Chelsea’s late substitutions reveal Antonio Conte’s process and patterns
By George Perry
Antonio Conte made his last subtitutions of 2017/18 later than any other this season. Chelsea’s approach to protecting the 1-0 lead against Manchester United mirrored the win over Liverpool two weeks ago.
For most of the 2017/18 season Antonio Conte gave his substitutes far more playing time than he did last year. Through matchweek 33, Chelsea’s second substitute averaged 18 minutes of playing time. Only nine times in those first 33 games did Conte make any substitutes in the final five minutes of the game.
In two of Chelsea’s most important games in May – the six-point game against Liverpool in the Premier League and the FA Cup final against Manchester United – Antonio Conte counted on his starting XI to take the game nearly to completion. Chelsea took the lead 10 minutes apart in the two games: the 32′ against Liverpool and the 22′ against United. Against Liverpool, Conte made his latest substitutions to date, in the 86′, 89′ and 90′. In the FA Cup final, Conte made his first substitution in the 89′ and the second in the 91′.
Conte’s late substitutions made little obvious sense against Manchester United. Olivier Giroud looked the wrong man for the tactics throughout the first half. He offers little in the press or counter-attack given his minimal acceleration and speed. His best contribution to the counter is to hold up the ball to bring Eden Hazard and the wing-backs into the play. He did this throughout the first half, bringing down long-balls from Thibaut Courtois and then warding off Chris Smalling.
Even with this limited role, Giroud was visibly fatigued early in the second half. He was doing far less than Alvaro Morata would have on the counter-attacks, but it took a significant toll on him. Giroud was not the right player for the first half tactics, and by the second half he was unable to match his first half involvement.
Cesc Fabregas was also a tactical mismatch. For his passing ability to have an impact on the counter-attack, he needs multiple options: Eden Hazard, a striker and another winger. Instead, he only had Hazard. Additionally, because Chelsea conceded possession and sat deep, Fabregas had to involve himself defensively much more. He is reasonably capable in this role, but it comes at the expense of his energy and passing.
By the hour mark he was further off the pace than usual and making sloppy mistakes on both sides of the ball. Like Giroud, he would have had a greater impact if Chelsea had been the team with prolonged possession.
Yet Conte kept both Fabregas and Giroud on the pitch. While Jose Mourinho sent on fresh legs and the additional threat of Romelu Lukaku and Anthony Martial, Chelsea’s dead-legged former Gunners remained. This nearly cost Chelsea the equalizer in the 82′, as Giroud completely lost his coverage of Paul Pogba on a corner kick. Pogba had an impossibly free header from 10 yards out, and somehow sent it just wide.
A common criticism of Antonio Conte this season has been his rigidity. Many examples of these narratives – starting XI’s, substitutions, youth inclusion – do not withstand examination. However, to whatever extent he may be “rigid,” that is a negative way of saying he is confident in his players and his plan. Where a Conte detractor sees intractability, a supporter of Conte (or Fabregas or Giroud) sees trust and belief.
Related Story: Antonio Conte turning to substitutes for more minutes than in 2016/17
Beyond the semantic discussion, though, a recurring pattern with Antonio Conte is, well, the recurring patterns. Conte rarely does anything that does not have a direct precedent, either a template or a trial run. The most notable example so far has been his tactics against Manchester City. Many thought them extreme, but they were only a shade more conservative than earlier games against Tottenham and Manchester United.
When Chelsea played Liverpool on May 6, the Blues had a slim chance of making the Champions League. The Blues played confidently and prevailed. A few days later, the Blues relented against Huddersfield, dashing the hopes they built up against Liverpool.
Antonio Conte surely wanted to keep the Champions League dream alive. But he also knew what a long shot it was, even with the win over Liverpool. In retrospect, he likely viewed the Liverpool game as a test lab for the FA Cup Final. He used Jurgen Klopp, Mohamed Salah and the Reds to perfect his tactics for Jose Mourinho, Paul Pogba and the Red Devils. Conte was not after the three points against Liverpool. He was after the FA Cup, and Liverpool was the practice match. The fans’ hope was merely a by-product – a somewhat unfortunate one – of its success.
In that light, the high-flying effort against Liverpool, the middling effort against Huddersfield and the line-up, tactics and substitutions against Manchester United make more sense. Conte trusted Cesc Fabregas and Olivier Giroud because they had previously proven to him – and themselves – that they could do this exact task.
Next: Player ratings: Tiemoue Bakayoko, Antonio Rudiger vie for MOTM
Through it all, Antonio Conte was exactly where he needed to be: two steps ahead of his opponents, and many more steps ahead of the rest of us.