Why do so many people have a problem with "parking the bus"?

Of course you do but only over the course of the tie. As far as I'm concerned, teams should be encouraged to win every single match and I would not say the current format encourages that. Chelsea will try to score tonight but I didn't see any real effort to do so in the first leg.

I see no problem with it. I mean City played fairly open and lost 3-2 to Liverpool and it was a good game to watch. We made the game terrible for the neutral but we won 2-0 at Anfield, and I'd take that any day.

Would I have preferred to watch a more entertaining game? Yes, but
Would I rather my team win even if it upsets neutrals? Yes

I like to watch entertaining football, but when it comes down to it, I prefer the team I support to win and I will support them regardless of whatever method they use.

I can understand that in the short term but surely you don't want your team spending the money it has spent, only to produce that dross.

It's not cheap supporting a team like Chelsea and I would be most unhappy at paying through the nose to watch a team whose first priority was not conceding.

It's not great to watch, and I'm someone who doesn't always enjoy the way we play, considering how we were playing last year.
I'd like us to play more expansive football and I'm guessing Mourinho will look back at what happened this season and buy a stronger central midfield presence, while getting a striker too.

Mourinho plays what will get him wins. If he thinks he can play attacking football, he will.

If Hazard and Eto'o had been fit, and we didn't have European football to play, we would've definitely been more ambitious at Anfield. Mourinho won't let Hazard go to waste like that seeing as he is Mourinho's favourite player (and he's probably starting to eat his words on Oscar).

I think one of the reasons I find it so frustrating is because, like you say, Chelsea can be very good to watch. Hazard and Oscar are unplayable at times so it is even more disappointing when Mourinho relies on 'old fashioned' players like Terry and Cahill to get the job done.

Tbh what he's doing is effective. I'll give him summer to see who he buys and then I'll judge him next year.

The Italian national team parked the bus for literally 50 years. It delivered them a World Cup (maybe not two).

So clearly, if you give it an Italian name and you end up winning the World Cup, it's no longer boring defensive football with long balls upfield, but highly organised defence with counter-attacking and pinpont passing.

Italian football is widely regarded as boring, which is why not many people watch it. Not even Italians go to Serie A matches in great numbers.

The Italian national team parked the bus for literally 50 years. It delivered them a World Cup (maybe not two).

So clearly, if you give it an Italian name and you end up winning the World Cup, it's no longer boring defensive football with long balls upfield, but highly organised defence with counter-attacking and pinpont passing.

Well then they should blame their team on not being able to break them down?

My brother complains about this on fifa lol since I rarely press him high up the pitch and only press in from the centre circle and says I play like Chelsea and it's too tactical and robotic how I play...

He usually says that when he loses.

Take it easy, I wasn't criticizing that style of football, just offering an answer to OP's question.

At the end of the day teams should work to develop strategies that counter the 'parked bus' tactic, rather than bitching about its use. Every sport is about developing a new strategy and taking wins whilst everyone else struggles to find a counterplay...

I disagree. Italian football is not defensive. Its a lot slower, more tactical, and more technical that the British game. Hence why many people pver here find it boring.
I actually quite like it - the 352 set up is an interesting tactic for example.

I do think Italian football has dropped off the international radar in recent years due to its lack of investment, TV money etc.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Effective it may be but we are always told it's an entertainment industry and Chelsea are not entertaining. Fair enough, though, judging him next year is sensible. They have an exceptionally strong team and no shortage of money so a couple of top strikers could turn Chelsea into quite a force.

Oh that wasn't directed at you. Sorry if I made it seem that way.

I'm just saying that's how people should view it according to the way they view it. Tbh I like parking bus and staying compact when my teams play.

I think one of the reasons I find it so frustrating is because, like you say, Chelsea can be very good to watch. Hazard and Oscar are unplayable at times so it is even more disappointing when Mourinho relies on 'old fashioned' players like Terry and Cahill to get the job done.

You know, I remember to say in my first period here, if you have a goalkeeper like Petr Cech that puts the ball in the opponents' box. If you have a striker like Didier Drogba that wins every ball in the air, why do you play short? Because you are stupid. If your opponent is very fast in counter-attack and they want space behind your defensive line, if you give them that space, you are stupid.