bridge views - the thinking fan's chelsea blog

Secret meditation room helping Chelsea players put mind over matter

In July I wrote a piece about Bruno Demichelis, a sports psychologist Ancelotti brought with him from Milan. Judging from his experience in setting up the venerated MilanLab, it seemed he had moved to London to help extend the careers of Chelsea’s older players. The latest from Cobham suggests that he’s turning to an unlikely source – meditation – to take the science much further.

A piece in today’s Daily Telegraph is well worth a read and shows just how far football has come since the days of black and white TV and orange slices at half time. Since Demichelis’ arrival Chelsea have set up what is called a ‘mind room’: a relaxing environment in which players can be placed into a meditative state. According to the Telegraph, the Chelsea mind room, the largest of its kind in Europe and a close relative of a similar facility Demichelis set up while at Milan, is being used to both reduce players’ fear of failure and help them conserve energy during matches.

Once in a meditative state, players are hooked up to a variety of sensors and shown video clips of themselves making mistakes. They are then trained to prevent their heart rate increasing as they watch themselves make those errors, in theory allowing them to have greater control when presented with similar situations in real life. The Telegraph article goes into more detail:

“The idea is that when the player then goes out onto the pitch and is presented with a chance to score, or to stop the opposition, he will be so focused and mentally-prepared that he will succeed. At the same time, the player will have been trained so well by Demichelis that he can bring down his heart rate when he does not have to run so that he can conserve energy. And he will also be able to this without thinking.”

Interestingly, the technique is expected to have a positive impact on players’ performances not just psychologically, but also physically. But Chelsea are keeping their mind room a closely guarded secret. Demichelis – who in typical Chelsea style has been nicknamed ‘BB’ or ‘Big Bruno’ by the players - has revealed that it is a ‘specially-constructed space’ that can accommodate six players at a time in ergonomically-designed loungers. Beyond that, we know very little, and the Telegraph can but assume that it follows a similar model to that in Milan.

But anyway, enough of the theory. It’s probably too early to say to what extent Demichelis’ techniques are working, and the ‘mind room’ is just one small part of the performance picture anyway. But the signs are good: so far Chelsea have scored 15 of their 26 goals in the last 40 minutes of games, compared with just 11 in the first 60, indicating improved stamina. Three games have been won from losing positions, indicating mental toughness. And Lampard hasn’t missed a penalty. But are these new traits for Chelsea?

In a football world dominated by machismo – on the terraces at least – the concept of meditation might seem a strange idea. But if it helps Drogba miss less chances, Lampard to keep scoring high-pressure penalties and Essien to stay injury free, it gets my backing. So far, the evidence largely points to it working…

You might also be interested to read:

• Training changes at Chelsea – including information on Demichelis’ MilanLab and what he brings to Chelsea
• Could injuries determine Chelsea’s success – how Demichelis is working to reduce injuries at the club, and how that will affect potential performances on the field

More swine flu? Bolton get excuses in early ahead of Chelsea clash

Sam Allardyce was quick to get his excuses in for his side’s 5-0 capitulation at Stamford Bridge on Sunday, revealing that two of his players contracted swine flu. Now, ahead of tomorrow’s Carling Cup fixture against the league leaders, Bolton manager Gary Megson has revealed that four of his players are now suffering from pig flu. I’m not normally so cynical, but could it be that is the excuses that are catching?

Megson said: “You are going to get one or two with swine flu and I think on the playing staff I think we have had five, four players and one member of staff. They are all okay at the moment, but it wouldn't be right to start giving you names.”

Clearly, whilst swine flu is relatively mild for most that catch it, it has had very serious consequences for many both in this country and around the world. I’m not trying to make light of the illness - it’s good news that evidently no-one is seriously ill. Saying all that, it has proved a handy post-thumping distraction for Allardyce, who has effectively shifted the spotlight away from his players. Perhaps Megson is similarly looking to play down the significance of tomorrow’s tie – although potentially for different reasons.

Meanwhile, Ancelotti has played down concerns that there might be a risk of spreading the illness to the Chelsea squad by the fixture going ahead. The Italian said: “The flu is not only on the pitch, it's everywhere. We take all the precautions and we want to think about playing, that's it. We are not worried about this problem because we've taken all the precautions.”

Amidst a freshly invigorated debate around spitting that has been stirred up by all the talk of swine flu, Ancelotti seems the voice of perspective and reason. And as it turns out, he has his own treatment for swine flu: “It's not a medical prescription. It's my grandmother's prescription - hot milk. Alcohol - red wine. Fantastic.”

Nice one Carlo. Perhaps the Italian is more fun than he lets on…

Chelsea linked with the world's top players again to prove silly season never ends

According to Fleet Street, Chelsea will launch an enormous transfer binge in January.

