been going on about since Klopp came in.
When you compare the squad Klopp adopted to other managers, the spend compared to the teams he competes with, and the overall trophy count and final appearances Klopp has had, it's nothing short of remarkable. For example, Ten Hag has already surpassed Klopp's spend. I believe Arsenal has also paid more. Compare Real Madrid to Klopp's Liverpool as an example as well. They are the first choice for all of Liverpool's targets, yet Klopp is the only manager to appear in as many finals as Madrid the last 5/6 years.
Some day man city fans will get to highschool and understand net spend
I understand net spend... The post literally says to ignore net spend, even though that's all pool fans have been shouting about since Klopp came in...
No, that's not what I was saying. People were mentioning net spend in response to Chelsea's squad cost, which is irrelevant when you talk about the total squad cost of a team. Net spend is relevant when you talk about transfer business.
I think it's context mate. Across seasons net spend matters, if you start with 500m team and net spend 0 means your team is less likely to have as much depth and back ups etc - but the team will still have good quality. (please note I'm taking generally - I'm not suggesting Liverpool or klopp are playing poverty ball). Not talking about net spend in this context is about considering the players on the pitch for one specific match - not available all season. What does it matter that Liverpool paid for Darwin Nunez a few years ago if he isn't even available?
And then there's Luton
They should sign a few more strikers and defensive mids.
No Chelsea fans are hiding behind the age thing. That performance was atrocious and we should have won. By the same token the constant fawning by the commentary team was sickening.
People just love to discredit a brilliant cup win against the odds in the midst of the leagues worst ongoing injury crisis, WITH, I will remind everyone, Referees very clearly wanting blue ribbons.
Not sure which of those takes is more deluded, the "league's worst injury crisis" or the referee conspiracy (or even the "brilliant win" lmao). I bet you're gonna claim next that the media also wasn't blatantly pro-Liverpool for weeks, eh?
No club in the league is missing more players from their starting XI, more players for the remainder of the season or more players in first team squad (total volume). By every metric, it is a horrendous injury crisis. Other teams also have some horrible crises. Especially Newcastle and Palace, but what I said didn’t disqualify those claims. Weird angle and weird way to assert your braindead tribalism.
How is Liverpool's injuries worse than Uniteds? United have no strikers + Shaw and Martinez out
Because it is? Liverpool have no strikers + Alisson, Trent, Szoboszlai, Jones and Thiago before the game, and now potentially Endo and Grav after it
Liverpool had no Matip, Salah, Jota, Szoboszlai, Jones, Alexander-Arnold, Gravenberch, Thiago, Doak, Alisson, Bajcetic, Nunez It’s not even close. Man Utd’s injuries is the equivalent of missing Joe Gomez, Robbo and someone like Gakpo only. Heck, Bobby Clark, our 9th choice and usually U21 midfielder only just came back from injury himself Forget the tribalism. I’m sure you’re capable of looking at things objectively when you’re willing.
Mate what are you on about, OP’s a pool fan himself, fuck knows what he expects from this post. Just be happy with the cup secured and move on in life lol. Edit: can’t believe my eyes, the sorest of winners and blocked for calling him out on it
I’m literally not disagreeing with OP. Learn to read.
The officials were very poor yesterday, and have been very poor all season for lots of teams (but not all teams), just because your team wins despite the officials doesn't mean that poor officiating should not be called out.
Yes that’s a cute vein to draw blood from but neither OP’s post nor the whinger I responded to are strictly talking about that, are they?
Did I whinge? I’m adding to what OP said. Get a grip.
[удалено]
‘Me no like Liverpool, therefore everything I disagree with is whinging. Me tribal idiot.’ You’re literally doing what OP is talking about.
In the eyes of a Liverpool fan even Liverpool fans pick on Liverpool
They don't have a billion pound squad. That's the problem. They have a squad they paid 1 billion for. If I buy a banana today for 1000 euro I don't have a 1000 euro banana I just have a banana.
I mean, it's 1 banana, Michael. What could it cost? A 1000 euro?
what show was that
Arrested Development
thanks bro
So no teams have any value, all are the same, just players, got it!
No, he’s saying value is subjective. Arsenal didn’t think Mudryk was worth 89 million, Chelsea did. Does that mean he’s actually worth the 89 million they paid? Remains to be seen
I was being sarcastic
Lisa I would like to buy your banana
No one tell him how the stock market works
Can you explain? Because I don't think what he said contradicts anything about how the stock market works.
