Chelsea were on the receiving end of a tactical masterclass at Stamford Bridge on Saturday. Antonio Conte met his opponent with the wrong game plan, and did not adapt once Manchester City exerted their dominance.
Manchester City executed Guardiola-ball to perfection on Saturday, but Chelsea played a major role in their own collapse. The Blues were not set up properly for this game, and that has nothing to do with the short recovery from their match at Atletico Madrid. Antonio Conte’s choices from the team sheet to the tactics helped this City team look like, well, Barcelona.
Conte extrapolated too much from the win over Atletico. He kept Chelsea in the 3-5-2 with only one change to the starting lineup. Even before Alvaro Morata left the game injured, Manchester City already had the measure of how to defeat this XI in that formation.
N’Golo Kante played a critical role in the 3-5-2 against Atletico. He pressed high throughout the game, playing nearly as a winger on both sides of the ball while still upholding his defensive duties. Manchester City’s speed and talent precluded him from moving out of midfield. With only two Chelsea forwards – one of whom was Eden Hazard – the Blues had no press against City’s backline.
This enabled City to send extra men forward as they played the ball out. They were under no threat until they crossed midfield, at which point they were already fully swarming Chelsea into their final third.
Must Read: Chelsea player ratings vs. City: Starters were poor, subs made it worse
Cesc Fabregas played 86 minutes against Atletico Madrid on Wednesday. He had little impact on the game, as Atletico denied him the time he needs to find and deliver his trademark passes. In the previous game against Stoke City he came on in the 68th minute and completely reshaped Chelsea’s ball movement. Stoke allowed him the time and space he needs, and he took full advantage of it.
If Atletico’s pressing and pace neutralized Fabregas’ main contribution to the team, Manchester City erased him entirely. City had at least two players on Fabregas before he was able to take his second touch. He had no chance against their swarm tactics to even make an outlet pass, let alone a long ball over the top.
Worse still, in a 3-5-2 all three central midfielders must join in the press and defence. City moved around and past Fabregas as if he was one of the wickets on their training pitch.
This was a match where Fabregas could have been an impact sub. Chelsea persisted in the same failing game plan until the final whistle. Had Fabregas started on the bench, he could have come on for the final 20 minutes to force City to adapt to something new. Instead, City shut him down until he ran out of gas and never had to worry about him changing the game as he otherwise could.
The 3-4-3 would have sat Cesc Fabregas on the bench – solving one issue – in place of either Pedro or Willian. This winger could have kept the pressure on City’s centre-backs, forcing their midfielders to drop deep to start the outlet pass. This, in turn, would have allowed N’Golo Kante or Tiemoue Bakayoko to push up to continue the press. The overall effect would be more time in City’s zone forcing a turnover rather than being in complete reactive-chase mode in the Chelsea half.
Next: Chelsea hindered by constant Antonio Conte uncertainty
Chelsea showed how effective they can be in a 3-5-2 against Atletico Madrid. Antonio Conte apparently believed this formation is the new standard, a plug-and-play solution against any opponent. However, Manchester City exploited Chelsea’s limitations, which in turn spoke to the importance of keeping a 3-4-3 in the repertoire.