The FIFA transfer ban hasn’t had much, if any, impact on the Chelsea gossip train – I guess journalists just aren’t prepared to give up the stories that would fill hundreds of otherwise empty column inches every six months. Despite knowing nothing about the status or credibility of the appeal, the newspapers have ignored Chelsea’s recent thriftiness in the transfer market and would have us believe that the ban will definitely be overturned and Chelsea will be hunting down several big name signings come January 1^st.

The names supposedly on Ancelotti’s shortlist have been coming thick and fast over the past few days – apparently David Villa, Sergio Aguero, Daniele De Rossi, Adam Johnson, Jack Rodwell, Marek Hamsik and Rafael Van Der Vaart are just some of the names that will be heading to Stamford Bridge for exorbitant sums in early 2010. Check out the Mirror and the Telegraph for just a flavour of the rumours.

Everything points to continued conservatism in Chelsea’s transfer policy: the club has continually spoken of the aim to break even; big money signings have been few and far between of late; and areas of the club have seen budget cuts – for example Chelsea Ladies (read here to find out how John Terry lent them a helping hand).

Plus of course, we’ve heard it all before. Over the summer Chelsea were linked with no less than 39 players – most of which being the biggest and brightest stars of the game. As it was, Chelsea signed four players: Zhirkov, Sturridge, Turnbull and Matic . And that was at a time when Chelsea were allowed to make signings.

What does this all mean? Well, just don’t believe all you read when it comes to Chelsea and transfers. Not until anything actually happens, at least…

Chelsea season in stats: a water-tight defence, invaluable Ivorian and lucky streak

Here’s another monthly look at what at what the stats tell us about Chelsea’s progress: this time with revelations about Lampard’s scoring rate, Chelsea’s deceptively good defence and a continuing reliance on Drogba. My obsession with football stats continues…

At this rate Lampard won’t score 20
Such is the quality of Frank Lampard that scoring just one goal in 12 games was a crisis. Now that he’s scored three in the last two his rate looks a whole lot more impressive and firmly into the realm of respectability for a player of his ability. He still needs a couple of quick goals to get himself back on 20 a season form however: if he carries on scoring at his current rate (one goal every 3.5 games) he’ll need to play 70 games during 09/10 to make that total – which clearly won’t happen.

Are Chelsea getting lucky?
14 games played – two penalties won (and scored) and two own goals. But to what extent do teams make their own luck?

Defence is king
After some unfortunate slip ups against Wigan and Villa, the media would have us believe that Chelsea’s defence was in crisis, Carvalho was past his prime and John Terry was a bad player. But in contrast to the knee jerk reaction, Chelsea’s defence is pretty rock solid, conceding just 0.6 goals a game on average. Carry on at that rate and Chelsea will concede just 22 goals in the league this season – comfortably less than any team managed during 08/09. Other key facts: Chelsea have kept nine clean sheets – a staggering 64% of games played – and haven’t conceded in any of the Champions League or League Cup games played so far.

More players are scoring more goals
I suggested during the last stat-attack that, in order for Chelsea to be successful, more players would need to start chipping in with goals. This has happened: now five players have scored three or more in all competitions. While at the end of September Drogba had scored 30% of all Chelsea’s goals, he’s now scored just 25% - and not because he’s stopped scoring.

But Drogba’s still invaluable
Scoring 8 goals from 10 games is pretty spectacular record. But it’s half the story – if you include the two penalties he’s won for the team and his seven assists, Drogba has played a critical role in 17 of Chelsea’s 24 goals scored in Premier League games (the only competition he’s played in). That’s seven in ten goals the Ivorian is having a hand in. Torres might score a few more, but it’s Drogba’s other attributes that make him the more valuable player.

A ‘reasonable’ record against better sides
So far Chelsea have played six of the teams currently in the top half of the Premier League (Spurs, Liverpool, Villa, Sunderland, Stoke, Wigan) winning four games, losing two, scoring 12 and conceding seven. It’s a very reasonable record, but those stats will come under threat once the games against Arsenal, United and Man City come around. Meanwhile, Chelsea have mopped up against more lowly opposition: four games against bottom half opponents have resulted in four wins with 12 goals scored and just 1 conceded.

For a full set of Chelsea team and player season stats broken down by competition, click here. If you think there’s any set of stats that would be useful or interesting to add to this page, let me know and I’ll start recording them.

More goals, more wins - Chelsea goal glut part of a more exciting league season

It was a great weekend in the Premier League for Chelsea. Not only did the Blues finally hit top gear to crush Blackburn 5-0, Liverpool took three points off Manchester United while Man City and Arsenal both dropped points having surrendered two goal leads.

Chelsea now sit two points clear at the top of the table with the joint best goal difference and, whilst more difficult games are on the horizon (not least Man Utd next month), things are looking bright. It will probably be a season unlike any other we have seen for a while with the ‘big four’ sides all likely to drop more points along the way, but for now Chelsea fans can enjoy being back at the top.

