Pedro’s second-half turn as wing-back against Manchester City was little better than his full game performance against Crystal Palace. His “energy” and “work rate” are disguising his lack of output and competence in the two-way role.
Chelsea gave the world a 45 minute peek into next season to start yesterday’s match against Manchester City. Cesar Azpilicueta moved to right wing-back to cover for the injured Victor Moses. Kurt Zouma made his first Premier League start of the season, replacing Azpilicueta in the back-line.
Azpilicueta proved once again that there are few positions on the pitch where he does not excel. (After City’s goal he may have been tempted to put on the gloves and try goalkeeping). Kurt Zouma’s starting XI debut was worth the wait, as he alternated between being highly mobile and an unmovable wall at the back.
Chelsea’s defensive right was as powerful as their offensive left, where Marcos Alonso and Eden Hazard had another commanding match. With the exception of Diego Costa, this was very much a 2017/18 lineup.
Related Story: Chelsea's right side will be dangerously vulnerable without Victor Moses
And then halftime struck. Nemanja Matic came on for Kurt Zouma, and slotted into central midfield. Azpilicueta returned to centre-back, and Pedro slid to right wing-back for the second time this week. After contending with the Azpilicueta-Zouma tandem for the first 45 minutes, Pep Guardiola and his midfielders probably could not believe their luck.
Pedro energetically chased the ball up and down the right side of the pitch. He was consistently in motion, making sprints on offence and defence. His work rate was among the highest of any Chelsea player. But all that energy, movement and work rate amounted to no solid production on either side of the ball.
Pedro’s incessant flitting about the pitch masks his lack of positional discipline and tactical control as wingback. Like a centre-back, a wing-back must commit himself to patrolling, protecting and moving through a well-defined area of the pitch. There should never be any doubt about where your wing-back is or what he is doing. With Pedro, these are both painfully open questions (see also: Luiz, D).
Pedro exposed Cesar Azpilicueta to a variety of Manchester City attacks. He would either be high up the pitch or too far central, leaving an open corridor to Azpilicueta as the last man back. He was often in those positions to chase after loose balls. Pedro receives many misguided accolades for this. Chasing those balls is not his job and – worse still – in many cases he was chasing a ball that he coughed up.
Antonio Conte said after the match that he made the half-time switch to reinforce the midfield and bolster Chelsea’s offensive thrust. Slotting Matic alongside Kante ostensibly strengthens Chelsea’s defensive midfield. Replacing Zouma with Pedro presumably shifted the emphasis of the wing-back role from defender to attacker.
However, Pedro’s play compromised Chelsea’s defence more than Matic’s entrance strengthened it. And he did not offer as much on offence to compensate for the additional risks on defence. With Manchester City controlling 60% possession, Chelsea needed a wing-back who could keep the play in front of him and repel City’s offence. Pedro is not that – nor any other wing-back.
Next: Chelsea clear final hurdle en route to Premier League glory
Pedro is becoming like Diego Costa: a player Antonio Conte seemingly trusts unconditionally, without regard for obvious performance deficits. Chelsea need a long-term solution for wing-back depth. But in the short term Cesar Azpilicueta, Kurt Zouma and the not-even-named-to-the-squad Nathan Ake are all ready options. Pedro should have no place in that rotation, yet somehow he has bested them all.