The Preston North End Women are still on break, but I'm going to the first team match at Deepdale this afternoon. While anyone in North America could have watched the Arsenal v. Chelsea match last night, so I have no unique insight, I believe there are key mistakes Ancelotti made last night from which we can all learn.
To be clear, Carlo Ancelotti is superb manager whose trophy cabinet includes winner's medals from the EPL, Serie A, Coppa Italia, FA Cup, European Cup and so on. But by his own admission, he was sleep-walking through last night's match, "I'd seen some very good training sessions this week, so I did not expect this. We have to wake up. Until now we've been sleeping. But maybe I have to be the first to wake up."
Chelsea's strategy was simple, tested, and had been successful before. They came out in a 1-4-3-3, sitting deep and narrow, and inviting Arsenal to come at them. Arsenal have been bullied by Chelsea recently, having not beaten Chelsea since November of 2008. However, last night proved different as Arsenal were willing to take the game to Chelsea, and when they lost possession, Arsenal were relentless, co-ordinated, and effective on the press. The following graphic demonstrates just how good the Arsenal press was; it is a comparison of the number and location of interceptions by both teams during the course of the match.
by Guardian Chalkboards
Chelsea was not able to get anything moving forward, and the midfield was completely overwhelmed. In the entire first half, Essien, Lampard, and Mikel completed nine positive passes in the Arsenal third between them, and only two after the sixteenth minute. When Ancelotti chose to use Ramires for Mikel and drop Essien into the holding position, it was clear he had no plan B. It was effectively a like-for-like switch and saw no change in Chelsea's overall shape and organization.
Further, I would argue that removing Mikel rather than Lampard showed a lack of courage. Lampard has been sorely missed since his injury, but he brought nothing to the side in the first half. His passing was erratic, movement off the ball poor, and due to Arsenal's pressing, he had no room to move forward on a marauding run. Mikel at least kept Fabregas a little deeper by consistently marking hm goal side, thus forcing Fabregas to move to his own goal for operational space. Also, Mikel's passing efficiency was the best of the Chelsea midfielders, 20 completed of 23 attempted in the first half. Yes, Lampard creates problems when he is at his best, but Arsenal clearly had him solved, and a change in approach was demanded.
The following graphic compares the passing of Lampard to Fabregas in the middle half of the match, when the outcome was decided. It's not entirely a fair comparison as Fabregas is a player of different qualities, however both filled the role of the key attacking player in their respective midfields. Of note is Fabregas completed five passes in the Chelsea penalty area. During the same period, Lampard completed only six passes in the Arsenal half, one of those a drop, and another square.
by Guardian Chalkboards
Ramires proved no more effective or creative in the midfield, and two remaining substitutions were likewise like-for-like, Kakuta for Malouda, moving Kalou to the left and Kakuta playing wide-ish right, and Boswingwa for Ferreira. The only time Chelsea appeared dangerous and capable of closing the 3-1 lead was about the 70th minute when for two or three sequences, Kakuta came underneath Drogba into his favored role as an attacking central player, and Ramires moved slightly higher and wider as he does with Brazil, and Chelsea played a lopsided 4-diamond-2 (or 4-trapezium-2). It appeared to be by happenstance and not design however, as they reverted to type with Kakuta pushing back wider and higher and played a rigid 1-4-3-3 for the remainder of the match that Arsenal had no problems containing.
So what can we learn from all this? I take away two lessons:
1) Even if plan A is remarkably cunning, has worked in the past (and to re-iterate, Chelsea has dominated Arsenal for five matches with roughly the same game plan), and has looked sharp in training, it is important to have a plan B.
2) Don't be afraid to remove your "best player" if he isn't contributing anything to the match. Lampard never looked like providing anything positive in the match, great player though he may be.
As coaches, it is incumbent upon us to "be the first to wake up," to use Ancelotti's phrase, and give our players the best opportunity to succeed. We can't fall in love with something we've seen in training when it's just not happening in the game. Indeed, in training we need to look for qualities in our players and patterns that develop that give us flexibility in our approach, so that when plan A fails we have something to give the players without re-inventing the wheel. Chelsea came up against a well prepared, organized, and inspired Arsenal squad last night, and collectively they simply lacked answers for the questions Arsenal posed.
