Do we actually want to beat Chelsea?

[sosman]

This may sound a controversial, or even heretical suggestion, but with recent history in mind, is it really better for us to beat Chelsea next month?

Consider the hangover, or one might say, long-term illness, that we caught following knocking Man U out of the Carling Cup. If we were to repeat this feat against Chelsea (this time in a cup that they are actually bothered about, at least to some extent) then is there a risk that the same thing would happen leaving us to face a lower-mid finish or even worse, a relegation scrap (which is still possible)?

You might argue that just because that happened two years ago, it doesn't mean the same thing would happen this time and anyway as a football club, we want to win every game, let alone a game against one of the top four in the country. On the other hand, maybe shocking Terry et al with an early goal, followed by the inevitable equaliser meaning a return to Roots Hall and a narrow and graceful defeat is the ideal scenario?

Or am I thinking the unthinkable?

P.S - Can people please stop using the phrase 'Chelski'? There is almost an affection there that I don't like one bit. I prefer my own made-up and rather contrived 'Chelscum'.

 

[Irate Ian]

Of course we want to beat the footballing mercinaries.

Having a free pop at them, is what the cup is all about.

We have nothing to lose and everything to gain. The opposite for them.

It will test their team spirit and ours.

 

[leeblue]

in a word yes, I work in the town centre and the complete lack of man u coats/scarves/shirts/hats in southend for the week after we beat them was like a mass cleansing

 

[Ulysses]

Understand your concerns but beating them is likely to be the silver lining on a disappointing season. Although i've not given up hope i'm not expecting us to make the playoffs so therefore this could potentially be our highlight.

 

[SARF]

Beating them will be a ****ing miracle.. getting a lucky draw will be fantastic.. I'll take either

 

[Mad Cyril]

I think a humiliating 5 or 6 nil defeat to Chelsea could really kick start our season.

 

[chapperzUK]

That is what the cup is all about. Smaller clubs beating top teams with a local hero being made. I'd like to draw at the Bridge and then win at the Hall. In my opinion, It happened 2 years ago because we had 2 consecutive promotions and we were not ready for life in the championship.

 

[A Century United]

Sorry, but what hangover? Before we played them we hadn't won a game in 12 league outings. After playing them we were starting to see a glimmer of hope with two home draws and what swung things against us then was Duguid's Famouse Dive. Even so we then went on to take 19 points from the next 13 games after Col Ewe.

I see no evidence of a hangover, quite the opposite.

 

[BrettieAngell]

We were struggling already that season so really its a null point.

 

[Somerset Ex-TTB]

Why do fans seem to think that we suffered a hang over from beating Man Utd?

We had gone 12 league games without a win only punctuated by victories over Brighton, and Leeds in the Cup.

We then went another 5 games without a win the league until we beat Southampton.

Stats courtesy of Robin's excellent SUFC database.

So nothing changed at all, the only thing that suffered a hangover was Freddy.

 

[MilkeySUFC]

Of course we bloody well do!

Well, I do at least. My wife's family are all Chelsea supporters. Her uncle played for them back in the '70s. My mum-in-law, who currently lives with us, is an avid fan. The stirring has already started. It's a no lose situation for me personally as even if we get tonked heavily I always have the "Only what was expected" fall-back, cop-out line.

 

[A Century United]

Why do fans seem to think that we suffered a hang over from beating Man Utd?

We had gone 12 league games without a win only punctuated by victories over Brighton, and Leeds in the Cup.

We then went another 5 games without a win the league until we beat Southampton.

Stats courtesy of Robin's excellent SUFC database.

So nothing changed at all, the only thing that suffered a hangover was Freddy.

Don't quite agree, (though you have a point about Freddy), see above. I think that we had a confidence about us that had been missing, and most people who went to Col Ewe agreed at the time that had Maher not been unjustly dismissed, and Gower lost his head as a consequence, we were looking the better side and had them rattled. The rennaisance that started with Southampton had its roots in the Man U match, and would have flourished even earlier without Karl.

 

[Richard_Cadette]

Sorry, but what hangover? Before we played them we hadn't won a game in 12 league outings. After playing them we were starting to see a glimmer of hope with two home draws and what swung things against us then was Duguid's Famouse Dive. Even so we then went on to take 19 points from the next 13 games after Col Ewe.

I see no evidence of a hangover, quite the opposite.