Looking back over the 96 league games played so far this season, high scoring games like Saturday’s have been a fairly common occurrence (although not all so one sided). There have been 52 home wins and 29 away wins, meaning that just 15 per cent of games so far have ended in a draw. Of those, just three have failed to produce a goal.

In total 287 goals have been scored. That’s just under three per game on average, and approximately half a goal per game more than last season. To put that in context: that’s the equivalent of an extra five goals hitting the net every weekend.

So we might have lost the Best Player in the World™, but it looks like the Premiership has lost none of what has made it the most attractive league on the planet: swashbuckling football at its most exciting.

Sky must be loving it. Regardless, despite their reputation for functional football, Chelsea are certainly playing their part.

You might be interested to read:

• What does the Ronaldo transfer mean for Chelsea?

Chelsea 5 Blackburn 0 - Blues finally hit top gear to demolish Blackburn

Despite a woeful recent record away from home, you might have expected Allardyce’s Blackburn to have put up more of a fight against Chelsea yesterday. But this was a masterclass performance from the Ancelotti’s men who unleashed a second half blue-coloured blitzkrieg to put five past a hapless Blackburn Rovers.

It didn’t look like the final score would be so comprehensive after the first half, however. Dominating both possession and territory, Chelsea should have put two or three past a Blackburn side that looked dumbstruck in the face of some top class one-touch passing. Joe Cole, Anelka and Lampard each passed up opportunities that arguably they should have scored.

But it was nevertheless an impressive first 45 in which Joe Cole – making his first start in the Premier League for ten months – was at the heart of a side playing football that was on another level to anything Chelsea fans have seen so far this season. It was a half characterised by everything that has always been good about Chelsea for the last few years: strength and industry from Essien, exquisite long passing from Ballack, Lampard making dangerous late runs into the box and the front two causing havoc either through the middle or by pulling the defence down the channels.

But there was more than the normal yesterday. Spurred on by a confident and driven performance from Joe Cole, this was a Chelsea that had added tricks, flicks and sharp one touch passing to their game. Blackburn were chasing shadows, and the one nil half time scoreline (an own goal created by a fine first time cross from the left by Anelka) was no reflection of the balance of play. Had it not been for lax finishing and three world class saves from Paul Robinson, the scoreline might have already been embarrassing.

The second half saw Chelsea finally rewarded for the quality of their play as four goals were put past the ex-England keeper in the space of fifteen minutes. The first came from Lampard who broke his barren run in the Premiership with a driven shot after Drogba had cut the ball back from the byline. The next came from an Essien 30 yard strike – arguably Robinson should have done better. Next Drogba was brought down in the box to set up Lampard to score his second of the day from the spot. Drogba got in the act to head Chelsea’s fifth from a Ballack corner.

This was the footballing equivalent of blitzkrieg. As if spurred on by not making the most of their first half chances, Chelsea cut loose and hit top gear for the first time this season. Even having gone three nil up, Chelsea still played a high tempo, positive game of the like we don’t usually see at Stamford Bridge unless the side go behind.

The scoreline allowed Ancelotti some freedom from the bench, with Bruma getting an unexpected chance to show his ability at centre half. Sturridge was given 10-15 minutes – that he wasn’t given longer would be my only criticism of an otherwise excellent display from both players and manager.

A great performance all round – and one that finally shows just what Chelsea are capable of when the pedal is pushed to the metal.

bridgeviews.co.uk man of the match: Lampard might be scoring again and Drogba might have scored his eighth goal in just 10 league games, but in bringing much needed creativity to a sometimes lifeless midfield Joe Cole was the difference yesterday. Quite simply, Chelsea looked a different side with him in it. He was the both the team’s metronome and its ‘fantasy’: the craft that put Blackburn out of the game. A very impressive comeback.

What the papers said

The Times
“Chelsea did all they could to soothe their manager, brutalising Blackburn, and Paul Robinson in particular, with their fluent, powerful and penetrative football. If all their games were at Stamford Bridge, Ancelotti’s side would be certainties for the Premier League.”

The Guardian
“During the second-half tornado, a blue force ripped through Blackburn, inhabitants of the Shed End jumped with enough vigour to test the stand's foundations, and there was a buzz in the air that made you wonder if Carlo Ancelotti had found the X-factor Roman Abramovich has long been after. This was a thrill-a-minute Chelsea, a forward-thinking Chelsea, a team brimming with goals and attacking intent.”

Telegraph
“With Cole playing as if he had never been away, Chelsea annihilated an inept Blackburn side to reclaim top spot in style. Frank Lampard, who has had an unusually quiet campaign in front of goal so far, was back to his menacing best, scoring twice. Chelsea…were rejuvenated by Cole. He instantly looked back to his effervescent best and should have scored.”

