Why is it always so in Chelsea?
This is a well-known phenomenon of the Roman Abramovich era that occasionally the team just decided to give up. This is a model dating back to the time when Jose Mourinho left the club in 2007, although for the latest harvest, the Eden Hazard era, the seeds were probably planted during the second Mourinho period season 2015-16. In the same year, Chelsea followed a campaign winning the title with a catastrophic 10th place to see Mourinho be fired after his team lost nine of their first 16 Premier League games. Mourinho moved to Manchester United and continued his career, so massive dropping out of Chelsea players might be forgiven – especially when Antonio Conte appeared and piloted the team to the Premier League title in 2017. 19659003] But the intense, demanding Conte quickly lost the support of the owner and his players. While relegation in 2017-18 to the fifth place was not as bad as the previous decline after the trophy, the freezing of star manager Diego Costa contributed to the poor results for the final, which did not reach the Champions League Qualification. Conte was forced to leave after only two seasons and was replaced by Maurizio Sarri last summer. If Sarry walked in the footsteps of his immediate pairs or predecessors, one would at least expect to win a title before losing respect to the accusations and leadership of the club. However, Sarri's term began to resemble more of Andre Villar-Boas's short run in 2011 as it may not even last a season.
On Sunday against Manchester City, Chelsea suffered the worst loss in history. As bad as the result of 6-0, it could easily be worse. Chelsea mumbled in the 90 minutes with a hint of effort on the defensive edge. It's a poor service for City and their talent to say they just hit them because they "wanted more," but Chelsea's apathy was impossible to ignore in so many cases. Like the complete failure in defense communication that gave the city the goal of opening the fourth minute:
Or any terrible loss of focus by Ross Barkley on City's third goal:
Or when the whole defense they decided to completely ignore Sergio Agüero in the box before the fourth place for City: İlkay Gündoğan: The city probably still could win if Chelsea played the heaviest, but no one would confuse the sorry display with the best Chelsea has to offer. The blues gave perhaps 10% of the effort they showed during what was their best performance since the season when they beat City 2-0 a few months ago. Since the start of the new year, the club has been in its free fall, taking only seven points of six matches, including a terrible loss of 4-0 to Bournemouth a few weeks ago. Naturally, it's time to find something to blame everyone, and Sarry's tactics feels as a primary goal.
Chelsea's most successful teams have recently been married to protect the sound. At the same time, Sarry is in a loyal monogamous relationship with an aggressive gaming system that strives to dominate the game near the target of the enemy. He is attacked, but also incredibly strict, demanding players are moving in cash and moving and switching to accurate, manager-prescribed models.
He works well with his previous work in Napoli, but in Chelsea, not only does this style probably require better players than what the team currently has, especially in the center of defense – this also significantly impedes the effectiveness of one of the few Chelsea players that are a legitimate world class, Nolo Ganto Kanté. The French World Cup winner spent the season in the far right and right to make room for the disgruntled and defensive Jorginho as the main distributor at the base of the midfield.
Sarry is currently destroying Chelsea's defense by exposing the defense line with almost no protection from the midfielders or strikers, and has not yet offered any offensive firepower to offset it except a predictably cool season. by Hazard. Of course, it's hard to rebuild a club and introduce a new style of play in just a few months – Guardiola could not even do it in its first season – but better managers are adapting to what they have to maximize the forces of the squads. In contrast, Sarry still sounds extremely stubborn that he has forced his ineffective philosophy into his band.
"I did not see my football," Sarri said after losing the city. "We need to understand the cause is not easy."
It is clear who the manager finds guilty: the players. As Sarri told reporters after a 2-0 loss from Arsenal in January, "this group of players is extremely difficult to motivate." And players have done nothing to prove it as a liar. The language of their body in the game of the city was depressing, creating the impression that they gave up as soon as the first goal touched the back of the net, if not before. Chelsea has suffered from persistent mental mistakes this year, puzzling lethargic efforts and bad results against teams that need to be easily managed – the types of things that show players really deserve their fair share.
This is chicken or egg. situation, whether the manager or players are more guilty about the form. (To be honest, Chelsea spent most of the year among the top four and still has a great hit at one of these points that would have led to a successful season). with Chelsea's history in the Abramovich era, it's hard not to see that in the same continuum of the owner who has interfered and the power of the players that has long affected the club. This video from the last season of Mourinho feels particularly suitable: But even more important for Chelsea's future is how this season reflects the past, how this time differs. Chelsea of Abramovich is so successful, despite his inclination to change managers as basketball players change their shoes because he has always been trying to give his new managers with a lot of money to change their membership with some of the best talents in the world. This summer, while trying to fundamentally change his way of playing, Sarrie was armed with only two new players – one of whom came to lend or even legitimate stars. Given the lack of visas in the UK and subsequent absence from the club, there were increasingly widespread rumors that Abramovich might sell Chelsea rather than buy new world-class players for the team. And no matter if Sarrie, who looks over his head in a club like Chelsea and a league like England, or the players who are once again impotent and right-handed, are really guilty of the potential season scream. may recognize that the only quick way to get back is that Abramovich spends a lot of money in a way he is not yet ready to do.
Chelsea fans can worry this season because of coach and player performance, and if the past is something to happen, Sarry does not seem to be long for this job. But what the fans need to be even more concerned about the long-term position of the club is the aspect that breaks from the long-standing model: the lack of literal and figurative investment on the part of the owner.