bridge views - the thinking fan's chelsea blog

The five games that really won Chelsea the Premier League

A few newspapers and websites have tried to identify the most influential matches in securing the title for Chelsea – here’s my attempt. There are some obvious suggestions, but a couple that the others haven’t thought of. And so, in reverse order…

5. Chelsea 2 Hull 1
Cast your mind back to a warm afternoon on Saturday 15 August. The dazzling sunshine seemed to somehow give credence to the idea that, under Ancelotti, there would be a new Chelsea with a bright future on show.

As it was, a lax display against Hull in this first game of the season at Stamford Bridge led to fans’ enthusiasm quickly being replaced with frustration. Hull actually went ahead, through the much-loved Stephen Hunt, and Chelsea laboured back into contention with Didier Drogba goal. As the game entered injury time – and just as it looked like Chelsea would drop their first points of the season against unfancied opposition - Drogba popped up again to score a fortunate winner.

I criticised Ancelotti for a lack of decisiveness and activity from the bench and bemoaned a performance that showed the worst of the old Chelsea. With retrospect however, it was an important opening day win. Chelsea won the next five Premier League games on the spin, scoring thirteen goals and conceding only one, establishing themselves as early favourites for the title.

4. Portsmouth 0 Chelsea 5
If the defeat at Stamford Bridge to Mourinho’s Inter was a kick in the teeth, Diouf’s equaliser only days later for Blackburn was a kick in the team’s collective ribs – and when they were down. It looked inevitable that the Champions League exit had precipitated a slide into end-of-season mediocrity.

The following game against struggling Portsmouth nipped that idea in the bud. An underwhelming first half performance – in which Chelsea still managed to finish with a lead due to a David James howler – was followed by a four-goal blitzkrieg in which Malouda was particularly effective.

The five nil win was a much-needed confidence boost as Chelsea entered the final furlong, and marked the beginning of a string of high-scoring matches. Most significantly, it was a sign that the Chelsea backbone was still intact and laid a marker for the Premier League run-in.

3. Arsenal 0 Chelsea 3
November 2009: Chelsea were comfortable leaders at the top of the table and looked on course to run away with the league. Aside from a tetchy encounter with Man Utd at Stamford Bridge however, Ancelotti’s men had been largely unchallenged and hadn’t played any of the so-called ‘big four’ away from home.

Many pundits thought that the visit to the Emirates would see the Chelsea juggernaut knocked off course: Arsenal were playing good football, Fabregas was on fire and Chelsea hadn’t been tested. Furthermore, Chelsea had showed signs of weakness away from home.

Those pundits were well wrong. This was as one-sided a contest as you’ll see between teams in the top four of the Premier League, with Chelsea’s men beating Arsenal’s boys with energy in reserve. Drogba, who according to Wenger ‘didn’t do much’, was imperious, and bullied the Arsenal defence into defeat with two immaculate goals. Chelsea looked unstoppable.

2. Chelsea 7 Sunderland 2
If August, September and November had been great, December was awful. Chelsea played a huge number of games and a string of draws and losses suggested the ageing team was creaking under the strain. First place in the league was under threat, and media soothsayers were circling with warnings of the famous post-Christmas Man Utd charge.

Adding to the anxiety was the forthcoming African Cup of Nations: the argument went that, shorn of Drogba, Essien, Kalou and Mikel, Chelsea would struggle to recapture title-winning form.

As it was, January went without a hitch, and Chelsea steamrollered all-comers. The win at Sunderland stood-out, with a seven goal haul sending a message to nay-sayers that there was the strength and depth required at Chelsea to manage without the African contingent.

Contrary to the prophecies of doom, the African Cup of Nations was arguably the best thing that happened to Chelsea all season. Chelsea were denied some of their best players, yes, but it was during a period of relatively easy games. More significantly, Drogba’s absence led to Ancelotti reverting to the tried and trusted 4-3-3 that would form the backbone of Chelsea’s goal-scoring title charge.

1. Manchester Utd 1 Chelsea 2
Both at the time and in hindsight this was a must-win game. With the stakes sky high, Ancelotti made the huge decision to leave top-scorer Drogba on the bench, and it paid off.

There was only one team in the game in the first half, and Chelsea opened the scoring through a delightful Joe Cole backheel. The second half saw a rejuvenated Man Utd rarely threaten the Chelsea net, although it was uncharacteristic good luck that refereeing errors (which were evenly spread across both sides) didn’t end up going Utd’s way.