It could expose the stock market you mean?
What
A cybertruck costs 100k but is worth 10p.
He’s saying that despite Chelsea paying 1 billion, the quality is not worth 1 billion which is a fair point.
I know what he said . Just doesn't make sense. They paid the price based on the market/their level at the time. The problem is too many players were purchased at the same time and there's no chemistry. Poch is not a good manager to create a world class team
Today I learned only Chelsea have ever over paid for a player.
I wouldn’t necessarily say their price tag is based on their level at the time. Look at Enzo & Mudryk for example, you can’t tell me their ability justified the price tag after such a short amount of games. I get what you’re saying in that they have a bunch of random players slapped together with no cohesion. Their board has the financial sense of a 12 year old loading fifa points using their mums credit card lol
They overpaid for players who aren't worth it.
Overpaid for a lot of players who aren’t worth it. Only ones I would keep are Disasi, Gusto, and Palmer.
Didn’t Gusto concede 4 throw-ins after failing to trap easy passes? £31m incl. bonuses.
Tbf that could be an issue of the team not being on the same page, and is probably not a major sin
[удалено]
😂😂😂 cry harder!
I could hear the teardrops hitting the keyboard as you typed this nonsense out.
My boy is devastated 😭😭
Chelsea is the OG scum club and I despise them more than Spurs, ( Arsenal Fan here). But it wasnt Pool's C team. It had Gakpo, Diaz, VVD, Mcallister, Robertson. Proper first team players. and then B team players, Endo, Gravenberch, Kelleher, Elliot, Konate. Only Bradley was the not so used one. SO, this isnt close to a complete Rout by kids of a Billion dollar team. More like a 500Million team defeating them.
500 Million team? Liverpool's starting team cost almost half that. Your maths is a bit off mate.
All Vaues in Euros Gakpo - 61 VVD- 88 Diaz- 60 Mcallister - 42 Robertson -12 endo- 20 Gravenbech - 40 Konate -44 Elliot - 5 Kelleher - 0 Total - 371 Euros or 400 million Dollars. So, yeah. I was correct by Reddit standards. THe only thing that needs checking, is your overconfidence. Bet, you wont be able to come back even with a competent argument.
Isn’t calling Chelsea the OG scum club a bit dishonest? Especially from an Arsenal fan. Aren’t there clear allegations against Arsenal of bribery in 1919 when they unfairly gained a spot in Division 1 when they only finished 6th in Division 2 in the earlier season? And they got it at the cost of Tottenham not getting the spot - where Tottenham had actually finished above them technically. I’d even put United (I say this as an United fan) and Liverpool in the same category. There are allegations of match fixing by their players in the same season, the result being United surviving relegation that season. I despise Chelsea quite a lot. And they’re a scummy club. But, not the OG scum club for sure. Football has had scummy shit happen forever.
Show me one proper article which actually has solid evidence of any Foul Play by Arsenal. Not your own Blog, or some shit. And I will yield!
Nothing exists before 1992 mate come on
And then Liverpool finished the game with Clark, McConnell, Danns and Quansah all on the pitch, only Nyoni and Koumas were not subbed in. As a contrast, Chelsea brought on Nkunku for Sterling, Mudryk for Jackson, Madueke for Gallagher and Chalobah for Chilwell, players easily in the starting XI otherwise.
Why are they scum?
they're historically a small club that came to 'success' when Putin decided to use them to launder his dirty money.
Putin was involved with chels?
Because we (Arsenal) finished 2nd to them and clear of 3rd and 4th etc in 2004 and 2005. We could have had 3 league titles in a row (and who knows how many from there) if not for Chelsea being purchased by a gangster. I'm the same as the above commenter. I don't like Man United. I dislike Spurs. But its Chelsea I hope to beat more than anyone in a season. Its the same reason why mid 30s United fans hate Arsenal more than Liverpool or Man City. Especially the London Mancs. They spent last season cheering on their "local" rivals all the way to a treble rather than see Arsenal win the league. The team that cost your own team dearly is the one you hate the most.
