reading list: the times on troubled chelsea

updates have obviously been thin on the ground. this weekend, however, seems as good as any with which to re-dedicate myself to the beautiful game. in-form city take on united (who were magnificently controlled against a good villareal team on tuesday night) in the manchester derby, but the game that interests me more is the other "super sunday" clash between arsenal and chelsea.

the mixed fortunes of arsenal have rather fascinated me over the past 3 months - to the extent that i have basically turned this into an arsenal-blog (my apologies for that) - but at this point i am more interested in the performance of their opponents. the reasons for this can be found in this half decent article today by matt hughes in the times, but can be surmised as such: the squad, the money and the tactics.

the squad and the money are not problems easily solved. the squad, bolstered with the signing of deco in the summer, is woefully imbalanced. the only attacker of any quality capable of playing in a wider area is joe cole; whilst i don't feel florent malouda is quite as bad as most people make out, he clearly isn't an amazing footballer - at least, not a match for a fit arjen robben, for example - and salomon kalou is a young player who arrived with much promise, but one that has had his development totally stunted by a lack of playing time and a constant shuffling of position. the remainder of their midfield is constituted by central midfielders, and whilst these are central midfielders of the highest quality, this inevitably means chelsea lack tactical flexibility. furthermore, they have, in one way, been very fortunate that michael essien has been injured - the outstanding ghanaian would otherwise demand a place in the starting xi, and with deco, ballack and lampard around him, it would be difficult to create a balanced line-up from that. his injury has guaranteed mikel a starting place, and whilst i have my doubts about him, he at least provides a valuable shield, dropping back into defence when necessary and picking the ball up from the back four to initiate attacks. and whilst essien could come back and fill that role, the dynamism and sheer excellence of his play means to limit him like that would be utter folly.

this is a situation unlikely to be altered a great deal in january, for ambramovich has allegedly told scolari he must first sell before he can buy. given the paucity of his options and the fact that the squad was already slimmed down in the summer this seems harsh, but it seems that even the russian isn't immune to the global recession. if we assume this to be true, scolari doesn't have much ability to raise funds: most of the marquee players are either too good or too old to generate a useful profit (see: the entire midfield, ricardo carvalho etc). so what could scolari do? i shall do my best to explore the options:

- sell didier drogba. this is probably a good idea: the ivorian is now probably reaching the end of his peak, and his playing time is already being drastically reduced by a succession of injuries that hint at a physical decline few players - certainly few players of his nature - really recover from. if rumours of inter's interest are correct, chelsea should certainly entertain offers. but how much would be gained? probably no more than a low-£20m fee, and it is dubious how much this would transform the squad.

- sell petr cech. the goalkeeper is probably the most overrated player in the squad, benefitting from the worst kind of nonsense punditry - the insistence on how having to make one good save a game is somehow more difficult than making ten - that means people constantly elevate his performances, based on precisely nothing, above those of his rivals. a good goalkeeper could likely be picked up for less than the money gained from a sale of cech, but it is questionable just how much that would be.

- sell john terry. terry is at his peak, and as a central defender who has never had much pace it is a peak that you imagine would continue for at least another 4 years. last week in the news of the world it was rumoured man city were considering a record bid and fee for terry, and although he is unlikely to want to depart, if chelsea were to make clear their desire to sell you would imagine his desire to stay would be rather reduced. and the rationale for selling is strong - carvalho is at this point the far superior player, and the best defender chelsea possess, and partnering him with alex is a partnership perfectly capable of maintaining the defensive excellence chelsea are known for, at a profit of at least £40m. in short, the symbolic value of terry far outweighs his value on the pitch, making him the ideal candidate to sell.

however, one would imagine this to be a highly unlikely scenario. i doubt chelsea will sell terry, and beyond him the ability of scolari to generate the profit necessary to bring in the quality he needs is limited. which means making the most of his current personnel.

as hughes points out, this has meant scolari defaulting to a broad approximation of the system with which he won the world cup in 2002 - two centre backs, shielded by john obi mikel, the defensive midfielder who then drops back to become a third centre back when necessary, with the width provided not by wide midfielders but by the two attacking full backs. more out of necessity a lone striker is played, supported by a pair of attacking central midfielders and two other attackers of some description, including perhaps another central midfielder. one of the latter may well be sacrificed when drogba finally returns to full fitness.

this is a system not without its flaws: the full-backs become de facto wing backs, and if pinned back by wingers chelsea find precious outlets stultified; if of course chelsea chose to ignore it, they are faced with speedy wingers attacking the fringes of a back three. the play is funneled through mikel, and without a gattuso to provide a shield, this allows other teams to put a man on him and disrupt chelsea's rhythm. further up the pitch, lacking the quality out wide, chelsea rely too much on the central midfield duo/trio/quartet (depending on your viewpoint) to penetrate. playing the lone striker role nicolas anelka does well to stretch the the play, but the current admiration of his prowess seems to ignore the fact he has scored almost nothing of any quality and on a lesser team, one unable to give him as many chances from 12 yards and in, would probably have a quarter of the goals he has currently.