You might be interested to read:

• The Chelsea season in stats – goals, assists and results analysis

Chelsea to go on January spending spree - but is it a good time to buy?

Reports in this morning’s papers – most notably on the back page of the Times – suggest that Chelsea are pushing the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to suspend FIFA’s transfer ban while its appeal is being considered, freeing the club up to make purchases in January.

The Times’ report suggests that Chelsea are already drawing up a list of targets which includes David Villa, Daniele De Rossi, Middlesbrough’s Adam Johnson and, most worryingly, Emile Heskey. Surely not the latter?

Rumour has it that Ancelotti is concerned at the depth of the squad. Perhaps if he were ready to play some of the current second string – the likes of Joe Cole, Zhirkov, Sturridge etc for longer than ten minutes a month – he might gain a different understanding.

It’s all speculation at this point however as we know nothing of CAS’ intentions regarding a potential suspension of the transfer ban, or the appeal itself, although noises in newspapers suggest that Chelsea are at relatively confident that the ban will be at least reduced. But on the off chance that the full ban is upheld, January might prove the only chance the club has to renew the squad until 2011.

From that perspective, planning for January deals is probably a sensible move for the club. Generally speaking however, the January transfer window is far from an ideal time to be making purchases.

Typically players of the highest calibre are not realistic targets in January, mainly because ineligibility for the Champions League makes them a less appealing prospect. In addition, teams are often even more reluctant to sell their best players mid-season, leading to inflated prices. If David Villa (who incidentally has had a great season so far with Valencia) would have cost £25m in July, you can bet he’d cost closer to £40m on 1^st January.

Good deals have been made in the January transfer window – £15m for Anelka wasn’t too outrageous, for example. But let’s not get too excited. We’ve heard nothing from CAS yet and I find it hard to believe that there’s plenty of money in the Chelsea coffers now when the club adopted such a thrifty approach just a few months ago. If the transfer window is open to Chelsea in January, expect one or two shrewd purchases of younger players already starting to show potential in English football.

And yes, that would rule Heskey out.

John Terry rescues Chelsea Ladies to prove wealthy stars have a heart

A nice story for a Monday afternoon – Chelsea captain John Terry has reached into his sizeable pockets to help maintain the future of his club’s women’s football team.

According to a story in the Guardian, Chelsea Ladies – who have made good progress in the last few years – have suffered a cut in funding recently which threatened to overshadow their development. This perhaps isn’t surprising – over the last 24 months, and particularly since the recession took hold, the club have been openly looking for ways to cut costs and it seems that for the time being the Ladies aren’t top priority. It is the first time in five years that Chelsea Ladies have had their budget cut.

Chelsea Ladies captain, Casey Stoney, explained how Terry got involved. “It was a blow when we were told what was happening. I mentioned it to a friend who's also a mate of JT's, and when he was told about it JT came to find me at the training ground to ask if he could help.”

Casey continues: “He ended up putting his hand in his pocket and persuading some of the other players to do the same, so now we can keep going on the same footing we had last year. We need that level of funding if we are going to compete at the top end of the Premier League and do well in the big cup competitions, so the help we've had from the guys has been invaluable. JT has also become president of the women's club and he's been with his family to see us play, so he's taking a real interest.”

Yes, it will be easy for some to dismiss John Terry’s generosity by pointing to his significant wealth. Nevertheless, this was something that he did not need to do. It is great to see these kind of stories make the national newspapers and a pleasant distraction from the stories of drunkenness about English footballers that more frequently make the headlines. Hopefully Chelsea Ladies can take advantage of the efforts of John Terry and the other players who put their hands in their pockets and continue their push up the table – currently they sit second.

I’m happy to admit that I don’t watch women’s football – and I’m unlikely to start in the near future – but I understand the importance of maintaining the game at this level. Regardless, this is another story that is testament not only to the extraordinary dedication of John Terry to Chelsea, but also to the existence of a wider sense of ‘community’ at the club, which stretches well beyond the senior squad alone.

You might also like to read:

• Does John Terry have too much influence?
• Devil’s advocate: should Chelsea have sold John Terry?

Aston Villa 2 Chelsea 1 - defence and Ancelotti give cause for concern

Another away match, another defeat. Overall, in losing to a good Aston Villa side, Chelsea didn’t actually put in a bad performance. But errors both in defence and attack, and a worrying lack of leadership from Ancelotti, were enough to get me concerned.

Even in deserved defeat, there were some positives. It might have been a tad lucky, but Drogba scored again to maintain an excellent goals to games ratio. It’s also worth pointing out that, coming on the fifteenth minute, the Ivorian’s goal was the earliest Chelsea have scored so far this season. At times on Saturday Chelsea played some nice football. Some slick passing from Deco and Lampard created two or three excellent chances to score. Overall, Chelsea had more shots on goal than the home side and dominated possession.

