Chelsea’s away win against Fulham on Sunday was almost as impressive as the victory at Sunderland, but for very different reasons. Whilst the one-sided affair at Sunderland had been all about pass and move, Sunday’s two nil win was a masterclass in stifling, high-pressure football that simply didn’t allow Fulham time and space on the ball. Here we take a brief (but closer) look at how the game was won and the performances of some of the key players.
Whilst the character of the two wins varied greatly, both had their roots in strong defensive performances from the holding midfield player. Mikel certainly didn’t cover the same amount of ground as Essien did against Sunderland – sticking strictly to the middle third only - but defensively he was arguably more influential. Over the course of the 90 minutes Mikel made eight tackles and four interceptions and he was consistent on the ball too, completing a mammoth 94% of his 47 attempted passes. The holding player clearly isn’t a position in which Chelsea lack talent.
But Mikel was playing in a side that lined up differently than it had up in the North East. Ancelotti played no rigid structure on Sunday, but it frequently looked more like a 4-2-3-1 than a 4-3-2-1 formation, with Ballack playing alongside Mikel and Anelka moving out to the right (especially in the first half). Whatever the formation, this was a match that was characterised by Chelsea’s tenacity in midfield with far more tackles and interceptions being made than in the previous fixture (successful tackles: Malouda – 6; Ballack – 2). Fulham repeatedly took the ball into a swamped midfield and couldn’t retain possession, leaving Chelsea’s deeper-lying midfielders free to try and pick out passes to Drogba, Anelka and Lampard.
Interestingly though, the harrying of Fulham when in possession didn’t stop with the midfield. Statistically a huge proportion of goals are scored following mistakes by defenders in their own third, and Drogba and Anelka played a pivotal part in unsettling Fulham’s defence not only with intelligent running off the ball but also by applying pressure. Over the course of the match, Chelsea’s two strikers stole possession a combined total of five times in the final third.
Once again the full backs were very influential, but particularly Ashley Cole who had more touches of the ball than any other Chelsea player and regularly overlapped Malouda (who actually played a lot of the game playing inside) throughout the 90. As I mentioned in my match report yesterday though, we didn’t see the best of Frank Lampard who completed less passes than all of the starting line-up bar Didier Drogba. As someone pointed out in a comment on that post, this doesn’t necessarily matter – if Lampard is creating space for Drogba and Anelka to play in then he’s doing an important job. On the other hand however, it would seem profligate not to find a way to take advantage of his ability to both score and dictate the play. It will be fascinating to see how Ancelotti’s use of Lampard evolves over the next few games.
One final, nit-picking point is about shot accuracy. As against Sunderland, Chelsea arguably could have scored more at the weekend – but of the total 16 strikes on goal only 4 were on target (25%). It’s perhaps worth mentioning that in last season’s games when Chelsea scored four or more the shot accuracy was far higher – 40% on target against Middlesborough (0-5 win), 32% against Arsenal (1-4 win), 45% against Portsmouth (4-0 win) and 40% against Sunderland (5-0 win). I’m not concerned about not putting more past Fulham – and big scores often come with a huge slice of luck - but clearly greater accuracy in front of goal will help the team past the post against more talented sides where chances are at a premium.
Key player stats and facts:
Player |
Passes completed |
Pass success rate (%) |
Successful tackles |
Lampard |
18 |
60 |
0 |
Ballack |
36 |
86 |
2 |
Mikel |
44 |
96 |
8 |
Malouda |
46 |
75 |
6 |
A. Cole |
53 |
88 |
6 |
Bosingwa |
47 |
90 |
1 |
You might also be interested to read:
Now the importance of Ballack in that midfield can be seen clearly. When Ballack does not play neither Mikel nor Essien are effective. When he does leave eventually we need someone who can fill his shoes.
Posted by: Sandeep | 25 August 2009 at 18:05
Sandeep - thanks for your comment. Think it's a really interesting point.
Ballack's languid style and his occasional giving the ball away sometimes make him an easy target (and fair enough, sometimes he has been very offer form for Chelsea). But on form I think he's exactly what you say - very effective.
I think Carlo will rotate the midfield players quite a bit this season - we'll see how the team gets on without him
Posted by: Russell Saunders | 26 August 2009 at 11:19
Usually what I see in the websites are the fans suggesting that Ballack should be sold off. Yet when Guus Hiddink took over it could be seen that he was picked every game. And you can see Carlo picking him regularly(at least half through the match). The reason is because of what he brings to the table. When playing under Guus Hiddink he was give a more holding role like Mikel has right now. Thhats the reason we did not see him scoring goals and hence people thought he was ineffective. Remember when playing against Barcelona Hiddink took off Lampard but not Ballack for both the games. Thats exactly what Ballack can get you. Scolari's regime cannot be considered because none of them performed well under him. But other than that I did not see him off form at any time. He was just following the coach's orders. I still feel when he does leave chelsea he is gonna leave big void in that midfield. What we must do is retain him in some coaching or even managerial role when he decides to hang up his boots. He is a natural leader and a very intelligent guy. Mikel can learn a lot from him and should try to emulate him rather than Makalele.
Posted by: Sandeep | 27 August 2009 at 18:17