I didn't think we were very good tbh

[Felt]

I think the OP has a valid point. It was a great result, but we didn't make it easy for ourselves and Chelsea were unlucky in the second half. Well done to the lads, they did us proud and I couldn't be happier, but it wasn't a vintage performance by any means and we definitely need to improve if we're to stay up.

[MattyRangers]

I think the OP has a valid point. It was a great result, but we didn't make it easy for ourselves and Chelsea were unlucky in the second half. Well done to the lads, they did us proud and I couldn't be happier, but it wasn't a vintage performance by any means and we definitely need to improve if we're to stay up.

Tbf, 9 men or not, look at the quality of Chelseas side? Was always going to be a battle. They were 9 top top players. Am I correct in saying they were all regular international players? Many of whom have apepared in World Cups and Euro Comps?

We cant ebe expected to play that sorta side off the park with glitzy football. If we play as we done yesterday against every side in the league, IMO, we would beat a majority of them.

Not the classiest 2nd half by all means, but we done what was needed to do and I, for one, and taking a huge amount of positives from the game!

[swanleyhoop]

I can't believe this.
Even with 9 men, Chelsea should have had enough quality to at least equalise and probably beat us -- they are INFINITELY, man-for-man, better than us.
They had 11 men on the pitch for half an hour -- and couldn't score.
The fact is that we beat them because we didn't give them any time or space on the ball, and that got them frazzled and, at several times, panicking. Pundits said as much on MOTD2 last night. We scored early when they expected us to roll over, and they didn't have a plan B. They had players on the pitch who could, and should, have scored against us even with two men gone, and they didn't, because our midfield and defence kept their heads and stopped them from playing the game they wanted to.

Added to that the crowd noise (which AVB had woefully under-prepared them for by rubbishing the derby element), they just couldn't hack what was, for them and many of their fans, their first PROPER derby match for 15 years (you can't count Fulham matches, their fans wouldn't know how to create an atmosphere if you brought them the Idiot's Guide to it).

We won that game fairly and squarely on all levels yesterday -- psychologically more than anything -- on and off the pitch.

[MattyRangers]

I can't believe this.
Even with 9 men, Chelsea should have had enough quality to at least equalise and probably beat us -- they are INFINITELY, man-for-man, better than us.
They had 11 men on the pitch for half an hour -- and couldn't score.
The fact is that we beat them because we didn't give them any time or space on the ball, and that got them frazzled and, at several times, panicking. Pundits said as much on MOTD2 last night. We scored early when they expected us to roll over, and they didn't have a plan B. They had players on the pitch who could, and should, have scored against us even with two men gone, and they didn't, because our midfield and defence kept their heads and stopped them from playing the game they wanted to.

Added to that the crowd noise (which AVB had woefully under-prepared them for by rubbishing the derby element), they just couldn't hack what was, for them and many of their fans, their first PROPER derby match for 15 years (you can't count Fulham matches, their fans wouldn't know how to create an atmosphere if you brought them the Idiot's Guide to it).

We won that game fairly and squarely on all levels yesterday -- psychologically more than anything -- on and off the pitch.

Hear hear

[silvercue]

Swanley - I do tend to agree with your posts, but they are not infinately better than us - and the Premier League is lauded as one of the most competitive. If you think that the top teams should beat us (and therefore others) with only 9 men, then we are poles apart in our thinking.

It was great to win, but 2nd half we got the tactics wrong. We rode our luck, gave the ref 3 chances to award them a pen and they nearly scored. We should have slowed the game down and had a man on all of theirs when they had possession.

No leagues should have teams that "should" win when down to 9 men.

[loftlag]

All this guff about chetsea attacking in the 2nd half what else could they do they had nothing to loose they had to have a go ,as any team 1 nil down ,down to 9 men would, it would only take fool to expect players of the quality chelsea has to lie down and accept defeat

[Naarven Mankey]

First of all it was an amazing result that most of us could only ever dream about. A day that we'll never forget but the op has some very valid points and also some good replies from Swanley and Matty too. Its wrong to all dive in with the boot if someone has a difference of opinion. Thats what this message-board is for . . . to debate things.

With eleven players we matched them and rattled them so much it caused them to concede the 2 rc's and the penalty. From our first half display there were no negatives. We did what we had to do and that was get in their faces. Our fans played a massive part in this too. We really was a 12th man yesterday.

The second half display was a different story and I agree with the op a bit here. To be honest though i think our players got very nervous in the second half and it showed. They came out thinking omg were 1-0 up against Chelsea and i seriously think it affected the way we played. Weve played some great passing stuff at times this season against Wolves, Newcastle, Villa and Everton but our passing kinda went astray second half. Some it was down to the fact of the quality of their players but partly cos of who we were beating and the occasion too and the fact is we got very nervous. Faurlin did in the second half what most of our midfielders should have done. That was short simple passes using the extra men to tire them out. Instead we panicked and played too quickly and hoofed a lot. The Luke Young chance was created because it was the only time in the second half when we put any passes together and it created a great chance. But having watched the game again i think if we'd have played them on a bigger pitch with 9 men we could have made them pay more. Even with 9 men on our pitch its still very compact and not much space. Having said that nothing can take away this moment and all the players should be proud for the way they played and dug in there. Some nervy moments especially the 2 Anelka chances but overall we were amazing and especially Anton Ferdinand. Many positives to take out of the game and lets hope we can use some of the positives against Spuds. U R'ssssssssssss

I recorded the game onto DVD so this will go on the shelf with all the other great moments and im sure this disc is going to get many plays over the coming years.

[80sCasual]

Who gives a toss whether we were any good we beat the **** and as they say, 'It's the result that counts', and it is what will be remembered in the stats.

[DouDou_87]

Who gives a toss whether we were any good we beat the **** and as they say, 'It's the result that counts', and it is what will be remembered in the stats.

Exactly !!!

We beat Chelsea, lets just enjoy it ffs

[Shrine]

I knew i'd get abuse for posting this but thought someone had to raise their hand and say but we weren't actually that good....

Anyway i've got no problem people telling me they disagree or just enjoy it etc...
my only issue is people saying i'm not allowed to give my opinion as we've won and that's all that matters.

personally i'd prefer to lose to chelski 8-0 twice and stay up rather than being able to sing your mum your mum all year and going down....

Anyway, overall pretty good natured responses - so thanks to all

[qpr1882]

To the original poster, go sit on a sharp biscuit.

[Gerryhatrick]

I knew i'd get abuse for posting this but thought someone had to raise their hand and say but we weren't actually that good....

Anyway i've got no problem people telling me they disagree or just enjoy it etc...
my only issue is people saying i'm not allowed to give my opinion as we've won and that's all that matters.

personally i'd prefer to lose to chelski 8-0 twice and stay up rather than being able to sing your mum your mum all year and going down....

Anyway, overall pretty good natured responses - so thanks to all

I did wonder whether to get the popcorn out when I first saw the OP. I've noticed that a ''balanced debate'' on WATRB means something different to what you think.

It should mean that half agree with your point, and half will disagree. But on here it means half are verbally abusive, disrespectful, and self opinionated, and the other half offer a point of view to agree or disagree. So anyway, it's still ''balanced''