for the sake of balance, i think scolari needs to make sure he's playing two attacking wide players at all times, so that without possession chelsea can move back into a 4-5-1 and provide a more balanced look to the side, especially in the transition from defense to attack. but beyond that, some brave steps need to be taken in the transfer window if this chelsea side are going to maintain their league position.

sketchy predictions on arsenal - man united

no blogs since friday: busy week for me my friends. it has also been an exceedingly busy week for the hacks of fleet street, who have devoted their spare-time to the castigation of arsene wenger. coverage reached a nadir in the times yesterday, with one shock-value-only headline questioning if it is the end for arsene and gabriele marcotti (who has always struck me as truly awful) suggesting that timmy simons, psv's veteran belgian midfielder, would be a good option for wenger's midfield.

obviously, i haven't exactly been wenger's biggest supporter during the past 3 months; i've been rather banging on about the failings of his squad since starting this blog. but i think this criticism has gone too far, to the point that i have begun to reconsider my own opinions on the matter. and i can definitely see arsenal getting a result today.

it sounds perverse, but arsenal are better against better sides. sides who seek to play football - and not ply the kind of contemptible, mindless mixture of thuggery and brawn stoke roll out every week - are always going to be a more comfortable fit for arsenal, simply because there is no better footballing side than they. certainly, united don't have a midfield presence to make the selection of denilson a complete liability, and they lack the physical centre-forward that gallas, silvestre and toure all struggle with. in fact, the united strike-force - technically outstanding, all deft movement and outrageous skill, with no little pace - fit the wenger central defender - pacy with good anticipation - template quite nicely. and although rooney and ronaldo will drop into the hole, which poses an obvious risk to a side with no legitimate anchorman, the overwhelming negativity of the coverage means that everyone has ignored the possibility that a three man strikeforce containing two reasonably lazy defenders (ronaldo and berbatov) won't necessarily do enough against the ball-playing central midfield pairing of fabregas and denilson when arsenal have possession. so, in a similar way to croatia - england, whilst i am uncertain about the stability of this arsenal side, let us not forget the potential trouble they could cause man united when going forward. if forced to predict, i would suggest a score-draw along the lines of 2-2.

furthermore, on what are we basing these reports of arsenal's demise? we have a loss to fulham, which saw a partnership of eboue and denilson in central midfield fail to compete. a loss to hull, which was, like so many other hull performances, a total fluke, requiring a wonder-goal by geovanni and succession of missed opportunities by the arsenal attack. the draw against spurs, another fluke, involving another wonder-goal by bentley and a strike by jermaine jenas that was merely wonderful. the loss against stoke saw an imbalanced midfield fail to properly keep the ball and succumb to the bullying physicality of a truly lamentable side.

on the back of this many commentators, including myself, have stated that arsenal needed to bulk up: the failing was one of height and aerial ability and muscle. but, on reflection, could this be flawed? the fact is, arsenal probably do need a central midfielder who is capable of tackling and breaking the play up. however, this isn't necessarily the reason they have dropped points this season. at stoke, common wisdom tells you that teams should weather the storm with strength and height and muscle, but is that right? stoke probably possess the biggest, least talented line-up in the premier league, and there are few sides who could reasonably claim to have personnel better at attacking the ball in the air. so why play to their strengths by sacrificing your advantage - skill - to defend their advantage? perhaps the key is to maintain possession and prevent the home-side launching their barrage of crap. instead, alex song came into the centre, abou diaby played left-midfield and denilson played right-midfield. alex song is a player i like the look of, but one currently not seemingly ready for the role i suggested him for, lacking the ability in possession you need to be a success in the arsenal side - certainly, against west ham he was one of the main culprits for their first-half lethargy. and, with denilson and diaby on the wings failing to provide proper width, they weren't ever going to be in a position to effectively maintain possession. this, then, allowed stoke the chance to launch their bombardment and actually meant arsenal were a negligible attacking force in the game.

furthermore, against spurs, the comeback was precipitated by the removal of robin van persie and theo walcott, and the introduction of song, as arsenal ran riot. van persie, in particular, had been outstanding, and arsenal weren't the same after he departed. and against fulham, the problem was not a lack of muscle - the arsenal midfield was overpowered by the pairing of jimmy bullard and danny murphy, an even less defensively talented duo than anything arsenal are capable of putting out. rather, their failing in that match was an inability to retain possession and create chances. with emmanuel eboue, a truly awful footballer, playing that is perhaps no suprise, and what arsenal needed that day was more composure, more talent, more incision.

perhaps, then, the fate of arsenal rests on the faith they have in their attacking game? playing their best offensive players in midfield - fabregas, denilson, nasri, walcott - arsenal present an attacking force that is likely to be irresistable on most match-days. of course, sometimes, that team will lose - as any side will. but the fenerbahce away game perhaps provides the template - by focusing on their strengths rather than the opposition's and fielding a balanced, attacking line-up, arsenal become a difficult proposition. this, and here is where i break with my previous musings, might be the best path for them to follow this season, especially given the progression of walcott and the upgrade samir nasri represents over the flaky alexandr hleb.

defence be damned.