By CovSid67
March 10 2009

Well, that was every bit the anti-climax I thought it would be. And, while I'm sure words like 'brave' and 'plucky' will be used to describe Coventry City's display versus Chelsea, the word 'disappointing' would be more apt. That said, it was nothing like the contest supposed professional journalist Patrick Collins said it was!

I can only presume (And it is only a presumption) that he watched the game from the comfort of a bar, with no TV on, and sought the opinion of the most blinkered of Chelsea supporters in a bid to write something about said fixture! 45% versus 55%, which was the official possession statistic according to one website (In Chelsea's favour, obviously), doesn't sound like a complete walkover! Neither does seven Coventry shots on target to Chelsea's eight....

This defeat was more about Coventry for some reason not being able to raise their game, rather than simply being out-classed by the side currently second in the Premiership. And resorting to the long-ball didn't help, because that's not the style of football we've been playing on our recent, decent run.

There was much talk of Coventry going to Wembley again by the stars of '87, but, continuing my theme of trying to think of a better track for Coventry to come onto the pitch too, for this fixture, 'Don't Believe The Hype' by Public Enemy would have been top of the list. We were supposedly a mere ninety minutes from Wembley, but never looked as if we truly believed we would be on that particular bus.

Chelsea showed Coventry City plenty of respect by playing what was probably their strongest side available, and there were also plenty of moments of sportsmanship shown throughout - including a nice touch from Drogba to acknowledge Dann and Turner when he was subbed (Despite some people saying Drogba was superb, I thought after a dodgy start, Turner did very well against him), and no crying when the odd hefty challenge was made.

One or three players seemed willing to get stuck in throughout the 90 minutes (Hall, Wright, Gunnarsson, Best .... that's four), and show a re-vitalised Chelsea that they weren't in awe of them, but sadly, to many players were, with their seemingly: 'no, after you' attitude to making a challenge. Or maybe the players were just fatigued?

Coventry lacked width, sat back to much, and made the errors that gifted a side that doesn't need gifts to win games, gifts. Distribution of the ball, especially at set pieces, was disappointing too, with most over-hit and going out of play, or going straight to Cech - there's know doubt Fox was missed. Henderson suddenly looked a bit light-weight to in this fixture, though he did run his nuts off, and will know doubt have slept well on Saturday evening!

Westwood wasn't tested to often, but on the odd occasion he was (A dipping Lampard free-kick, and a smart save at the feet of a Chelsea player, before realising the liesmans flag was up), he once again proved he's a class act, earning decent reviews from the 'experts' on TV (At least for the 50 minutes of the match my other half bothered to tape! If you want something doing, do it yourself....).

The fact Westwood wasn't called upon to often would suggest Virgin Media's suggestion that 'Chelsea looked as if they could breach the Coventry back four at will' wasn't quite true. Like their last few visits to Highfield Road, when Coventry graced the top flight, Chelsea saw a lot of the ball, but not necessarily in dangerous areas.

Marcus Hall did far better than I expected him to (I'll apologise when I see him!), especially as he had little or no cover in front of him. Both Henderson and Eastwood seemed to be playing in the middle alongside Doyle and Gunnarsson, rather than out wide, where they both did so well versus Blackburn. And somehow, despite seemingly having four players there, we still didn't win the battle of the middle of midfield!

Turner and Dann are only youngsters, and were up against one of the best in the business (When he isn't throwing a strop), so to criticise would be harsh. But they both failed to carry out basic defensive duties during the first 15 minutes, eventually resulting in a goal. A very soft goal.

An aimless hoof upfield from Bosingwa saw a poor back header from Turner land at the feet of Drogba, and he strode past Dann far too easily, before rounding Westwood and slotting home. The Coventry crowd fell silent, and I presume at this point the players must have decided to play even further back so as not to be on the wrong end of a big scoreline.

Leon Best didn't seem over-whelmed playing against John Terry, and won a decent percentage of 50-50s against him throughout. Mid-way through the first half saw his best moment (No pun .... at all) when he made both Terry and Alex look like mugs, taking them on and beating them with ease, before unleashing a woeful finish.

That was about as good as it got for Coventry in the first half, and Coleman could have been forgiven for replacing Dann with Ward at the break, as he looked the shakier of the two Coventry central defenders (Ward would have been more of a physical presence at set pieces too). Quaresma replaced Kalou after half-time for Chelsea.

