had chelsea lost against POOL and roma with ballack??

give me an answear

i say no

I say yes...Ballack hasn't shown his proflicliflcic-ness with Chelsea, because Lampard scores most of the midfield goals. You'll need to justify a bit more - who in their team should make way for Ballack? How would he have improved their play?

ballack is not about goals, his brainpower on the field is more important for chelsea, hes controlling the midfield and dont give the enemy space


are you kidding me, ballack will always play when his fit

No, with VDV they would have won though

Toni Kroos wrote:ballack is not about goals, his brainpower on the field is more important for chelsea, hes controlling the midfield and dont give the enemy space


are you kidding me, ballack will always play when his fit

Yes but if he was to be put in, then they would either have to lose their DM (Mikel) which leaves the back 4 with no protection, or Deco, who adds a lot of creativity and link-up play with the attack. So far Scolari seems to be keen on retaining the 4-3-3, so if Ballack is to be squeezed in then one of the wingers will have to be dropped and the formation changed to 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 with Joe Cole behind the striker.

the facts don't lie

with Ballack in the side Chelsea win 100% of games
when Ballack is out of the side Chelsea win 40% of games

if Ballack had played in the Champions League final Chelsea WOULD HAVE WON

think about it



and have a great day

Ballacks

kas wrote:

Toni Kroos wrote:ballack is not about goals, his brainpower on the field is more important for chelsea, hes controlling the midfield and dont give the enemy space


are you kidding me, ballack will always play when his fit

Yes but if he was to be put in, then they would either have to lose their DM (Mikel) which leaves the back 4 with no protection, or Deco, who adds a lot of creativity and link-up play with the attack. So far Scolari seems to be keen on retaining the 4-3-3, so if Ballack is to be squeezed in then one of the wingers will have to be dropped and the formation changed to 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 with Joe Cole behind the striker.

I don't agree - Malouda or Kalou would be out, and Scolari would modify his system. Remember Portsmouth game? Mikel, Lampard, Deco and Ballack played together and it worked perfectly. Anelka played up-front with Joe Cole as second striker, which could be done by Malouda (if you need SS more of a wing player) or Kalou (more of a scoring threat).

Not saying that I'm sure that result against Liverpool would be different, but it's still quite possible.

who do you think was missed more ringsting? Ballack or Drogba?

I'd take Drogba every time

Glenn Hysén wrote:who do you think was missed more ringsting? Ballack or Drogba?

I'd take Drogba every time

Ringsting

Definitely it has to be Drogba, especially if you look at his replacements and generally forwards playing at that game for Chelsea. But having Ballack and one less forward on the pitch would help Scolari's guys dominate midfield, where during the real match Liverpool looked really, really strong. And this by itself could change outcome of whole match...

With Ballack Chelsea would have a chance beating Mascherano/Xabi in midfield and forcing Agger or Carragher to step up, opening a channel for through ball for Anelka. I know he sucks, but if eventually he scores, it's more probable that it will happen from through balls, than from headers. He is useless as target man too (even if that game he tried hard, and liked him more than Kalou or Malouda - which is not telling much)...

Toni Kroos wrote:give me an answear

i say no

I can see the logic. Seeing as Ballack is a proven winner. As shown by all those victorious finals with Leverkusen, Chelsea and Germany. And all those Premiership winning medals he's picked up since being at Chelsea.

Interesting fact- before Ballack signed for Chelsea, they were two times Premier League champions.

So does this mean they would have been champions the last 2 seasons had Ballack NOT been playing for them?

What do you think Toni. Any thoughts?

This is a fantastic thread. Premised entirely on a hypothetical. Actually two hypothetical scenarios. One is the fantastic question itself. The other is that Ballack is actually decent.