How long was Didier Drogba on the ball during Chelsea’s victory over Arsenal? 50 seconds? And yet he was the most influential player of the match.

Carlo Ancelotti has arrived and we should be impressed.

Searching to close the gap at the top of the table on Chelsea, Arsenal entered Sunday’s match versus Chelsea seeking a convincing victory, but they ended as the losing side of a convincing 3-0 victory. Arsenal played the more pretty football, controlling 55% of ball possession and attempting the greater number of shots. Yet it was a conspicuous fact to every viewer that the team who controlled the ball for the minority of time and had the fewer shots was by far the dominant team in the game.

Clearly shocked by the margin of victory, Arsene Wenger immediately tried to lift up the spirit of his players. He praised his side’s ball possession, questioned decisions by referee Andre Marriner and then turned on Chelsea match-winner Drogba, downplaying the impact of the striker’s performance. It was as if, to Wenger, Arsenal were the better team who were cheated out of victory.

The question for regular viewers is not whether Arsenal were cheated out of a victory, but why did Chelsea dominate Arsenal the way they did given such little possession?

Didier Drogba was a key difference between the sides, putting in a superb offensive display. Wenger may note that the Ivory Coast international only touched the ball for little more than 50 seconds of 90 minutes, but Drogba produced from that minimal amount of ball possession two goals, while he forced a third. He anticipated crosses into the box better than any other player on the pitch and his touch upon delivery ensured cheers for his fans. It was a brilliant performance from the Premier League’s top goalscorer.

Arsenal, on the other hand, found few scoring opportunities without a finisher with the anticipation and touch of Drogba and facing a resolute Chelsea defense. Of twelve aggregate Arsenal shots in the game, only two were on target. In the second half, with Arsenal needing to come from behind to gain something from the game, Chelsea’s backline limited Arsenal to just one shot on goal. Perhaps more impressive from the standpoint of admirers of defensive acumen, Chelsea limited the Premier League’s top goalscorers to only one shot on goal from within the penalty area in the entire match. Arsenal ran into a defensive wall that was too strong for them.

Chelsea’s first goal came in open play toward the end of the first half. Left-back Ashley Cole took advantage of Arsenal’s lack of a right winger to surge forward before sending a sharp cross from the left of the penalty box to set up Drogba to skilfully turn the ball into the top right of the net from six yards.

Two minutes later, another surge and cross from Cole to the anticipatory figure of Drogba led Chelsea to double their lead. The pressuring Drogba forced Arsenal centre-back Thomas Vermaelen to attempt a clearance from a dangerous position facing goal. Unfortunate for him, the ball jumped straight into the top right of the goal.

Arsenal came into the second half intent on breaking down the Chelsea defense, but they certainly did not prepare properly for the menacing Chelsea backline. 45 minutes. 1 shot on goal. End of story.

Chelsea reinforced their dominance over their London rivals in the 86th minute. They were granted a free-kick thirty yards from goal. Drogba stepped up and with a superb, crisp strike made the score 3-0.

For all Arsenal’s possession, Chelsea were the better team. It is a conspicuous fact to all viewers that Chelsea dominated Arsenal. Ancelotti overcame the challenge of Arsene Wenger. As the Daily Telegraph put it, “this was heavyweights overpowering middleweights, Didier Drogba knocking over Diddy Men. No contest really.”

A deeper story of this victory was the strategic demolition Carlo Ancelotti made of his Arsenal compatriot. The two tacticians offered vastly different approaches to the game. Both prepared their teams to play a successful game. Players were told about the necessity of cooperation, positional play, passing strategies and defensive teamwork to limit the effect of opposition possessions.

Wenger’s focus in preparation for the game was clearly to use quick, accurate passing and the adjustment of positions to meet the ball carrier to break down Chelsea‘s defensive walls. They lined up with four defenders, four midfielders and two forwards, but this formation was constantly broken in order that each player adjust his position to meet the ball possessor. In order to break through the hard tackling Chelsea midfield diamond and feed the forwards of Arshavin and Silva, Wenger moved his right midfielder, Samir Nasri, to the middle of the pitch and played four central midfielders. The young and masterful midfield four of the tackling Song alongside the ball carrying Denilson, Nasri and Fabregas had the task to control the ball and feed the forwards of Arshavin and Silva. Yet this strategy did not work effectively against Mikel, Essien and company. With this eye on midfield dominance as the key to success, Wenger had his forwards - the decisive and highly skilled Russian Andrei Arshavin and the striker, da Silva - constantly dropping back to support the midfield when the path to goal clogged. Arsenal did indeed control the majority of possession, but Chelsea ensured this was meaningless to success.