Unfortunately however, there really is only one stat that matters in football matches – goals scored and conceded – and Villa were ruthless in their exploitation of Chelsea’s weaknesses on the day. Indeed, had poor fortune struck Ancelotti’s side the losing margin could have been even greater, as Villa created more chances on the break.

Ancelotti has some work to do over the next couple of weeks on the training ground to urgently correct what appears to be an uncharacteristic weakness in defence. At times last season the same frailty from corners and crosses reared its head, but was quickly quashed once Hiddink took over. Now history seems to be repeating itself.

There have been suggestions that Carvalho is the weak link, and that replacing him with Alex when fit might resolve the problem. On Sky Sports commentary, Andy Gray suggested something similar – and that the Portuguese was too weak. I’m not in that school of thought: a central defensive pairing should be about a blend of talents and, on form, Carvalho offers the best possible foil for John Terry.

Conceding two goals from corners on Saturday was about poor discipline and concentration. What else could have got John Terry so riled? One would hope that, with world class defenders in the team, extra work on the training ground will go some way to solving the problem. Anelka and Deco both missed excellent chances to level the score, and I suspect that such profligacy might be harder to correct. As I pointed out earlier in the season, if Chelsea are to be successful this year, one or two players need to start chipping in with more goals. Drogba’s current form is outstanding, but can’t be relied on to win the league on its own.

But this was one defeat – not a disaster, especially bearing in mind Liverpool’s equally unfortunate and hilarious loss at Sunderland. In light of that, the most worrying aspect of the defeat at Villa isn’t the players’ performances at all, but the manager’s, which could have longer-term meaning.

As during the Hull game earlier in the season, I was at first startled and then livid at Ancelotti’s refusal to take positive action to change the game on Saturday. Chelsea fell behind Villa in the 51^st minute, and it wasn’t until the 83^rd that he made an attacking substitution. This represented an infuriating lack of leadership: essentially he was trusting to hope alone to get a result.

A loss is worth nothing – why not push for a goal? When Bosingwa got injured, why not take 60 seconds to consider whether there was a better option rather than the obvious straight swap for Ivanovic? Bringing on Cole and switching Essien to right back could have helped take advantage of a Villa side that would be on the back foot for half an hour, for example. What was giving Joe Cole – a player just coming back from injury – five minutes to try and turn a football match around going to do but undermine the player’s confidence?

We were spoilt with Mourinho. Whilst Jose may not have always got his starting XI right, he never failed to take action to change games that were ebbing away. Fans understood what he was doing, and players were able to respond to the ‘let’s win this’ message that his positive substitutions would send when they were a goal down. As it was, Ancelotti sent no message at all, and the game ebbed away rather than heated up with ten minutes to go. I suspect that I’ll get some flack for my criticism of Ancelotti from forummers, and perhaps other bloggers like thechelseablog.org and chelseadaft, but in my view if we’re happy to criticise our defence’s performance on Saturday, then we shouldn’t shy from criticising the manager’s, either.

All that said, Ancelotti must have had his reasons. This was just one game and next time that we’re a goal down he’ll – hopefully – do something different. We are far from a crisis, and the season thus far sits firmly in ‘going well’ territory – but Ancelotti has work to do to make sure it stays there.

What O’Neill said

“They’re (Chelsea) really good. I think they’re so strong and I don’t think they ever get the credit for being brilliant.”

What the papers said

The Times
“By the end of this fulminating spectacle it was Chelsea, if recent history is anything to go by, whose title hopes were grounded. His (Ancelotti’s) Chelsea, just like Luiz Felipe Scolari’s Chelsea last year, have a flaw that will surely prove fatal to their ambitions unless it is promptly addressed.”

Telegraph
“Chelsea are far from a crisis even if their second Premier League defeat of the season, the second in a row away from home, means they have ceded the leadership of the table. And Chelsea have never won the title after losing two of their first nine games. Ancelotti has the players, he has their support, he has the tactics, the structure and the temperament. But who can defend him when his team can’t defend?”

Guardian
“A second consecutive away defeat on the domestic front is a feeble sort of crisis since the new leaders Manchester United are merely a point clear of Chelsea. In contrast to the 3-1 loss at Wigan, Ancelotti's side produced some excellent football.”

No Chelsea 3pm kick-offs? Football has changed, but could it damage the game

Looking back over the matches Chelsea have played so far this season, one of the ways increasing television coverage has changed football over the last ten years is startlingly apparent.

Chelsea have played 12 games so far this season, including the Community Shield, and only four haven’t been shown live on television. Of the 28 games that the team is scheduled to play before 1st January 2010, only nine won’t be on Sky or ESPN: just one third of games aren’t being shown on TV.