The win gave Chelsea a four-point advantage, which turned out to be the deciding factor just a couple of weeks later when Spurs outclassed the Blues at White Hart Lane.

What do you think – have I missed a more important Chelsea result or performance? Or were there more pivotal results for rivals elsewhere that swung it in Chelsea’s favour? Post a comment…

Chelsea threaten Man Utd's Premier League goals record: about the 93

Chelsea’s third seven-goal haul of the season against Stoke yesterday took the club within shooting distance of Man Utd’s Premier League record for number of goals scored in a season.

Man Utd scored 97 Premier League goals in the 99/00 season, winning the league by a staggering 18 points. Whilst it hadn’t hit the same heights as the previous season, this was still one of the great Utd attacking sides. Andy Cole and Dwight Yorke scored 39 goals between them. At the other end of the pitch however, they conceded 45 goals. Chelsea meanwhile finished 5th and won the FA Cup.

Chelsea, having now scored 93 goals this season, are just four goals away from equalling that record with just two games remaining. Equalling or surpassing the record is far from a certainty, but it is possible: on average this season Chelsea have scored over 2.5 goals a game.

This season, Chelsea have scored four goals or more in a Premier League game no less than eight times, and have ratcheted up seven goals three times and five goals twice. 

Critics will say that most of Chelsea’s goals have been scored against lower table opposition. I would argue that any high-scoring side has historically scored more goals against weaker opposition than against their closest rivals, and that the argument is at least a little simplistic. Look at the teams Chelsea have scored against this season however, and the stats tell a different story…

In total, 43% of all Chelsea’s goals so far have been scored against teams currently in the top half. Furthermore, Chelsea have scored nearly as many goals against the three other sides currently in Champions League qualification spots (12%) as against those in relegation positions (15%). 22% of all Chelsea goals have been scored against teams in European qualifying places, while 19% have been scored in derbies. The table opposite (click to enlarge) shows where goals against which team’s Chelsea’s goals have been scored.

And who’s scored all these goals? Drogba, with 25 league goals to his name, has accounted for 27% of them, and Lampard, Chelsea’s second highest top scorer, 22%. Chelsea’s four top scorers – Drogba, Lampard, Anelka and Malouda have scored 66 (71%) between them.

Together Lampard and Drogba have created a third of Chelsea’s league goals. Just 9% of the 93 have come from the penalty spot, and marginally more Chelsea goals have been scored in the second half of games (56%).

Regardless of whether Chelsea reach 97 – and the debate about the quality of the league that will inevitably follow the end of the season - the sheer number of goals scored has been unprecedented for Chelsea who, in recent memory, have typically lagged behind in the goal difference stakes.

Ancelotti has claimed Chelsea now have a new ‘identity’. I’m not absolutely sure I’m ready to believe him, or that Chelsea are suddenly playing like Brazil. But the final goals tally will certainly be impressive.

Media obsession with Man Utd's Wayne Rooney ignores valid Chelsea and Arsenal claims

As if the media hype surrounding Ryan Giggs last season – and him subsequently being given the PFA Player of the Year award – wasn’t bemusing enough, the media are attempting to contrive a one horse race for this year’s honour.

The benefit of being English and playing well in a World Cup year to Rooney is so insurmountable in the race to be given the PFA award that it may as well be re-branded the ‘Wayne Rooney award’, presumably doled out for being the outstanding candidate from a pre-selected pool of one. Absurdly, Rooney – aged 24 – has also been shortlisted for the young player of the year award.

I have no problem with Wayne Rooney being shortlisted for the award, which he was today, or indeed him actually winning the thing. He has had an excellent season, has carried Man Utd and even I’d be hard pushed to come up with a 100% concrete argument that any other player has bested him. He will be a deserving winner of any award. But I resent the overwhelming media circus that has come to surround him which now seems to be reaching a crescendo.

Want evidence of this media obsession? Look no further than the headline on the BBC website reporting the shortlist. The headline reads: ‘Man Utd striker Wayne Rooney shortlisted for PFA award’. Interesting – and what about the other players? Focusing on the Liverpudlian in the headline makes no sense – the announcement isn’t in the least surprising. Had Owen Hargreaves, Manuel Almunia or Robbie Savage been in the running, I would be less perturbed at the domination of their name in the headline. But that didn’t happen.