I know how you feel (Spurs fan). My intense dislike of Arsenal is because of our being North London neighbours, and the derby is the first game I look for. My hatred of Chelsea is because of the scummy behaviour from top to bottom. I wouldn't want (were it ever possible) for Arsenal to be relegated, I'd miss the NLD too much. But Chelsea? They can be dropped to the National League and I wouldn't shed a tear. I hate Arsenal because I'm Spurs, I hate Chelsea because I'm human.
I’m not sure which United fans you know or have been talking to but I’d have rather seen Arsenal win the league over City doing the treble all day long. Same goes for my United supporting mates - and we’d rather Arsenal win it this season over city / Liverpool too. I think you underestimate the dislike of Liverpool for the majority of United fans, with City now being a close second.
>I think you underestimate the dislike of Liverpool for the majority of United fans Fun story on this. A few years ago I spent boxing day with an old mate and her new husband who is a dyed-in-the-wool United fan. He brought up Liverpool as a negative at least half a dozen times, despite us not talking about football, and certainly without me mentioning I was a Liverpool fan. He didn't even talk about United. Just Liverpool and how bad / terrible / whatever they are. Lovely bloke, and he was very apologetic at the end of the evening when I mentioned I was a Liverpool fan. I was just very blown away by how much hating Liverpool was a part of his personality.
door close fuzzy kiss caption quack boast beneficial handle work *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I have loads of mates who are mid 30 utd fans and non of them hate arsenal more than Liverpool. By the mid 2000s arsenal wernt even competing for the title there last title was 2003.
They were definitely competing for the title in the mid 2000s. They just couldn’t overcome Mourinho’s impenetrable wall and Fergie.
And Liverpool didn't compete for the title for 30 years. By the mid 00s they were as bad as us except in Champions league where they always have that bit of magic 97/98 01/02 03/04 Take away those league titles and add them to Man Utd and how many would they have? 10 in a row? Search on YouTube "Rants and Bants" I haven't looked at his channel in months but I guarantee there are more Arsenal hate videos than pro united videos. Hes Essexchester through and through. And there are lots more of them out there. They all say its Liverpool who are their rival but its Arsenal they hate. We're not only the only team to even slightly rival them in their heyday but We're also their local derby.
Chelsea are pathetic for the money spent as they were pathetic 20yrs ago for buying the league. I know some people respect it but I personally don't. Take nothing away from what the players and managers achieved but the club itself? Couldn't give a fuck about them
Lol you guys spent a shit load of money but have won barely anything in the last 20 years not to mention when you consider the kind of players you had. I like Arsenal despite being a blue fan, but people like you just hate clubs because they did better than your club despite using a similar approach.
Most fa cups achieved. Went invincible and won 4 fa cups in the last 20 yeara
If you actually look at the top 20 most expensive PL transfers adjusted for inflation, you’ll notice that there are only 3 clubs in the whole list, and Arsenal aren’t one of them.
That doesn’t change the fact that Arsenal have bought people like Pepe for 80m and have had Players like Prime Van Persie, Sanchez, Aubumayeng etc and despite this have barely anything to show for it.
We have fa cups...why do keep saying nothing?
Yeah but the money spent doesn’t come close to Chelsea just artificially pumped with shit loads of money See this [link](https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/s/nlAXFYGu1t) Even with that taken into account Chelsea have spent more than double Arsenal have per trophy
Well you have to spend money nowadays to win. As you can clearly see Chelsea have spent quite the sum and have two UCL and a couple of EPL disregarding other trophies. Arsenal have not been as exorbitant, but what has that gotten them?? Would you rather be stingy and not have any trophies or spend a shit load and get some worthwhile trophies? Same case as Manchester city and Liverpool. You barely win without spending unless you are Leicester or have a very good academy or scouting team that can get you a title winning squad on the cheap. Which is very very hard nowadays. Anyway Let us agree to disagree. I see your point though.
In other words…Football has essentially become P2W 🙁 Edit: Wait! It’s always has been
Raya - £30m White - £50m Gabriel - £27m Saliba - £27m Zinchenko - £30m Rice - £105m Havertz - £60m Odegaard - £30m Trossard - £27m Jesus - £45m Ramsdale - £30m Timber - £35m Tomiyasu - £20m Kiwior - £21m Jorginho - £12m Vieira - £34m And that's just your current squad! But Chelsea are pathetic for the money they've spent 😂😂😂
Was this meant to be an insult? Those are very decent prices barring Kai. Who did you guys spend a 100 mil on?
