Mourinho plays down Chelsea trophy chances
LONDON: Jose Mourinho has played down Chelsea`s chances of winning silverware this season, because they lack a killer "selfish" striker.
The London side missed a series of scoring chances in their 2-1 win over strugglers Crystal Palace on Saturday but still moved within two points of Premier League leaders Arsenal, whom they meet on December 23.
"I don`t think we are the big contenders of any competition," Mourinho told BBC radio.
"We don`t have the striker who is going to score 30 goals in the league."
Chelsea`s 50 million pound striker Fernando Torres scored his second league goal of the season on Saturday. He and fellow strikers Demba Ba and Samuel Eto`o have contributed only five of Chelsea`s 32 Premier League goals so far.
Belgian attacking midfielder Eden Hazard is top league scorer with six.
"We don`t have that striker we used to call the killer, the selfish one, the one that gives the last touch," Mourinho said.
On Friday Mourinho said his strikers` hard work helped the attacking midfielders to get on the scoresheet but he and they were frustrated by their lack of finish.
"The number of goals is quite frustrating not just for me but also for them," he had said after training.
"Do I expect a little bit more? Yes. Do we want them to do a little more? Yes."
Mourinho repeated after Saturday`s game that he did not expect to buy a striker in the January transfer window as there were unlikely to be any good ones available.
"They are in the big clubs, they are in the clubs with big ambitions and big clubs with big ambitions don`t sell their top selfish ones," he said.
More from India
More from World
More from Sports
More from Entertaiment
- Is Zakir Naik's foundation converted many to Islam for monetary benefits?
- Is Zakir Naik's foundation converted many to Islam for monetary benefits?- Part II
- Why Pakistan commits heinous crime in Balochistan and POK?
- Why Pakistan commits heinous crime in Balochistan and POK?- Part II
- Why Pakistan commits heinous crime in Balochistan and POK?- Part III