The media love-in for Wayne Rooney is everywhere. Commentators seem to want to talk about him even when Utd aren’t playing, and print journalists seem willing to forget his aggressive tantrums (which haven’t disappeared) and, particularly as Terry vacated morality over the last few months, as they laud Rooney as some kind of reformed character and perfect role model. Until they had their eyes opened by Messi’s performance against Arsenal last week, the journalist community were convinced Rooney was the best player on the planet.

Other players deserve a balanced appraisal from the media, especially in a year where – unlike last season – the top teams are far more evenly matched.

I’ve compared Drogba with Rooney before, but let’s remind ourselves of the figures. Rooney has scored 26 goals in the league (once every 95 minutes on average), Drogba 25 (once every 96 minutes). Rooney has made 5 assists, Drogba 11 – meaning that Rooney has ‘contributed’ a goal every 79 minutes to Drogba’s one every 67. And, while Utd fans won’t believe it, Drogba does just as much work tracking back as Rooney does, and shows just as much commitment. And he doesn’t take penalties. Who would have thought that the two were so closely matched and that there was at least one other convincing candidate (Fabregas has been outstanding too) for player of the year? Well, no-one reading a newspaper.

Journalists should bring balance first and foremost, in addition to opinion, and the BBC should in particular. Rooney will win the award next month, but in the meantime he needs no extra help.

Intemperate, improper Alex Ferguson and Man Utd: good news for Chelsea?

When you’re beaten well, as Arsenal were on Tuesday, it’s almost easy to be gushing about the opposition. When you’re beaten by a hair’s width, it’s evidently not so easy.

Alex Ferguson proved that rule last night. In the aftermath of his side’s exit from the Champions League at the hands of Bayern Munich, he gave tetchy interview to ITV (or was it MUTV? It’s hard to tell the difference sometimes). His suggestion that Bayern players surrounding the referee was the behaviour of ‘typical Germans’ was well below the belt, and I suspect recriminations for that comment would have been far more severe had it been uttered by someone at Chelsea.

Half the Bayern side aren’t even German. Aside from anything else, Ferguson wasn’t aware of the clear irony: Utd have a tremendous and unrivalled record in harassing, cajoling and influencing referees.

Ferguson’s suggestion that Bayern players deliberately targeted Rooney’s ankle jars, too. And even if it were true – you took the risk playing him, Alex. If he wasn’t 100% fit and gets injured, the buck stops with you.

Ferguson’s poor sportsmanship – he also claimed that the better side hadn’t won – stretches wider at Old Trafford. As his interview progressed, several shouts of ‘cheats’ could be heard, presumably from Man Utd players or officials. Will we hear anything more of it?

But that’s by the by. It was a remarkable night of football, in which Man Utd were by a distance the better side during the first half. Nani looked something like the player his early potential promised, and I thought Valencia was again very effective down the right. ITV commentators remained largely oblivious to all that however: after all, Wayne Rooney was on the pitch. When the Evertonian got injured and it looked like his game was over, they suggested that ‘just him being present’ for ten minutes was worth the risk. Sickening sycophancy.

But by the time the second half was over, Bayern had worked their way back to 3-2 and put the tie beyond Utd on goal difference. As he ranted, Ferguson was unwilling – or unable – to see how his own side had been the architects of their own downfall. Da Silva had been brilliant against Ribery, but his two yellow-card challenges were silly in the extreme. Carrick was poor all night, and was culpable for the first Bayern goal - Vidic’s suspect positioning was also partly to blame. Finally, his chance made chances even with ten men, but couldn’t take them to kill the Germans off.

It’s not the first time we’ve seen top sides lose their rag after defeat in a big game. Utd have been famous for it – they certainly lost it at Stamford Bridge earlier in the season, and big-time the season before that. Chelsea have obviously been guilty of similar behaviour on more than one occasion – Ballack was certainly affected by impending defeat when he got sent off against Man City earlier in the season for example, and Drogba’s antics after the Barcelona defeat last year have been widely written about. Is it just the case that all the best sides struggle to accept defeat?

But Man Utd’s sense of injustice was manufactured (just as it was after Chelsea’s win on Saturday, where the referee was just poor all round). In reality, individual errors made Man Utd vulnerable to the sucker punch, which Robben duly delivered. How his pace, creativity and class are missed at Stamford Bridge.

