Juan Mata

Chelsea signed Meireles when they couldnt get Modric. After that AVB implied the modric position had been covered.

The Mata deal was clearly something else as he isnt being played in the same position, nor did Chelsea discontinue their Modric attempts and looking for a midfield alternative.

Arsenal were never going to sign Mata. Not unless they completely changed their policy and forked out £23 million for him and even then they'd have to convince him not to join Torres at Chelsea. Mata says Torres convinced him to join
 
Ekeke said:
Chelsea signed Meireles when they couldnt get Modric. After that AVB implied the modric position had been covered.

The Mata deal was clearly something else as he isnt being played in the same position, nor did Chelsea discontinue their Modric attempts and looking for a midfield alternative.

Arsenal were never going to sign Mata. Not unless they completely changed their policy and forked out £23 million for him and even then they'd have to convince him not to join Torres at Chelsea. Mata says Torres convinced him to join
Click to expand...

You're making a lot of assumptions here. If Meireles was signed as an alternative to Modric and AVB said Modric's postion has been filled why, again according to you, CFC continued to pursue the Croatian?

As for Mata, the whole argument started with me addressing the £150K a week issue which peterstorey claimed to be the reason for Mata not signing for Arsenal. If Valencia demanded the fee in the 20 something region that he eventually went for and which Arsenal never pays, the whole issue of his wages is irrelevant since it wouldn't even come to that point without clubs agreeing on a transfer fee first.

I doubt Torres was the reason, either. It was just something Mata mentioned in an interview. He simply decided to join the better club with better chance to advance his career and a better wage packet.
 
KM said:
Kinell, what a player. Silva took one year to settle but he has just settled in flawlessly and looked a class apart from the rest of his team-mates.
Click to expand...

Mata is a superb player but Silva is better and was amazing last season as well. I do not understand why the hype has begun this season.
 
antihenry said:
You're making a lot of assumptions here. If Meireles was signed as an alternative to Modric and AVB said Modric's postion has been filled why, again according to you, CFC continued to pursue the Croatian?
Click to expand...

Are you confused? Meireles was signed right at the end of the window when things werent progressing with Modric. We dont know whether Chelsea are still interested, but I remember reading comments to suggest that they have filled the position they wanted Modric for.

As for Mata, the whole argument started with me addressing the £150K a week issue which peterstorey claimed to be the reason for Mata not signing for Arsenal. If Valencia demanded the fee in the 20 something region that he eventually went for and which Arsenal never pays, the whole issue of his wages is irrelevant since it wouldn't even come to that point without clubs agreeing on a transfer fee first.

I doubt Torres was the reason, either. It was just something Mata mentioned in an interview. He simply decided to join the better club with better chance to advance his career and a better wage packet.
Click to expand...

The whole argument isnt the issue, its the one story that came out of spain with no sources or quotes about mata having this phantom clause in his contract, and because of Fabregas leaving and Mata being the outstanding player at an under 21s tournament, of course he was linked with Arsenal. Now for some reason everyone just goes with this story that has no quotes, no source or anything but one story in a spanish newspaper, as if its gospel that Arsenal were going to sign the player at a discount but "time ran out" or something convenient

There are just too many holes in the story from Valencia's perspective and nothing to suggest there is any credibility to it. Just Arsenal losing their main player and quickly being linked with another Spanish passer who was in the limelight at the time

As for Torres convincing him, what are you even talking about? You dont think a Spanish international team mate being at a club is going to factor into your choice of club? Having Spaniards there (Romelu or whatever also joined) is of course going to help him settle into a new league and his international team mate can tell him how things are at that club before he signs. If Mata says Torres sold the club to him, why shouldnt we believe him? It makes all the sense in the world
 
Ekeke said:
Are you confused? Meireles was signed right at the end of the window when things werent progressing with Modric. We dont know whether Chelsea are still interested, but I remember reading comments to suggest that they have filled the position they wanted Modric for.



