Terry and Gallas was better! Carvalho was better on the ball, but Gallas was quicker, stronger and better tackler. He was moved to cover the weaker right fb spot.
How did Chelsea concede only 15 goals in 2004/05?
- Thread starter VorZakone
- Start date
Team with a great defence who played first and foremost defensive football.
United's free-flowing, expansive 2007/08 team conceding 23 is more impressive.
Great tam by the way, stronger than the current City team I reckon. Certainly did better in Europe. I can remember thinking they would win absolutely everything for years, then the greatest ever PL team came along
United's free-flowing, expansive 2007/08 team conceding 23 is more impressive.
Great tam by the way, stronger than the current City team I reckon. Certainly did better in Europe. I can remember thinking they would win absolutely everything for years, then the greatest ever PL team came along
Yeah but those smaller teams are better today than they were earlier and there are a lot more difficult games to play now as well. Wolves, Everton, Spurs, United, Arsenal and Liverpool. The scoring one goal and hanging up may not have held up against today's attacks and I think City's far superior attack would easily win at the end of the season. I'd expect both Liverpool and City to finish above that Chelsea team over the course of 38 games.
Still the most impressive PL record for me.
It wasn't all about Carvalho, something that doesn't get mentioned is that Terry and Gallas played 12 games that season as a centre back pairing and only conceded one goal (vs West Brom - Zoltan Gera).
I don't think the rest of te league was particularly weaker. The following season they gave up 22. As i said, it was a great defensive side and it was just one of those years, where everything goes right
This opinion gets criticised a bit nowadays but one of the key factors was that they strangled the life out of games at times. I know they were a good attacking side but they knew how to see a game out. I remember that whenever they went in front in a league game I would just feel absolutely deflated because I knew they wouldn't concede a goal that year. It was like, yep that's it, game over. Up to that point I was always felt that the great United and Arsenal teams would give teams a bit of a chance before pummelling them but Chelsea were ruthless.
They only conceeded 22 the following season and 23 the season after that when Utd won the title. From 204//5 until the end of the decade there was only one season when they didn't have the best defence.
And that's what made them really good. You won't see teams making a come back against them. Too hard to score and play against. I still remember I was super ecstatic when we beat them 1-0 in 2005 (the fletcher header). Any win against them was great.
They would have been really, were it not for us and the José/Abramovich fallout in 2007
To be honest, even as a Chelsea fan it got a bit dull at times watching Jose's team go 2-0 up after half an hour then strolling through the rest of the game in 3rd gear. I much prefered Carlo's team, who'd go and smash teams once they got on top.
Exactly. It was an incredible defensive side. With the same players and the same manager and the same playing style. And 22 and 23 are not 15. 15 was an aberration
That's impressive. Probably doesn't get his dues does Gallas, that brainfart tantrum for Arsenal doesn't help his legacy.
15 goals conceded in 38 games takes some doing. They only scored 72 goals though, so that suggests a defensive mindset rather than a great defensive performance is behind it. Liverpool only conceded 16 goals in 42 games back in 1979. We also scored 85 goals too.
They scored 2. 3-1 away and 1-0 at the Nou Camp (I think)
But your overall point is valid
Even though I was very young I remember that quite well. That would also have been the season of the 7-0 vs Spurs as I think Ardiles and Villa had just joined them after the World Cup. What an impact they had on the league. Huge fuss was made over those signings. Great times to be a football fan.
I stand corrected!
Everyone was playing 4-4-2 back then and Jose was playing 4-3-3. This allowed his first Chelsea team to dominate the midfield, which obviously allowed his team to easily control games.
Also he had a great defense and an amazing Petr Cech. I was quite young back then and I honestly thought that him and Chelsea would dominate the Premier League for a decade.
Also he had a great defense and an amazing Petr Cech. I was quite young back then and I honestly thought that him and Chelsea would dominate the Premier League for a decade.
They had better CBs than Victor Lindelof?
Can't remember if it was that season or the one after but in one of the back to back title years Terry and Gallas played together 21 times and only conceded once.
I think it was a mix of Jose's way being new to the game (ie no serious counter to him at that point) and the fact that JT/Ricky/Gallas were comfortably the three best defenders in the league (Rio the one maybe in with them) shielded by the best ever sitting DM.
I think it was a mix of Jose's way being new to the game (ie no serious counter to him at that point) and the fact that JT/Ricky/Gallas were comfortably the three best defenders in the league (Rio the one maybe in with them) shielded by the best ever sitting DM.
I may be talking bollocks but that season seemed incredibly low-scoring in general. Loads of 0-0s in football back then from what I remember. That and teams weren't prepared for a well-drilled defensive unit by Mourinho yet.
Arsenal conceded only 17 goals in 98/99 season. They were ridiculously powerful.
The Makelele, Terry and Cech spine made all 3 look better. Carvalho might be worth saying as a 4th. Very solid if unspectacular. Makelele came the season before, then Carvalho and Cech in the transfer window before 04/05
Same with the worse version of Matic, Terry and Courtois. It was the combination of the 3 that resulted in them looking pretty solid. It wasnt 1 single player
Same with the worse version of Matic, Terry and Courtois. It was the combination of the 3 that resulted in them looking pretty solid. It wasnt 1 single player
That was before the pass back rule. They would take the lead then pass about at the back for ages.