But how does this relate to Chelsea’s fight for trophies? Man Utd now find themselves where we were three weeks ago, facing disappointment in the league and narrow exits from Europe. How well, and how quickly, Utd respond could well determine where the Premier League title ends up this season.

Reading between the lines of Ferguson’s interview, the Scot wasn’t feeling too confident. But don’t be fooled: he has proved a master of motivation over the years and I wouldn’t bet against a strong Utd reaction to this disappointment. There are five games to go, but I suspect plenty more twists and turns…

Remaining fixtures:

Chelsea (74 pts)	Man Utd (72 pts)
Bolton (h)	Blackburn (a)
Tottenham (a)	Man City (a)
Stoke (h)	Tottenham (h)
Liverpool (a)	Sunderland (a)
Wigan (h)	Stoke (h)

He who dares, wins? Bold Ancelotti tactics lead Chelsea to Man Utd victory

There have been times this season when Carlo Ancelotti has come into criticism from the media and Chelsea fans, me included. He was at least partly culpable for the tame defeat to Inter and, if we’re honest, some of his tactics and substitutions have bewildered.

But just as blame, in sensible measures, should be apportioned when things go wrong, credit should be doled out following success. As with all teams, Chelsea’s successes and failures so far this season have been fuelled by the actions of the players, the manager and the people behind the scenes, but Ancelotti certainly played his full part in Saturday’s crucial victory.

Just 48 hours before kick-off, I posed a question to followers of this blog on facebook: given the choice, would you start with Drogba against Man Utd? Most said they would. After all, how could you leave out the player who had scored 24 goals and torn the likes of Arsenal apart? Despite the media hyperbole surrounding the Englishman, many would still argue that Drogba has had a better season than Wayne Rooney. 

Those fans – and I think I was one of them – were falling back to the trusted default position. Despite the great showing without Drogba against Villa the previous weekend and the Man Utd defence’s apparent weakness in the face of fast, mobile forwards, the urge to turn back to the Ivorian was preferential to most. Ancelotti saw it differently, and again started with Drogba on the bench, and surely not because of injury. 

The Italian nonetheless fielded a very attacking starting XI. When Man United came to Stamford Bridge back in November, they played with three deep-lying, ‘holding’ midfielders. Albeit under different circumstances, Chelsea started with an attacking 4-3-3 at Old Trafford, and took the game to the Champions in the first half. The plan paid off with a goal that showed off all that Chelsea’s brand of football can, at its very best, be: strength combined with audacity. Boring, boring Chelsea?

It was a must-win game, and Ancelotti went armed with a must-win strategy. Just as his inactivity and futile substitutions against Inter and Blackburn sent negative messages to his team psychologically, so his starting XI on Saturday sent a message. Chelsea’s players, from Cech to Anelka, must have felt empowered, able and trusted to take on the champions in their own back yard and win.

The in-game tactics were spot on, too. The formation was fluid, looking a threatening 4-3-3 in attack and a stable 4-2-3-1 when Utd had the ball. Chelsea dropped deep as Utd’s pressure grew in the second half and, whilst it might have increased the tension for Chelsea fans, it was largely successful in shutting a Rooney-deprived Utd attack out. United fashioned few – if any – clear cut chances.

Ancelotti’s substitutions worked perfectly. Just as United were taking the initiative and Chelsea were struggling to break out of their own half, Drogba and Kalou provided new and viable attacking options to keep the Utd defence occupied occasionally. The introduction of Ballack was just as vital too: Deco was increasingly a marginal figure, and the German added more bite in midfield, not to mention a calm head in the closing stages to either keep the ball or draw a foul.

In a closely fought match (Man Utd had 52% of possession and had ten shots on goal to Chelsea’s eight) between two relatively evenly matched sides, Ancelotti himself was decisive on the day. 

Once a match starts, players win or lose them, not managers, but this isn’t evidence that managers shouldn’t bear the brunt of criticism when things go wrong. They are – or should be – the pivotal person at the club, forming the foundation for how a team sets up ahead of kick-off. More than that, they have the opportunity to do any number of things during a game to help their players get a result. Great managers – the Mourinhos, Fergusons, Hiddinks and Wengers of this world – each have a unique mastery of both of these elements. In a game where at the top even the smallest margins can determine success or failure, the gap caused by having or not having one of these managers can be cavernous.