The whole argument isnt the issue, its the one story that came out of spain with no sources or quotes about mata having this phantom clause in his contract, and because of Fabregas leaving and Mata being the outstanding player at an under 21s tournament, of course he was linked with Arsenal. Now for some reason everyone just goes with this story that has no quotes, no source or anything but one story in a spanish newspaper, as if its gospel that Arsenal were going to sign the player at a discount but "time ran out" or something convenient

There are just too many holes in the story from Valencia's perspective and nothing to suggest there is any credibility to it. Just Arsenal losing their main player and quickly being linked with another Spanish passer who was in the limelight at the time

As for Torres convincing him, what are you even talking about? You dont think a Spanish international team mate being at a club is going to factor into your choice of club? Having Spaniards there (Romelu or whatever also joined) is of course going to help him settle into a new league and his international team mate can tell him how things are at that club before he signs. If Mata says Torres sold the club to him, why shouldnt we believe him? It makes all the sense in the world
Click to expand...

You pick and choose what you believe but it doesn't make it true. I trust Balague knows a whole lot more about what's going on in Spanish football than you or any other poster on this forum does, including you.

He said Torres "encouraged" him to join CFC, it's a little different from convincing, and it's something a lot of players say when they join a new club. If Arsenal agreed the deal before Chelsea got involved he'd be praising somebody else for advising him to join Gooners.
 
antihenry said:
You pick and choose what you believe but it doesn't make it true. I trust Balague knows a whole lot more about what's going on in Spanish football than you or any other poster on this forum does, including you.
Click to expand...

Then you have trust issues.

I watch Valencia every week, have done for years. I post on Valencia sites.

Ballague attatches himself to just about every rumour in Spain. About one time in 15 he gets one right.

Torres definitely going to United certainly wasnt one of those. Suffice to say that you'll be all kinds of ill-informed if you believe everything that idiot has to say.
 
Ekeke said:
Then you have trust issues.

I watch Valencia every week, have done for years. I post on Valencia sites.

Ballague attatches himself to just about every rumour in Spain. About one time in 15 he gets one right.

Torres definitely going to United certainly wasnt one of those. Suffice to say that you'll be all kinds of ill-informed if you believe everything that idiot has to say.
Click to expand...

tbf to Ekeke he's been spot on in terms of various Valencia players since ive been on the caf. Beyond Valencia, now thats a different matter :angel:

Also Ballague is a twat....
 
KM said:
Kinell, what a player. Silva took one year to settle but he has just settled in flawlessly and looked a class apart from the rest of his team-mates.
Click to expand...

Has looked distinctly average again tonight, just as he did against City. Are we still wanking over him?

Very good player mind, but this place made it sound like we'd dropped the boo boo of the century by not signing him, I haven't seen that yet. And the comparisons to Silva? very premature.

Watch him go score the winner now
 
Watching the game tonight and to me he doesnt look fit, unless Chelsea are dominating games possession wise Mata is nowhere to be seen
 
Some way off the best in the league, as was blatantly obvious in the difference between him and Modric tonight.

Thought he picked up his game in the second half, mind.
 
He's a great player but is played out of position on the left, he's wasted there and always ends up drifting infield. Chelsea lack balance when he plays there as they end up having no width on that side, AVB's using him wrongly but he's an excellent talent.

As for the City game, Chelsea's best play came through Mata in the second half when he played more centrally, I thought he had a good game.
 
Of course he is, he's one of the best players for Chelsea who are challenging for the league and the Champions League. What do you think he is? Simply good?
 
You're just discussing useless semantics unless you include some sort of reference.

He's a good player, but in my opinion a tier below the best in the league such as Rooney, Silva, Nani, Van Persie, Modric etc. Fully expect him to make the step up though, he's clearly got what it takes.
 
Theon said:
Of course he is, he's one of the best players for Chelsea who are challenging for the league and the Champions League. What do you think he is? Simply good?
Click to expand...

Do you understand the word great? or even the difference between very good and GREAT.

And no, Chelsea aren't competing for the League, and I doubt they will for the CL either.

Sturridge is also one of Chelsea's best players, is he "great" too?
 
Probably the worst player on the pitch tonight even including Asshole-Twatto.
 
