To answer this question, I decided to focus on three of the best teams from the 2020-2021 season: Manchester City, Chelsea, and Bayern Munich. Last time, I covered Manchester City, today we’ll look at Chelsea. For each team, I’ll get into how they normally set up (which clusters do their players come from), why they work so well as a team (as well as some instances where they didn’t) and include some helpful visual aids along the way. Finally, I’ll summarise what I see to be the major trends regarding how the clusters work with each other.
Chelsea
I focused on three of Chelsea’s games vs tougher opponents last season in my analysis. The second leg vs Real Madrid, the second leg vs Atletico Madrid, and the champions league final vs City. Let’s start with the matchup against Real Madrid.
Chelsea vs. Real Madrid: UCL semifinal second leg
Setup:
Mendy: Cluster 4
Silva: Cluster 14
Rudiger: Cluster 14
Christensen: Cluster 14
Azpilicueta: Cluster 17
Kante: Cluster 12
Jorginho: Cluster 12
Chilwell: Cluster 6
Mount: Cluster 11
Havertz: Cluster 3
Werner: Cluster 8
Analysis:
In my analysis on Manchester City, I detailed how Chelsea’s disciplined defensive structure forced City into a lot of static, side-to-side possession. Chelsea caused very similar problems against Real Madrid as well. Their defensive structure varied between a 4-4-2 and 5-2-3 often funneling the ball towards the outer center backs rather than the midfield. With so few touches in the midfield, Madrid had a really hard time progressing the ball and it mostly stayed in wide areas. In fact, you can see they could barely even progress the ball anywhere near the box.
For Chelsea, their defense was their attack. With their compact shape and defensive activity, they were able to quickly spring counter-attacks (utilizing the pace of their front 3) when they won the ball in Madrid’s half. This is exactly how they scored their second goal, with Kante winning the ball in an advanced position creating a 3v2 with Madrid’s center backs.
In build-up, Chelsea looked to draw Madrid’s midfield out, creating space for Kante to run into or for Mount and especially Havertz to check back into.
On their first goal, the Madrid midfield was drawn out to Jorghino leaving space in between the lines for Kante. When the ball got to Kante, he had multiple options with Havertz checking in from an advanced position and with Werner available to receive the ball to feet. He was able to play a quick 1-2 with Werner springing another 3v2 with Madrid’s defense and leading to the goal.
I’m going to discuss cluster trends mostly in my conclusion, but so far we’ve noticed that Chelsea like to control the game with their defensive discipline, and launch counter-attacks where they push heavy numbers forward. Let’s look at how the blues made quick work of Atletico Madrid next.
Like what you're seeing? Don’t want to miss a post? To keep seeing content like this, consider following me on twitter and signing up for the free newsletter. With each post being sent directly to your inbox, you’ll never miss an article!
Chelsea vs. Atletico Madrid: UCL Round of 16 second leg
Setup:
Mendy: Cluster 4
Zouma: Cluster 14
Rudiger: Cluster 14
Azpilicueta: Cluster 17
James: Cluster 17
Kante: Cluster 12
Kovacic: Cluster 12
Alonso: Cluster 6
Ziyech: Cluster 3
Havertz: Cluster 3
Werner: Cluster 8
Analysis:
With players out due to injury and suspension, Tuchel’s Chelsea side looked a little different in the second leg vs. Atleti. However, many of the replacements Tuchel chose had similar profiles to the players they replaced leading to a similar tactical setup and execution. In build-up, Chelsea were able to break Atleti’s press fairly easily with Azpilicueta pushed up higher to create numerical superiority on the right side, where most of their danger came from. Kovacic and Kante both did an excellent job of beating oncoming defenders to break the press as well, and both Reece James and Marcos Alonso were pushed very high up the pitch in attack.
However, much like the other games, Chelsea was most dangerous on the counter-attack where they looked to push numbers up and take advantage of their speed (particularly Werner). Both their goals were manufactured in this way.
The first:
And second:
Once again, Chelsea were able to completely control the game on the defensive end. Their press gave Atleti trouble all game and they looked completely comfortable without the ball. Finally, let’s take a look back at the UCL Final to finish our analysis of the Blues.
Chelsea vs. Manchester City: UCL Final
Setup:
Mendy: Cluster 4
Silva: Cluster 14
Rudiger: Cluster 14
Azpilicueta: Cluster 17
James: Cluster 17
Kante: Cluster 12
Jorginho: Cluster 12
Chilwell: Cluster 6
Mount: Cluster 11
Havertz: Cluster 3
Werner: Cluster 8
Analysis:
As mentioned earlier, I briefly went over how Chelsea managed to win this game in my analysis of Manchester City. However, I’ll go over it again here with a little more detail for the sake of refreshing your memory. As you probably know by now, Chelsea’s press forced City out wide and into side-to-side possession. Here’s the visualization I provided in the last article.
Chelsea were able to play out of City’s press on numerous occasions and they did it once again to score their goal. As was the case a number of times, Chelsea found Chilwell in space. He quickly played it first time to Mount and Chelsea’s attack was fully launched. Werner made a lung-bursting run along the City backline pulling Dias out of position. Havertz simultaneously ran into the space created by him and Mount found him with a beautiful pass. Chelsea had gone from being pinned near their own penalty area to scoring in a matter of mere seconds, stunning City.
They continued to control the rest of the game without the ball, forcing City into more static possession. After 90 minutes, they had conquered Europe once again.
Conclusion
For Manchester City, the objective seemed to be to control the game with an emphasis on the attacking phase (keep the ball as much as possible). Chelsea wished to control the game as well, but they went about a different way, controlling the game more without the ball than with it. Chelsea clearly still love to have the ball, but they are also completely content and comfortable without it. Their defensive structure and press are constructed in such a way that the opposition is forced to try and play around the compact block that squeezes and suffocates them resulting in a lot of static possession and causing them to cough up the ball often in deep positions. This immediately springs Chelsea’s lighting-quick attack where Werner wreaks havoc with his runs and Mount and Havertz play cutthroat final passes. In build-up, Jorginho and Kante form a formidable double pivot (engine-engine) and they look to get their fullbacks high up and involved in attack, relying on their crosses to create a lot of chances. As you’ve probably noticed, Chelsea usually only field one creator (very different from City) hinting at the more direct, open style they play with.
Come back again tomorrow for my final team analysis in the Soccer Team Building series.