Chelsea: Mason Mount is not a mutually exclusive player

Mason Mount has been one of many revelations this season for Chelsea. So why are so many desperate to make him a mutually exclusive player?

Many who followed Mason Mount last season at Derby and earlier at Vitesse knew he had the makings of a good player. His first Premier League start on opening day against Manchester United came as a surprise to many but Mount has taken his chance and has refused to let go ever since.

Mount is not playing because Frank Lampard likes him; he is playing because he is a very good player. Denying that is to deny a reality because it does not suit a narrative. Mount is one of the first names on the team sheet for good reason.

But despite that, even those who understand and respect his importance are wondering if he will be a player to make way for Ruben Loftus-Cheek’s return. Meanwhile, the US media is desperate to draw the line between Mount and Christian Pulisic. For a player that is very much not mutually exclusive with anyone in the squad, many are trying hard to make it as if he is.

Loftus-Cheek will eventually return and if he is close to the level he was at previously, he will deserve to play. So the question then becomes who he pushes out. N’Golo Kante and Jorginho are nonstarters in that argument. Loftus-Cheek has a little experience playing wide and because Lampard’s wide men are often narrow, it would not be out of place for him. Antonio Conte saw him as a potential striker but no one is unseating Tammy Abraham anytime soon. So that seemingly leads to the conclusion that Mount is the odd man out.

But Lampard has already shown that Mount does not have to play in midfield. Indeed, most of this season the Englishman has been playing in one of the aforementioned wide spots. Lately he has been more of a 10 but it has already been shown that it is perhaps more important that Mount is playing than where he is playing. Assuming Loftus-Cheek comes back as he was, the two can very much coexist.

The Pulisic argument is even more ridiculous. There is a silly narrative that Mount is picked over Pulisic because he is English when he has been picked because he has played better. Many in the US refuse to accept that and are using terribly small Pulisic sample sizes to show it is not true.

But anyone who watches Chelsea knows that it is not Pulisic versus Mount; it is Pulisic versus Willian, Pedro, and Callum Hudson-Odoi. Mount was on the wing in part because of the lack of depth in the early stages of the season while Hudson-Odoi was injured and Pulisic was acclimating. For whatever reason, few want to make the comparison between Pulisic and his actual competition. The comparison to the player out of position seems to suit their narrative better.

Above both of those narratives, however, is the simple fact that Chelsea does not have to have one single best XI. Yes, only eleven can play at a time but the season is a marathon, not a sprint. The likes of Manchester City, Liverpool, or even the Chelsea of old did not have one best XI. They all have or had a match day 18 (or more) that was filled with starting caliber players.

Mount can play with Loftus-Cheek and Pulisic but even if those two do not play with the Englishman, it does not mean they will not play at all. Mount is flexible and can play with anyone. To suggest otherwise is to deny the player he is because it does not suit. Chelsea is building something great and like it or now, Mount, Loftus-Cheek, and Pulisic will all be part of it. Not in spite of each other, but with each other.