Tactical Analysis: Everton VS Chelsea Everton's tactical set-up sought to ask important questions to Chelsea. What was Chelsea's plan, and what could have been done better? Possible central combinations despite their block? Etc.... A Thread!
Lets start with our in possession set-up. It was the usual 3-2-5 with a Enzo/Caicedo pivot, Gusto pushed into the LCM role with Disasi as the RCB, Tosin CCB and Colwill LCB. However, Enzo would often drop alittle outside the pivot with Caicedo consistently pinning 1 MF(we saw similar when Enzo moved higher in the 2nd half with Caicedo dropping and Gusto pinning-3rd image-). This saw Enzo average 113 touches(his highest this season) and he made good use of it given the context of the game.
Take a look at EVEs shape. They inverted both wingers and applied almost no pressure to our first line. Their sole focus was on blocking all central areas, which left Chelsea with v.few options. Those options being - Go long - Pass to wide CB which leads to a pass to the winger
https://twitter.com/CFCNewsJJ/... EVE press in a way that allows them to easily counter with enough men if there is a turnover in the middle of the pitch, so the spaces were open in the middle in their initial press(can be seen in images above). This meant their passive zonal marking could easily shift to an aggressive zonal/man2man pressing scheme. Chelsea knew this, which is why CHE wanted to bait the EVE press to play through/over them. - Caicedo playing with his back to Doucoure is meant to pin him and also serve as an offensive trap(if Caicedo receives the ball) - Enzo receiving almost outside the pivot without being an out and out LCB is meant to draw in his marker. EVE did well not to fall for any of our taunts though. The video shows what we wanted, though abit scrappy
Longs balls was a theme throughout the game and EVE managed to force us long so often you would think it was part of our game plan. However, given their press we did manage to find our wingers in 1v1 situations/play it in the channel a decent # of times.
A clear tactic was to force EVE on one-side, switch it to the opposite flank to the winger for 1v1 opportunities and cross to the crowded backpost. EVE defended well against this, but we did look dangerous whenever it worked.
- Could we have done more? - { Central Progressions } We had very few central progressions which is understandable given how narrow EVE defended, but we did not force the issue enough. We had some good moments, but overall we lacked in consistency in ideas(we are a new team). EVEs press was fairly man oriented, so they are there to be manipulated. Its all about where/how you position yourself.
- Up-Back-Through- The first thing you notice is how wide the DFs are(something we didn't do enough). By stretching the DFs with the 8s positioned higher, we leave a massive hole in the middle. Gusto drops(Young is late), a touch to Enzo and a chance.
In the image below, Sancho rotates with Gusto. Sancho drops to receive a pass from Enzo, makes the run but isnt seen by Enzo(surprising). Look at the amount of space Sancho finds himself in if he receives that pass which Enzo can easily make. You would trust Sancho to pick out a runner as well. We need to get better at reading these cues. These are the best gaps you will find when a team defends the way EVE did.
https://twitter.com/CFCNewsJJ/... What Enzo does here is what you want against teams like EVE. A player that can receive in the half space, take on 1/2 players to discombobulate the opposition and release to the free man. We need to find ways to integrate Felix/Nkunku in these games. Another option is to play Sancho centrally.
Like I mentioned above, Caicedo here serves as a offensive trap for EVE. #16 was always aggresive when the ball was coming to Caicedo, so maybe we could have trusted/communicated to Caicedo to receive and take a touch from that position. Draw in 16 and use the space in behind. Something like this> Caicedo receives and protects, makes a small run in between Disasi/Tosin and releases to one of them who quickly use the space created by Caicedo. Just a suggestion though.
- Support - Our wingers had relatively poor games and its hard to fault any of them. They barely had support when they received the ball. The images tell you how willing EVE were to drop their attacking players to the backline to defend. This left us consistently outnumbered centrally/wide areas, made worse by our hesitancy to overlap/attack with a +1. In the images below, Disasi and Caicedo should be making that offball run. In this regard, Maresca was too cautious of EVEs attacking threat and wanted to maintain his base of 5.
{ Out of Possession } Chelsea wanted to be aggresive from GKs. Neto/Sancho were often tasked with staying in between their wingers/FBs which allowed them to easily help on defence if EVE went long or to press their man if EVE build up play. Chelsea wanted to consistently keep 2 men on EVEs ST so EVE always had the spare man, but rarely built up play anyway. They most often went long. In the mid-block, it was an aggressive 4-4-2 that transitioned into man2man pressing.
- The Offside Trap - We try to use the box-line as a reference point for offside traps, but its proven too costly. Players have to look, process and think. This offside trap takes away from whats important. - By looking to first see if everyone's on the line and watching the ball, you get caught ball watching(what happens to Gusto specifically) - Removes the danger POV as you naturally think the line will do its work. Its caused too many big chances.
Overall it was a deserved point from both sides. These are the games that show you that Chelsea is still a new and developing team that needs time to improve on many things. Certainly not the worst result against a side even some of our best ever teams have struggled against.