Sharky7 said:
Do you understand the word great? or even the difference between very good and GREAT.

And no, Chelsea aren't competing for the League, and I doubt they will for the CL either.

Sturridge is also one of Chelsea's best players, is he "great" too?
Click to expand...

lol watch that arrogance.

Of course I understand the word, you're simply undervaluing Mata a great deal, which is evident from your previous post as well. You say he wasn't effective against City, which just shows how little you know. He completed the most passes out of any of the forwards, with the highest pass completion rate as well, was on the ball almost twice as much as Sturridge, but lost the ball half as much, and in the second half when he moved infield he caused City their biggest problems of the night.

Anyway, as for him being great, it's just a word buddy, so firstly you should probably calm down. Secondly, it's my opinion, which I'm entitled to. You might not think he's great, but I do, as do most of the football commentators and pundits this season as well. Thirdly, by any definition of the word, he is great, as it means significantly greater than the average, so it's you who should probably check your understanding. Forgetting the definition, which you unnecessarily brought into it, use your head. How is he not a great player? He's one of the best players for the third best team in the country and has 14 caps for Spain at the age of 23.

Whilst your checking your understanding of the word great, you should probably check challenge as well, because Chelsea are challenging for the league and the Champions League. You might not think they'll win it, but they're quite blatantly challenging.

No, I wouldn't say Sturridge is a great player, as I don't believe he's as good as Mata. Like I said anyway, Mata's being used out of position for me, so he isn't showing his best form. If he were to move into the middle he'd have far more influence on the game and his creativity would pose more of a threat.
 
I'm a massive fan of Mata, and I do rate him as a top winger who has delivered well for Chelsea, however I do have one, slight criticism of him, that I've noticed throughout this season.

For me, he's a player who struggles to sometimes perform when the chips are down and the rest of the team isn't performing. Most of his good performances have come in games where things have been going for Chelsea. He's sometimes gone missing when Chelsea have been in tough games, where they have either not won or had to resort to scraping a win. I'd look to Mata as being the sort of player who Chelsea really need to produce those moments of magic to grab the wins, not just when they're already playing well.

I'm still a big fan of Mata and I'll be the first to admit he is a talented winger, and I'll be the first to praise him, but that's the one criticism I do have.
 
Theon said:
lol watch that arrogance.
Click to expand...

Arrogance? You simply took it wrong, I honestly have no idea, you may not be English and therefore throw the word "great" around. Who am I to know who Theon from the internet is?

Theon said:
Of course I understand the word, you're simply undervaluing Mata a great deal, which is evident from your previous post as well.
Click to expand...

I don't undervalue Mata, I think he's class. It's just that I think many have gone way overboard on him, comparing him to David Silva etc.

Theon said:
You say he wasn't effective against City, which just shows how little you know. He completed the most passes out of any of the forwards, with the highest pass completion rate as well, was on the ball almost twice as much as Sturridge, but lost the ball half as much, and in the second half when he moved infield he caused City their biggest problems of the night.
Click to expand...

How effective was he then? Because I don't remember him having much of an affect on the game at all. Yes he got on the ball more after City went down to 10 men, hardly surprising. And yet even with 10 men, the great player who is David Silva still managed to complete 39 passes, compared to his 38. Silva with a pass completion of 91% compared to Mata's 83.

I also remember that Chelsea were crying out for a touch of class to unlock the City defense, and they had to call Lampard from the bench for that.

Theon said:
Anyway, as for him being great, it's just a word buddy, so firstly you should probably calm down.
Click to expand...

Always funny to be told to "calm down" on the caf, as if I'm smashing my keyboard keys in anger. ha ha.

I'm totally "calm", I just know that GREAT is reserved for the likes of Ronaldo, Messi, Iniesta, Silva etc. Mata may well get there, but he isn't there yet and he'll have to do a damn sight more against the likes of us, Arsenal, City etc before then.

Theon said:
Secondly, it's my opinion, which I'm entitled to. You might not think he's great, but I do, as do most of the football commentators and pundits this season as well. Thirdly, by any definition of the word, he is great, as it means significantly greater than the average, so it's you who should probably check your understanding.
Click to expand...

