I didn’t watch it. Glad now. Chelsea had one thing to do today and they still fcuked it up, the useless shower of cnuts!
The 2024 Carabao Cup Final - Chelsea V Liverpool
- Thread starter tentan
- Start date
What are you on about?160 mil?. 300 mil euros was payed for that first 11 today.
And what Chelsea have with this? We are not talking about Celski. We are talking about myth (which is now all over media) how you won it with kids. You didn't win it with kids and you didn't win it with some kind of cheap B team.
The final 11 players that won that match cost arond 150. Half of that on one player who won the match. Unreal
Just basic math. Are you living in an alternate reality?
The final 11 players that won that match cost arond 150. Half of that on one player who won the match. Basic math. Basic
It’s games like today…and Liverpool/Klopp winning with their b team that make a mockery of us at the moment.
I am guilty of it…suggesting injuries have ruined us…we’ll be ok when Shaw, Martinez, Casemiro. Mainoo, Hojlund all playing together.
It just highlighted today that a squad can all be coached to play the same way. Understand their roles and each others position on a pitch. more so on the back of our awful wknd display v Fulham where it looked like a bunch of strangers playing together for the first time.
I am guilty of it…suggesting injuries have ruined us…we’ll be ok when Shaw, Martinez, Casemiro. Mainoo, Hojlund all playing together.
It just highlighted today that a squad can all be coached to play the same way. Understand their roles and each others position on a pitch. more so on the back of our awful wknd display v Fulham where it looked like a bunch of strangers playing together for the first time.
First 11 who started today's match were;
1. Older than Chelsea's first 11
2. Cost over 300 mil euros in fees
3. Had zero players under 20
But yeah, lets build a story around that 11 which finished the match
The story is Chelsea lost to a bunch of kids. Chelsea did not lose to the first 11 you've so passionately put up there.First 11 who started today's match were;
1. Older than Chelsea's first 11
2. Cost over 300 mil euros in fees
3. Had zero players under 20
But yeah, lets build a story around that 11 which finished the match
Nothing is black or white.
Regarding injuries, Pool was way more affected, even if Chelsea still has a couple of important names like Latvia and Reece out.
Regarding the starting teams, Chelsea's one might have been even younger and having more players with less experience in the EPL, but mostly in an age and experience matter, both were quite balanced.
Regarding money, yeap, Chelsea paid a loooot more for theirs, mostly in recent times, yet those 75 for Virgil back in the day were sthg like the 100 that are paid nowadays for almost anyone, but no doubt that Chelsea spent zillions lately and Pool have spent a lot less ("wiser").
Regarding the match, in regular time, the game could have gone for any of them. The main prolem for both, were that Liverpool missed their main forwards and Chelsea still doesn't have a reliable one.
Regarding the whole "the kids" won it, I think it's mostly related to the extra time, were Chelsea actually and strangely left the attitude they were having to win it loosing the good sensations and kind of upper hand they were enjoying in the last minutes (and from some periods) of regular time. So it's kind of an over the top statement in the way it has been sold in these last hours, even if there is a good portion of truth when it's about the extra time period.
NOTE: I thought both coaches played with fire taking out some of their main players prior to the extra time, more when the game looked like going straight to penalties. Maybe Klopp decided that this is won by the kids or nothing in order to not get any of his first 11 injured or extremely tired for wajht's next, but Poch taking Chilwell was quite curious.
Regarding injuries, Pool was way more affected, even if Chelsea still has a couple of important names like Latvia and Reece out.
Regarding the starting teams, Chelsea's one might have been even younger and having more players with less experience in the EPL, but mostly in an age and experience matter, both were quite balanced.
Regarding money, yeap, Chelsea paid a loooot more for theirs, mostly in recent times, yet those 75 for Virgil back in the day were sthg like the 100 that are paid nowadays for almost anyone, but no doubt that Chelsea spent zillions lately and Pool have spent a lot less ("wiser").
Regarding the match, in regular time, the game could have gone for any of them. The main prolem for both, were that Liverpool missed their main forwards and Chelsea still doesn't have a reliable one.