There remain question marks over Ancelotti, but his performance on Saturday went some way to dispelling them. The season is a long way from being over, and the Premier League nowhere near won. But regardless of how the season finishes, Ancelotti has raised hopes that he can stay at Chelsea for the long term. As the league’s top clubs pick themselves up after a strange and, in many cases, below par season, Chelsea fans can look forward hopefully to the Italian being given the opportunity to sculpt a new side of his own.

You might also be interested to read:

• First thoughts on the United win
• Ancelotti in danger of creating a Chelsea too much in his own image?
• What happened last time out: Chelsea 1 Man Utd 0

Man Utd 1 Chelsea 2: first half Blues performance enough to see off sedate Utd

It is a shame that much of the talk after Chelsea's victory over Man Utd today will probably be of refereeing mistakes. In truth, this was not a vintage clash, but one that nonetheless Chelsea ran out deserved winners.

The first sixty minutes were almost entirely Chelsea's, with Utd clearly suffering from both a post-European hangover and the absence of Wayne Rooney. Lampard, Deco and Mikel were handed the freedom of Old Trafford by a lack lustre Utd midfield and played with purpose throughout the first 45. While Van der Saar wasn't frequently tested, Chelsea opening the scoring inside twenty minutes wasn't particularly surprising. 

And a good goal it was too. Malouda - later voted man of the match - picked the ball up on the left touchline and made a driving run towards the box, showing strength to shrug off a rugged challenge from Fletcher and cut the ball back to Joe Cole, who played a deft backheel to flick the ball past the Utd keeper. 

It was a rare highlight in a pedestrian game that at times was being played at walking pace. Chelsea were dominant in both possession and chances, but never managed to seriously threaten the Van der Saar's net again. As an attacking force, Utd were rendered almost redundant by a (very nearly) second string Chelsea's defence.

Meanwhile referee Mike Dean, who had received so much attention in the papers this week for giving too many penalties, added an uncharacteristic brand of controversy. First, Park was felled in the box by a clumsy challenge from Zhirkov, but Dean somehow didn't see it as a penalty. Only minutes later Gary Neville bundled over Anelka at the other end - again a clear penalty - but Dean gave nothing. At least he was being equally inept at each end. 

Ancelotti's tactics - which included the surprise omission of Didier Drogba from the starting XI, supposedly because of injury - looked spot on. As against Villa, Deco and Mikel played deep, providing a solid foundation for Lampard to get forward through the middle and Cole and Malouda to pull wide. Malouda was a consistent threat down the left and, while Anelka's tendency to drift either wide and deep meant Chelsea weren't really playing with a conventional centre forward, the Blues' movement was getting the better of Utd.    

While Chelsea came close to doubling their lead through a Ferreira break into the Utd penalty box within seconds of the restart, the second half had a different complexion. Ferguson sent out a far more dynamic, energetic Man Utd side. Mikel, Deco and Lampard had far less time on the ball and United started to dominate possession. Chelsea's response was to drop deeper towards their own box, inviting pressure from Utd, who finally hit something like top gear around the sixty minute mark.

But for all their possession (and Chelsea's unwillingness to close down space), United weren't able to carve out a real chance, and it was Chelsea who next drew blood. Kalou found Drogba - who was at least one full yard offside - and the Ivorian slotted powerfully past Van der Saar. Glad as I was that Chelsea had scored, this was a goal that throws into sharp contrast the need for using technology to iron out human refereeing error, and the sheer ignorance of football's governing bodies in rejecting it altogether.

But in the biggest games Chelsea wins are rarely straightforward. Man Utd scored their goal within minutes of Drogba's and, on reflection, it was similarly controversial. Getting a hand to an Evra cross, Petr Cech palmed the ball into the path of the substitute Macheda, who clearly moved his hand towards the ball to push the ball over the line. The referee stood little chance of seeing it, but the goal shouldn't have stood. And even if it was unintentional - and I doubt that it was - gaining such huge advantage through even accidental use of the hand should not be allowed.

In the end, the two non-goals were irrelevant. This wasn't a vintage game, nor a vintage performance from Chelsea. But the first half performance was enough to win it, and even United fans wearing the most red-tinted glasses will probably concede that United didn't carve out clear-cut chances and that Chelsea's defence did a good job of keeping the likes of Giggs and Valencia quiet.

