Chelsea, a cornered beast or simply dead in the water?

So Chelsea crashed out of the League Cup against Sunderland, going 120 minutes while scoring just one goal and watching helplessly as Ki Sung-Yueng netted at 118′ to see Sunderland through to the next round. Of course, caveats and asterisks abound as Cech, terry, Ramires, Oscar, and Mata rested. Of Chelsea’s XI, we might see Lampard, Cole, Cahill, and Luiz, each of whom played the full 120′. Given the ages of Lampard (35) and Cole (32), not to mention the latter’s reliance on pace, they’re likely to be rested. Then again, Essien’s yellow-card, his fifth on the season, means he’ll sit out and perhaps force a weary Lampard into action.

However, before we go too far into the specifics of the match, let’s take a broader view. Chelsea, to put it politely, have been mediocre despite managing to scrabble their way to enough points to sit third in the Prem. Since November, a stretch of eleven matches including the Champions League, they’ve managed to win six while drawing once and losing four times. Of those six wins, perhaps only their 3-0 win over Schalke in the Champions League stands out for its quality. Along the way, Chelsea have found a way to draw at home to West Brom, lose at FC Basel, win at Sunderland thanks to a late own-goal, lose at Stoke, eke out home-wins over Steaua and Crystal Palace, and lose at home to Sunderland. Yes, three points matter regardless of their manner, and champions find ways to win when quality alone doesn’t carry the day, but it’s been somewhat shocking to see how poor Chelsea have been—not just on Tuesday at Sunderland, but all season. Each potential signature victory comes with some kind of an asterisk. Defeated Man City? Yeah, but that was at Stamford Bridge. Defeated Arsenal? But Arsenal rotated heavily for the League Cup. In fact, it’s remarkable to see how few definitive wins Chelsea can claim and how many shocking defeats they’ve suffered. Each one, however, reduces the shock-value.

This latest, one that some may defend by saying that Chelsea had rotated heavily, still stands out. Much is made of Chelsea’s depth, with the idea that their bench is better than most clubs’ starting XI. Well, we saw much the opposite on Tuesday, with Chelsea’s XI, which included regulars such as Cole, Luiz, Cahill, Azpilicueta, Lampard, and Mikel, fail to defeat the Prem’s most abject squad, one that has managed only two wins in the Prem from 16 fixtures and that fired its manager six matches into the season. I mean, good God. Were it not for a Cattermole own-goal, Sunderland might have kept a clean-sheet.

None of this is to say that Monday’s fixture will be a cake-walk, not by any means. However, so much has been made of the fact that Arsèneh has never defeated Mourinho across nine matches that I felt like it would be worth addressing. Look. Historic comparisons don’t matter all that much. We can perhaps look a season or two into the past for some context, but squad change so often, and players evolve so much, that there’s little to be gleaned from them. More instructive, perhaps, would be each club’s recent form. At the risk of coming across as overly optimistic, we’ve salvaged a tricky draw against Everton, backed our way into the next round of the Champions League despite losing away to Napoli, and very nearly equaled Man City at the Etihad. By contrast, Chelsea eked out a 1-0 win over Steaua and a 2-1 win over Crystal Palace, both at home, and lost 1-2 away to Sunderland. On the surface, both Arsenal and Chelsea have staggered.

There are still six days before we’ll clash, but Tuesday’s result suggests that Chelsea is the club on the ropes, not Arsenal. How delicious would it be to deliver a knock-out on Monday, not just to Chelsea’s aspirations, but to Mourinho’s tenure? 

Average rating 0 / 5. Vote count: 0

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

1 thought on “Chelsea, a cornered beast or simply dead in the water?

  1. Anonymous

    No doubt Chelsea are on the way down while Arsenal are going up. Look at the age of the players. I would argue both teams keep a set of core players over the years. Those @ Chelsea were very poweful back then.If the manager can make use of them, they can do a very good job. If the manager cannot for whatever reason, they fail.Managers would prefer not to touch the players since the oil man boss wants quick results. Rather than up set the team, managers prefer to keep the core. No doubt they buy and sell and some leave because the contract is up but Chelsea is really about those “core guys”. Now those guys are getting old. That not even the “Special One” can help. If any of the mangers are around longer, one of them would take the risk to make more drastic changes to the squad. No one was there long enough to do that.Mourinho will need to rebuild the team. He has not started and he will need some authority to do so. I doubt if he will get any if he does not keep the team in top three in EPL and at least got one other trophy.At the mean time, Wenger's kids are maturing. He also added a few experienced players where he brings in over time.Arsenal have a hard time Aginast Chelsea. At the beginning with Mourinho around, it was a tactical issue. In the reason years, its more to do with the in-experience of their core players.When they manage the win, it would really mean they have moved a step up and the new generation has come of age. Beware that while there are old marshals from the past like Sagna and Rosicky, and a group of experienced additions such as Cazorla, Per, Arteta, and Poldi, the core players are still quite young.


Leave a Reply