Regarding the whole "the kids" won it, I think it's mostly related to the extra time, were Chelsea actually and strangely left the attitude they were having to win it loosing the good sensations and kind of upper hand they were enjoying in the last minutes (and from some periods) of regular time. So it's kind of an over the top statement in the way it has been sold in these last hours, even if there is a good portion of truth when it's about the extra time period.
NOTE: I thought both coaches played with fire taking out some of their main players prior to the extra time, more when the game looked like going straight to penalties. Maybe Klopp decided that this is won by the kids or nothing in order to not get any of his first 11 injured or extremely tired for wajht's next, but Poch taking Chilwell was quite curious.
Mental gymnastics
It's unbearable.
Was listening to the radio on the way to work this morning, made me want to drive into an oncoming truck.
It's the league cup ffs, they beat a perennial loser in a final who wad over a team full of overpriced average players.
I honestly don't think Leicester's FA cup win was hyped this much.
But this is what happens when you have a sport that overrates nonsense like heritage and history and fan base size.
But this is what happens when you have a sport that overrates nonsense like heritage and history and fan base size.
That's embarrassing. Especially considering Chelsea's starting line-up was two years(!) younger than Liverpool's on average.
Just when you think it cant get any worse TalkSport bring on Phil Thompson
I see the stat that Liverpool have scored more last minute winners under Klopp in 8 years than Sir Alex did in 26 years.
Got to love those energy levels.
Got to love those energy levels.
They played about 30 mins with the stupid brats, Utd played a whole season with the kids and won the double!
Forget the FA cup, don't even think them wining the PL was hyped this much!
Holy feck that's absolutely embarrasing from Amazon
First time ever a team of embryos won a cup.
Vomit!
Vomit!
It is cringe I agree.
From whole squad, only 3 players were under 20 and they played half an hour. But who knows; maybe they count Kelleher as youngster. He is only 25y old.
I think the person who tweeted that for Amazon started watching football last year or something. Or they're just a shameless Liverpool fan who took the opportunity.
I mean, let's not get carried away with too much sympathy for fecking Chelsea.
I'm sure 22 year old 100m+ Enzo and Caicedo significantly contribute to lowering the average age of Chelsea.
The average age arguments from both sides are stupid. I mean, just look at gutsy Real Madrid and how they're able to punch above their weights with youngsters Vinicius jr, Rodrygo, Tchouaméni, Camavinga and fecking Bellingham.
I don't have any sympathy for Chelsea. I'm just pointing out that hailing Liverpool's win due to the youth of the line-up is really fecking dumb when the other side was quite a bit younger - that's separate from the money laid out for those players.
Younger and with far fewer appearances for their respective club. Van Dijk and Robertson had a combined 44 more appearances for Liverpool than the entire starting 11 had for Chelsea.
Chilwell has the most Chelsea appearances at 100. Harvey Elliot has played more times for Liverpool.
Chelsea's average age at kick off was 23.36 years, whereas Liverpool's was 25.27 years, and even with the teenagers coming on for extra time, Chelsea's average at the final whistle was 22.64 years, with Liverpool's being 24.09.
Appearance-wise, Chelsea's starting 11 averaged 44.55 appearances for the club, whereas Liverpool's averaged 91.18, and at the final whistle it was 32.91 for Chelsea and 75.36 for Liverpool.
I get that Chelsea's squad was very expensively assembled, but given this whole thing seems to have stemmed from Neville's commentary, he of all people should know that paying a huge fee doesn't equate to output on the pitch, given United's woes over the last decade.
@Mike Smalling is right that the whole fuss about Liverpool's "youth" playing an important role is silly. And that goes for most average-age based arguments and makes people do mental gymnastics to make any point they want. Like in your post, you say Chilwell has the most Chelsea appearances. It's like he was born, joined Chelsea and only ever played for them.
That's why I initially gave the example of the current Real Madrid squad. Without Kroos and Modric, they're practically in their diapers. Not to mention after Mbappe's debut season for Real, he would've only played about 50 or 60 games for Real. A real up and coming youngster.
Oh, I get that the likes of Chilwell and Sterling are seasoned professionals outside of Chelsea, but it's definitely better to be in a side that's settled under one manager than one that's been fairly recently assembled, even if it cost a lot of money to assemble it.
The whole thing is daft but it's just nauseating to see the love-in for Liverpool based on a couple of teenagers getting late minutes.
