Chelsea took a very promising performance from Gameweek 1 against Liverpool to East London in Gameweek 2. Many expected the game to be difficult because West Ham games often are, but very few foresaw the complete disgrace that turned out to be that performance.
The lineup was mostly understandable, and the result was not a direct consequence of the lineup anyway. On the day, the Blues’ usage was subpar, keeping the ball and passing it around, but not creating enough good chances.
West Ham managed the red card very well and stretched Pochettino’s men, with a certain Blues’ debutant making sure that the extra man was a non-factor, or worse, a negative factor. Here are six negatives and two positives from the game:
Chelsea POSITIVES
Raheem Sterling: Incredibly effective
Sterling was the most dangerous player in Blue. He came up against a team filled with 28 – 30-year-olds and he made it count. He drove past several West Ham players at will, at different points in the game, and they couldn’t deal with him.
According to Sofascore, the Englishman completed a whopping 6/7 dribbles on the day (40% of all Chelsea’s completed dribbles), and made the superb run that forced Tomas Soucek to bring him down just inside the area. The former Manchester City forward also won 12/21 duels he contested, and five fouls, creating several offensive set-piece opportunities with his skill alone. If there was any player for the away side that did not deserve to be on the losing end today, it was Raheem Sterling.
It is Gameweek 2
Yes, that’s the only other positive. Chelsea fans need not be worried yet, as this is Pochettino’s second competitive game in charge. There’s not much room for performances like this though, as there are teams in the league that can punish performances like this more comprehensively. West Ham is not a traditionally high-scoring side, and they even had scoring problems last season, which is why conceding three to them is not good.
The Blues boss is smart and self-aware enough to rewatch the game and figure out where things went wrong. The only thing that prevents this result from meaning more than just the horrid scoreline and performance is the fact that it’s Gameweek 2 and there’s still a lot of time for improvements.
Chelsea NEGATIVES
Toothless in possession
Chelsea did not create nearly enough quality chances against West Ham United, despite having 76% of the ball and completing 88% of their passes. In all of these, the Blues got one clear-cut chance, which was the penalty. The expected goals numbers read as 2.49 for Chelsea, or 0.15 xG per shot, for 17 shots taken.
Removing the penalty makes it 1.7 xG at 0.11 xG/shot, for 16 shots. This of course applies to West Ham too, because they also had a penalty, and removing their outlier (pen), makes their own 0.09 xG/shot. The point stands because Pochettino’s men got into very good positions, but no big chance came from them, and after spending £872m on a squad, this is unacceptable.
Enzo Fernandez: Fell short in decisive moments
Fernandez had a generally good game, but goals change games and no player gets a better chance to score than a penalty. First of all, he was near a non-factor defensively, which, for a pivot player, is poor. He passed the ball well, but his ball retention was not good. He counts as a negative though, because for whatever reason, he stepped up to take the penalty that could have given Chelsea the lead, and he missed it.
It was a bad penalty too. The best players come out top in decisive moments, and he should have scored that pen. His penalty miss makes ironic, the point that penalty goals should be paid less attention when evaluating forwards, this is because goals decide momentum, and a penalty goal does the same thing to a game that a non-penalty goal does.
The back line: Stretched too easily
It cannot be overemphasized how unacceptable it is that West Ham’s second and third goals happened. The second goal was ridiculous because Michail Antonio ran past Thiago Silva, out muscled…eh, spun Levi Colwill, and made Axel Disasi, the covering centerback, a non-factor. The fact that Disasi was covering centerback was doubly ridiculous because he played at right centerback, which is strange for someone who’s covering.
If he wasn’t intended from the get-go to be the covering centerback, it makes it all the more comical. When West Ham went down to 10 men, they got even more joy in Chelsea’s final third, which is incredibly baffling, and reflects critically on the centerbacks on the day, as well as the midfield, but there were more centerbacks than central midfielders.
Robert Sanchez: Not good enough on the day
Sanchez was poor for the second goal particularly, which makes it two games in a row where he has let in very saveable goals. it should be mentioned that the back line was stretched and all three centerbacks for Chelsea on the pitch were as culpable as Sanchez was for the goal. Antonio did not take an unexpected shot, and Sanchez should have been better prepared for the shot.
Moises Caicedo: Went out of his way to make the red card in West Ham’s favor
Caicedo is the most expensive player in England at the moment, and it was not surprising that he was brought on with the Blues 2-1 down in an away game. Yes, an attacking option would have been preferred, but the Blues hierarchy, as well as the head coach, were happy to let everyone who could create something out of nothing – especially Ziyech – go, so when the chips are down and you need goals, you turn to expensive central midfielders because that’s all you have.
Caicedo didn’t have a poor game because he didn’t bring an attacking threat, which Chelsea needed, it was because he was bad at everything that mattered in decisive moments of the game. He made a needless error leading to a shot, exhibiting a shocking lack of spatial awareness. He also conceded a penalty with a careless tackle.
Caicedo attempted zero long balls but completed only 84% of his passes, which is incredibly poor for a central midfielder on a team with an extra man. It was outrageous that David Moyes took off Michail Antonio and West Ham still threatened us considerably with 10 men.
Nicolas Jackson: Wasteful
Jackson has shown extremely good ball movement in the last two games, but he has missed four big chances in that time, and Chelsea has only scored two goals as a team. There’s only so much praise Jackson can get when he’s not scoring goals or finishing chances at a reasonable rate. Jackson kept dropping into midfield to receive the ball and try to make things happen.
This is poor, as he’s supposed to be a center forward, and as such, he should be pinning the centerback, and staying forward. Manchester City doesn’t win the FA Cup final, UEFA Champions League final, UEFA Super Cup final, and the Newcastle game this weekend without Erling Haaland playing at center forward, despite him not scoring in any of these games. Effectiveness cannot be substituted at the highest level, and Jackson has to stay forward to be effective as a center forward for the Blues.