Football news - What Chelsea's Maurizio Sarri must do to dodge another 'disaster' for Chelsea
/dnl.eurosport.com/sd/img/placeholder/eurosport_logo_1x1.png){kind=logo}
Updated 26/11/2018 at 10:07 GMT
Maurizio Sarri has set out his stall: the players were to blame for his first Chelsea defeat, not his system. Dan Levene on a man who may well bring sexy football back to Chelsea, but who is unlikely to deliver tactical flexibility.
Chelsea's Eden Hazard looks dejected as teammate Antonio Rudiger applauds the fans after the match
Image credit: Reuters
Chelsea were a disaster at Wembley against Tottenham. That's not my appraisal (though it's remarkably close to it): it is Sarri's.
In a refreshingly frank and honest post-match press conference he told us how his side had failed to properly prepare for the game; failed to keep the ball; and, all over, failed to turn up at a place normally thought of as their second home.
Sarri's words were full of implicit demands: listen to me; follow my lead; live the system (I paraphrase).
But there weren't many alternatives: clearly, for Sarri, it's 'my way or the highway'.
All of which, some will argue, has been fine so far: Chelsea were coming back from the November international break undefeated on all fronts – unprecedented for a new manager in the Premier League.
Yes, that start has defied all expectations. But, in recent weeks, there has been a clear slacking-off in performances.
A humbling has been waiting in the wings. And, make no mistake, this was just that.
/origin-imgresizer.eurosport.com/2018/11/24/2468527-51269250-2560-1440.jpg)
Son Heung-Min celebrates scoring for Tottenham against Chelsea
Image credit: Getty Images
Sarri's possession football has no alternatives. And that was the crux of the problem against a Tottenham side that showed few superlatives: even Son Heung-min's outrageous solo goal owed much to the 'disaster' - Sarri used that word several times - in defence.
Chelsea knew what they were getting here: a manager with one way of playing, and no Plan B.
The main difference between he and predecessor Antonio Conte, accused of a similar flaw, is that Sarri's football is easier on the eye.
The accompanying difference, of course, is that Sarri's football has never brought him any trophies – whereas Conte has plenty.
/origin-imgresizer.eurosport.com/2018/10/29/2451023-50919190-2560-1440.jpg)
Antonio Conte, with the FA Cup
Image credit: Getty Images
That, in itself, does not seem to have been a deal-breaker for Chelsea: they know they are in the market, now, for merely a Champions League place (which, despite this poor result, should still be eminently achievable – and to fail, from this position, would be Chelsea career-ending).
Any silverware for Sarri, in the domestic or European margins of the season, will be a bonus.
But, as Chelsea know better than most, finals require pragmatic tactical management.
Here, an admission: tactically dogmatic managers make me nervous. The football of ideology: of idealism and inflexibility; is something that largely succeeds only within the realms of a one-party state.
Pep Guardiola can afford to be dogmatic: because at Manchester City, just as at Bayern and Barcelona, he is the only show in town. (And, besides, he does have the depth of tactical flexibility to make the little tweaks required in the Premier League).
Most will look at the overall managerial career of Roberto Di Matteo, and conclude he wasn't much of a coach. But he was a pragmatist.
Result: probably the most against-the-odds trophy win in the history of football - at least until Leicester won the league under Claudio Ranieri (another pragmatist).
/origin-imgresizer.eurosport.com/2017/11/27/2218952-46277890-2560-1440.jpg)
Roberto Di Matteo interim manager of Chelsea lifts the trophy in celebration after their victory in the UEFA Champions League Final between FC Bayern Muenchen and Chelsea at the Fussball Arena München on May 19, 2012 in Munich, Germany.
Image credit: Getty Images
Andre Villas-Boas was, perhaps, as dogmatic a boss as Chelsea (or Tottenham, for that matter) have ever seen: no further words needed.
Sarri, for his part, has been pragmatic in the approach to his squad: he has refused to complain about the depth of talent available.
And, tactically, he insists there was a Plan B: late in the game he played a false nine (which about as successful as his false one-to-eight).
But, in terms of tactical pragmatism: in its execution, this barely made a dent on the strategy that has seen him through the last two decades of Italian football.
One poor result aside: there remain many reasons to be sympathetic towards Sarri, particularly if he should be willing to morph tactics to accommodate the flexibility required of this league.
And there are many more reasons to be optimistic about Chelsea's season: a return to the Champions League is something both of his title-winning predecessors failed to deliver in follow-up seasons.
But he should be aware there was a Blues boss who stuck doggedly to just such an inflexible line a few years back.
Tactically, managerially, pragmatically: Sarri has more to offer than him. But he'd do well to remember that Chelsea's history doesn't look kindly on Luiz Felipe Scolari.
Scan me
Related Topics
Share this article