Despite the presence of several hundred million pounds’ worth of talent on the pitch, it proved to be the battle between the two managers that was decisive in Manchester City’s 1-0 win over Chelsea on Saturday.
The match marked a change of formation for Antonio Conte’s Chelsea as the Italian ditched his familiar 3-4-3 formation in favour of a more conservative 3-5-1-1.
The idea behind this was to add another man into central midfield to control the middle of the park. N’Golo Kanté and Tiémoué Bakayoko were there to do the hard yards in a three man midfield either side of Cesc Fabregas, of whom the feeling has persisted for a while that he lacks the energy to play in a midfield two against the best teams. In this case, he would be free to use his vision to release Eden Hazard and Alvaro Morata on the counter-attack.
Conte explained his thinking after the game to Sky Sports:
In this type of game when you play against City or this type of team, they like to have possession of the ball and you have to consider two tactical aspects. Either you go very high to press and play a game of great intensity but you must do this for the whole game. In the other case, you must be disciplined and try to close the space, and then try to exploit the space behind their defenders.
Here Chelsea clearly tried to attempt the latter, which explains why Conte controversially replaced Morata with Willian in order to utilise his pace to get behind the City defence.
This tactic to absorb pressure and hit City on the counter-attack worked to perfection last year when Chelsea did the double over the Manchester side. On Saturday, however, the tables were turned, as Pep Guardiola won the tactical battle against Conte.
City sought a way to blunt Chelsea’s strengths and release their fearsome attacking players. Guardiola’s solution was to instruct Leroy Sané and Raheem Sterling to stay wide and attack down the flanks. This would pin down Chelsea’s wing-backs, effectively forcing the London side into playing five at the back.
It begs the question as to why more teams have not tried this. Essentially, the problem in stationing two players on the flanks is that it risks leaving the middle of the field undermanned. It is a catch 22 – play through the middle and risk being caught out by Chelsea’s wing backs out wide, or try and block off the flanks and find yourselves cut open through the centre. It is part of why Chelsea have proved so successful after their manager’s tactical tweak last year.
Crucially, City possess the ability to implement this tactic, such is their quality in the heart of midfield, with David Silva and Kevin de Bruyne wonderfully adept at controlling the tempo of play and retaining possession of the football.
Guardiola’s tactics worked a treat as Chelsea’s wing-backs were forced back in defence and denied a chance to get up field. The home side struggled to get any kind of foothold on the game, and when they did win the ball they found themselves lacking options.
As their wing-backs were so focused on defence it meant that the champions had little width to work with, and City’s high press forced Chelsea’s three man midfield into looking for long balls to the front two. With Morata off the pitch nursing a sore hamstring Chelsea lacked an outlet, as Hazard and Willian do not possess the hold-up play of the Spanish striker.
Perhaps fielding the forward-thinking Victor Moses over the more conservative Cesar Azpilicueta at right wing-back would have forced Leroy Sané to be more circumspect about his play, mindful of the greater attacking threat Moses offers. As it was, Sané was able to set up shop in the Chelsea half and rarely had to retreat.
City’s glittering array of attacking options were able to fashion chance after chance, and it says much for Chelsea’s durability and commitment that they only conceded a single goal. It was a well-deserved victory that surely marks Manchester City out as the team to beat this year.
