Chelsea took on Tottenham Hotspur away from home as the Blues looked desperately to turn things around in a season that is rapidly turning sour. However, in a performance that was devoid of both fight as well as clear patterns of play, CFC allowed themselves to be rolled over in the second half as goals from Oliver Skipp and Harry Kane condemned Potter to back-to-back defeats in the Premier League. Here are the lessons learnt from Spurs 2, Chelsea 0.
Chelsea not good enough
No away wins in the league since October and only two wins since the beginning of November. Wherever you turn to, be it social media, the morning papers or the post-match commentary, damning statistics regarding Chelsea’s form permeate the senses. These are troublesome times for Graham Potter and it is almost inescapable now, just how badly the Englishman is underperforming in his role.
Sunday’s terrible performance came off the back of a week of fighting talk from both the club and Potter himself. Quotes directly addressing Potter’s supposed “lack of fight” and how the board are still fully backing him and his ability to carry the team through this crisis period were, unfortunately, not backed up by tangible performances and results on the pitch. Against a Spurs team that were not in a great vein of form who very much regard Chelsea as a bogey team – having never won against the Blues at their new Tottenham Hotspur Stadium – Potter’s side simply failed to turn up. There was absolutely no desire or fight from the players and the team utterly collapsed, seemingly under the weight of the expectations placed upon them to turn things around, after Oliver Skipp opened the scoring for the home side.
As was the case against Southampton the weekend before, Potter once again had a full week to prepare his team for this crucial fixture against a fierce London rival. However, nothing on Sunday would suggest that Potter had made use of the time he had on the training ground to any particular effect. The performance remained flat and the players looked devoid of ideas on the pitch – often not for the lack of trying. This would seem to suggest that the issues on the pitch come from above the players, and land squarely on the shoulders of the manager. Potter just seems incapable of bringing out the best in these group of players. More worrying is the lack of signs that things are going to get any better any time soon. Managers have been sacked for less at Chelsea, and as much as the new board continues to toe the line that “things are different now” and preach for patience, things are not looking great for the man in the CFC hotseat at the moment.
The substitutions
While it was undoubtedly good to see Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang back on the bench again for Sunday’s game against Spurs, his inclusion, coupled with Potter’s decision to only introduce him into the game with 10 minutes left on the clock raises even more questions.
Firstly, having only scored one goal in the whole of February, why did Potter choose to leave Aubameyang, a player revered for his uncanny ability to find the back of the net, out of the squad until now? With Kai Havertz struggling so badly for form, Potter went so far as to start a 20-year-old David Datro Fofana against Southampton last week rather than to give the Gabonese striker a chance to lead the line. At the time, it was mentioned that the statistics by the backroom team indicated that Fofana was a better fit for the team. While that in itself is not an issue, what could possibly have changed over the course of a week so as to prompt Aubameyang’s sudden inclusion? Decisions like this are difficult to fathom, and perhaps alludes to uncertainty even at a backroom level.
Secondly, why, with the team so desperate for a goal against Spurs, did Potter only decide to bring on Aubameyang and Mykhailo Mudryk with barely any time left to play? Against Spurs, Chelsea’s frontline laboured for last parts of the game to create anything of significance. It is thus difficult to understand the manager’s decision to withhold reinforcements until that late into the game.
These questions lead into a larger point, that is that Potter has generally struggled to influence games during the matches itself. When considering that the team generally starts to fade early on into the second half, making effective substitutions becomes even more crucial in influencing the flow and tempo of the game. Thus far, Potter’s substitutions have proven ineffectual, and serves as yet another potential area of improvement for the Englishman.
So what is next?
There is understandably a lot of anger within the Chelsea fanbase right now but I just want to take a moment here, to address the death threats that Potter has been facing from the fans since his appointment by the club. I understand that as fans, we naturally want what is best for the club. I also understand that winning has become so ingrained into the Chelsea DNA under Roman Abramovich that we not only expect success. We demand it.
Yet the line has to be drawn somewhere, and it is important to recognise that the way in which some fans have chosen to express their anger and disappointment is wholly unacceptable. It is never okay to wish death or serious injury to another person over a game of football, or anything actually. There are no “ifs” and “buts” to this statement and no amount of justification or caveat can ever give rise to a scenario where one thinks it appropriate to act or comment in such a manner. With all that unpleasant business out of the way, I move on now to consider the question that is presumably on every Chelsea fan’s mind right now, what is next for Potter. It is important to first recognise that the board are in fact in a rather impossible position right now.
On one hand, the form of the team right now certainly justifies consideration as to the possibility of sacking the manager. No matter how one cuts it, two wins in 16 games is unacceptable for any club, notwithstanding the fact that we are talking about a club of CFC’s stature and consistent history of success. On the other, to sack a manager less than six months into a supposed five-year project is embarrassing to say the least. This, alongside the fact that the board saw it fit to replace a Champions League winner in Thomas Tuchel with Potter means that any conversation of yet another managerial change would understandably be a touchy one.
While a large number of fans have been calling for Todd Boehly to “set aside his pride” and “admit his mistake” in appointing Potter in the first place, I personally do not see a clear benefit in sacking the manager at this stage of the season. For one, there are currently no clear options out there that would (a) represent an immediate upgrade on Potter and (b) be open to taking up the Chelsea job with the club and squad in the state that it is right now. Moreover, Boehly’s investment in Potter goes beyond just the manager himself. It has manifested itself in the types of players that the club have bought and has undoubtedly influenced the recruitment process of higher-level decision-makers. On the recruitment side of things, for example, Paul Winstanley’s arrival from Brighton was clearly intended to further bridge the gap between the player recruitment and the player management side of things.
To get rid of one end of the equation now could prove to have far-reaching consequences for Boehly’s long-term vision for the club. In addition, there is some validity in the claims that Potter has yet to have a pre-season of his own where he can conduct a proper assessment of the squad. With Chelsea already out of all the domestic cups, the race for the top four in the Premier League and 90 minutes away from securing their European exit, this season is shaping up to be a complete write-off. There is nothing more to lose with keeping Potter around until the summer and allowing him more time to work with the squad.
As much as everything seemingly points to an early managerial grave for Potter at CFC, let us let cooler heads prevail and recognise that nothing much can be changed from removing Potter from his post. The time to swing the axe is not yet upon us.