Is this going to be the best Premiership season for years?

Chelsea arn't playing well, Manchester arn't very convincing, Arsenal had an awful start to the season, and Liverpool took a while to get going.

...and on the other end of the scale, Everton, Portsmouth and Villa have all had tremendious starts to the season. Could this be the most open and entrancing premiership for years?

...Chelsea may be top of the league, but they arn't exactly setting the world alight like they were for the last 2 seasons. They are not invincible, as Boro showed earlier. They are not destroying teams, or outplaying them especially well.

Could they slip up?

Could the season be decided on the last day?

Could this finally be the year Bolton win the league?

We're not playing well? Maybe, but 5 out of 6 wins isn't a bad start tp the season mate (Poorer than last season I'll give you).

Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, and United are all picking up points week in week out and that's the thing. Despite none of us playing our best stuff (understandable, it's still early in the season and every club has key players either injured or just coming back).

Great start by Villa, Pompey and Everton like you say, but how long will they keep it up for?

Chelsea to win the league by Mid-April....

S4P wrote:We're not playing well? Maybe, but 5 out of 6 wins isn't a bad start tp the season mate (Poorer than last season I'll give you).

Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, and United are all picking up points week in week out and that's the thing. Despite none of us playing our best stuff (understandable, it's still early in the season and every club has key players either injured or just coming back).

Great start by Villa, Pompey and Everton like you say, but how long will they keep it up for?

The hardest game you've had is Fulham away. (or us at home) are you havn't looked brilliant in either. Last season, Chelsea seemed far more 'confident' in their performances

Crouching Tiger wrote:

S4P wrote:We're not playing well? Maybe, but 5 out of 6 wins isn't a bad start tp the season mate (Poorer than last season I'll give you).

Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, and United are all picking up points week in week out and that's the thing. Despite none of us playing our best stuff (understandable, it's still early in the season and every club has key players either injured or just coming back).

Great start by Villa, Pompey and Everton like you say, but how long will they keep it up for?

The hardest game you've had is Fulham away. (or us at home) are you havn't looked brilliant in either. Last season, Chelsea seemed far more 'confident' in their performances

I don't think we've played well, but, considering we've had little or no width, I think winning 5 of your first 6 games is a tremendous start. It may not have been a convincing start (performance wise) but the results are still coming in (and that's what I meant when I said we've done well this season)

It will certainly be the best season yet if we bring the title back home to the most successful trophey cabinet in England

Typical Chelsea - 5 wins out of 6 isn't bad. Well, it is when 4 out of 5 of those wins have been 'ground out' results. Sooner or latter the wheels will fall off unless you start to play better football. Man U, Liverpool and Arsenal, by comparison, have played better football but not got quite as good results, mainly due to poor finishing and/or a bit of bad luck. If you think you can grind out another 25 wins this season then fine, we'll see what happens. But I'd like the team that wins the league to be the team who plays the best football - like Arsenal in 2004 or Man U the previous year.

Agreed Saints, id be mortified if my club spent 400 trillion on a team that grinds out wins, fuck me id want them to put the show of my life on. Please dont let for a 3rd season a terribly negative footballing side win the league.

saintgoingmarching wrote:Typical Chelsea - 5 wins out of 6 isn't bad. Well, it is when 4 out of 5 of those wins have been 'ground out' results. Sooner or latter the wheels will fall off unless you start to play better football. .

Don't you think I was being sarcastic when I said this?

5 wins and 1 defeat this season, with 2 key wingers missing almost all of the matches and some people think we're struggling.

If you take out the wingers of a team, leaving a congested midfield, of course the football is not going to be very entertaining. I expect it to pick up.

Robben played yesterday did he not.....

Its not the fact you have had no wingers, you're attempting to play a whole new system, so you are still trying to find your best x11.

Personally you look weaker for it, and it looks like your formation has changed solely to fit in your new signings

Football Genius wrote:Agreed Saints, id be mortified if my club spent 400 trillion on a team that grinds out wins, fuck me id want them to put the show of my life on. Please dont let for a 3rd season a terribly negative footballing side win the league.