That isn't what great means. Not at all.

And obviously you're entitled to your opinion, did anyone claim otherwise, could anyone claim otherwise? But it a forum for debating things like this, not for saying, "nice opinion", "yours too", "I think yours is different to mine but well done:)" etc etc.

My problem is that some posters are way to quick to lavish praise on certain players, Mata is certainly one of them this season, in the way that David Luiz was after Chelsea signed him last year.

Theon said:
Forgetting the definition, which you unnecessarily brought into it, use your head. How is he not a great player? He's one of the best players for the third best team in the country and has 14 caps for Spain at the age of 23.
Click to expand...

No, he's a very good player. Great players are listed above. Use your head.

Theon said:
Whilst your checking your understanding of the word great, you should probably check challenge as well, because Chelsea are challenging for the league and the Champions League. You might not think they'll win it, but they're quite blatantly challenging.
Click to expand...

Chelsea are 11 points off the pace already, they haven't a hope of challenging this season.

Theon said:
No, I wouldn't say Sturridge is a great player, as I don't believe he's as good as Mata. Like I said anyway, Mata's being used out of position for me, so he isn't showing his best form. If he were to move into the middle he'd have far more influence on the game and his creativity would pose more of a threat.
Click to expand...

That's neither here nor there in our debate.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Have to admit the only Chelsea games I've watched in full (apart from the one against us) have been Wigan, City, Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs. He's been distinctly average in all of them. Not fit to lace Silva's boots based on that admittedly very small sample.
Click to expand...

I've seen him in a few more games where admittedly he's been excellent, but as you say, there have been plenty of average games in there too and the comparisons with Silva are just silly, Spain is all they have in common at this time.

Obviously all that may change in time, but another Spanish player who for a short while at least, sparkled in England, even more so than Mata imo, was Jose Antonio Reyes. And well, we all know how that ended up. Like David Luiz before him, let Mata have a year or so here before we brand him anything other than a good footballer. I'm sure Mata will go on to be a much much better player than Reyes, but boy we're quick to build players up these days aren't we.
 
He's clearly very talented but doesn't influence games as often as he should for his talent. A match of the day player personified.
 
Sharky7 said:
Arrogance? You simply took it wrong, I honestly have no idea, you may not be English and therefore throw the word "great" around. Who am I to know who Theon from the internet is?


I don't undervalue Mata, I think he's class. It's just that I think many have gone way overboard on him, comparing him to David Silva etc.


How effective was he then? Because I don't remember him having much of an affect on the game at all. Yes he got on the ball more after City went down to 10 men, hardly surprising. And yet even with 10 men, the great player who is David Silva still managed to complete 39 passes, compared to his 38. Silva with a pass completion of 91% compared to Mata's 83.

I also remember that Chelsea were crying out for a touch of class to unlock the City defense, and they had to call Lampard from the bench for that.


Always funny to be told to "calm down" on the caf, as if I'm smashing my keyboard keys in anger. ha ha.

I'm totally "calm", I just know that GREAT is reserved for the likes of Ronaldo, Messi, Iniesta, Silva etc. Mata may well get there, but he isn't there yet and he'll have to do a damn sight more against the likes of us, Arsenal, City etc before then.


That isn't what great means. Not at all.

And obviously you're entitled to your opinion, did anyone claim otherwise, could anyone claim otherwise? But it a forum for debating things like this, not for saying, "nice opinion", "yours too", "I think yours is different to mine but well done:)" etc etc.

My problem is that some posters are way to quick to lavish praise on certain players, Mata is certainly one of them this season, in the way that David Luiz was after Chelsea signed him last year.


No, he's a very good player. Great players are listed above. Use your head.


Chelsea are 11 points off the pace already, they haven't a hope of challenging this season.


That's neither here nor there in our debate.
Click to expand...

Of course it was arrogance, don't embarrass yourself by lying. fecking hell :lol:.