This means that some of the footballing traditions are being eroded too (at least for the bigger sides): namely, the Saturday 3pm kick-off. Of the eight Premier League games Chelsea have played so far, only two have been standard Saturday afternoon affairs. We’ll have to wait until 21st November for the first home game Chelsea will play on a Saturday at 3 o’clock (our 13^th league game). In total, of the 20 Premier League games Chelsea will play before New Year’s Day, 70% won’t be 3pm starts.

So the game changes. Is that a bad thing? Not necessarily. Yes, a 3pm Saturday kick-off does feel right somehow, offering just the right amount of time for fans to have a drink before the game and up the volume in the stadium. Conversely 12.45 kick-offs lead to quieter crowds and Sunday games often feel flat.

But Chelsea fans (or fans of other big sides) can’t complain too much either, as TV coverage forms the financial backbone of the club’s success on the pitch, and has been the driving force behind the modernisation of the game. Furthermore, fans of clubs lower down the table don’t have the same opportunities to watch their team, and their clubs don’t reap the same financial rewards.

But increased television coverage could have further reaching and more damaging consequences. Many argue that the current lull in Italian football – characterised by matches frequently being played in half-empty stadiums – has its roots in the massive expansion of pay-per-view coverage, where fans could pretty much watch every game on television.

Clubs like Manchester United are unlikely to be affected by increased television coverage - their huge fanbase means they won’t struggle to fill their stadium. Clubs with smaller fanbases – perhaps even Chelsea – are more susceptible to more games being shown on TV however, as fans’ decision to make the large financial outlay for tickets becomes unbalanced by the ability to watch games more cheaply at home. Whatever benefits television coverage brings, it shouldn’t be to the detriment of the stadium experience.

We’re certainly not at that tipping point yet however, and of course clubs lower down the table aren’t as fortunate as us and are more vulnerable to falling attendances. The Premier League probably has it just about right at the moment, but with broadcasters ready to throw ever-increasing resources at the game, football will need to fight off the temptation and look to its long-term future.

Chelsea season-tickets holders and members – do you care that matches aren’t 3pm Saturday kick-offs anymore? Post a comment.

You might also be interested to look at:

• Chelsea’s 09/10 fixture list, including kick-off times, television coverage and bridgeviews.co.uk match reports

Another international break but English football fans don't care about the national team

How many international breaks (interlull™) have there been this season already?

The game against Ukraine on Saturday – which I didn’t watch, incidentally – sounds like it was one of the more unconvincing England displays we have seen for a while. To be fair to Capello and the team however, it wouldn’t be the first time football sides have turned out sub-standard performances having previously completed the job at hand. Stupid defensive errors are concerning, but we shouldn’t whip ourselves up into a frenzy.

To be honest though, I rarely get into any kind of frenzy watching England these days. Yes, a major international tournament is among the more exciting events the game throws up, but these days watching the national side pales almost into insignificance in comparison with my club allegiance.

International breaks are infuriating, breaking up the rhythm of an otherwise exciting league (or your best player’s cruciate ligaments, as in the case of Essien last year). More than that, I find it hard to rationalise hurling abuse at Wayne Rooney or Steven Gerrard in a red shirt one week while cheering them on when they play in white the next, in that I refuse to do the latter. Sad it may be, but watching England has often become merely an extended exercise in supporting Lampard, Terry and the Coles, and this from a not unpatriotic person.

But I’m not on my own.

An interesting piece of research called ‘Football Passions’ was conducted last year by The Social Issues Research Centre, commissioned by Canon. The report, which looked into a range of football-related sociological issues across Europe, claims that football fans almost universally favour their club side over the international team. It varies from nation to nation but, perhaps surprisingly, the British are among those who comparatively care the least about the fortunes of the national sides.

Over 80% of British football fans said they ‘feel a stronger sense of allegiance to the team that I support than I do for the national side’ - a fairly huge majority. That’s over the European average, and bested only by the Norwegians and the Swedish (around 92 and 87% respectively). Interestingly, those nationalities caring most about their national sides were the French (not at all surprising bearing in mind their domestic league may as well be the Conference and ships its best players abroad), Polish and Portuguese. But those three countries were out on their own.

In light of that, I’ll feel better about myself if long working hours means I don’t manage to tune in for tomorrow’s meaningless game against Belarus. It also means I feel much calmer about the disgraceful decision to allow Saturday’s game to only be shown on the internet. It’s just England – I’ll get over it. Until South Africa, that is…

What do you think? Club, or country – which is it for you?

A life without Abramovich - are Chelsea considering the potential fallout?

A life without Roman? It doesn’t bear thinking about. Or does it? Well, evidently Chelsea Chairman Bruce Buck thinks about it at least once a year. According to quotes attributed to him in today’s Sun, Buck has said:

“I think we'd be in a reasonably good state if Mr Abramovich left. However, we are comfortable — the directors of Chelsea Football Club are comfortable — that he is here for the long haul. Every year we're required to look at that. We're comfortable and we don't see it as an issue at all.”