Many opponents would have been bewildered by Arsenal’s slick passing. Fifteen years ago, if a Premier League team passed the way Arsenal did - with effectively three ball carrying midfielders and quick, highly skilled forwards constantly dropping back to within reach of the ball carriers - any opponent would have been made to appear like the local pub team. Even today, most teams cannot keep pace with Arsenal and they are deservedly the top scorers in the 2009/10 Premier League. It is the brilliant Fabregas, the best player in the Premier League in my opinion, who is the architect of this strategy of dazzle and goals. His task is to meet the ball carrier as often as possible to get on the ball and then use his creativity to bewilder his opponents, create goals and score goals. Against Chelsea, he did once again gain possession of the ball more than any other player in the game, helping Arsenal play with slick, acute passing. But unfortunate for Fabregas and his teammates, Chelsea are not a Premier League team of fifteen years ago (Tim Sherwood at his peak would not break into the current Chelsea side) and are equally innovative in their approach to the game. Arsenal could opportune little from their dominance in the realm of ball possession, while Chelsea did opportune much from what little possession they gained.

While Arsenal controlled the majority of possession and conducted the bulk of attacking, they were shutout - the ultimate embarrassment for attack minded players - while Chelsea scored three goals. This was the first time that Arsenal had conceded three this season. It would equate to nothing but folly to suggest anything other than the fact that Arsenal were fairly beaten by a more effective team. But what about Chelsea‘s play allowed them to leave Arsenal’s stadium as comfortable winners?

Chelsea entered the game intent not on controlling possession but on maximizing the use of each individual toward the team goal of leaving leaving victorious. I cannot resist but to offer this quip from a manager of old explaining how his side begot a victory:

“While they did the bulk of the attacking we scored the goals that mattered. Yet often, for all their pressure, the opponents had few dangerous shots, and their efforts were either charged down or kept to long range. In contrast, we had the clear-cut opportunities. At times we must have seemed to have thirteen players because we had an extra man helping to block our own goal and yet a spare man popped up to score at the other end of the field. Our victories were triumphs of tactics. We planned to make the utmost use of each individual, so that we had a spare man at the right moment in each penalty area.”

Arsenal did the bulk of attacking, but they had only two shots on target, one from within the penalty box. Chelsea restricted Arsenal to shooting from beyond scoring range, while even these shots were charged down at maximum speed. Concretely, the Blues blocked six of twelve Arsenal shots. Though, for all the deserved praise of the Chelsea defense, I want to articulate how Ancelotti’s midfield setup was the key to victory.

Chelsea lined up in a 4-4-2 diamond formation with essentially four central midfielders - the tough tackling Jon Obi Mikel, Michael Essien, Frank Lampard more to the left and Joe Cole as the most attacking midfielder. It needs little proving that this four has a greater physical presence and defensive skill than the Arsenal four. For all Fabregas’s ball touches, the best player in the Premier League did little when it came to planting his stamp on the game. Mikel and Essien kept watch of his every move and prevented him making a mark, even with Nasri adopting a middle position to power up the Arsenal centre. With this accomplished, Arsenal struggled to create opportunities, leading the Arsenal forward duo of Arshavin and Silva, as has been said, to drop back and serve as auxiliary midfielders (I will not understand why Wenger dropped Silva back deep where his effectiveness is minimized. He is weak on the ball. His strength is on the defensive line. Under any other manager, his ball possession skill would take a back seat). Ask any defender and they will tell you it is better to stop the ball reaching a striker in the penalty area than to tackle him. You shepherd your opponent, moving him away from the danger zone or into a crowded area. Chelsea did this. Aresenal’s forwards obeyed. This clustering in midfield allowed the Chelsea defense to prepare more effectively for Arsenal’s attacking moves. Silva, as Arsenal’s centre-forward, had a total of zero shots. Arshavin had a total of two shots, both blocked. Coming from deep, these guys were watched like hawks and given no space. Quick passing matters most in the offensive zone. Chelsea offered quick attacks. Arsenal did not. A key task of Mikel and Essien was to slow down the Arsenal midfield, force the attacking duo to drop back and thus ensure any Arsenal attacking move was easy to read. This was accomplished. Arsenal were too short in attack to change things up and send the ball long and could not send the ball wide due to the fact that they started with no wingers while Sagna and Traore clearly have weaknesses in attack. Sagna was not going to trouble Cole the way Cole was going to trouble Sagna, while Traore was not going to trouble Chelsea’s right-back, Ivanovic. Chelsea limited Arsenal to one method of attack: short, quick passes through central midfield. Ancelotti read Wenger’s book and understood Arsenal’s weaknesses. The Gunners could not break through the Chelsea defense to get shots on goal.