Anyway, you clearly have some aversion to the word great, so I'm not really sure how to proceed. You say he isn't great, but he is class, so we can summarise that great is better than class? Where does excellent rank in your carefully thoughtout list of suitable adjectives for differing levels of skill? Does Mata qualify? How about brilliant?

I'm interested to know what you think great means, if you wont take my definition. I'm sure it will be enlightening. Why do you keep capitalising great out of interest? Very odd, but then again, the word great is of much importance to you.

So, only Ronaldo, Messi, Iniesta, Silva and a few others qualify as great. Okay, that's your chosen definition, it's extremely narrow and I'd argue a better term would be world class, but fair enough. However, you thinking great cant apply more widely than how you've interpreted it is absurd. I've chosen a slightly wider interpretation, which is perfectly rational and acceptable, so what's the issue? If I said Mata was a world class player then maybe there's cause to question my view, but saying he's great really isn't peculiar.

I still think he is great, like I say, he's played 14 times for Spain at the age of 23. If he was English he'd have probably had 40 caps by now, although that's just my opinion. I never compared him to David Silva, so I'm not sure why you're bringing that up. What's your definition of a great player? What do they have to do? Starring for Chelsea isn't enough?

Back to the City game. Yes he was good in that game, he was poor in the first half, but the whole of Chelsea were, and in the second he picked it up hugely and was Chelsea's most threatening player, this happened throughout the half not just after Clichy was sent off. To get involved he started drifting infield more, and looked by far the most likely to create something for Chelsea. What do you think Lampard did? He didnt "provide a touch of class to unlock" the City defense, he just scored a penalty, you certainly lavish praise quite heavily when it suits you. I'm sure he wasnt great though, nobody is.

I know Chelsea are 11 points off the top, I don't think they'll win the league, or the Champions League, but it's a possibility. However, given you support United, how can you not appreciate that thing's can change in football? Chelsea threw the title away last year around this period, in the same way they could push on this season, we dont know do we, the point is that you saying they arent challenging, whilst criticising my understanding of the word great, is laughable.

Finally, Mata's currently being played out of position, so he isnt reaching his potential. How can you not see that impacts our current assessment of whether he's great or not? If you put Modric out wide, he wouldn't be as influential and his performances would drop, but he'd still be a great player. It's the same with Mata, class is permanent and all that. I'm saying that even though he isn't performing at his best, due to certain issues with the team, he is still at great player. It is completely relevant.
 
Mata's a brilliant player

Every brilliant player has poor games though even more so when the rest of the team is wank like Chelsea's is at the moment/this season
 
Ekeke said:
Arsenal were never going to sign Mata. Not unless they completely changed their policy and forked out £23 million for him and even then they'd have to convince him not to join Torres at Chelsea. Mata says Torres convinced him to join
Click to expand...
I think you'll find the wages of £150K a week persuaded him. Torres after all is a good advert of 'how to join a club and trash your career'.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Have to admit the only Chelsea games I've watched in full (apart from the one against us) have been Wigan, City, Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs. He's been distinctly average in all of them. Not fit to lace Silva's boots based on that admittedly very small sample.
Click to expand...

He hasn't been consistent at all and has shown nowhere near his best form, so your not wrong in thinking that way. However, in other games, he has been excellent, against Valencia at home and Wolves for example. Despite having a relatively disappointing season, considering his ability, he's still got 3 goals and 7 assists in 14 appearances, which isn't a bad return at all.

Plus, he's being used extremely poorly by AVB, I'm shocked he's still playing him this way, although maybe the reason he hasnt moved to the centre is the lack of any real options on the left wing, with Anelka in the reserves now and Malouda out of form. I wouldn't be surprised if a winger was signed in January, as Mata is in no way a natural winger, it plays to his weaknesses as he lacks strength and pace, and also nullifies his strengths as his creativity and passing isn't as influential out wide. That's why he drifts in so much, but that just crowd's thing's up, which isnt what players like that need.