Very interesting. I can see why they might feel comfortable. Whilst the club has consistently been making losses over the past few years, the figures have been steadily improving. Had it not been for the odd bad appointment or decision here and there (for example hiring Scolari or giving Grant a four year deal), the club probably would be edging towards the holy grail of self sufficiency by now. With the huge investment in the academy over the past five years, Buck is probably hoping Chelsea’s younger players will eventually reduce the need for significant investment in the squad in coming years.

On the other hand, it is also hard to avoid the conclusion that all the success of the last six years is down to Abramovich and that his departure would certainly have far-reaching consequences. Perhaps that’s why Buck chose the words he did: ‘comfortable’, not ‘well off’; ‘reasonably good’, not ‘very good’. Roman leaving is clearly vaguely plausible too – Buck and his team consider the potential impact each year. But we shouldn’t read too much into that, it’s standard business practice to do this kind of contingency planning and likely just a part of how the club reports to the owner on its financial growth.

That Buck is even answering these questions however could re-open the debate around Roman’s commitment to the club. This is a debate that won’t just fade away, mainly because of the Russian’s ongoing determination to keep a low public profile. But the signs are all positive: earlier in the year he halved the debt Chelsea owe him, a move the club hailed as a symbol of his commitment (although it is a move that does him no financial harm whatsoever, so I’d argue it’s a slightly shallow move); he regularly attends games; he personally intervened to both fire Scolari and hire Ancelotti. Hardly the actions of a disengaged Oligarch.

So no cause for concern…probably.

Roman hasn’t been spending freely of late – even before the recession burned a huge hole in his pocket – so maybe we shouldn’t worry about him leaving anyway? Then again, even if he isn’t investing millions maybe his wealth is an important safety blanket for the club. Chelsea fans – what do you think? I’m sure like me you wouldn’t want him to walk away…

You might also be interested to read:

• Chelsea should abandon its ‘off the shelf’ transfer policy

New deal for Chelsea's Kalou - but is he worth it?

News reports today suggest that Saloman Kalou is about to agree a new deal at Chelsea. It’s easy to see why Chelsea might be marshalling him towards putting pen to paper, but there’s another side to the coin…

When Kalou joined Chelsea back in 2006, he looked a promising player. Perhaps a little inconsistent – especially in the final third – Kalou was at least dynamic, energetic and positive in possession.

Three years on, Kalou is still all of those things (and he’s chipped in with a fair number of goals in his those years too, scoring at a rate just under one goal in every four games). But, sadly, he’s still no more than that – a player that looks to have potential. At 24 years of age, is that enough?

Compared with Malouda, whose constant refusal to take responsibility on the pitch used to infuriate me before his renaissance under Hiddink, Kalou was a godsend. He has never lacked the will to take a man on, drive towards the byline or take on an ambitious shot at goal, and his work-rate is beyond question. But he looks the same player he did three years ago, scoring the same number of goals (seven in his first two seasons and six last), making the same kinds of runs and mistakes.

Most frustratingly, his three years of experience haven’t improved his decision making in the final third. In two recent appearances against Porto and Wigan his lack of either composure or top class footballing intelligence was clear to see, time and again letting down his own good approach play (and that of his team-mates) by attempting the wrong pass or, more often than not, taking on a shot at goal when it just wasn’t ‘on’.

Can this footballing intelligence be taught? Whilst I suspect that the clichéd ‘good football brain’ comes bundled with the best players, I do think it can be picked up or enhanced (for me Joe Cole’s immeasurable improvement under Mourinho is evidence of that). But after three years at Chelsea I have my concerns for Kalou – he just hasn’t added it to his game. The devil’s advocate might point the finger at Chelsea’s coaching: Arsenal have been rumoured to be interested in the Ivorian, and it isn’t hard to envisage Wenger making more of his talents.

As one of the only players in the Chelsea squad willing to run at defences with the ball at his feet, Kalou does bring value to the side. He also brings youth to a team full of 30+ year olds and, in the face of the FIFA transfer ban, the club can’t afford to haemorrhage players. Bearing all that in mind, Kalou signing a new deal is definitely the right move for the club, and we certainly wouldn’t want to see him move to a rival for free.

But, when he does sign up, both the Chelsea management and fans should demand improvements from Kalou that see him finally deliver on his potential.

What do you think of Kalou? Would you give him a new deal? Post a comment…

Chelsea 2 Liverpool 0 - league leaders ride luck but lay down title credentials

Are there more nerve-jangling games than against Liverpool? Whether the tightly-contested, tactical games of the Mourinho era or the goal-fests under Hiddink, games against Liverpool in the last few years have had that little something extra. Before heading to the game yesterday, I was surprised to learn  however that not only have Liverpool failed to score at Stamford Bridge in the league over the last five years (aside from last year’s winner, an own goal), Chelsea hadn’t managed a win over the reds at home in three years.