Chelsea fans - after the disappointments of early March - won't care how the result came to be. This is a result that doesn't guarantee the title for Ancelotti's men. While the fine performances against Portsmouth and Aston Villa got Chelsea back on track, it was always the Man Utd game that would determine whether they were really in the hunt. Now they lead the hunt, and stand every chance of navigating the inevitable remaining twists and turns to regain the Premier League title.

Keep an eye out for further posts on where the match was won. In the meantime: Chelsea or Man Utd fans - what are your thoughts on today's result? How does this affect the chase for the title? Post a comment...          

Big match fallout - eight things we learned about Chelsea and Man Utd

This time yesterday Chelsea and Man Utd were heading onto the pitch for the second half at Stamford Bridge. Forty-five minutes later, a slightly anti-climatic encounter was over and a one nil win for Ancelotti’s men represented their most significant – if below par - display of the season.

Manchester United fans are choosing to take an awful lot of positives from the fact that their below strength side managed to play so well. Many are convinced that, based on that display, they are in good shape for the rest of the season. They’ll certainly be up there – of course they will. But I on the other hand think it works both ways: Chelsea played poorly against a slightly under-strength United side performing out of its skin, and still won.

Chelsea and United fans will disagree about plenty of aspects of yesterday’s game, but here are the things I took about each of the sides from the encounter:

Chelsea

A familiar grit and determination
Aston Villa and Wigan may disagree, but Ancelotti’s Chelsea has some similarities with that of Mourinho’s. Patient, disciplined, confident and tough to break down are expressions that could equally be said of Chelsea in November 2006 as in 2009. Pretty passing football works to a point, but the Chelsea we saw yesterday – full of those Mourinho-esque qualities – is the sort of side that can win the title.

Deco isn’t up to it
The Portuguese looked good against Bolton and almost had me convinced. But against Man Utd he reminded me of why I came to think that he wasn’t up to it last season, and probably why Hiddink wouldn’t pick him: against better sides who give him less time on the ball he goes missing. All game he completed only 26 passes and, with minimal ability or willingness to make passes or interceptions, the side were carrying him.

Ivanovic is much improved
Trusty Ivanovic is no Bosingwa – he’s not going to make roving, high paced runs down the right flank for 90 minutes. But he is…well…trusty. As a reserve, whether at centre half or right back, he’s an excellent option to be able to call upon and did a pretty good job in attack against United too, considering. Did he miss a header yesterday?

We’re not Barcelona
Top of the league? Check. Five points clear? Check? Best defence in the league and second highest scorers? Check. Many fans and a handful of the papers naively expected Chelsea to walk all over Man Utd yesterday, but a disciplined, containing performance from Man Utd put paid to some of the as yet unjustified hyperbole. A slick one-touch side capable of playing silky football isn’t born in three months: Chelsea aren’t Barcelona. We shouldn’t be ashamed of the fact that, whilst sometimes our ‘A’ game hasn’t always fired on all cylinders, it’s Chelsea’s superior plan B, C and D that’s made the side successful.

Man Utd

A one man team?
For the last two seasons, Man Utd were probably a one man team. Yesterday, they looked like a one man team again. Before the season started I suggested that, if Berbatov could up his game, he was the one that could make the difference for a re-jigged Utd. That doesn’t look like it’s going to happen. Now that Rooney has been given the freedom to play upfront however, the ex-Evertonian is in a position to make the difference himself. If Utd want to retain the title, he might just have to.

Less confident
It struck me that last year’s Man Utd – with Ronaldo – would never have come to Stamford Bridge with such a defensive mindset. And injuries probably aren’t to blame: last year’s Man Utd that visited SW6 had injuries too, with Jonny Evans doing well at the back in one of his first appearances in the senior team. How much less confident is Ferguson in his team’s ability to attack the biggest sides and win? Despite their marginally superior possession, Utd’s midfield lacked dynamism and incisiveness.

Strength and depth at the back
Jonny Evans’ tackle on Drogba was pretty appalling, but you have to give him some credit. It’s uncommon that someone of his age can be so accomplished at centre half and – albeit with a trio of holding midfielders in front of them – United’s back four wasn’t regularly troubled by Chelsea yesterday. Regardless of Ferdinand’s declining form and Vidic’s occasional injuries, United still have one of the best defences in the league.

