Chelsea: Sense of the pointlessness of out possessing Manchester City

Chelsea achieved a rare feat in their loss to Manchester City: having more possession than a Pep Guardiola team. It is pointless but how did it happen?

There has almost always been two ways to beat a Pep Guardiola team and both are complete opposites. There is the Roberto Di Matteo way of putting as many players behind the ball, frustrating the Guardiola team, and playing long to good attackers to make something happen. Then there is the Jurgen Klopp way of hounding them at every turn and giving them a game they are not used to (one where the opponent plays to win against them).

Frank Lampard chose the Klopp way which should come as no surprise. Chelsea harried City for as long as they could and kept looking for ways to take the game to Guardiola’s side. Ultimately, it failed, but a rare thing happened along the way: Chelsea out possessed a Guardiola team.

Per Opta, Guardiola has actually never had such low possession. Mind, Chelsea fans should not really care because the Blues simply should not be the team looking for moral statistical victories rather than actual ones like some other teams in London. Chelsea plays to win and this stat is ultimately pointless in that pursuit. But still, it is worth exploring how and why it happened.

According to WhoScored, it was not just the second half where Chelsea made hundreds of worthless, sideways, non penetrative passes that won the possession battle. In the first half, Chelsea dominated possession with a whopping 55.4 percent of the ball. In the second half, that dropped to 50.9 percent which implies a more even context.

Breaking it down further because it was clear how things changed with the first Manchester City goal, the Blues dropped from 54.4 percent of the ball prior to the goal to 49.6 between the two City goals. Afterwards the game was more or less evenly split.

Guardiola sides are all about control of the game, but as opposed to Jose Mourinho, a Guardiola sides control is predicated on possession of the ball. It is clear that Chelsea’s initial surge put City into uncomfortable territory but the equalizer wrestled some control back. It was still not the total control they are used to, but their quality showed as they came back from the 1-0 goal deficit.

The second half adjustments by Guardiola to simply shift to cut off the pivot forced the Blues into their useless possession in the back. Without a winger looking for a run in behind, Chelsea was stuck with Fikayo Tomori and Kurt Zouma passing it back and forth with their midfielders covered. That helped to inflate the possession.

Realistically, City had control of the match after their first goal and they did not let go. It is notable, even surprising, that they let the opponent have the ball so much during these moments. Perhaps Guardiola’s analysis showed that the Blues were much more dangerous in transition but also more vulnerable during it. That would have led City to be more defensive when Chelsea had the ball and more risky when they had it themselves. Both of these would have led to a drop off in possession.

The answer could simply be that there is no answer. Outliers happen and just because Guardiola had never seen his side with so little of the ball does not mean it never would have happened. Chelsea did well early on to put some fear into City but ultimately their control was really City’s. Interesting as the stats may be, City won the game.

This should be less of a pat on the back, you tried your best for Chelsea and more of a “oh cool, still lost”. Winning on possession, or xG, or any other stat is not winning if the score says otherwise. The sample size is simply too small to say this was anything but an outlier on Guardiola’s part. The Blues can say they did what they could and the stats support that, but Chelsea cannot be the club being happy about stats when the score says otherwise. That is a one way ticket to putting the pressure on and commemorative DVD’s commemorating moral victories instead of real ones.