I would like to foreword this
article by stating that I am not a Chelsea fan, and in fact would probably
count myself in the bracket of football fans who would endorse the demise of Chelsea
Football Club and all that goes with it. I will admit that when I am writing
about Chelsea I am far from unbiased, but I would like to think that I am fair
and give a reasonable account of what I see to be the failings, and the successes
of Chelsea FC.
Like so many last night, I found
myself suffering at the hands of another incredible European fight back from Chelsea.
Another late goal, another chance for Jose Mourinho to run on to the pitch, and
another famous moment to build on the clubs rapidly developing history and
tradition. Because for a club that 20 years ago had little to no reputation in
Europe, they have created a strong and lasting tradition. No longer can
nostalgic Liverpool fans, and snobby Arsenal supporters sing their variety of
chants exclaiming Chelsea’s lack of history – because now, they have one. They
have a tradition of winning. Often not in style, sometimes not even deserved,
but they win.
I am sure that a lot of
journalists from certain media outlets will have convinced themselves that this
was Mourinho’s win, his tactically astute mind saw the PSG centre backs were struggling
to cope with two centre forwards, let alone three. As I’m sure you know, two substitutes
scored last night, which can be manipulated to show how special the ‘Special
One’ is. However, what I saw seemed quite desperate. By the time Ba came on
with half an hour to go Luiz and Willian were being well outnumbered in
midfield and the huge gap between defence and attack meant PSG could relax and
take plenty of much needed time to stroll with the ball down the pitch. The game
seemed so set that all the eyes in the room turned to the small laptop screen
showing Dortmund Madrid where it looked like someone had told Klopp that you
get more points for nearly scoring than actually scoring. Only when the Chelsea
pressure reformed with 10 minutes to go did everyone realise; they only need
one goal.
So how do Chelsea consistently
defy the odds? The easy answer is Mourinho, I think most people would agree
that over two legs Mourinho can beat almost anyone. But Chelsea’s courage and
grit surpasses Mourinho’s time at Chelsea. I remind you that their greatest achievements
in Europe came without Jose. I can accept that Mourinho started the Chelsea we
know now – but not that without him they would not have won last night. This is
where the clumsy metaphor in the title comes into play, for the only things
that Chelsea seem to have in common with Charlie Bucket is their first letter
and that neither’s story is believable. As a side note, they strongly differ on
likability and finances. But if not Mourinho how do Chelsea keep on winning?
I would first suggest that belief
creates belief. Because they have done it before they believe they can and will
do it again. I have no doubt that as the game kicked off almost every person
wearing or supporting blue in that stadium believed that Chelsea would be in
the next round of the cup. This belief affects both sides, not only will
Chelsea players think they can win, but PSG will start doubting themselves. As
was seen last night, when PSG did look stronger they still could not mount
pressure, a lot of their attacks seemed sporadic and random.
Secondly, the experience at the
core of Chelsea’s team. Perhaps if there had been a full squad available
Lampard would not have started, but his experience at not only playing in
European competitions but playing with Chelsea in Europe is, as a MasterCard
advert would say, priceless. But of course it is not only Lampard, the formidable
and sickening John Terry also provides the same experience and belief. A key to
Chelsea’s ‘never say die’ attitude.
Thirdly, something that even Martinez
cannot adapt Steven Naismith to prevent, something that cannot be coached into
a player, luck. You give Cavani those chances again and he will put them in
every time. It is as simple as luck can get you through. Of course the previous
two points help generate the luck and put pressure on the opponents, but
Ibrahimovic being injured, Cavani snatching at chances and an accidental scoop
miskick from Ba can be and has been enough.
If you asked me if this is enough
to win the competition I would probably say no. Assuming Manchester United don’t
progress tonight then you would have to accept that Chelsea are the weakest
team left and thus the least likely to win. However, if Real Madrid fall into a
lake of Chocolate and get stuck in a pipe, or Munich find themselves turning
into a giant blueberry then who knows. Perhaps in this world of imagination it
is possible.
So belief, experience and luck took Chelsea into the finals according to this article?
ReplyDeleteNo mention for the hard work put in by the squad midweek to prepare? No mention towards Andre Schurrle's performance and goal? Or his signing for Chelsea by Jose?
No mention towards the truth that Mourinho actually sprinted down the touchline in order to re-organise the team to get Chelsea through the last 7 minutes of the game with 3 strikers, along with Willian and Schurrle all on the pitch?
You are also happy to write that it was lucky that Ibrahimovic was injured, however fail to recall that Eden Hazard was removed from the field with an injury of his own less than 20 minutes into the match?
No mention of the "luck" PSG enjoyed when within 60 seconds the PSG crossbar was rattled twice by Oscar and Schurrle? Both times Chelsea were denied.
At the end of the day, playing the way Chelsea played for the last 15 minutes of the game was a big risk, and it was the performances of the team as a whole that helped put the pressure on PSG to get that final goal and to prevent Cavani from doing any damage down the other end.
I can't help but feel this is another Anti-Chelsea article, just this time its slightly more cloak and dagger than usual. Another journalist out to undermine the hard-work put in throughout the club all year round, placing emphasis on "belief", "experience" and "luck", rather than endurance, skill and tactics.