They don’t like losing
We saw a little of the old Man Utd yesterday. Chelsea are certainly not whiter than white in this respect, but United’s players shouted, screamed, swore and kicked their way through the last twenty minutes of the game. I’m just speculating, but they haven’t experienced too much pressure over the last three years: maybe, without Ronaldo to bail them out and with Chelsea and Arsenal now setting the pace, Ferguson and his players suddenly foresee a much more difficult title chase.

Premier League preview - Chelsea rivals part I: Manchester United

Pre-season games are over, the Community Shield has been played and the Championship is underway. All that's left is for the Premier League to get started - and there are just five days to go. Chelsea have a new manager, a new formation and a new Russian winger, and it looks likely we're in for another rollercoaster season. But what about our rivals?

In the days running up to Saturday's big kick off, bridgeviews.co.uk will day-by-day take a look at each of Chelsea's biggest rivals - who they've signed, who they've sold and how they'll get along next season. First up, last season's Champions and this season's Community Shield runners up - Manchester United.

Up until yesterday afternoon most bookies had Man Utd as favourites to win the Premier League. Apparently a narrow win on penalties is enough for them to reconsider however, and Ladbrokes now have both United and Chelsea at 3-1, and William Hill have Chelsea as marginal favourites. A strange knee-jerk reaction, or a realistic prognosis for a declining force?

Ins and outs
Yes, £80m is a lot of money. But in reality, the money that Utd received for Ronaldo is almost useless, such is the scarcity of players of his ability. It's oft written that Chelsea are lacking that one creative player - that 'spark' that can make the team tick and dig it out of holes. But where is that spark in the United side now that Ronaldo's gone? Is it Valencia? Nani? Rooney? Berbatov? No, I'm not convinced either.

That said, there are plenty of goals left in that side. In Rooney and Berbatov they have two strikers the equal of any other in the league and Owen - provided he can stay relatively injury free - will score goals. His signing could well be a masterstroke - and a relatively cheap one at that, with his signing likely to cost only £5m over two years (click here to see what I said about Owen two months ago). A snip for one of England's highest goal scorers who has played at some of the biggest clubs in world football (no, not Newastle). Antonio Valencia is good young player, but goal shy, and won't make the difference - this season, at least.

I almost forgot - someone called Tevez left United too. I've made no secret of the fact that I don't think Tevez is worth £25m and that I wouldn't have been excited had he signed for Chelsea (read my article on the Argentine here). He's an expensive terrier who doesn't score enough goals. United won't miss him.

If he steps up, they'll win the league
I suspect United fans might not agree, but it's Dimitar Berbatov. When he signed for United last season, I was convinced he was the final part of their jigsaw. They had the defence, they had flying wingers and a solid midfield. But it didn't quite work out like that. Berbatov has an exquisite first touch and extraordinary imagination on the ball. Yes, he has a laissez-faire demeanour, but doesn't Drogba? Didn't Cantona? Berbatov was a 20+ goal a season man at Spurs - if United find out how to fit him in the side they can get more goals out of him. If they do, he and Rooney will play havoc with most Premier League defences.

But United's youth might also do the trick. A string of viable young players - Evans, Macheda and Gibson, for example - might arguably give United the edge in terms of squad strength and depth, especially when compared to Arnesen's youth debacle at Chelsea. Evans and the Silva brothers are pretty much proven now - but we'll need to see the the likes of Macheda for a longer period before we can make an informed judgement on their quality.

Where they'll lose it
There's no room for failure for Berbatov, Rooney and Owen. If these three don't chip in with their fair share of goals, a light-looking midfield will expose Man United. Park, Valencia and Anderson are relatively goal shy, Scholes and Giggs are <another> year older and I don't 'buy' Anderson. It's not just goals that will be missing, either - as last season's Champions League final proved - Fletcher and Carrick are very good players but certainly not world beaters. Furthermore, the likes of Park and Nani don't have that star quality. It didn't happen at Wembley yesterday, but United's midfield might find itself either undone or short of firepower a few too many times over the course of a long season.

bridgeviews.co.uk predicted finishing position
I've been as confused as the bookies over the last few weeks. Before the pre-season friendlies, I was convinced that Chelsea would be able to take advantage of the loss of Ronaldo and snatch the league. But Ancelotti's persistance with a 4-4-2 diamond - a formation I'm convinced matches neither Chelsea's squad nor the Premier League - gave me second thoughts. 