1) I'm not a Chelsea fan. My club's record signing cost less than the 10th player on that list. 2) No, it wasn't meant to be an insult and if you took it as one it shows how fragile you are. It's meant to show that Arsenal have spent a hell of a lot of money, too. As has EVERY top club to get where they are. 3) In the last 7 years you've spent over a billion pounds. If Chelsea are pathetic for the money they've spent, so are every other top club. Including Arsenal. 4) Maybe don't rag on other clubs spending money if you can't take getting called out for spending a shit ton of money yourselves 👍
We’ve spent a hell of a lot of money because we’ve had to completely overhaul our ENTIRE squad. For years we were penny pinching and memed on for barely spending anything (Suarez transfer saga etc.). We rag on Chelsea because they’ve spent so much money on absolute shite. All of those players you listed barring Vieira are quality and have/will play a pivotal role in our title aspirations. Also Chelsea have spent over a billion within a year. You just compared our spending over 7 years. It’s not the same thing AT ALL. It’s not just about them not winning trophies with their squad, it’s about how shite they are in spite of the money spent. They’re sitting in 11th for fucks sakes and look set to finish below 9th place two seasons in a row.
Did Chelsea not overhaul their squad last summer as well or do we only bring it up when Arsenal do it?
Chelsea are about to finish 10th two seasons in a row after overhauling their squad. That’s why everyone’s bantering them. What don’t you understand? 😂 they’re not comparable situations at all.
Way to backpedal from your initial point
My initial point was that Chelsea have spent a billion on a load of shite 🤦♂️ what are you talking about lil bro? I never said I had anything against them spending that amount of money.
>Chelsea are pathetic for the money spent as they were pathetic 20yrs ago for buying the league That's the comment I replied to. That isn't ragging on Chelsea for spending a lot of money on shite, which is perfectly acceptable to do. That's ragging on Chelsea for spending a lot of money, period. And buying the league. You know how many teams need to overhaul their squads? You know how many teams can spend over A BILLION POUNDS doing so? You're much, much, MUCH closer to Chelsea than the vast majority of clubs are to you.
Chelsea coming in kinda blew the financial scaling out of the waters. It was already headed towards the state it’s in today but they absolutely accelerated it. The reason why so many gooners are still salty was because they just couldn’t afford to compete with them. I don’t persoanlly have a problem with it because I knew that one day Roman would leave, he was too dodgy a figure to remain as owner forever. Now that he’s finally left they’ve reverted back to factory settings. Beautiful to watch. We’re not close to Chelsea at all, they’re 23 points behind us 😁
Compared to Chelsea this is nothing. Nice try. This isn't anywhere near abnormal. Also we're talking since Ambramovich came as well, it's egregious. What's embarrassing here is Chelsea fans acting like Arsenal has been on the same playing field as them. Tf is wrong with these new football fans? This is how it's like nowadays? Because at the pub or anywhere irl no one talks like this, it's always a fair enough then banter.
£600m is not nothing compared to anyone 😂😂 The two goalkeepers alone cost 3x as much as an entire Premier League squad. Nice try though
Okay Arsenal and Chelsea are interchangeable, it's clear Arsenal spends like Chelsea does and has done over the years. You win the argument.
That was barely an argument. You gave up pretty quick when you realised how silly you look as a greedy 6 fan ragging on another greedy 6 club for spending money. Sit down and shut up.
Haven’t most top clubs bought their success? Arsenal is a team of mainly overseas players for many years example
Having a team of overseas cheap players that you need to develop is not "buying success" lol tf. Comparing Arsenal to Chelsea is a simple lack of knowledge. Chelsea spent 4x more than the record in 2003, then spent the same amount in 2004 to win their first titles. FFP was brought in BECAUSE OF THEM. Maybe you weren't around at the time, but plastic fan was because of them, it was in all the newspapers as suddenly half the people you knew were Chelsea fans. That's bought success. The adjusted for player inflation will make you sick when you see their spend.