In truth, before this week (and in a way, your first half v Tottenham) you haven't exactly played entertaining football, but how can I laugh at your performances, if it wins you games? I can't.

In truth, the team that spends the most amount of money (excluding Arsenal) wins the league. Blackburn in the mid-90s spent more money than anyone, and hardly played "entertaining football". From the mid 90s right up until 2003, only Real Madrid and Inter Milan spent as much/more money than Manchester United, and nobody could compete with them (although Arsenal really pushed them).

Like I said, if you're playing 4 CM, because your wingers are either injured (Robben, Joe Cole) or don't deserve a place in the team, because of poor performances (SWP), it's hardly going to be 'entertaining' football, but if it wins matches and you can still dominate possession, I'm not exactly bothered.

S4P wrote:

saintgoingmarching wrote:Typical Chelsea - 5 wins out of 6 isn't bad. Well, it is when 4 out of 5 of those wins have been 'ground out' results. Sooner or latter the wheels will fall off unless you start to play better football. .

Don't you think I was being sarcastic when I said this?

No

5 wins and 1 defeat this season, with 2 key wingers missing almost all of the matches and some people think we're struggling.

Given that you've spent nearly 100 million on wingers in the last 3 years, complaining about missing two is ridiculous. You've still got Kalou and SWP, it's just that Mourinho would rather play hoof and run football.

If you take out the wingers of a team, leaving a congested midfield, of course the football is not going to be very entertaining. I expect it to pick up.

Man U are missing Giggs and Park (as important to them as the two player you are missing, if not more so) yet play football that's about 100 times as exciting. And they've bought two wingers in 3 years (Park and Ronaldo). Arsenal loan-swapped their best winger out, and sold you their leftback, yet they play football that about's 50 times as exciting.

You cannot use Robben/Cole injuries as an excuse when you've got better replacement than your counterparts but still play dull, hoof n run football.

Football Genius wrote:Robben played yesterday did he not.....

Yes, but he's only just come back from injury and still can't go longer than 60 minutes.

Football Genius wrote:Its not the fact you have had no wingers, you're attempting to play a whole new system, so you are still trying to find your best x11.

Personally you look weaker for it, and it looks like your formation has changed solely to fit in your new signings

agreed, but within the next few weeks, you'll see better stuff once the team begins to really 'gel' again. I remember Mourinho saying (just after the Community Shield match) that it would take Chelsea near on 2 months (early October) to find their best form.

saintgoingmarching wrote:

No

OK, well I was

saintgoingmarching wrote:5 wins and 1 defeat this season, with 2 key wingers missing almost all of the matches and some people think we're struggling

Given that you've spent nearly 100 million on wingers in the last 3 years, complaining about missing two is ridiculous. You've still got Kalou and SWP, it's just that Mourinho would rather play hoof and run football.

Kalou is more of a striker is he not? And Wright-Phillips looks poor almost every time he plays (so why should he play, if he's not going to try?)

saintgoingmarching wrote:
Man U are missing Giggs and Park (as important to them as the two player you are missing, if not more so) yet play football that's about 100 times as exciting. And they've bought two wingers in 3 years (Park and Ronaldo). Arsenal loan-swapped their best winger out, and sold you their leftback, yet they play football that about's 50 times as exciting.

Not since Giggs has got injured they haven't, which makes my point. Certainly their end product has got much worse.

It's all very well Arsenal playing pass and move 30 yards out, but again, there's no end product (possibly because they loaned out their best winger, as well as selling Pires too?)

saintgoingmarching wrote:You cannot use Robben/Cole injuries as an excuse when you've got better replacement than your counterparts but still play dull, hoof n run football.

Actually, the only time we've really played "long ball" this season, was against Liverpool (and that was predominantly when we were down to 10 men). I don't consider a player like Lampard/Essien trying to chip a ball over the top to Drogba from only 30 yards out "hoof and run"

S4P wrote:

saintgoingmarching wrote:

No

OK, well I was

So you don't consider 5 wins out of 6 a good start?

saintgoingmarching wrote:5 wins and 1 defeat this season, with 2 key wingers missing almost all of the matches and some people think we're struggling

Given that you've spent nearly 100 million on wingers in the last 3 years, complaining about missing two is ridiculous. You've still got Kalou and SWP, it's just that Mourinho would rather play hoof and run football.

