Jumping to conclusions can be unwise. Three months ago, with Chelsea yet to suffer a defeat in any competition, they were being tipped to emulate Arsenal’s Invincibles and go the whole season unbeaten. A few days later, they lost for the first time, beaten 2-1 at Newcastle United, and the talk turned to whether Chelsea could win an unprecedented quadruple. They were promptly dumped out of the FA Cup by Bradford City.
Now, after the shock of Paris Saint-Germain knocking them out of the Champions League at the last-16 stage, some observers believe that Chelsea are looking thoroughly vincible. Questions have been asked, doubts have been raised, weaknesses have been identified. As José Mourinho says, some people follow the wind and Chelsea’s manager used his press conference on Friday to admonish one reporter for being too pessimistic about his team.
The message was that Chelsea’s defeat on away goals to a PSG side that played most of the match with 10 men should not be blown out of proportion. “With Chelsea, I lost against Barcelona in the last 16 [in 2006] and we were champions that season,” Mourinho said. “It was a fantastic season for us.”
Clearly Mourinho’s rebooted Chelsea, who already have the Capital One Cup in the bag after squeezing the life out of Tottenham Hotspur in the final, still have plenty to play for this season. With 11 league matches to go, starting with the visit of Southampton on Sunday afternoon, Chelsea remain on course to win their first title since 2010, especially after Manchester City’s 1-0 defeat at Burnley.
Yet some of the criticism is valid. Before the PSG game, Cesc Fàbregas spoke of the need for Chelsea to develop a killer instinct, to polish off their opponents when they are wounded, to show no mercy.
The following evening, however, Chelsea did not know whether to stick or twist after Zlatan Ibrahimovic’s harsh red card. As impressive as PSG were, they were aided by Chelsea’s inherent caution, their failure to take a commanding grip on the game and squash Laurent Blanc’s side when they were at their most vulnerable. They led 1-0 and then 2-1, but PSG fought back twice, and Chelsea were made to regret their passive approach.
Chelsea are immensely difficult to beat, like all Mourinho sides, yet there is a sense that their safety-first football has occasionally held them back. They have twice drawn 1-1 with Manchester City after leading 1-0, they conceded a last-minute equaliser against Manchester United at Old Trafford and although Eden Hazard gave Chelsea the lead in the first leg of their Capital One Cup semi-final against Liverpool, they were poor in the second half and it finished 1-1.
The margins have been fine and maybe this would not be an issue if, say, Diego Costa had not struck a post when Chelsea were leading 1-0 at City, while the free-kick that culminated in Robin van Persie’s equaliser for United was awarded after Ángel Di María made the most of minimal contact with Branislav Ivanovic, who was sent off after receiving his second booking.
Equally, though, it was the introduction of Mikel John Obi for Oscar that saw Chelsea hand the initiative to United and the accusation against Mourinho is that his natural defensive instincts can be counter-productive. There have been times when Chelsea have had their opponents on the ropes, only to take a step back after failing to land the knockout blow.
Mourinho insists that Chelsea are not a negative side. He pointed to the hard-fought 1-0 win over West Ham, a tight game that could have gone either way. “Imagine West Ham with the last corner of the game, they score to make it 1-1 and we lose two points,” Mourinho said. “We did nothing to score the second goal? Ramires didn’t hit the post? Willian didn’t have a shot off the line? We did nothing to kill the game? We did. We tried. We wanted to. You don’t see Chelsea score a goal and suddenly give the ball to an opponent and say now we are going to defend. We don’t do that.
“But if you don’t score against Burnley, independent of what happened with the red card and so on, how many chances we missed in the beginning of the second half. We left the dressing room at half-time convinced to go and to kill. How many chances we missed. Diego in front of the goal. Another one, the keeper made a save. Sometimes football is not the way you project things.
“Against West Ham, Ramires scores those two goals – one against the post and one with a header that the keeper makes a fantastic save. Then Eden makes a fantastic touch and Willian has an open goal, Cresswell takes the ball. We can score three goals and win 4-0 or at least score one and win 2-0. We didn’t – in the last minute, they go and score. 1-1.
“Did we play defensively? We didn’t. I don’t see much difference between our 5-0 against Swansea and other matches we played away. The difference I see is that every time we shot we scored. First shot, 1-0, second shot, 2-0, third shot, 3-0, goodbye. I think this is a phase. In one of these games we will score three or four goals.”
A worrying prospect, but the truth is that Chelsea have not clicked in attack since that 5-0 destruction of Swansea in January. Oscar and Willian, both of whom have flattered to deceive in recent weeks, have faded, Fàbregas went missing against PSG and the goals have dried up for Costa. Hazard is having to assume too much responsibility.
Mourinho has preferred to use Fàbregas as a No10 and play either Mikel or Ramires in the big games, a sensible tactic given that the Spaniard offers the defence little protection when he plays alongside Nemanja Matic. Fàbregas was exposed when he started in a deeper role against Liverpool. Yet Chelsea have lacked fluency when Ramires has started and perhaps the missing piece of the jigsaw is a technical midfielder who can play with Matic and free up Fàbregas by winning the ball and distributing it well.
That can wait until the summer. Chelsea have a league to win before then and although Mourinho says his belief in these players is unshakeable, they can still go up a level or two. That will be easier if they release the handbrake.