Man City v. Chelsea - The Review

Blogger #18

11 straight home wins, a 20 match unbeaten run, and a scoring at home run of 61 games. Chelsea’s win at the Etihad on Monday night brought an end to a number of City’s streaks. But despite thrashing teams week after week at the Etihad, the two times they’ve lost there this season (against Bayern and Chelsea), they have looked shorn of creativity as both teams exploited the flaws of City’s 4-4-2 system.

Mourinho seems to have adopted a ‘don’t lose’ policy against the big teams away from home. Games at both Old Trafford and The Emirates finished 0-0 and all signs seemed to point to a similar approach. Perhaps that was his greatest trick, convincing the media, fans and maybe even the managers that he had just the one game plan. All the talk before the game was about parking the bus. When questioned about it before the match, he responded by saying “Parking the bus [in front ofgoal] has no relation with the players the manager chooses, but how the team plays. You can play with six, seven, eight defensive players and be an attacking team."

How true it turned out to be.

Line Ups and Shape:

The Line-Ups

City lined up in their customary 4-4-2 (or 4-2-2-2). Fernandinho and Aguero’s absence meant that Pellegrini went with Demichelis in midfield, with Dzeko and Negredo upfront. In the return leg this season, Pellegrini went for three in the middle with the midfield battle in mind, and was unlucky to lose that game. It made sense to go for a similar approach here, but City’s brilliant run at home (over 4 goals a game) seems to have convinced him to leave their shape untouched. But Aguero’s absence lead to the side having a predictable feel, with Dzeko and Negredo quite similar in their approach to donning the center forward role.

Initial impressions of Chelsea’s starting line-up seemed to suggest a 4-3-3 with a midfield trio of Matic, Luiz, and Ramires. But as the match played out, Chelsea looked more like a 4-2-3-1, a formation Mourinho has come to favour and love since his initial departure from the Premier League. Willian played behind Eto’o as Ramires played a central midfielder/winger role on the right, with Matic and Luiz patrolling midfield. It is also entirely possible that Mourinho changed his plans at the last minute after seeing Demichelis in the City line up, wanting to make the most out of a player in an uncomfortable position.  

David Silva and the free flank:

City get away with playing a 4-4-2 largely due to the way Silva (or Nasri) drift in field to dictate play, essentially becoming the third man in midfield. A winger drifting in played a major part when they thrashed Manchester United. This also allows Kolarov (or Clichy) acres of space to run into on the overlap.

Having recognized this, Mourinho seemed to have instructed Luiz to sit on Silva. Luiz was quite good in his role, and Silva failed to dictate play to the extent he usually does. While Kolarov did have a chance or two to put in dangerous crosses, the opportunities were few and far between. Looking to escape from Luiz’s shadowing, Silva seemed to consciously drift towards the right flank towards the end of the first half and for the entirety of the second. Being City’s playmaker, this also reduced City’s threat down the left and much of their build up in the second half was through their right flank. It was an interesting shift in shape that seemed to slightly unsettle Chelsea. With Hazard stationed high up for the counter attack, it was Matic who often helped out Azpilicueta with the defensive duties on that flank. With Silva drifting, and Zabeleta overlapping Navas, City easily created numerous 3v2 situations, which they failed to make the most of. Azpilicueta had a good game, matching Navas for pace, and Matic showed that not everyone requires time to ‘get accustomed to the Premier League’. He was splendid in his reading of the game and was comfortable on the ball, passing it around sensibly.

Silva's zones - 1st half v. 2nd half

City's passing in 2nd half concentrated down the right.

With Silva drifting in, and Ramires slightly tucked in, that entire flank was left to the two wing-backs, Kolarov and Ivanovic. Ivanovic was very brave with his positioning, and was often found challenging for Chelsea goal kicks against Kolarov way beyond the half line. Exploiting this situation was clearly instructed into Ramires as he often advanced into the vacant space behind Kolarov pulling Nastastic wide. Chelsea made the most of Silva’s free role and while it might have not been in their plans to score the way they did, it was an indicator of Chelsea’s plans.

Chelsea’s individuals and City’s midfield:

Despite their free scoring run, City’s soft center has been exposed on occasions. Liverpool were unlucky to lose against them, and Bayern by and large thrashed them. Demichelis in midfield compounded City’s problems. Despite staying back for most of the game, he lacked the positional sense of a proper DM and often rushed into tackles when staying on his feet and covering space would’ve been a better option. He was also a liability on the ball, often slowing down play and losing possession at times in crucial zones. A more solid and dependable DM would’ve helped City’s cause (even if Les Ferdinand doesn’t agree).

Much has been made of Mourinho’s tactical master class in this win, but so much of it depended on the individual brilliance of Hazard and Willian. Hazard was in a class of his own, skipping past tackles with ease, and dragging the City defence out of shape. Hazard and Willian’s movements were co-related as each exploited the space created by the other. The City back four often had to deal with Chelsea’s front four on their own, and were exposed numerous times. While he does make a huge difference in the attacking third, you have to question Yaya Toure’s defensive awareness (Probably why Hamann called him a liability).

Hazard attempting more take-ons than the entire City side (Chelsea attempted 37)

Eto’o worked hard to keep the City center backs occupied and while he certainly wasn’t their best player, it was a hardworking performance, much similar to what he did under Mourinho at Inter. The City defenders also showed a surprising inability to defend high up the pitch against Chelsea’s fast transitions from defence to attack.

Pellegrini made just the one change, Jovetic on for Negredo, and it was a generally good move. Jovetic positioned himself behind Dzeko, drifting into pockets of space. His lack of fitness led to a poor touch or two, but his presence caused some disturbance in the Chelsea midfielders. With two nimble footed players, Silva and Jovetic, trying to find space between the lines, it brought some unpredictability to the City attack.  

Final Thoughts:

City’s midfield weakness was exploited very well by Chelsea, who were comfortable to sit in numbers behind the ball. The Chelsea defenders rarely had to face a City attacker 1v1. Both Terry and Cahill were splendid, mainly because they were never dragged out of their comfort zones.

High pressing, pro-active possession football has often been declared the way to play in recent times, but this Chelsea performance (and Bayern against Barcelona) shows us that there’s nothing wrong in playing defensive, counter-attacking football, despite what Mourinho said about the same last week.

Pellegrini will learn from this, and it’s tough to see him play with a 2 man midfield against Barcelona. As for the rest of the season, City can afford to drop points against the likes of Chelsea, as long as they continue to blow away the smaller teams. Chelsea have now faced both Manchester clubs home and away and come away with 10 points from 12. It’s a remarkable record, and shows Mourinho’s capability to get results from the big games.