Five Reasons Why Chelsea Lost To Arsenal
A surprising home defeat to a shaky Arsenal in an eight goal thriller could knock the morale of The Blues. How did it happen at Fortress Stamford Bridge? Allaboutfootball.com takes a look...
Getty Images
"That was not a football score, it was a hockey score...in training I often play matches of three against three and when the score reaches 5-4 I send the players back to the dressing room, because they are not defending properly."
-Jose Mourinho, November 2004 after Arsenal's 5-4 win against Spurs
-Jose Mourinho, November 2004 after Arsenal's 5-4 win against Spurs
Where have those times gone? Chelsea have conceded as many in 9 games as they did in the whole of 2004-05. Is there any reason behind this madness? Its all been fine and dandy with the decent league position and healthy goal difference, but the fact of the matter is, Chelsea have only one Premier League clean sheet in 9 games. Unthinkable. QPR was circumstansial, but now this. How often have Chelsea lost two in a row? Hard to recall, isn't it? So where did it go wrong against Arsenal? We suspect...
STRONG PHYSICALITY STRONG
One down, two to go| Robin van Persie ensured the Czech Cech had an outing to forget
When you have a goalkeeper who is pretty much a consistent figure in the top ten keepers in the world you don't expect him to be beaten at his near post. Much less twice. Much less after the midweek heroics where he comes on to save a penalty and then also rebound to the same. Least of all when he is Chelsea's Petr Cech. One cannot say his positioning was poor, but it seemed like he put in just less that 100% percent behind the attempt, and that fraction cost him the goals. Had he not conceded Walcott's goal and Van Persie's third, it would have been a draw. Although this is an irrelevant point when you consider that each goal changes the pattern of a game. A goal not scored would put an entirely different complexion to it. Suffice to say that while he was left mostly high and dry by his defenders, he was not up to par by his own high standards. (Actually, conceding 5 should be below any keeper's standard)
Take a chance on me?| Mikel proved that the only thing he can consistently be is inconsistent
Just the name on the teamsheet is a mistake. Mikel is almost as big a gamble on the pitch as Tevez is in the squad. He is about as predictable as a tornado, slightly less if the performance today was to be believed. And that is not a good thing. Multiple Personality Disorder has been suggested by some fans, but somehow, he keeps finding a way into the Chelsea team. He is a watered down Kalou in many respects and deserves the same treatment - off the team until he can prove he's worth being on it. This is definitely not his first London derby but he was anonymous against, with no offence meant to the Gunners, the weakest Arsenal team in living memory, letting Ramsey run the show in midfield. As a defensive midfielder, he is expected to either win the ball, or at least, begin to show them the outside. Mikel effectively failed on all counts and to add to that, his passing was poor. In all honesty, Chelsea looked less threatened AFTER he went off.
Guess who ripped Chelsea's high line?| Hint: They're in the picture
Chelsea played a high line against Arsenal. Which had a forward line of Robin van Persie, Theo Walcott and Gervinho. All of whom are at least 1.23456789 metres/sec ahead of the centre backs on pace. And slightly less faster, but faster nonetheless than the full-backs. As exemplified when Walcott beat Ashley Cole for pace earlier in first half but luckily, had no goal as the end result. But it was a warning for things to come. And how they came! Right on Chelsea's face. 3 of the 5 goals simply had Chelsea beaten for pace. No one tracked Gervinho as he burst through to set van Persie up. Chelsea let Santos waltz through for the second. The less said about the fourth, the better, but remember that there was no Chelsea defender in the camera's sight when van Persie was in on Cech! Chelsea's proud defence has conceded as many in 9 games as they had in all of 2004-05. It is nice how AVB wants to change things, but why fix what isn't broken?
Hi. Remember me? The guy in scoring form?| Everyone seemed to forget about Torres
It is a testament to Chelsea's spending power that they could ignore their 50 million pound man as completely as they ignored him against Arsenal. From chalkboard statistics, he got approximately 10 passes over 90 minutes, not counting ones he collected himself. Torres is not the kind of player who will call for the ball in the final third. He plays off the shoulder of the centre-backs and calling will pretty much ruin any element of surprise he affords. It is for Chelsea to pick out his runs. It is more or less to exact that end that Mata and Meireles were bought by the club. The result in this game? The aforementioned 10 passes. Naysayers might snidely comment that it has to be a terrible day for Chelsea if Fernando Torres, in his state, is Chelsea's man in-form. But jokes apart, that is the way it is. Genk is hardly stellar opposition, but the fact is that he grabbed a double against them. And no one played him in. At all...
WHAT the *bleep*?| The manager's inexperience showed in his inflexibility
While it is true that Andre Villas-Boas is a manager par excellence and has all the makings of a tactical genius, it is also true that against the so-called big teams, his inexperience has showed raw. 3-1 against United at Old Trafford and now the 3-5 against Arsenal at home. In football, you cannot mark things like these down to coincidence. It is commendable that Chelsea refuse to stop attacking, but that does not mean that AVB needs to be inflexible to the tactical needs of the game.
If this goes on, Chelsea's gaffer might soon fall into the category of one-dimensional being only attack-centric, and predictable. The important lesson that he needs to learn from today is that you can be amazingly potent in your attack, play extremely well, score an appreciable number of goals and still lose if you don't get the tactics right. Truth be told, he didn't have it down well either against Arsenal nor against United (although there were some poor refereeing decisions in there too).