Kalou is more of a striker is he not? And Wright-Phillips looks poor almost every time he plays (so why should he play, if he's not going to try?)

Kalou can play wide, SWP only became crap since he went to Chelsea. Go figure.

saintgoingmarching wrote:
Man U are missing Giggs and Park (as important to them as the two player you are missing, if not more so) yet play football that's about 100 times as exciting. And they've bought two wingers in 3 years (Park and Ronaldo). Arsenal loan-swapped their best winger out, and sold you their leftback, yet they play football that about's 50 times as exciting.

Not since Giggs has got injured they haven't, which makes my point. Certainly their end product has got much worse.

Bullshit. They battered Celtic and Reading, and created more good chances than Arsenal did in that game. Their only boring game so far this season that I've seen was against Tottenham.

Their end product hasn't got much worse - they still create more chances than any other side in the league. Yesterday it was only a dreadful penalty decision (note how many penalties Chelsea have had already this season) and poor finishing that stopped it being 4-0 to Man U.

It's all very well Arsenal playing pass and move 30 yards out, but again, there's no end product (possibly because they loaned out their best winger, as well as selling Pires too?)

I don't even like how Arsenal play but there is an end product and Arsenal still play considerably more interesting football than Chelsea.

saintgoingmarching wrote:You cannot use Robben/Cole injuries as an excuse when you've got better replacement than your counterparts but still play dull, hoof n run football.

Actually, the only time we've really played "long ball" this season, was against Liverpool (and that was predominantly when we were down to 10 men). I don't consider a player like Lampard/Essien trying to chip a ball over the top to Drogba from only 30 yards out "hoof and run"

I do. Keep lobbing the ball into Drogba, try to pick up the scraps. Same as Bolton with Kevin Davies, essentially. But Bolton do it more entertainingly, and mix it up with wing play. You used to do that - the first season that you won the Premiership you were an exciting team. Not any more, I'm afraid.


Like I say, if you're happy to just grind out results then you'll probably win the league again but once more fall short in Europe. Ballack and Shevchenko should have added new dimensions to your play - Shevchenko being the best all-round striker in Europe, Ballack being twice the playmaker Lampard is - but in fact you seem to have gone backwards. Look at your goals yesterday - the first was a penalty (yawn) the second was 'play it into Drogba, get it back, hoof it!!!!!' which I've seen dozens of times and it's not particularly interesting anymore.

saintgoingmarching wrote:
So you don't consider 5 wins out of 6 a good start?

I consider it an excellent start. I don't think you quite understood what I meant (I must've worded it badly). I was being sarcastic before, because people (not necessarily posters on here, but the media in general) are saying things such as "Oh Chelsea are struggling this season"

saintgoingmarching wrote:the second was 'play it into Drogba, get it back, hoof it!!!!!' which I've seen dozens of times and it's not particularly interesting anymore.

Don't agree. I thought it was excellent midfield play. It was a goal similar to the ones you saw a lot from United in their treble winning days. One of the strikers (Normally Cole or Yorke) would play a 1-2 with the midfield and Scholes would arrive and hit it in from 20 yards out. But yeah, we have seen it many times before (first United, now Chelsea), so I can understand why it gets boring to see

saintgoingmarching wrote:(note how many penalties Chelsea have had already this season)

Yes I do. And all but one of them (the one that was missed funnily enough) have been deserved.

The penalty yesterday on United was very harsh, but how many years did they go without conceding a pen at Old Trafford in the Premiership? It was something ridiculous like 10 seasons (before Middlesborough finally got one about 4 or 5 years ago). You tend to get the better of the decisions when you're the top dog, (Real Madrid in the Champions League before for example), but I think it all evens itself out over the season and I wouldn't like to accuse the ref of cheating for anyone

I disagree with the original poster, the league has started well but it will now settle into a boring easy Chelsea title by 10 points.

