Wolves vs Chelsea was a particularly interesting tactical battle.
Below, in an in-depth thread, I break down:
- Gary O'Neil's tactical masterclass & mid-game adjustment,
- Chelsea's 3-2-5 shape,
- and why Chelsea fans shouldn't be so hard on Pochettino for the loss.
THREAD! 🚨
Below, in an in-depth thread, I break down:
- Gary O'Neil's tactical masterclass & mid-game adjustment,
- Chelsea's 3-2-5 shape,
- and why Chelsea fans shouldn't be so hard on Pochettino for the loss.
THREAD! 🚨
Wolves vs Chelsea was of particular interest because Pochettino changed tactical system from a 4-1-5 into a 3-2-5.
Colwill tucked into the back 3, Gallagher played in the pivot, Gusto pushed high on the right, and Jackson dropped into the left pocket.
The system was balanced.
Colwill tucked into the back 3, Gallagher played in the pivot, Gusto pushed high on the right, and Jackson dropped into the left pocket.
The system was balanced.
Gary O'Neil did not expect Pochettino and Chelsea to set up in that manner, though, so they had to adjust tactically once they realised Chelsea were playing a different system than the one they prepared for.
Aït-Nouri went down "injured" & O'Neil provided tactical instructions.
Aït-Nouri went down "injured" & O'Neil provided tactical instructions.
Wolves themselves often play a back 5 against the top sides in the league and it was no different against Chelsea.
This meant that O'Neil could set Wolves up in a way where they could simply match up all over the park against Chelsea's 3-2-5 with their very own off-ball 5-2-3.
This meant that O'Neil could set Wolves up in a way where they could simply match up all over the park against Chelsea's 3-2-5 with their very own off-ball 5-2-3.
Wolves' pressed aggressively within a man-to-man block as the force 3 pressed Chelsea's back 3, the pivot pushed high onto Chelsea's pivot, and the back 5 dealt with Chelsea's 5 attackers in the last line.
The press was compact, well-drilled & difficult to reliably play through.
The press was compact, well-drilled & difficult to reliably play through.
Wolves even matched up in man-to-man fashion when Chelsea built play in their 4-2-4 shape from goal kicks.
Wolves simply tracked their respective man as described above, but they were brave to leave their zones with Aït-Nouri pressing as high as Chelsea's last line, for example.
Wolves simply tracked their respective man as described above, but they were brave to leave their zones with Aït-Nouri pressing as high as Chelsea's last line, for example.
This often forced Chelsea to play long into Broja and Jackson but Dawson and Kilman often got the better of them in duels.
Another big reason as to why Chelsea struggled to play *through* Wolves centred around the roles of Kilman and Toti. They were very brave out of possession.
Another big reason as to why Chelsea struggled to play *through* Wolves centred around the roles of Kilman and Toti. They were very brave out of possession.
When Chelsea's outside attackers dropped between the lines, both Kilman and Toti reliably followed them into midfield.
Kilman had to do this less often because although Jackson and Broja rotated which required communication to manage, they both primarily stayed high in attack.
Kilman had to do this less often because although Jackson and Broja rotated which required communication to manage, they both primarily stayed high in attack.
Palmer, on the other hand, consistently dropped deep to get on the ball and influence proceedings creatively.
Toti was aggressive in following his dropping movements, but sometimes he had to pass him on to Wolves' midfielders because he dropped so deep into Chelsea's build-up.
Toti was aggressive in following his dropping movements, but sometimes he had to pass him on to Wolves' midfielders because he dropped so deep into Chelsea's build-up.
Similar can be said for Conor Gallagher who also often dropped outside the lines which meant that Lemina, his marker, would have to vacate central areas which would open up passing lanes directly into the feet of Chelsea's attackers, something which he was unwilling to do.
These movements left Chelsea with an overload in the build-up as both Toti and Lemina passed their respective men onto players in the line ahead of them.
This meant Gallagher/Palmer became free or the men that were previously marked became free as Gallagher/Palmer were marked.
This meant Gallagher/Palmer became free or the men that were previously marked became free as Gallagher/Palmer were marked.
Then, when Wolves were pushed back, Kilman and Toti defended in the last line as normal with Lemina and Gomes picking up Jackson & Palmer between the lines.
Wolves put on a clinic on how to man-mark aggressively but also as to how to be cautious within it.
The tactics were TOP.
Wolves put on a clinic on how to man-mark aggressively but also as to how to be cautious within it.
The tactics were TOP.
Wolves' game plan made it particularly difficult for Chelsea when considering they essentially matched up all over the park against Chelsea's 3-2-5 shape.
It reduced the game to fine margins, and the disparity in quality between Wolves' XI and Chelsea's XI was not large.
It reduced the game to fine margins, and the disparity in quality between Wolves' XI and Chelsea's XI was not large.
Wolves are a very physical and a very technical team whilst excelling tactically.
They beat City this season, after all, and gave the likes of Liverpool, United, and Spurs great games despite losing.
When they match you tactically and have similar qualities, it's a close game.
They beat City this season, after all, and gave the likes of Liverpool, United, and Spurs great games despite losing.
When they match you tactically and have similar qualities, it's a close game.
Chelsea may have had a balanced system with some good players and generic balance player-wise within the tactical set-up, but the disparity between their team & Wolves' team was not 'enough' to give them the edge..
It could have been if they were more decisive, but they weren't.
It could have been if they were more decisive, but they weren't.
Wolves were also incredibly smart in the sense that they almost solely went long from goal kicks & put a clear emphasis on set pieces to exploit Chelsea's lack of height.
This saw them gain a further edge in the game, but this is a factor not necessarily in Pochettino's control.
This saw them gain a further edge in the game, but this is a factor not necessarily in Pochettino's control.
Taken together, these collective factors are why I cannot be too harsh on Pochettino despite another defeat.
The only criticism that is warranted is his selection of both Jackson and Broja when Sterling would have been a better fit in the left pocket with Mudyrk on the wing.
The only criticism that is warranted is his selection of both Jackson and Broja when Sterling would have been a better fit in the left pocket with Mudyrk on the wing.
We saw the difference Nkunku made when he came on and dictated proceedings from the left half space..
He may be the optimal fit in that role for Chelsea, but Sterling would have been a better fit than Jackson for sure.
Outside of that, it was simply a Gary O'Neil masterclass 👌
He may be the optimal fit in that role for Chelsea, but Sterling would have been a better fit than Jackson for sure.
Outside of that, it was simply a Gary O'Neil masterclass 👌
Loading suggestions...