The good thing about this defeat is that it finally gave Villas-Boas no choice but to look at his team's defence whereas in the others he had (justifiably) pinned some portion of the blame on the referees. It is unthinkable with 29 games left to go, that Chelsea will not finish strongly. Perhaps trophies MAY, just MAY be out of reach this season for this team in awkward transition, but there is no doubt that Andre Villas-Boas is the man to take Chelsea forward. They will go to Blackburn with renewed belief in the themselves, in the manager and in Chelsea Football Club, for what has suddenly become a crucial game in Chelsea's calendar in terms of morale.
Do you agree with us? Leave a comment below and let us know your opinion as to why Chelsea lost to Arsenal at home?
| PETR CECH DISAPPOINTED |
One down, two to go| Robin van Persie ensured the Czech Cech had an outing to forget
When you have a goalkeeper who is pretty much a consistent figure in the top ten keepers in the world you don't expect him to be beaten at his near post. Much less twice. Much less after the midweek heroics where he comes on to save a penalty and then also rebound to the same. Least of all when he is Chelsea's Petr Cech. One cannot say his positioning was poor, but it seemed like he put in just less that 100% percent behind the attempt, and that fraction cost him the goals. Had he not conceded Walcott's goal and Van Persie's third, it would have been a draw. Although this is an irrelevant point when you consider that each goal changes the pattern of a game. A goal not scored would put an entirely different complexion to it. Suffice to say that while he was left mostly high and dry by his defenders, he was not up to par by his own high standards. (Actually, conceding 5 should be below any keeper's standard)
| JOHN OBI MIKEL |
Take a chance on me?| Mikel proved that the only thing he can consistently be is inconsistent
Just the name on the teamsheet is a mistake. Mikel is almost as big a gamble on the pitch as Tevez is in the squad. He is about as predictable as a tornado, slightly less if the performance today was to be believed. And that is not a good thing. Multiple Personality Disorder has been suggested by some fans, but somehow, he keeps finding a way into the Chelsea team. He is a watered down Kalou in many respects and deserves the same treatment - off the team until he can prove he's worth being on it. This is definitely not his first London derby but he was anonymous against, with no offence meant to the Gunners, the weakest Arsenal team in living memory, letting Ramsey run the show in midfield. As a defensive midfielder, he is expected to either win the ball, or at least, begin to show them the outside. Mikel effectively failed on all counts and to add to that, his passing was poor. In all honesty, Chelsea looked less threatened AFTER he went off.
| HIGH DEFENSIVE LINE |
Guess who ripped Chelsea's high line?| Hint: They're in the picture
Chelsea played a high line against Arsenal. Which had a forward line of Robin van Persie, Theo Walcott and Gervinho. All of whom are at least 1.23456789 metres/sec ahead of the centre backs on pace. And slightly less faster, but faster nonetheless than the full-backs. As exemplified when Walcott beat Ashley Cole for pace earlier in first half but luckily, had no goal as the end result. But it was a warning for things to come. And how they came! Right on Chelsea's face. 3 of the 5 goals simply had Chelsea beaten for pace. No one tracked Gervinho as he burst through to set van Persie up. Chelsea let Santos waltz through for the second. The less said about the fourth, the better, but remember that there was no Chelsea defender in the camera's sight when van Persie was in on Cech! Chelsea's proud defence has conceded as many in 9 games as they had in all of 2004-05. It is nice how AVB wants to change things, but why fix what isn't broken?
| WHO PLAYED FERNANDO TORRES? |
Hi. Remember me? The guy in scoring form?| Everyone seemed to forget about Torres
It is a testament to Chelsea's spending power that they could ignore their 50 million pound man as completely as they ignored him against Arsenal. From chalkboard statistics, he got approximately 10 passes over 90 minutes, not counting ones he collected himself. Torres is not the kind of player who will call for the ball in the final third. He plays off the shoulder of the centre-backs and calling will pretty much ruin any element of surprise he affords. It is for Chelsea to pick out his runs. It is more or less to exact that end that Mata and Meireles were bought by the club. The result in this game? The aforementioned 10 passes. Naysayers might snidely comment that it has to be a terrible day for Chelsea if Fernando Torres, in his state, is Chelsea's man in-form. But jokes apart, that is the way it is. Genk is hardly stellar opposition, but the fact is that he grabbed a double against them. And no one played him in. At all...
| AVB'S NAIVETE |
WHAT the *bleep*?| The manager's inexperience showed in his inflexibility
While it is true that Andre Villas-Boas is a manager par excellence and has all the makings of a tactical genius, it is also true that against the so-called big teams, his inexperience has showed raw. 3-1 against United at Old Trafford and now the 3-5 against Arsenal at home. In football, you cannot mark things like these down to coincidence. It is commendable that Chelsea refuse to stop attacking, but that does not mean that AVB needs to be inflexible to the tactical needs of the game.
If this goes on, Chelsea's gaffer might soon fall into the category of one-dimensional being only attack-centric, and predictable. The important lesson that he needs to learn from today is that you can be amazingly potent in your attack, play extremely well, score an appreciable number of goals and still lose if you don't get the tactics right. Truth be told, he didn't have it down well either against Arsenal nor against United (although there were some poor refereeing decisions in there too).
The good thing about this defeat is that it finally gave Villas-Boas no choice but to look at his team's defence whereas in the others he had (justifiably) pinned some portion of the blame on the referees. It is unthinkable with 29 games left to go, that Chelsea will not finish strongly. Perhaps trophies MAY, just MAY be out of reach this season for this team in awkward transition, but there is no doubt that Andre Villas-Boas is the man to take Chelsea forward. They will go to Blackburn with renewed belief in the themselves, in the manager and in Chelsea Football Club, for what has suddenly become a crucial game in Chelsea's calendar in terms of morale.
Do you agree with us? Leave a comment below and let us know your opinion as to why Chelsea lost to Arsenal at home?
1 comments:
bosingwa
Post a Comment