Couldn't agree more. I have no idea where this illusion comes from to be honest. I remember Brushy saying at the end of our Championship season that it did us no favours beating Manchester United, and we may have fared better had we not. I think that's rubbish.

I don't doubt that sometimes you can get a case of 'After the Lord Mayor's show' in the next game, but to suggest it has any adverse affect on any games subsequent to that is nonsense.

If you can beat a top team like Manchester United, or in this case, Chelsea, it can have a massive effect on the morale and confidence of the team. Look at how well Burnley have done since beating Chelsea, clminating in them beating Derby 3-0 and Arsenal 2-0 this week. That should be proof enough what beating Chelsea can do to your teams fortunes.

 

[Irish_Shrimper]

Yes. And I hope Michael Ballack cries at the final whistle. Oh, and Anelka too.

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

There is almost an affection there that I don't like one bit. I prefer my own made-up and rather contrived 'Chelscum'.

Why the deep antipathy? If it weren't for Ken Bates (while Chairman of Chelsea) we may have had no club to support - that's why the lion appeared on our club crest during the 80s & 90s, as a thank you to Chelsea. Webby - one of our heroes - is a Chelsea man, through and through. They've loaned us Sawyer. And they hate West Ham.

Can't say I'm comfortable with the abuse at all. As Shrimpers, we should generally feel moderately sympathetic to Chelsea - certainly not chucking brickbats like "Chel-scum"...

And of course we want to beat them. Our defence is plainly not good enough for us to consider ourselves serious promotion contenders this season anyway, so I'd love it to be remembered for a famous cup upset.

Matt

 

[bucket&spade.f.c]

maybe the question should of been would you rather win the league or get to the fa cup final but finish mid table?

id rather get to the final as it could be a one off winning the league could be done at any time

 

[Richard_Cadette]

Why the deep antipathy? If it weren't for Ken Bates (while Chairman of Chelsea) we may have had no club to support - that's why the lion appeared on our club crest during the 80s & 90s, as a thank you to Chelsea. Webby - one of our heroes - is a Chelsea man, through and through. They've loaned us Sawyer. And they hate West Ham.

Can't say I'm comfortable with the abuse at all. As Shrimpers, we should generally feel moderately sympathetic to Chelsea - certainly not chucking brickbats like "Chel-scum"...

And of course we want to beat them. Our defence is plainly not good enough for us to consider ourselves serious promotion contenders this season anyway, so I'd love it to be remembered for a famous cup upset.

Matt

Yep, I quite agree with that.

I think the general hatred felt towards Chelsea among the majority of football fans is born out of the Abramovich approach. But you can hardly blame Chelsea for having an extremely rich benefactor. Would any of us have turned round and said 'No, we don't want your money Roman, please go away and give it to someone else'..... No, I don't think so!

I have never had a problem with Chelsea, and as much as I would love to beat then, that is more to do with us taking a Premiership scalp than any negative feelings I have towards them.

As yoy say, Bates played a very important part in our survival, and Webby is the greatest managed this club has ever been fortunate enough to have at the helm.

 

[Richard_Cadette]

maybe the question should of been would you rather win the league or get to the fa cup final but finish mid table?

id rather get to the final as it could be a one off winning the league could be done at any time

But why do they need to be mutually exclusive? Just because we have a decent cup run, it doesn't mean that we have to sacrifice our league position? I don't see why it has to be an either/or situation.

As it turns out, with the squad we have at the moment, we don't have a cat in hells chance of doing either, but I certainly won't be thinking if we beat Chelsea it means we can't be successful in the league.

 

[BrettieAngell]

Yep, I quite agree with that.

I think the general hatred felt towards Chelsea among the majority of football fans is born out of the Abramovich approach. But you can hardly blame Chelsea for having an extremely rich benefactor. Would any of us have turned round and said 'No, we don't want your money Roman, please go away and give it to someone else'..... No, I don't think so!

I have never had a problem with Chelsea, and as much as I would love to beat then, that is more to do with us taking a Premiership scalp than any negative feelings I have towards them.

As yoy say, Bates played a very important part in our survival, and Webby is the greatest managed this club has ever been fortunate enough to have at the helm.

Its their general arrogance and lack of grace especially under Mourinho that gets under my nose, oh and Drogba is a complete nob aswell! Oh yeah and Peter Kenyon do I need to go on?

 

[Clinton Baptiste]

More chance of Vanessa Feltz winning Miss World than us beating Chelsea.