Makelele was a beast. Those defenders were on holiday most of the time.
The league wasn't that strong. Arsenal were very good, we were rebuilding and Liverpool and Everton were half decent. The rest was pure dross. The league has far stronger depth now than it ever has. Ever since that giant TV deal came in the weaker sides have narrowed the gap dramatically.
That was the period when we seemed to struggle Bolton and Blackburn every year. Nolan/Jussi and Pederson/Friedel really got on my tits back then. Anyone remember David Bentley of all people tearing Vidic and Rio a new one when they beat us a year later? Man, I went way off topic here didn't I. fecking Blackburn.
To properly answer the question anyway, Mourinho is one of the best defensive managers of all time and was in his absolute prime here, Terry and Carvalho were a beastly centre back partnership, and Makelele is the best to ever do it in a position which has since been named after him. Add all those together along with a relatively weak league, and you ain't conceding many goals. What a side they were. They were the best team in Europe that year and were robbed by the officials against Liverpool. That Chelsea team deserved the CL. Chelsea vs. Milan would have been some final.
That was the period when we seemed to struggle Bolton and Blackburn every year. Nolan/Jussi and Pederson/Friedel really got on my tits back then. Anyone remember David Bentley of all people tearing Vidic and Rio a new one when they beat us a year later? Man, I went way off topic here didn't I. fecking Blackburn.
To properly answer the question anyway, Mourinho is one of the best defensive managers of all time and was in his absolute prime here, Terry and Carvalho were a beastly centre back partnership, and Makelele is the best to ever do it in a position which has since been named after him. Add all those together along with a relatively weak league, and you ain't conceding many goals. What a side they were. They were the best team in Europe that year and were robbed by the officials against Liverpool. That Chelsea team deserved the CL. Chelsea vs. Milan would have been some final.
Last edited:
Stat needs a little context. 9 of those goals they conceded in 4 games versus Bayern Munich and Barcelona... and yet they beat both those teams in two legged ties. They were semi finalists, only just losing out to Liverpool.
Sure they conceded a few in the champions league but they were still well and truly within the elite of Europe that season.
-----------------------Cech
Ferreira---Carvalho----Terry-----Gallas
-------------------Makalale
---------Tiago--------------Lampard------
Robben--------------------------------Duff
------------------Drogba------------------
What a team that was.
Ferreira---Carvalho----Terry-----Gallas
-------------------Makalale
---------Tiago--------------Lampard------
Robben--------------------------------Duff
------------------Drogba------------------
What a team that was.
Probably should've gone that season unbeaten, think they only lost once and that was to a pre Dubai Man City. Imagine that, one year after Arsenal Chelsea do the same with more points and less goals conceded.
That was Drogba's first season wasn't in the prem? Mad thing was he had good games here and there but he was still being criticised lots (similar to Higuain and Morata in recent times) and only really became a week in week out brilliant striker from 2006 onwards. You had Robben and Duff who were brilliant on their day but often injured (Joe Cole still played lots) and Tiago who was decent tactically but not one of best in europe in his position.
I think Chelsea were stronger in the 2006-08 period with Ballack, Essien and Ashley Cole all in the line up by then but Man. United had rebuilt very well and the defence and attack had really clicked. Winning three straight prems and a CL against that Chelsea spine was a magnificent achievement. Chelsea weren't as strong when they actually won the double in 2010 imo.
Funny how football dominance actually works for teams sometimes.
Yet we conceded 20 more and still had a better GD, take nothing away from conceding 17 though that is fantastic.
Was the league that weak ? Liverpool won the CL in 2005 Arsenal got to the final in 2006. Relatively speaking you could argue English football was the strongest league in Europe during that time.
Remember all the weird signings they made around that time? Scott Parker, Jiri Jarosik, Alexi Smertin, Del Horno. Then Steve Sidwell & Tal Ben Haim a few years later. What the feck were they thinking?
The league overall was far weaker. The midtable teams of today would batter the midtable teams of 04-05. There was far more cannon fodder back then.
They were our equivalent of Fortune, Bellion, Djemba Djemba, Dong and Spector.
No they weren't the best side in Europe, Milan was
And they should have done better against a mediocre Liverpool
And if the goal wasn't given they would have got a red card
Carvalho was immensely under rated.
Carvalho's record when Terry was missing was far better than Terry's record when carvalho was missing.
Carvalho read the game far better than Terry and I'd say carvalho and cech were the main reasons for that strong defence
Carvalho's record when Terry was missing was far better than Terry's record when carvalho was missing.
Carvalho read the game far better than Terry and I'd say carvalho and cech were the main reasons for that strong defence
I disagree. I think Chelsea were better. They walked the league that year, Milan didn't even win Serie A. No way in a million years would that Chelsea side throw away a 3-0 lead against that Liverpool team.
That Chelsea side wouldn't be up 3-0 against a Liverpool team, they had two tries and couldn't score!
My biggest memory of that Chelsea side was that if they scored 1 that was it. That team was so incredibly solid - didn't create much but almost didn't concede a single chance, it was incredible. I wasn't able to watch a lot as I lived in the US, but would follow score tracker - if Chelsea scored that was the end of the match, period.
The mental strength of that team is probably the best of any team in the modern era.
The mental strength of that team is probably the best of any team in the modern era.