As for comparisons with Silva, they're premature. Silva is currently a better player, but Mata's new to the league which will have it's impact, for a direct comparison, Silva wasnt as good last year as he's been this year. Also, the City team is largely built around Silva, Toure and Barry always look for him to pass to and he has complete freedom of where to roam. In comparison, Mata is out wide and the Chelsea team lack any real fluidity or direction in who to pass to. I think AVB will eventually build his team largely around Mata, which will then allow him to shine in a similar way to Silva. Whether he'll ever be as good isn't certain, but he'll be an excellent player.
 
Theon said:
I know Chelsea are 11 points off the top, I don't think they'll win the league, or the Champions League, but it's a possibility. However, given you support United, how can you not appreciate that thing's can change in football? Chelsea threw the title away last year around this period, in the same way they could push on this season, we dont know do we, the point is that you saying they arent challenging, whilst criticising my understanding of the word great, is laughable.
Click to expand...

Whoa this is tough work. As I said above, Jose Reyes was a "class" player for a while.

I'd understand your point if I thought that it was just our interpretations of the word "great" that differ. And despite you thinking I'm "lying", that was honestly my original thought. However, judging by your posts regarding the player, it appears you that actually think Mata is a great player. Nothing lost in translation, no mis-interpretation.

If you think Mata was good against City, despite not creating anything against 10 men, fine. Personally, and it seems Pogue and no doubt a few others agree, he was poor against 11 man City, and average against 10 man City. He was also distinctly average against us, Arsenal and tonight, all the tough games. But really, we're splitting hairs talking about 45 minutes of football against 10 men aren't we?

And now onto your silly paragraph regarding Chelsea, because competing for the league means they actually stand a chance of winning it. And the comparison with last season is laughable, most here argued for weeks that the press were way too premature with the plaudits for Chelsea as they'd had quite simply the easiest start to a Premier League season in history. United and City have not had that. Also, we had ONE team to catch, Chelsea, meaning we only needed one team to hit poor form. Chelsea need 2, that doesn't happen. "We don't know", well obviously not, but then we don't know if Tottenham will challenge either, or Liverpool/Newcastle United for that matter. But in all honesty.... there's a reason you can get 26/1 on Chelsea to win the title. Is that laughable? only in your World it is.
 
Sharky7 said:
Whoa this is tough work.
Click to expand...
But someone's gotta do it. Mata is a very technically accomplished player he's put in a lot of less than stellar performances in the PL (see tonight). I don't buy this 'he's out of position' either he clearly has a pretty free role which ought to suit.
 
Sharky7 said:
Whoa this is tough work. As I said above, Jose Reyes was a "class" player for a while.

I'd understand your point if I thought that it was just our interpretations of the word "great" that differ. And despite you thinking I'm "lying", that was honestly my original thought. However, judging by your posts regarding the player, it appears you that actually think Mata is a great player. Nothing lost in translation, no mis-interpretation.

If you think Mata was good against City, despite not creating anything against 10 men, fine. Personally, and it seems Pogue and no doubt a few others agree, he was poor against 11 man City, and average against 10 man City. He was also distinctly average against us, Arsenal and tonight, all the tough games. But really, we're splitting hairs talking about 45 minutes of football against 10 men aren't we?
Click to expand...

Yes, this is tough work. You have only just understood that I think Mata is a great player, 5 posts and three hours after I originally said it.

I don't know what the first paragraph is on about. You should have responded to my whole post, not one small section of it. Plus you havent answered any of the things I said in it, to summarise, 1) What you think great actually means, 2) Why Chelsea cant win the league or CL, despite stranger things happening before 3) Why Mata being played out of position doesnt impact his performances 4) Why the word great is so important to you.
 
peterstorey said:
But someone's gotta do it. Mata is a very technically accomplished player he's put in a lot of less than stellar performances in the PL (see tonight). I don't buy this 'he's out of position' either he clearly has a pretty free role which ought to suit.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. As you say, he's technically superb so there's nothing to stop him becoming a great player, but then there was nothing to stop Jose Reyes either.
 
Theon said:
Why Chelsea cant win the league or CL
Click to expand...

