IT WAS YET another defeat for Villas-Boas's Chelsea who are struggling badly; this time at the hands of the fast-paced, counter-attacking Napoli. The Italians beat the Blues 3-1 and took a huge step towards advancing to the next stage of the Champions League. Yet, that one away goal by Juan Mata still leaves the door, just a tiny crack, open for a successful overturn at Stamford Bridge. Here, we will analyse how Chelsea got that thin but vital lifeline.
The Steal
 |
| Picture 1. Ramires Tackle |
At this stage of the game, Napoli pretty much had Chelsea pinned back in their own half. The home side were creating chances by supplying passes to Lavezzi down their left side. Chelsea, on the other hand, looked for breakthroughs by sending direct balls towards Drogba and scrambling for the second ball. This is not a bad approach in and of itself: when it is done right, it can be very effective (e.g. Newcastle used this method to perfection during their great league run earlier in the season).
In this case, Cech delivered a long ball from a goal kick. Drogba attacked the ball initially but it fell to Napoli players. Chelsea players then pressed hard to recover the ball high up the pitch. As Lavezzi was receiving a pass from his defender, Ramires, in doing what he does best, sneaked in from behind and got a tackle in. The Brazilian had a poor game in terms of creating chances through passing but that's not his strong suit and it showed. Anyhow, the loose ball from that tackle rolled towards Malouda.
The Counter
 |
| Picture 2. Malouda to Drogba to Sturridge |
Malouda did well to find Drogba quickly as Ramires pushed forward centrally. And the Ivorian was excellent in controlling the pass with his chest and laying the ball off to unmarked Sturridge on the right side. Here's where it gets interesting.
The Misunderstanding
This was a rare 3 v 3 situation for Chelsea who have been doing a lot of defending up to this point but it didn't go smoothly despite resulting a goal. This, I think, is because of a misunderstanding between Sturridge and Ramires.
Sturridge, as he received the pass from Drogba, wanted to a one-two with Ramires (A of Picture 3): he would pass the ball to Ramires and run into the space on the right to collect the pass back from Ramires. The Brazilian, on the other hand, wanted to continue his diagonal run towards the right -- behind the Napoli defender marking Sturridge -- and receive the pass from Sturridge. Put those two scenarios together and what do you get?
A Slice of Luck
Sturridge's first time pass was way too far behind diagonal-running Ramires. But fortunately for Chelsea, Napoli defender Cannavaro made a mess of clearing the ball and Mata got the chance to put Chelsea in the lead with a calm finish.
THIS GOAL WAS anything but straight forward but just like any other goals, it counts (and has a little bit more weight because of the away goal rule). Whether Chelsea could make anything out of this slim hope however is up for debate/speculation.
Carefree, wherever you may be...
 |
| Picture 3. The Misunderstanding between Sturridge and Ramires |
This was a rare 3 v 3 situation for Chelsea who have been doing a lot of defending up to this point but it didn't go smoothly despite resulting a goal. This, I think, is because of a misunderstanding between Sturridge and Ramires.
Sturridge, as he received the pass from Drogba, wanted to a one-two with Ramires (A of Picture 3): he would pass the ball to Ramires and run into the space on the right to collect the pass back from Ramires. The Brazilian, on the other hand, wanted to continue his diagonal run towards the right -- behind the Napoli defender marking Sturridge -- and receive the pass from Sturridge. Put those two scenarios together and what do you get?
A Slice of Luck
 |
| Picture 4. Mata Goal |
Sturridge's first time pass was way too far behind diagonal-running Ramires. But fortunately for Chelsea, Napoli defender Cannavaro made a mess of clearing the ball and Mata got the chance to put Chelsea in the lead with a calm finish.
THIS GOAL WAS anything but straight forward but just like any other goals, it counts (and has a little bit more weight because of the away goal rule). Whether Chelsea could make anything out of this slim hope however is up for debate/speculation.
Carefree, wherever you may be...
I believed that introduction of Lampard and essien slowed the game and it killed the penetrative ability of Chelsea, am i right to arrive at the conclusion ? can you prove it with the result of some stats ?
ReplyDeleteMeireles and Ramires were very poor, so Lampard and Essien couldn't have done worse if it was a direct substitution. Subbing out Malouda and moving Sturridge, who has been playing well on the right, to the left wing was not the greatest move. Ramires, then, played right wing and was not effective there either. It was a loss-loss tactical change.
ReplyDeleteWith All the spot light on AVB i think the work (or lack of it) of DI -Matteo is going un-noticed. I am surprised that he is going scot free and all balme is falling on AVB, i think we should aso evaluate that if he is bringing anything on the table to help AVB. I think AVB should sack him and get a new assistant, i did the same in FM11 and got excellent resutls :-), what's your view on that ?
ReplyDeleteI think it is fair to give part of the blame to Di Matteo. But assistant managers don't get that much praise when team succeeds and they don't get too much blame with the team fails. That's just the nature of things. It is hard to know what Di Matteo offers and what he doesn't. I'm not sure firing him will help.
ReplyDeletei would love to have zola at that role...!!! Asst Coach for AVB...
ReplyDelete