In attack, Chelsea outmatched the Arsenal defense. Keys to victory are having a multitude of attacking means and quick, acute passing in the application of these means. Arsenal, as I have explained, did not have these. Chelsea did. First, in addition to goals, Chelsea had the greater number of shots on goal and the grater number of shot in the opposing penalty area. They were quicker with their passes in the offensive zone and enabled their forwards to get space in the Arsenal penalty area, something Arsenal could not accomplish.

For all Chelsea’s defensive skill in central midfield, it is simply impossible to call any of Mikel, Essien, Lampard and Cole weak ball possessors. Each of these players is a two dimensional player. He can contribute to his attack and defense. Lampard is one of the top three attacking central midfielders in the Premier League. In short, Arsenal had to take caution with Chelsea’s central midfield. But, while Chelsea’s central midfielders are two dimensional players, Arsenal’s, though as a group better in attack, are significantly worse when it comes to defending. Arsenal’s midfielders had to always be aware of this Chelsea threat from central midfield. They could not run out of position in the middle of the pitch for too long at risk of the side getting outnumbered in a Chelsea counter attack.

With both sides clustered in the middle of the pitch, the wings became of prime importance and this is exactly what Ancelotti wanted. Ivanovic and Cole, it was known, would eat Sagna and Traore for breakfast. In terms of the wing battle, most important for this game was the battle between Sagna and Cole. Sagna is a great right back, but a one dimensional, defensive right-back. Cole is a great defensive left-back. He is also a great attacking force. With no right winger running at him and minimal threat posed by forward runs by Sagna, Cole had the green light to surge forward whenever an opportunity presented while his teammates had the instruction to quickly get their left-back the ball when he surged. Cole surged. His teammates quickly passed to him. Cole set-up two. Cole 2 - 0 Sagna.

Chelsea’s multidimensional and quick attack caught Arsenal by surprise. Quick passes through the middle and wings troubled the Arsenal defense, while the Arsenal offense could only offer passes through the middle.

The game of football is not about possession. It is about goals. Arsene Wenger and Arsenal showed their weaknesses in the game against Chelsea. They have one dimensional players who, for all their skill, can be read and restricted by a strong team with an intelligent manager. Chelsea, on the other hand, have few players with noticeable weaknesses. Each of Chelsea’s defensive and midfield players is a two dimensional presence on the pitch. This enables Chelsea to shut down opponents in one area of the pitch knowing an attack can be set-up in a different area - through the middle, left or right. A manager’s task is to maximize the use of each individual in his team toward the goal of winning. When his team has the ball, each player must adjust his position to meet the necessities of the attacking strategy, exploiting the opponent‘s weaknesses. When his opponent has the ball, the manager must ensure that each of his players adjust his position to meet the necessities of the defensive strategy, restricting the danger of the opponent. Each of Chelsea’s defensive and midfield players can perform well according to both offensive and defensive strategies. Arsenal’s brilliant midfield and attack, led by Fabregas, was forced to cluster, while Chelsea could attack with ruthless speed in multiple areas of the pitch. Arsenal had certain players who struggled to adjust to defensive strategic necessities, while others who struggled to adjust to offensive strategic necessities.

Ancelotti’s outsmarted Wenger in his approach to the game.

For all of this analysis showing Ancelotti‘s skilful approach to the match, there are still questions that remain unanswered about Wenger. Why did Wenger tell his forwards to drop so deep and feed Chelsea’s original strategy to cluster and so easily read the Arsenal attack? Why did it take so long for Wenger to send a winger onto the pitch? Why has Wenger not purchased a strong defensive central midfielder who would provide those in front of him with greater freedom of movement on the pitch? Why has Wenger not purchased a strong striker to allow for greater diversity in attack? It appeared as if Wenger was so focused on ball possession as the variable of success that he allowed his team to control possession without creating scoring chances, something Ancelotti was fine with. Ancelotti displayed his managerial acumen this match. Chelsea were deserved winners.

Sources:
Daily Telegraph, Arsenal 0-3 Arsenal
ESPN Soccernet, Gamecast
Bernard Joy, Soccer tactics, Phoenix Sports Books, London, 1956