Lucas Hood wrote: » Mentioned on here during the week that Falcao could be benched. He hasn't done enough to warrant a starting spot. Di Maria up front hopefully.
PARlance wrote: » You know you're a FSA addict when you see Walcott break through and all you can think is Dahats not going to like this if he scores....
finnharpsboy wrote: » or that Mr P wont be happy with the shot not bursting the net :pac:
PARlance wrote: » Didn't want to draw attention to Mr P's agony
FutureGuy wrote: » Honestly, and no disrespect to anyone that did captain Sanchez over Hazard, but Hazard was clearly the better choice for captain this week. Fine if you are looking for a differential but not for consolidating a lead. I was captaining Hazard every day of the week in that situation. Better form, better fixture, better stats, penalties, rested.
MarkSRFC21 wrote: » Falcao not starting
Dempsey wrote: » Oh how my GW would have been if I captained Sanchez....
finnharpsboy wrote: » FT 3-0
garra wrote: » Am assuming you are basing this choice on those variables listed above. When examining the form of Sanchez v Hazard, I cannot agree though. Sanchez is buzzing like a firefly at the moment, whereas Haz & co were going to be facing a Newcastle team with a new manager who can organise defensively and Chelsea came out playing like they did against Spurs. Based on this it was 50:50 between Haz & Sanch for me, not clear at all.
Ace2007 wrote: » Comparing Captain choices in hindsight is waste of time, for example you have just said "Chelsea came out playing like they did against Spurs" when making captain choice, it was assumed that they wouldn't play that way, and that there would be a strong response from them losing the game the way they did. Arsenal could have come out today and played like they did against Southampton last week. Look at last 6 GW. Hazard had 3 goals, 3 assists, 7bps Sanchez had 1 goal, 4 assists, 3 bps Had Silva got a goal and assist people would had an argument that he was obvious choice.