Outrage at Chelsea’s forwards is baseless and misplaced

Chelsea has looked particularly more defensively disciplined since the arrival of Thomas Tuchel back in January, but this seemed to be at the expense of productivity in the final third. Tuchel solved the Blues’ defensive problems with one of the most common, if not most effective, methods: numbers. By assigning and deploying more players in a position to defend, the team is less likely to be caught in situations where it is most vulnerable as defensive players are never outnumbered or disadvantaged. This meant that Tuchel knew he had to make sacrifices—he did.

Every team is allowed only 10 outfield players, this means that managers have to decide how many of those 10 they’re committing to defense and attack. Several formations help determine, and others restrict, how many players a manager can commit to each phase of play. Tuchel decided that having a solid core of three centerbacks and two central midfielders sitting in front of them would give Chelsea a good defensive base. It did, but not just because of the numbers.

Mateo Kovacic and Jorginho are very good distributors of the ball, this is extremely important for the system as ball movement is one of the most important parts of build up play and attacking transitions. These players are also exceptional at pressing off the ball. This means that ball losses are often dealt with in a way that Chelsea’s central areas of the middle and defensive third are not exposed soon after turning over possession.

Playing with three centerbacks and two central midfielders already means that Tuchel has reduced the amount of forwards he can use. Two centerback formations naturally use fullbacks, but three centerback formations often use wingbacks. Wingbacks are a hybrid between defenders and midfielders. Think of them as defensive midfielders, but for the flanks. In fact, SofaScore sees Marcos Alonso as a midfielder, this is because the positions he and Reece James occupy in Chelsea’s formation are really right midfield and left midfield roles. The reason they can’t just be looked at as strictly midfielders is because they have the defensive responsibility of defenders. As such, they play the most difficult role in the sport as they are judged harshly in defense and attack.

You’ll often see people dismiss a wingback because of a perceived inadequacy in attacking situations, and you’ll just as often see them dismissed because of a perceived inadequacy in defensive situations. Wingbacks—in today’s sport—are expected to be as defensively solid as fullbacks and still as offensively sound as creative out-and-out wingers. This leaves Tuchel with only three slots for forwards. This means all the creative and production load is placed on three players in a squad of XI. You many say “no that’s not true, the wingbacks are also tasked with creating,” but at the end of the day, wingbacks aren’t in fact forwards. No such excuse can be made for forwards, despite the numbers along the front line.

Chelsea’s forwards have come under fire but the claims are baseless and unfair given the Blues’ formation has put them between a rock and a hard place

This pressure means that each forward player has to be flawless every time they step onto the pitch for Chelsea to be as defensively solid as Tuchel wants. They also have to be as offensively productive as the fans demand. Many reference Liverpool and Manchester City when trying to say why they’re dissatisfied with Chelsea in the attacking third, despite those two teams being set up and coached differently. Formations often impact the team shape at various points in the game, including during build up and in defensive transitions, because of starting positions of players. The personnel in those teams also defer greatly from that of Chelsea, how?

Man City has six players with supreme technical ability starting every match. The Citizens have two central midfielders who can easily play as attacking midfielders. They also have three forwards who are very good at exploiting space and moving opposing defenders around the area. This doesn’t include the fullbacks they have that remain wide when they’re in possession, restricting the number of things opposing players can do. All of this is topped off with a superb pressing system that ensures Man City wins the ball back the few times that it loses possession in every match. That’s about six to seven players that can help in the final third.

Liverpool? The Merseyside club has a winger that scores more than most strikers in world football. Make that two wingers. The Reds have a fullback with technique so good he creates more than most attacking midfielders. Make that two fullbacks. They also have the best centerback in the Premier League, who is so good that they can just leave him to clean up after the midfielders and forwards. Yes, clean up, because this team is also so hard-working off the ball that the few balls that aren’t dealt with by midfielders or forwards are easily swept up by the centerbacks. Liverpool has a centerback taller than 95 percent of centerbacks in the division, better in the air than 95 percent of centerbacks in the division, a better passer than 95 percent of centerbacks in the division, and faster than 100 percent of centerbacks in the division.

Chelsea’s most effective centerback in the air is the shortest. Should I continue pointing out the differences in squads and abilities? That’s what I thought. Granted, Tuchel inherited a better squad than Pep Guardiola and Jurgen Klopp, part of the appeal of the Blues’ squad was the sheer number of unique attacking talents they had in their ranks. Yet, Tuchel has only been able to use three of them at a time given that his formation of choice is the 3-4-3.

“Why not just change the system then? Moron!” It’s not that simple. Why? From Tuchel’s first day in charge, he has been working on this system, fine-tuning it, correcting mistakes and perfecting it. The system brings the best out of Chelsea’s centerbacks, fullbacks and central midfielders, as evidenced by their dominance in the Champions League triumph. The Blues’ forwards were perhaps the only section of the squad the system change did not help. It was a fair and well calculated trade off. Cater to just the forwards or cater to the midfielders and defenders?

Chelsea has a centerback as good as Virgil van Dijk and Ruben Dias, but not quite as fast or agile. Van Dijk can cover ground that Thiago Silva cannot cover. Meanwhile, Dias is 14 years younger than the Blues’ veteran centerback. Let that sink in. Chelsea’s best centerhalf is the closest to the exit. The Blues may need players in subsequent transfer windows, but they won’t be forwards. With time, the forwards will begin to communicate better, not just with each other, but with the midfielders and defenders. Romelu Lukaku, Hakim Ziyech, Timo Werner, Kai Havertz, and Christian Pulisic are all prolific and productive for their national teams, which indicates that they’re not bad forwards. Sacrificed for the greater good, yes, but not bad forwards.

Do you still think Chelsea needs new forwards in the transfer window? Let us know in the comments or on Twitter!