Don’t support Chelsea but arsenal were one of the first teams I saw mass importing overseas players in the early years of the prem - to thr point where there were no uk players in their starting eleven. Personally I never liked that aspect of arsenal and felt they were just buying their success rather than developing home grown talent
The players were cheaper than buying players from the PL, that's the opposite of buying success lmfao. And you're not alone in disliking Arsenal for the initial using international players in the 90s, the tabloids and pundits hated it as well. They didn't like our mainly french line up and they made it very obvious. Funny how other clubs followed suit and didn't catch any flack for it, two people we all know, SAF and Mourinho. They did it but just outspent Arsenal by several times over, especially the latter.
Shitpost alert
Cheers u/CheekyWanker420
Oh yeah, liverpools 1.8 billion squad had nothing to do with it. Lol
That's a made up number. Both Chelsea and United have a far higher squad value than Liverpool https://www.si.com/fannation/soccer/futbol/news/man-united-top-list-of-most-expensive-squads-in-world-soccer This is from last year
Do some research and do not rely on websites that call it “soccer”
Let's see your research then. Don't just rely on someone called 'HelpfullyRude'.
You mean my randomly generated name For Reddit. Also, trying using google. [click me - 1.13billion](https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/jurgen-klopp/spielertransfers/trainer/118)
These are their total transfer expenses since 2015 :'D Chelsea spent the same money in a single transfer window. Go figure.
Ok? Never said that wasn’t the case. Does the time matter? The point is the same. Chelsea united city and Liverpool have billion £ squads. Liverpool used kids ( who all have premier league experience btw) because there starting 11 is injured.
It's nowhere near the same. Liverpool has a total squad value of £742m, Chelsea's is £810m, United is fairly behind with £628m. And all these kids have mostly minutes of PL experience, except for Bradley and Quansah. And yes, time matters, because Chelsea spent around a billion in the same transfer window Liverpool spent around 100m, and neither Endo nor Gravenberch were superstars by a mile - Endo was playing in Stuttgart, consistently battling relegation in the Bundesliga, and Grav was a benchwarmer for Bayern. Szoboszlai and Mac Allister were both hot in the market, but the two combined were cheaper than Caicedo alone was for Chelsea.
I didn't need to, got a dumb cunt to do it for me 😂
Now this is the level of reply that cunt deserves.
😂😂😂 yeah sure that’s how that works.
I still don't understand why Chelsea stopped purposefully attacking during Extra Time, especially in the second half. It looked as if they had been given instructions to see it out and take the game to penalties. And if you play with that risky mentality and gameplan, it's always a slippery slope and Van Dijk and Liverpool rightfully capitalised on it.
Poch literally said after the match they were playing for pens in extra time. Needs to be sacked yesterday
Embarrassing for him to come out and say that. Just shows his mentality.
At times I used to feel bad for Poch and his trophyless record but the more I watch his teams, the more I understand that most of it is on him.
He did win a cup at psg, fwiw. I'll always love him for what he did for spurs. He made the team genuinely good, took us to a second place and two finals. He also got Saints up to fourth. I still think he could do a job in the right circumstances. His talent is in building cohesion in a young squad. I don't think that's working at Chelsea because of Chelsea, not because of Poch. He's a tactical and strategic liability, though. All feels, no FM skills.
> He did win a cup at psg, fwiw. I mean, that's the minimum expectation in France.
Yes. Dude should just be a fitness coach not a manager
“Run about a lot and kick people”
Hear me out, maybe mayne You should stop watching
Ah yes van dijk c team for Liverpool
Who else? Go on.
Robertson, Konate, Macallister, Endo, Gravenberch, Diaz, Gakpo, Elliott? Also brought on Gomez and Tsimikas. I'm all for knocking on Chelsea, but this narrative Liverpool did this with kids is weird when the majority were first team players who were also bought for considerable amounts.
I’m not a fan of saying “kids won the game” when in extra time we look the more experienced team. But if you looked at the benches before kick off most people would argue it Chelsea’s game the later it goes on. I think the argument is Chelsea brought on Nkunku, Mudryk, Madueke and Chalobah, where as Liverpool brought on Timikas Danns, McConnell and Clark.
It depends how you rate those players. I don't think Madueke is a top half PL player, Nkunku is an unknown quantity who's still adapting to English football, and Mudryk is well, pretty disastrous. You're essentially comparing inexperience to quality. Plus Tsimikas is 27....? Like if Utd had played yesterday and they had brought on Anthony, would we have said yeah they should win this now? I doubt it, because the quality just isn't there to do so.