Why is this always the case with Chelsea?
It is a well-known phenomenon of the Roman Abramovich era that the team occasionally decides to top. It's a pattern that dates back to when José Mourinho left the club for the first time in 2007, although the youngest players – the Eden Hazard era – let's call it – were probably seeded during Mourinho's second season in the 2015-16 season planted. This year, Chelsea followed a title campaign with a catastrophic 10th place. Mourinho was fired after his team lost nine of their first 16 Premier League games. Mourinho moved on to Manchester United and continued his late career career, with the result that Chelsea's massive dropping could be forgiven, especially when Antonio Conte appeared and brought the team back to Premier League in 2017.  But the intense, demanding Conte quickly lost the support of the owner and his players. While the descent to fifth place in 2017/18 was not quite as bad as the previous slump after the trophy, striker Diego Costa's manager, who scored few goals, narrowly defeated Champions League qualifiers. Conte was forced out after just two seasons and was replaced by Maurizio Sarri last summer. If Sarri were to follow in the footsteps of his most immediate couple or his predecessors, one would expect him to at least win a title before losing respect for his accusations and leadership of the club. The term of Sarri, however, looks more like André Villas-Boas' short term because 2011 could not last a full season.
On Sunday, Chelsea against Manchester City may have suffered the most embarrassing defeat history. As bad as the 6-0 was, it could have been worse. Chelsea slumbered through the 90 minutes with a touch of effort at the defensive end. It's a downside to City and their talent to have simply said that they got the blowout because they wanted "more," but Chelsen's apathy could not be ignored on so many occasions. As the complete collapse of defensive communication, City bestowed the first goal in the fourth minute:
Or whatever, that terrible focus loss came from Ross Barkley on City's third goal:
or when the entire defense He decided to completely ignore Sergio Agüero in the field ahead of İlkay Gündoğan's fourth place for City:
City might still have won if Chelsea had played the hardest, but no one would make that sad performance with the best Chelsea can confuse. The blues may have spent ten percent of the effort they had shown during their best performance of the season when they defeated City 2-0 a few months ago. Since the start of the New Year, the club has been in freefall, taking just seven points from six games, including a horrific 4-0 defeat by Bournemouth a few weeks ago. Of course, it's time to find something to blame, and Sari's tactics seem to be the main goal.
The most successful Chelsea teams of recent years were married to defend themselves defensively. In the meantime, Sarri is in a strictly monogamous relationship with an aggressive game system that tries to dominate the game near the opponent. It's attack-oriented, but incredibly tough, demanding players move in numbers and move in precise patterns prescribed by the manager.
It worked wonderfully in his previous job in Napoli, but not only in practice at Chelsea. This style probably requires better players than what is currently available to the team – especially in central defense – and also the effectiveness of one of them few Chelsea players who are rightfully world class, N & Golo Kanté, severely restricted. The French World Cup winner has deported the season from right to right to make room for the suppressive and defensively awkward Jorginho as the main midfielder.
As things stand, Sarri has defeated Chelsea's defense by leaving the line of defense almost without protection from either the midfielders or the strikers. Except for a predictably good season, however, he still has to be offensive by Hazard. Of course, it's difficult to revise an association in just a few months and implement a brand new style of play – Guardiola could not even do it in his first season – but better managers are adapting to what they have to offer to their club Maximize Team Strengths By contrast, Sarri still sounds very persistent in forcing his ineffective philosophy on his group.
"I have not seen my football," Sarri said after losing the City. "We have to understand the reason, it's not easy."
It's clear who the manager is guilty of: the players. Sarri told reporters following a 2-0 defeat by Arsenal in January: "This group of players is extremely difficult to motivate." And players still need to do something to prove him a liar. Her body language in the City game was depressing, giving the impression that they gave up as soon as the first goal touched the back of the net. Chelsea has had to endure constant mental mistakes, puzzling lethargic efforts, and bad results against teams that they should easily handle – the kind of thing that shows players are really to blame.
It's basically a chicken or egg situation, whether the manager or the players have more fault on the form. (To be honest, Chelsea spent most of the year in the top four and still has a great finish in one of those places, which would make for a successful season.) And because it all fits so well Given the history of Chelsea In the Abramovich era it is difficult not to see this on the same continuum of ownership mixes and player power that have long plagued the club. This clip from Mourinho's final season feels particularly fitting:
. Even more important for the future of Chelsea, however, is that this season is different in the past. Abramovich's Chelsea, despite his penchant for changing managers, has been as successful as basketball players change shoes, always keen to provide his new managers with plenty of money to transform the team into the best talents in the world. This summer, as he struggled to fundamentally change the way the team played, Sarri was armed with only two new field players – one of them was on loan, and both were not legitimate stars. Given his lack of British visa and the subsequent absence of the club, there were widespread rumors that Abramovich might have sold Chelsea as he bought new world-class players for the team. And regardless of whether Sarri, who seems cocky at a club like Chelsea and a league like England's, or the players who again turn out to be disinterested and legitimate, are really to blame for possibly shutting the season off, everyone I can admit that the only quick return for Abramovich is to spend a lot of money in a way he did not seem to be ready yet.
Chelsea fans may be worried about the coach's and player's achievements this season. and if the past is something to pass by, Sarri does not seem to be long for this job. However, what should worry fans even more about the club's long-term position is the aspect that breaks away from the long-term pattern: lack of literal and figurative investment by the owner.