The comeback against Chelsea may prove to be the ‘turning point’ in the season for Man City after the crucial victory takes them within touching distance of Man United. Chelsea found out that a lack of ambition and cutting edge were to cost them, they were, for the most part, defensively sound however were very limited in attack. Only countering and even then they were limited to half chances, the goal that they scored came more from luck than skill, a deflected Gary Cahill shot giving them the lead.
Chelsea set up in a 4-2-3-1 formation, as we can see from the graphic below on the right, Mikel and Lampard were in the 2 with Meireles behind Torres and Ramires and Mata flanking the Spaniard. The problem was that the midfield on the night was generally poor, apart from Mikel, which tells a story in itself. Lampard and Meireles were especially poor, in possession they were slow, Meireles only having a 64% pass completion. Ramires, naturally a central midfielder was deployed on the right, first to neutralize the threat of Clichy and Nasri but also for his energy, however, his end product is one of few negatives to his game, with a 0 out of 2 cross completion. Mata, although normally excellent looked tired and was defensively poor, especially when you consider how Pablo Zabaleta (City’s number 5) was so far forward, on average, for most of the game as shown by the average position graphic.
Image courtesy of WhoScored.com
Conclusively, Chelsea were made to pay for a lack of ambition and being pegged back in to their own half. Also, tactically, there were some decisions that were left wanting, unlike against Napoli. Meireles was brought off for Essien, who gave away the penalty, however if Sturridge came on, Ramires would have moved to his natural central position and Sturridge could have posed an attacking threat down the right. Fernando Torres was also brought off for Didier Drogba who didn’t work as hard as the Spaniard in tracking the ball down. However, this performance wasn’t all negative, defensively Chelsea were excellent for the most part and there was a fight and spirit which wasn’t apparent in some games under AVB. Chelsea are improving, however they need to do it fast as 4th is getting more and more distant.
- Excellent
- Informative
- Awesome
- Good Read
- ok
About the Author
Categories: Chelsea, EPL Index Featured Article, EPL Index Match Report
Tags: CFC, Chelsea Stats, EPL, epl opta stats, Opta Stats
This article has had 562 Views
“lack of ambition”?? Whilst you are entitled to your own opinion, I personally think you are “cuckoo land”. Maybe you had better finish your course before you “go into print” again!
Thank you for the compliment! Well, I thought we defended too deep during the game, we didn’t have the players with the necessary pace (Lampard and Meireles) to counter attack effectively.
I thought we showed a lot of ambition. I don’t agree with your summation of Lampard’s fitness – he never was a “pacy” player but is still one of the very best arttacking midfielders.If anybody should be on that list it must be Michel – lethargic in body and thinking! We were winning for 70 minutes until the “penalty” given by that “bought” ref, who didn’t penalize the numerous fouls on Torres etc. We got caught out by trying too hard, in the end. My take on it. We need to play faster, pass more accurately, and use the breadth of the pitch to “open” up the opposition. That’s what City did. We tried to be cute in tight situations and lost the ball nearly every time. Lastly, it is the team performance that should be rated – there will always be individual performances which are not up to par. My “exocet” earlier was meant as “constructive critism”:) “Lack of ambition” was the wrong term to use, in my opinion.
Just the way you went about saying this constructive criticism came across as rather rude, however I take it on board.
Personally, I feel Lampard slows our game down now, in the past he was excellent but I think he isn’t a first team starter anymore, yes he scores goals but our midfield needs more than that. I agree about opening up the position and playing faster, hence why I said that Lampard and Meireles can slow the game down in the article.
Defensively we were absolutely superb and that team performance was a credit, overall I was happy with our performance, a much improved team performance compared to recent weeks but I still maintain that maybe we should have gone for it a bit more, especially when City were struggling to get past us. Hence why I feel that Sturridge would have been a good substitute for Meireles as he would have opened up the position, as you put it.
Although this article seems generally negative, it’s only commenting on our attacking performance. Defensively we were absolutely superb. Maybe a lack of ambition is a bit harsh, especially as we are away to City, however there were times where we could have really got at them and didn’t have the personnel to do so.
So as far as footbal is concern,chelsea ar stil looking poor what they lack is keeping bal possesion nd selfish sturrigde. Chelsea we need better players. Thanks to Torres who is improving