chelski 0 - 2 aston villa
-
-
i think you quoted the wrong tnp comment thankOriginally posted by iceFatboy:anyone read this report??
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/sports/story/0,4136,140888,00.html?
CHELSEA were awful. They had a whole lot of possession but failed to make a significant impact. Scott Carson was hardly tested.
Click to see larger image
Didier Drogba wonders what has gone wrong to his mighty Blues at Villa Park. -- Picture: REUTERS
Aston Villa have learnt how to play the big teams. Soak up the pressure and hit them on the break.
It was this tactic that reduced Manchester United to just three goals in five matches. And it worked wonders for them.
Chelsea lacked invention. I thought Joe Cole would be a much better option to start because he has the capability to turn a match around with a moment of genius. He came on too late, and was the only one who came closest to scoring.
Shaun Wright-Phillips has to work much harder on his crosses if he is to progress further.
And Didier Drogba - what a pathetic diver! He was clearly cheating his way through the match, going down as though he had been hit by a bullet at the faintest of touches.
A man as strongly built as him cannot be going to ground that easily, so it was plain diving.
Jose Mourinho also has some explaining to do. You could see how frustrated Roman Abramovich was after Villa scored the second goal.
He puffed his cheeks, stood up and headed for the exit. It's time he gave his manager the 'hairdryer' treatment.
now, read the comments ->
- Ng Ghim Pheng, 17, student
MARTIN O'Neill must have studied Chelsea's play studiously to come up with a winning formula.
His players stuck to the plan of marking Chelsea's forwards tightly from the first minute, so much so that Drogba and gang couldn't even muster a decent shot at goal for most of the match.
Martin Laursen defined what stubborn and effective defending means, as he cut off Chelsea's attacks time and time again - so much so that Carson in goal had not much to do.
Zat Knight's goal exposed Chelsea's make-shift centre-back pairing of Terry and Alex.
It is not often that you see Chelsea conceding such a goal.
The second goal was a sucker punch. It happened just as Chelsea were searching for the equaliser.
Villa deserved the win, and O'Neill a pat on the back and a big bonus from management for showing them how Chelsea could be beaten.
"It is not often that you see Chelsea conceding such a goal."
the truth burns..... -
wah.. so much words ar... i help u guys summarised what GP said ok.....Originally posted by iceFatboy:anyone read this report??
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/sports/story/0,4136,140888,00.html?
now, read the comments ->
- Ng Ghim Pheng, 17, student
MARTIN O'Neill must have studied Chelsea's play studiously to come up with a winning formula.
His players stuck to the plan of marking Chelsea's forwards tightly from the first minute, so much so that Drogba and gang couldn't even muster a decent shot at goal for most of the match.
Martin Laursen defined what stubborn and effective defending means, as he cut off Chelsea's attacks time and time again - so much so that Carson in goal had not much to do.
Zat Knight's goal exposed Chelsea's make-shift centre-back pairing of Terry and Alex.
It is not often that you see Chelsea conceding such a goal.
The second goal was a sucker punch. It happened just as Chelsea were searching for the equaliser.
Villa deserved the win, and O'Neill a pat on the back and a big bonus from management for showing them how Chelsea could be beaten.
"It is not often that you see Chelsea conceding such a goal."
the truth burns.....
Chelski SUCKZ!!! , period.
v -
thats all you are going to say dickhead? wheres all the gloating? go suck lolly lahOriginally posted by ghimpheng:i think you quoted the wrong tnp comment thank
-
My bad.Originally posted by ghimpheng:i think you quoted the wrong tnp comment thank
icefatboy, i think u really need to re-read the comments again.I THOUGHT Chelsea were very unlucky not to score with 13 corner-kicks and 20 shots, of which eight were on goal.
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/sports/story/0,4136,140888,00.html? <<---- hint: scroll all the way to the bottom and start counting the names and up the page til GP name.
Chelsea created lots of good chances but failed to finish it and were certainly missing Frank Lampard's driving runs into the box.
Chelsea decided to go gung-ho in the 80th minute and sent John Terry up front as a striker - and got punished by Villa.
- Ng Ghim Pheng, 17, student
Very de paiseh..
-
mine isOriginally posted by turbo_drift:Zhun bo?
click on the link provided by icefatboy and u'll know whether icefatboy is quoting the right one.
I THOUGHT Chelsea were very unlucky not to score with 13 corner-kicks and 20 shots, of which eight were on goal.
Chelsea created lots of good chances but failed to finish it and were certainly missing Frank Lampard's driving runs into the box.
Chelsea decided to go gung-ho in the 80th minute and sent John Terry up front as a striker - and got punished by Villa.
- Ng Ghim Pheng, 17, student
The One IceFatboi quoted
MARTIN O'Neill must have studied Chelsea's play studiously to come up with a winning formula.
His players stuck to the plan of marking Chelsea's forwards tightly from the first minute, so much so that Drogba and gang couldn't even muster a decent shot at goal for most of the match.
Martin Laursen defined what stubborn and effective defending means, as he cut off Chelsea's attacks time and time again - so much so that Carson in goal had not much to do.
Zat Knight's goal exposed Chelsea's make-shift centre-back pairing of Terry and Alex.
It is not often that you see Chelsea conceding such a goal.
The second goal was a sucker punch. It happened just as Chelsea were searching for the equaliser.
Villa deserved the win, and O'Neill a pat on the back and a big bonus from management for showing them how Chelsea could be beaten.