One of those records came to an end yesterday. Chelsea clinched an impressive, if slightly flattering, 2-0 victory. As always, I’ll leave you to read the paper reviews to recount the ebb and flow of the game in detail, but just a few thoughts in reaction follow… 

Liverpool, clearly feeling that they have a legitimate title challenge to make this season and wanting to make amends for a weak showing against Fiorentina earlier on Tuesday, came out of the blocks quickest and had the better of the play in the first ten minutes. Aside from that however, the only periods of dominance from Benitez’s side came in the opening minutes of the second half and in the closing twenty when Chelsea inexplicably seemed to go to sleep.

Outside of those moments however, Chelsea probably edged the game and deserved their win. What’s more, this was the kind of performance we have come to expect from Chelsea over the past five years. The likes of Drogba, Ballack, Essien and Terry were just too physically strong for Liverpool (and especially Carragher, who Drogba gave a torrid time), and Chelsea’s ruthless efficiency in front of goal was vintage Mourinho. That efficiency was the ace in the pack yesterday: this was a game in which both sides would only rarely let their guard down.

Chelsea’s back four were on top form – John Terry’s performance, in which he time and again out-thought or out-muscled Torres, should prove those cynical of his ability wrong – but Liverpool did carve out chances. Torres arguably could have done better with chances in both halves, and both Gerrard and Benayoun came close with second half efforts. But, unlike Chelsea’s, those chances weren’t taken and Liverpool were otherwise fairly well contained.

Gerrard (and Lampard too, if I’m honest) was largely anonymous, Torres dangerous only in fits and starts and Glen Johnson showed little of the attacking promise of recent weeks.

If Torres’ misses cost Liverpool a point, then Essien’s performance earned Chelsea all three. The Ghanaian was all-powerful in front of the back four, continually holding off opponents, breaking up Liverpool moves and building a platform for attacking play. Elsewhere, Ashley Cole was top class yet again, Ballack’s all round game was superb, Drogba gave a masterclass in leading the line (when he decided to stay on his feet) and Hilario was flawless between the posts. In the end, goals from Anelka and Malouda – both exquisitely created by Drogba - sealed the win. 

This wasn’t a free-flowing Chelsea performance by any means, especially in parts of the first half, but you wouldn’t expect that against a Liverpool side expert in nullifying opposition. Regardless, this was a performance that was good enough.

Looking for faults, you could point the finger at the side dropping too deep and not closing down quickly enough in the last twenty – which certainly contributed to Liverpool looking much more dangerous – but this performance was a far cry from Chelsea’s dire exploits against big four opposition under Scolari last season.  

It is perhaps a little ironic that, whilst Chelsea yesterday came through their second major test of the season with with a second win, it is only the inauspicious display at Wigan that now blights the Blues’ record. But let’s not kid ourselves: there are improvements to be made (possession football in the last twenty, anyone?) and yesterday’s result could have been different. Nevertheless, the result was well-deserved and things are looking good for top of the table Chelsea. Meanwhile, title-rivals Liverpool’s third loss in eight league games puts them just a couple of poor performances away from being out of the chase altogether. 

Is it worth all the nerve-jangling? With results like that, unquestionably yes.

bridgeviews.co.uk man of the match: So many good performances to choose from, but for me Essien was a cut above. Dominating through his physicality alone, his distribution was top notch and he was a at times unplayable. A performance befitting of the ‘Bison’ moniker.

What the papers say

The Times
“Small details, according to Carlo Ancelotti and Rafael Benítez, are what decide football matches. It sounds like the ultimate truism, but, after two of the Barclays Premier League’s heavyweight teams had spent an hour trading punches at Stamford Bridge yesterday, one of them briefly let their guard down and, from that moment on, Chelsea and Liverpool seemed to be heading in opposite directions.

“Little wonder that John Terry and his Chelsea team-mates celebrated as joyously as they did at the end. It had been a tough slog, a serious test of their mettle after a week in which they had been soundly beaten by Wigan Athletic and unconvincing in victory over Apoel Nicosia in the Champions League, but they had emerged stronger, two points clear at the top of the table and six points clear of a Liverpool team whose title challenge is already faltering.”

The Guardian
“Predictability was a delight for Chelsea. The side must reduce their opponents to fatalism when they have this durability and efficiency about them. Liverpool, eager as they were in the hunt for revival in the Premier League, were well contained.

“It must, of course, be a pleasure to the manager, Carlo Ancelotti, that there is searing reliability to Didier Drogba these days. Once again he could not be denied and in this case he set up both goals. Liverpool's effort was great and they may therefore be all the more despondent that they have been defeated for the third time in the league, with October barely begun.”