Everton provided an answer to beating Chelsea, but not a solution

Everton provided one tactical answer to how to stop Chelsea, but they did not have an overall solution to beating the Blues with only a penalty to score.

There are two threads to pull on when reviewing how Carlo Ancelotti’s Everton got the better of Frank Lampard’s Chelsea. The first is that every team, from Burnley to Barcelona, usually has exactly two weaknesses that can be used to beat them: the proactive solution and the reactive solution. Tactics, by their very nature, are almost always proactive but here it means more about how the team can take the game to the opponent instead of luring the opponent into a trap.

The second thread is that managers are vultures. They watch each other’s games and see the solutions everyone comes up with to defeat opponents. Many will then take what works and add their own twist to it to defeat their current opponent. Carlo Ancelotti is no different, having borrowed an idea from Jose Mourinho to stall Chelsea out.

Everton set the trap for Chelsea early. The Blues generally build up through the wide areas with the center mid, the fullback, and the wide forward interchanging to move forward before sending in a cross or recycling possession into a now set up midfield structure. Everton’s intense pressing early on stifled this. The Blues were forced to play faster than they generally want to, which caused riskier passes and sloppier movement.

But the real master stroke, if there could be one, is playing four center backs. Or rather, playing four center backs because the shape would collapse into a 6-2-2 if Everton was all the way pushed back. The wingers would mark Chelsea’s fullbacks as they pushed up and Olivier Giroud and the wide forwards would be outnumbered four to three for any cross. Chelsea’s 2-3-5 shape may have had an advantage in midfield, but trying to break through a six is nearly impossible.

If Everton got the ball back, they had a target man in Dominic Calvert-Lewin to aim for who could then flick on to Richarlison or Alex Iwobi onrushing. Everton getting forward was mostly about forcing Chelsea to over commit in an attempt to break through the six, and then hitting on the counter.

And it worked. For one of the rare times this season, Chelsea was kept blank. At the same time, however, it cannot be ignored that the Blues did have their chances (mostly from set pieces, in fairness) and were it not for Jordan Pickford actually being good for the first time this season the Blues might have won. Of course, Chelsea did themselves no favors either. A back six can still be broken through with the right movement of players in addition to the movement of the ball, but Chelsea players were increasingly static as the match went on. The loss of Hakim Ziyech was felt, but Christian Pulisic and Callum Hudson-Odoi being willing to go wide and central (wherever the space is) would have been helpful too. Tammy Abraham instead of Olivier Giroud might also have offered a freer flowing option to escape the numbers in the box.

On the other end, it can’t be ignored that the lone goal came from a penalty. Mind, Edouard Mendy shouldn’t have rushed out to challenge for that ball (like last week) but sometimes that lesson has to be learned harshly. Overall, Chelsea’s play didn’t warrant a win, but it easily could have been on another day.

What is important now is to keep things in context. That was only Chelsea’s second league loss of the season and only their second loss in regular time all season. Everton won, but they did so with a penalty and having survived several golden chances at the other end. Teams will surely try to adopt this strategy now that it has worked for Mourinho and Ancelotti, but now the Blues need to find a way through it. Wolverhampton might just be the next side to try and Chelsea has to show they learn quickly.