- Elvin Woo PF, 54, civil servant -
whatever it is. the 'unlucky' part was a lame excuse. just accept it lah, you fair-weathered fan!Originally posted by ghimpheng:mine is
I THOUGHT Chelsea were very unlucky not to score with 13 corner-kicks and 20 shots, of which eight were on goal.
Chelsea created lots of good chances but failed to finish it and were certainly missing Frank Lampard's driving runs into the box.
Chelsea decided to go gung-ho in the 80th minute and sent John Terry up front as a striker - and got punished by Villa.
- Ng Ghim Pheng, 17, student
The One IceFatboi quoted
MARTIN O'Neill must have studied Chelsea's play studiously to come up with a winning formula.
His players stuck to the plan of marking Chelsea's forwards tightly from the first minute, so much so that Drogba and gang couldn't even muster a decent shot at goal for most of the match.
Martin Laursen defined what stubborn and effective defending means, as he cut off Chelsea's attacks time and time again - so much so that Carson in goal had not much to do.
Zat Knight's goal exposed Chelsea's make-shift centre-back pairing of Terry and Alex.
It is not often that you see Chelsea conceding such a goal.
The second goal was a sucker punch. It happened just as Chelsea were searching for the equaliser.
Villa deserved the win, and O'Neill a pat on the back and a big bonus from management for showing them how Chelsea could be beaten.
- Elvin Woo PF, 54, civil servant -
GP is back!
-
Welcome back, GP.
GP is back in action -
Why is this thread allowed to continue? The thread title alone is enough.
-
well i did call man utd manure, pool as poo and arsenal as arse before, so must be fair abit.Originally posted by SumOne:Why is this thread allowed to continue? The thread title alone is enough. -
i think you are one of the best chelsea fans i have ever seenOriginally posted by stellazio:well i did call man utd manure, pool as poo and arsenal as arse before, so must be fair abit. 
-
This is wat GP posted.
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/sports/story/0,4136,140888,00.html? (scroll all the way down and see the name at where [bottom most,]).I THOUGHT Chelsea were very unlucky not to score with 13 corner-kicks and 20 shots, of which eight were on goal.
Chelsea created lots of good chances but failed to finish it and were certainly missing Frank Lampard's driving runs into the box.
Chelsea decided to go gung-ho in the 80th minute and sent John Terry up front as a striker - and got punished by Villa.
- Ng Ghim Pheng, 17, student -
quote:Originally posted by stellazio:
Are U sure he is a Chelsea fan? more like a ManU fan in disguise!!
well i did call man utd manure, pool as poo and arsenal as arse before, so must be fair abit. Laughing
quote:Originally posted by sandking:
i think you are one of the best chelsea fans i have ever seen
See... my posting on Spurs being denied 3 penalties was taken off the instant it was post up, but this Blues flaming thread continues on......
Hmmm i wonder
-
you called man utd cheaters, divers etc.Originally posted by ultimate_s&l:Are U sure he is a Chelsea fan? more like a ManU fan in disguise!!
See... my posting on Spurs being denied 3 penalties was taken off the instant it was post up, but this Blues flaming thread continues on......
Hmmm i wonder
this thread was only offensive in the naming sense, there were no vulgarities or anything used! -
Great result!
And rumours of ballack,sheva leaving and roman and mourinho not on good terms are pleasing too~ -
Actually i don't find the title offensive at all... If someone didn't mention it, i didn't even realise there was anything amiss with it. Anyway, Chelski isn't an offensive name i think, Cos its just a word/name most of the English Press use quite frequent to reflect it's a Russian own club... It not as though the TS call it Choa si (Smelly). This i would say is probably offensive but then again, some here have called Man utd, manure... Isn't it worse than Chelski?
Honestly, i don't see anything wrong with it... Recently Arsenal were also link to a Russian and the English Press came up with a name for them too... Gunnerskis...
Lets not be too sensitive over a name... its just for fun... -
hi superstrongandlongOriginally posted by ultimate_s&l:Are U sure he is a Chelsea fan? more like a ManU fan in disguise!!
See... my posting on Spurs being denied 3 penalties was taken off the instant it was post up, but this Blues flaming thread continues on......
Hmmm i wonder -
my wrong... for a moment, I was stunned that GP string such nicely formed comments together....Originally posted by turbo_drift:http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/sports/story/0,4136,140888,00.html? <<---- hint: scroll all the way to the bottom and start counting the names and up the page til GP name.
Very de paiseh.. -
So ur way of being a Chelsea fan must call Man Utd divers, cheaters? or using offensive names and vulgar words?Originally posted by ultimate_s&l:Are U sure he is a Chelsea fan? more like a ManU fan in disguise!!
See... my posting on Spurs being denied 3 penalties was taken off the instant it was post up, but this Blues flaming thread continues on......
Hmmm i wonder
thats a Chelsea fan for u right? I see... -
- Ng Ghim Pheng, 17, student
why did'nt JM study Aston Villa?
MARTIN O'Neill must have studied Chelsea's play studiously to come up with a winning formula. -
U another 1 who read wrongly.Originally posted by sand king:why did'nt JM study Aston Villa? -
whatever it is, a lost is a lost, just pick up and move on, there are still 30plus games to correct one mistake unless you have some teams who stays ahead of the pack the entire season which is pretty unlikely!! so all should still have a chance for the league
-
Originally posted by turbo_drift:U another 1 who read wrongly. ps my england not belly powderfool.
-
GP is back! More predictions wanted in future!