I was going to post today on the contrast between the two headliners of yesterday, the glorious Ryan Giggs and the appalling Emmanuel Eboue, but Scolari has superceded those events somewhat.
Unfortunately for Big Phil, Chelsea's bright start had faded but it was less the defeats to Liverpool (twice) and Manchester United than dropped points against sides like Hull City that did the damage. What is certain is that Chelsea were struggling to score goals against anybody, and against good teams they were struggling to keep them out at the other end.
How much blame is attached to Scolari, though? The squad left to him by Mourinho and Grant is hopelessly lopsided in midfield, with a series of outstanding central players, but a total lack of width. Just to compound the situation, Joe Cole and Michael Essien have missed large chunks of the campaign with injuries, and Didier Drogba has, so to speak, lost his mojo. The one error Scolari made was his attempt to integrate Deco into the machine; unfortunately, the Brazilian-turned-Portuguese simply doesn't have the workrate for the Premier League; moreover, he requires too much time to weave his magic, fine in the vast expanses of midfield space in La Liga, but not in English midfields which outdo the M25 for crowdedness. Ricardo Quaresma may be the answer - I suspect not, though he cannot be worse than Florent Malouda - but he has arrived too late.
When Anelka was sulking and Lampard wasn't on all cylinders, Chelsea were simply no better than the likes of Everton. But if Abramovich reckons this squad can play the football of the Copacabana, without the investment that he put in three years ago, then he should be staying away from his countrymen's vodka...
L.
No comments:
Post a Comment