I think we should 4-3-3 against Barca. Put Mata on the wing and let him drift when we attack. Provided he watches Alves of course. We'll attack so sparingly that accommodating Mata in the middle will be a waste imo.

Mata doesn't get back to watch the full backs hence why he will be good in the middle of a 4-2-3-1, if he does get the ball he can release the wingers and drogba. Kalou and Ramires do track back a lot hence why they should start.

Depends. If you get awarded goals which dont cross the line and manage to keep players on the pitch who should be sent off then yeah you've got every chance.

#cheats

Good god not Kalou.

I would rather see him replaced with Essien and play a 4-3-2-1

modricsleftshinpad

modric

Oh

If the goal hadn't been given they'd still have hammered you 4-1 so quit whining.

If im being honest then Beating barcelona would be a near impossible task but the least we can do is make a match of it and not get embarassed...we should let them have the ball but should press them enough so it remains in their half or the halway line, compact the midfield and hold a tight line,if we do so then who knows we might get something on the counter with drogba providing the threat in their half of the pitch.
Though it seems a difficult proposition in reality!!

I was confident we could keep a clean sheet on Wednesday before Luiz got injured

Please harry them and run like dogs and be nice and exhausted before the final against us

If the goal hadn't been given they'd still have hammered you 4-1 so quit whining
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Erm you know thats not how football works.

comment by André's Tears ~ Stay Strong Petrov (U6019)
posted 33 minutes ago

I think we should 4-3-3 against Barca.

........................

You plan to play three in midfield against Barcelona.

Good luck with that.

modric

So what?

They were still the better team and would have beaten you!

I never understand this reasoning that if the goal had not been given then Chelsea would have won 4-1. If the goal had not stood then the next passage of play would not have started with Spurs kicking off on the halfway line. To be fair Bale may not have scored a few minutes later either. Chelsea may well have won in any event so I am not saying the outcome would have been different.

Barca do not finish a good proportion of the chances they make and have some vulnerability at set plays. I expect Barca to prevail, but I would be surprised if it is a stroll.

GUNNERBEGOOD (U10646) - Exactly spot on.

If the 'ghost goal' didnt stand and we went 1-1 then we wouldnt have 'chased' the game and ended up losing 5-1.

We may well of lost still, we'll never know. But up until that 'goal' we were well in it. In fact first half we were the better team IMO.

Gunner

The thing about Barcelona is against the good teams they nearly always come out on top and have done for the last few years because they just step it up a few gears to a level nobody else can reach and they will just keep the ball and with your old (no offence) team, I think you will really struggle.

Torres cannot play though because you need Drogba to be harrying their defenders. Also you need a man on Messi at all times to have any chance of keeping him quiet but then you need to be spot on tactically because of their other threads in Pedro, Sanchez, Fabregas and Iniesta.

Sit back and defend and Messi will get the better of you.

Hold a high line and Messi has the pace to beat it.

Harry them and you'll be knackered and in the last 10 minutes they will finish you off.

Don't pressure them and they'll walk all over you.

Chelsea would probably have won 5 of 6-0 if the Mata goal was not awarded. Spurs were capitulating and the only time they looked interested was after the injustice of the second goal. We were all over them like a rash before that happened, a goal was coming one way or the other.

GUNNERBEGOOD

This is the flaw in the logic of most people I have seen comment on this matter (not just the $puds).

a lot of people seem to assume they would have equalised anyway. WHY

We was on top and starting to boss the midfield already

Whitewall, the reason why we are debating it is because we do not know what would have happened. It is too easy to say it would have been 4-1. Who knows Chelsea may have won 6-0 even if it were not allowed.

Geoff Hurst's World Cup final goal is an example. If not given, it would have been a corner as a German defender headed it out and not a kick off. It does not mean England would have won 3-2. The Germans were all in the England half trying to equalise when he got the 4th which they may not have been doing at 2-2.

Cech
Ivan Cahill Terry Cole
Mikel Lampard
Sturridge Mata Torres
Drogba

Need our best footballers on the pitch. Ideally Romeu for Lampard but that won't happen

lets put this scenario across. Lets say chelsea draw 0-0 against barca at home and in the away game are 1-0 down pretty much in it then a goal that was not over the line is awarded, then barca rip chelsea to shreds and win 5 or 6-0 when reality is it was a close game till the injustice. The goals at the end don't make up for the fact a ridiculous goal meaent chasing the game.

Now lets say tottenham goal was the equaliser, they would have stuck to the game plan but instead started throwing more men forward when at 1-1 it would have been close. You only have to look at the league games this season to work out how tight it is.

I think adebayor must be getting so frustrated as I believe he scored a legitimate winner against chelsea and it was disallowed.

I still remember the 09-10 season when tottenham beat you 2-1 it could literally been 10-1.

Torres for Barcelona,Drogba for Arsenal