I think the point that most people are (intentionally?) missing is that it's not about the difference in actual age between the teams, but the difference in experience and price tags. The Chelsea youngsters all have lots of first team experience and cost hundreds of millions of pounds while the Liverpool youngsters basically come straight from the U21s.
Which Liverpool players from their starting line-up yesterday are we talking about exactly? Conor Bradley, sure, he is young and has very appearances for the club. Then there is Harvey Elliot that had 46 appearances last year, and Kelleher that has been the back-up keeper for five years. That's it. All the rest of the starting line-up has been brought in from other clubs.
Nah. This is all because, just as Chelsea seemed to have the upper hand by the end of normal time, Liverpool threw on 2 or 3 players from their U21s during ET and ended up winning. That obviously makes for a nice story in the media. But to paint it as some kind of blindfolded David taking down Goliath is just lazy.
I was just thinking of our midfield in terms of selection. As we have a three man midfield the selection, if all fit, would be something like:
1st choice: Thiago Mac Jones
2nd: Endo Bajcetic Szob
3rd: Elliot McConnell Gravenberch
4th: Clark Nyoni
So we started the game with only 1 of our first choice midfielders, 1 second choice and then a 3rd choice. We finished the game with a 2nd choice and 3rd and 4th choices (as Elliot played the forward role).
Won't bore you with the forwards but it follows a similar trend. All our injuries are top heavy from 1st choices mainly.
1st choice: Thiago Mac Jones
2nd: Endo Bajcetic Szob
3rd: Elliot McConnell Gravenberch
4th: Clark Nyoni
So we started the game with only 1 of our first choice midfielders, 1 second choice and then a 3rd choice. We finished the game with a 2nd choice and 3rd and 4th choices (as Elliot played the forward role).
Won't bore you with the forwards but it follows a similar trend. All our injuries are top heavy from 1st choices mainly.
Honestly the way the media are going out of their way to make this look like a massive achievement is embarrasing as are the Liverpool fans who are on here trying to justify it.
The Liverpool fans all claimed this was a meaningless tin pot when we won it last year and now the same Liverpool fans are making their win this year out to be some kind of miracle and a huge achievement.
The Liverpool fans all claimed this was a meaningless tin pot when we won it last year and now the same Liverpool fans are making their win this year out to be some kind of miracle and a huge achievement.
They had a parade for almost winning the quadruple. Are you surprised?
At least try to get your facts straight when trying to downplay our achievement.
The thing is that wasn't Chelsea 2007 who Liverpool were playing, that was an expensively assembled team going nowhere. Press would do good to remember lots of money does not equal success.
The 'farewell tour' guff is just that. There is going to be a cruel ending and I hope the media are ready for Klopp's rant.
The 'farewell tour' guff is just that. There is going to be a cruel ending and I hope the media are ready for Klopp's rant.
They came on in the last 10 minutes of normal time.
Winning any trophy is a great achievement in my opinion however this stupid narrative around ‘the kids’ is nonsense as I’m sure you’ll agree.
3 of them came on in regular time, one of them (the most experienced one) during ET. That's not "2-3 of them came on during ET" at all.
And no I don't agree, it's a great and special thing how we won it yesterday. I'm sure you'd feel the same if I see how a lot of here are creaming themselves over your own youngsters coming through the ranks.
I'll agree that the opponent was bang average, even if the name Chelsea still sounds elite they are a horrible team. And we were second best for major parts during the game. But we came through when it was needed most and if you look at some of the names who were on the field during ET who had a part in getting us over the line, that's a special title for us. Can imagine you just view it as just another minor throphy though, and am fine with that.
As has been pointed out Chelsea’s team was actually a few years younger than yours.
They came on at 80 minutes and didn’t start the match. The fact they got any game time at all was down to injuries.
United have been playing several teenagers all season. Actually starting and finishing matches.
As I say winning any trophy is a good achievement so I’m unsure why you’re all trying to make out this is some kind of Busby Babes style moment. It’s embarrassing. They did well but no one really stood out.
I didn't watch the match but the media praise for playing kids is a bit odd? No Salah, back-up keeper and the lad at RB looks new. But was that it? 
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date