@saints: obviously Chelsea play boring football and they do grind out results. The problem is that they are absolutely amazing at it and have shown in the past that they are well capable of going 30 games unbeaten with plenty of 1-0s and narrow 2-0s.

I worry.

S4P wrote:

saintgoingmarching wrote:
So you don't consider 5 wins out of 6 a good start?

I consider it an excellent start. I don't think you quite understood what I meant (I must've worded it badly). I was being sarcastic before, because people (not necessarily posters on here, but the media in general) are saying things such as "Oh Chelsea are struggling this season"

Fair enough, I take your point. But mine is simply this: Chelsea aren't struggling for results, but they are struggling to play attractive football. Call me an aesthete if you like, but I'd prefer to finish 2nd playing beautiful football. Of course, I'm a Southampton fan so finishing 2nd in the league would be incredible for us, particularly this season.

saintgoingmarching wrote:the second was 'play it into Drogba, get it back, hoof it!!!!!' which I've seen dozens of times and it's not particularly interesting anymore.

Don't agree. I thought it was excellent midfield play. It was a goal similar to the ones you saw a lot from United in their treble winning days. One of the strikers (Normally Cole or Yorke) would play a 1-2 with the midfield and Scholes would arrive and hit it in from 20 yards out. But yeah, we have seen it many times before (first United, now Chelsea), so I can understand why it gets boring to see

The difference being that Man U scored all sorts of different goals, whereas Chelsea do a lot of 'hoof it if you get within 20 yards'. Direct football is great, in moderation. Every live game I've seen of Chelsea in the last 12 months has seen them primarily rely on direct aggressive play.

saintgoingmarching wrote:(note how many penalties Chelsea have had already this season)

Yes I do. And all but one of them (the one that was missed funnily enough) have been deserved.

Hmmm...

The penalty yesterday on United was very harsh, but how many years did they go without conceding a pen at Old Trafford in the Premiership? It was something ridiculous like 10 seasons (before Middlesborough finally got one about 4 or 5 years ago).

That's mainly because Man U were excellent defensively - they actually didn't concede that many fouls at all, in or outside of the area. I don't remember that many 'could have been' decisions that resulted in no penalty.

You tend to get the better of the decisions when you're the top dog, (Real Madrid in the Champions League before for example), but I think it all evens itself out over the season and I wouldn't like to accuse the ref of cheating for anyone

On the contrary, I don't think they even themselves out. That's another football myth.

Owen Thomas wrote:
@saints: obviously Chelsea play boring football and they do grind out results. The problem is that they are absolutely amazing at it and have shown in the past that they are well capable of going 30 games unbeaten with plenty of 1-0s and narrow 2-0s.

I worry.

Of course, if they carry on like this then they'll eventually grind out a 1st place in the league, but they won't make any friends doing it. When Arsenal won their 3 league titles everyone, pretty much, held up their hands and said 'well, they play some bloody good football and no one had an answer to it'. Same with Man U. Chelsea don't seem to give a damn for entertainment, which is possibly why they sometimes only fill 3/4 of the stadium.

S4P wrote:I don't think we've played well, but, considering we've had little or no width, I think winning 5 of your first 6 games is a tremendous start. It may not have been a convincing start (performance wise) but the results are still coming in (and that's what I meant when I said we've done well this season)

no width you can have no complaints on that score its a tactical decision for your manager, not forced upon you

No i would, but this maybe be the best la liga season in years(then again la liga is great every year)

Messiah wrote:No i would, but this maybe be the best la liga season in years(then again la liga is great every year)

Are you female Messiah?

Parks Lives wrote:
Are you female Messiah?

He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!

Sorry, couldn't resist

I'll get me coat.

Best premiership season for years? Only if your a Chelsea fan.

dont think the best prem season....but definitely the best league one season

@ millwall

Roger_Hunt wrote:

Parks Lives wrote:
Are you female Messiah?

He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!

Sorry, couldn't resist

I'll get me coat.

On the contrary, that's a solid joke.

It will be the best premiership season, purely because Liverpool will win the league.

@half English half biscuit.
See you in the championship next season.

Obispo wrote:It will be the best premiership season, purely because Liverpool will win the league.

I think thats what Crouching was really getting at.