Emerson gives Chelsea the most flexibility in place of Marcos Alonso

The FA may do what Antonio Conte will not, and sit Marcos Alonso on the bench for a few days. Chelsea have several options to replace him, including the man they bought specifically for this scenario.

Misfortune is often the most effective way to break into Antonio Conte’s starting XI. The FA may hand down three games of misfortune to Marcos Alonso as retrospective punishment for an incident with Shane Long on Saturday at Southampton. With Chelsea wanting to stay within striking range of a Tottenham collapse and the importance of the FA Cup to Antonio Conte’s season, Alonso’s suspension could be the only way Emerson Palmieri sees his first Premier League start.

For better or worse, Conte has another options. He has previously played Davide Zappacosta or Pedro at left wing-back in Alonso’s absence. Both of those players have something to offer, but neither offer the complete package nor tactical flexibility – let alone the return on investment – as Emerson.

Emerson would let Chelsea play in either the 3-4-3 or 4-2-3-1. He would likely play the left wing-back role similar to how Alonso played it last year, only much faster. He would stay close to the touchline and would be a potent option on the counter-attack. He could bring the ball up with the speed to match Eden Hazard and Willian on the other side, staying in line with them as they move into their more central position. Emerson could play quick one-two’s with Hazard on the counter in a way Alonso could not.

Emerson’s speed would allow him to play slightly higher than Alonso because he could get back to cover the space behind him. Particularly against a counter-punching but relatively slow team like Burnley, this gives him a strong advantage.

Must Read: Chelsea must not dodge transfer offers for Ruben Loftus-Cheek, Kenedy

Marcos Alonso has evolved his role in his second year. He spends much more of the game in the centre of the pitch, coming off the flank and into the box. This reduces the impact of his lack of pace, as he trades position for speed. Whereas last year he and Eden Hazard connected vertically, this year he becomes another central option for Hazard, Alvaro Morata or Cesc Fabregas.

Emerson does not have the experience to make these moves inside. Doing so would also reduce the amount of space he has to make best use of his speed. By coming inside he negates his opportunities to sprint past the opposing defenders to send in a cross from deep, or a cut-back after overlapping Eden Hazard.

If Chelsea switch to a 4-2-3-1, Emerson would deliver the same attributes as full-back. Whereas the centre-backs had to shift left in this formation against Southampton to cover the space behind Alonso (and knowing Cesar Azpilicueta on the right would stay deeper), they would not need to as much with Emerson. This would allow Chelsea a different balance between the full-backs on either side.

Neither Davide Zappacosta nor Pedro would allow Chelsea to move seamlessly between the two formations. Zappacosta was much stronger in his second game at left wing-back than his first. He spent more time in the half-space, making clever diagonal passes into the box from an unexpected position. This compensated for him not being able to make a strong cross with his left foot.

Pedro has not had a positive game at left wing-back, despite Antonio Conte repeatedly tapping him for the role. He does not have the positional discipline on either side of the ball, and does not have the necessary defensive skills. He becomes a source of confusion (more so than usual) when Chelsea are on the attack and in possession, given his tendency to search out his usual spot on the wing.

Related Story: Chelsea's formula for success: Olivier Giroud, the 4-2-3-1 or both?

Pedro showed how valuable he is in the 4-2-3-1 against Southampton. But he did so as a winger. If he started at left wing-back in a 3-4-3 and Conte made a mid-game formation switch, Conte would need to send someone on as left full-back. Unlike Marcos Alonso, Pedro cannot play the defensive position.

Zappacosta played most of his games at Torino as a right full-back. He understands the position well enough, but may be too right-side dominant to be reliable on the left. He is already out of position as left wing-back, a role that allows for some compensations. As a left full-back, he could open Chelsea up too much along the outside. Whereas Pedro could stay on but switch positions from the 3-4-3 to the 4-2-3-1, Zappacosta would need to come off in favour of – most likely – Emerson Palmieri.

Chelsea bought Emerson to provide direct depth for Marcos Alonso: allow Alonso to rest during less difficult domestic cup games and cover the Premier League in case of injury or suspension. Emerson can replace Alonso with minimal disruption to the rest of the lineup and the team’s tactics.

Next: Predicted XI vs. Burnley: Rotation ahead of the FA Cup

Emerson is – logically and tactically – the best person to start on the left if the FA suspend Marcos Alonso. If Antonio Conte decides otherwise, Emerson may join Danny Drinkwater in asking “why did they bring me here?”