It should be close. Each side's defence is as good as the other and with the departure of Ronaldo the strikers aren't too much different either. Chelsea certainly  have the quality to win it, but a vaguely settled team at United coupled with them having a manager who is more familiar with English football than the back of his own hand, could (depressingly) mean that they're favourites to lift the trophy once again.

But, as a Chelsea fan desperate to be optimistic, my verdict is: United will finish second.


You might also be interested to read:

• A look back at what Chelsea's pre-season tour of the US tells us
• Who Man Utd are actually worrying about - could it be Man City?

Sir Alex’s hypocrisy points to his fear of the Man City threat

He's a funny one, is Sir. Clearly bored of the uber laid back, calm and collected alter ego he's wheeled out for most of Manchester United's press conferences during pre-season, Ferguson turned nasty earlier this week when the subject of Man City came up.

Some probably innocent looking journalist asked Ferguson for his reaction to Manchester City’s Carlos Tevez ‘welcome to Manchester’ advert, and he obviously couldn’t help himself.

"It's City, isn't it? They are a small club with a small mentality. That arrogance will be rewarded. It is very poor stuff".

Clearly however, Ferguson’s memory is as short as his fuse.  It was only last April that he lost his temper again, this time with Benitez (fair enough, we’ve all done it) for labelling Everton a “small club”. Of Benitez’s comments about Everton, Ferguson scowled: “It points to his arrogance”.

I’m sure the irony is lost on him. But there’s something else about his anti-Man City tirade (read more about it – and his suggestion that Liverpool and Chelsea will be his main rivals - on the Guardian’s website here). Traditionally Ferguson has only really taken the time to launch verbal attacks against clubs he perceives as a threat – hence his battles with Wenger and, more recently, Benitez. Aside from the odd scuffle, it was strange that the touch-paper was never truly lit with Mourinho.

So I’m taking Ferguson’s comments as a sign that he expects Man City to pose a threat next season. In turn, we can expect more mind games and some occasional fireworks along the way. 

Look out for team-by-team previews of the forthcoming season on bridgeviews.co.uk in the next couple of weeks.

One night in Rome

I can’t say last night’s result wasn’t the one I was looking for.

 

Well, I suppose Barca might have stuck a couple more in for good measure. Thankfully, it’s getting some pick-up in the press today (and was pointed out by Ruud and Graham on Sky last night), but what yesterday’s Champions League final really did prove wasn’t that Barcelona are the greatest team on the planet, but how great a performance Chelsea’s was in the semi-final earlier this month.

 

I won't deny still feeling bitter about that game, but the team and manager were criticised in some quarters for what was considered overly-negative tactics, when in reality it was a ruthlessly executed plan to stop the world’s best footballing side from playing their game.

 

The simple facts are that, in 90 minutes of football, Barcelona scored twice against a creaking Utd defence because Utd failed to adopt a game plan to contain them. It took Barcelona 184 minutes to score half that tally against Chelsea, by which point they were fortunate to be still in the tie after some lax finishing and some of the most baffling refereeing decisions any of us had ever seen had gone their way.

 

We didn’t let Barcelona play their tip-tap football and were criticised for it. But where’s the obligation? Last night, Ferguson didn’t learn from the Chelsea masterclass. I’m not actually sure what he was trying to do actually – and maybe the players didn’t either. Might explain their ‘nothing’ performance. But managers, fans of the ‘holier-than-thou’ clubs and UEFA themselves should understand that the first priority in football is winning – everything else is a bonus.

 

As I said, it was good to see some of the papers pick all this up, including the ever-reliable Martin Samuel (such a shame he’s writing for the Mail), who wrote this morning:

 

“What else was proven last night? Well, something about Guus Hiddink and Chelsea, that is for sure. Without setting foot in Rome, we now know that Hiddink was even more unfortunate than many believed to have lost over two legs to Barcelona in the semi-final. Their supremacy here simply confirmed Chelsea’s success over two legs in frustrating Barcelona and bringing the carousel to a shuddering halt.

 

They were never taken for a ride like United and the criticism of their negative tactics now looks even more misplaced. As United chased darting shadows across the pitch, Hiddink’s game-plan appeared smarter by the minute.”

 

Long live Guus - he got it right.

 

nb. ok, we didn't win. But if you want to relive that Essien wonder-strike you can see it here