Sharky7 said:
And now onto your silly paragraph regarding Chelsea, because competing for the league means they actually stand a chance of winning it. And the comparison with last season is laughable, most here argued for weeks that the press were way too premature with the plaudits for Chelsea as they'd had quite simply the easiest start to a Premier League season in history. United and City have not had that. Also, we had ONE team to catch, Chelsea, meaning we only needed one team to hit poor form. Chelsea need 2, that doesn't happen. "We don't know", well obviously not, but then we don't know if Tottenham will challenge either, or Liverpool/Newcastle United for that matter. But in all honesty.... there's a reason you can get 26/1 on Chelsea to win the title. Is that laughable? only in your World it is.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they can't win the CL, I said they won't. And being in the next round doesn't count as "challenging", unless Basel are also "challenging"??
 
He is a very good player, as many people have pointed out before he is not at Silva's level yet and probably will never be. He doesn't seem to perform in the big games as of yet, still settling in and doesn't seem to link up that great with Drogba either.
 
Theon said:
1) What you think great actually means
Click to expand...

I thought I said that already, great players are the likes of Rooney, Ronaldo, Vidic, Ferdinand, Torres (for a while :)), Drogba, Robben, Silva etc etc.

The players have proven over time to be GREAT, not just good, not just a flash in the pan a la Jose Reyes. My main point all along is that lots of people would've told you a matter of months ago that David Luiz is a GREAT player, and now?
 
peterstorey said:
But someone's gotta do it. Mata is a very technically accomplished player he's put in a lot of less than stellar performances in the PL (see tonight). I don't buy this 'he's out of position' either he clearly has a pretty free role which ought to suit.
Click to expand...

You don't buy that he's being played out of position? It isnt something you buy, it's a fact. He isnt a winger, but plays on the wing, it's not hard. Do you think his best position is left wing?

As for having a free role, that's true to an extent, but he's still always predominantly on the left, so it isn't comparable to Silva who drifts all over the pitch, swapping postions with other players.

Plus, when Mata comes inside, no one swaps with him to go out to the left wing, which if you watch Chelsea causes problems as they become very narrow and predictable. A lot of the time the only pass he will have on is to the right wing, as no ones on the left flank. Contrast that with Silva at City who when he has the ball in the middle will have passing options all over the pitch, Balotelli has a tendency to drift wide left, against Arsenal for example he did this alot, Aguero and Nasri likewise drift to the flanks, stretching the pitch. This gives Silva numerous passing options and creates space, Mata on the other hand often drifts in field, but as no one is on the left the defensive line just moves with him and he really has no where to go. Watch Chelsea play and look out for it, it always happens.
 
Red Pavan said:
He is a very good player, as many people have pointed out before he is not at Silva's level yet and probably will never be. He doesn't seem to perform in the big games as of yet, still settling in and doesn't seem to link up that great with Drogba either.
Click to expand...

Drogba's only been in the team very recently though, not sure Drogba's the type of player Mata is used to playing with either (he's not known for his intricate one touch play is he old Didier)
 
Theon said:
3) Why Mata being played out of position doesnt impact his performances
Click to expand...

This has feck all to do with argument, that's why. I have no real idea of where his best position is, my thinking is that AVB knows better than me and you? but obviously not.

Theon said:
4) Why the word great is so important to you.
Click to expand...

Childish.

I've made this point all along. Mata isn't in the top 10, probably top 20 Premiership players for me. He has the talent, but so far in the tougher games, he's gone missing, and therefore I think you and some others were getting a little over-excited with him. feck the word "great", it's not important.
 
Theon said:
You don't buy that he's being played out of position? It isnt something you buy, it's a fact. He isnt a winger, but plays on the wing, it's not hard. Do you think his best position is left wing?
Click to expand...

He's played the largest chunk of his career out there in a similar starting position.
 
Theon said:
You don't buy that he's being played out of position? It isnt something you buy, it's a fact. He isnt a winger, but plays on the wing, it's not hard. Do you think his best position is left wing?
Click to expand...
Nope, he played LAM at Valencia in a 4231, he's playing ahead of the midfield in a 433 at Chelsea with licence to float. Shouldn't be a big ask.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.