Beuzelin replaced Doyle with an hour played, and Beuzelin gave a typical Beuzelin display: very good when he was good, and very poor when he was poor! It was his losing of the ball that led to Chelsea's second goal, which was simplicity itself, and the reason why I have always said Coventry City need to bring in more pace.

From our throw-in, which was cleared with ease (Despite Chelsea only having nine players on the field of play), Quaresma ran up the pitch, and with Chelsea in a three-against-one, he passed to Alex who finished the game as a contest. Chris Coleman was right to complain that waving two missing Chelsea players onto the pitch when he did gave them an unfair advantage, but it mattered not. At least Chelsea's second goal saw Coventry come out of their shell a little bit!

Before that, Coventry's best spell of the second half came from two Gunnarsson throw-ins in a minute. The first saw Cech flap while trying to gather the ball, with Beuzelin's follow-up blocked; and the second saw both Morrison and Best just fail to make contact with the ball from a couple of yards out. With Fox missing, it was no surprise that Gunnarsson's throw-ins were our best weapon, but certain Coventry players just didn't seem to go in where it hurts on the day.

There were chants of 'where were you when you were sh*t' from Coventry's supporters towards the Chelsea fans, and I'm sure the irony of 10,000 of our own fans suddenly climbing out of the woodwork when Chelsea came to town wasn't lost on those of us that turn up week in, week out. For those of you that don't know, it's Doncaster at home a week on Saturday - see you all at the Arena again? Thought not....

Coventry also had at least three decent shouts for second half penalties .... and before anybody says that opinion is wrong, that was according to the experts on TV! Alex's challenge on Morrison could have resulted in a penalty (Had Clinton 'Honest' Morrison not decided to stay on his feet); Bosingwa's challenge on Best looked a possible penalty too; while an 86th minute shove by Terry on Best looked fairly clear cut decision. None of them were given, and any chance of a consolation goal was lost.

Henderson resorted to shirt pulling because he couldn't keep up with 10 to 15 minutes left, and badly needed replacing. While opinions on Kevin Thornton seem to split Coventry fans right down the middle, his unpredictability, and direct running with the ball, were just what we needed with the game as good as over anyway. His introduction would have seen a set of fairly fresh legs, and Coventry had nothing to lose. Simpson for Morrison probably wouldn't have done to much damage to our chances either.

With 88 minutes on the clock, Coventry stuck every player in their own penalty area to defend a set-piece. With the game as good as over, if you're 2-0 down, what is the point of having no outlet when the opposition have a free-kick around your penalty area? You might as well lose 3-0 trying to make it 2-1 in a sudden death fixture such as this.

There are some positives - aside from the money! - to come from this defeat, and they are: our very young team can only benefit from playing against players of the calibre that Chelsea have, and hopefully inspire them to want to play against the best every week (For Coventry, in the Premiership!); and there are a lot of Premiership sides that would regard a 2-0 defeat against Chelsea as an acceptable result.

The final positive is that because Fox was missing, Westwood wasn't massively tested, and Gunnarsson didn't run the show, it might just keep a few Premiership scouts away from the club for a while, meaning we hold onto our best players!

Team: Westwood, Wright, Hall, Dann, Turner, Henderson, Doyle (Beuzelin 60), Gunnarsson, Eastwood, Best, Morrison. SNU: Marshall, Ward, McPake, Osbourne, Thornton, Simpson.

Attendance: 31,407.

Coventry 0 Chelsea 2 : Report 2

Discussion started by Covcitytilidie , 10/03/2009 10:26

Covcitytilidie
10/03/2009 10:26

What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.

Reply Quote Report

dixon9
10/03/2009 17:26

Very good thorough report that.





.



"It is born out of hypocrisy and fundamental insecurity. There have been two kids on the block for the past 12 years. Suddenly, there is a third and that one is threatening to be more successful than the others and they don’t like it." P Kenyon.

Reply Quote Report

CCFC Sid / CovSid67
10/03/2009 17:42

Cheers fella.

Quite an enjoyable game Saturday, though as the report says, I wish we had turned up properly. Our wins against Wolves, Brum, and Blackburn were well deserved, and while Chelsea might be a class above, we could have made you break sweat slighlty more. That was our big chance to keep some of our 'where were you when we were sh*t?' supporters to stick around. Alas...

I'm still tempted to back Chelsea to win the Premiership this season!! (Having blown money on the Villa at 33/1).

Reply Quote Report

guest
17/03/2009 18:08

yeh good right up that

Reply Quote Report

Goto: Forum List•Message List•Search• Log In

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net