Chelsea Can't Strike A Light
Posted by Zeno in Chelsea | 27 September 2006
From a team of underachieving entertainers to the most fearsomely pragmatic unit ever to don branded ultra-lightweight performance garb, Chelsea’s striking conundrum remains just that… a riddle wrapped in an enigma, seasoned with inconsistencies and garnished with confusion. The Hasselbaink – Gudjohnsen glut of 2001 remains something of an anomaly: look at the names that have come through the door and failed to pass muster. Think of Casiraghi (alright, an unlucky situation rather than the wrong player), Sutton, and Kezman: a collective spend in the region of £20million, with barely a brace between them.
Didier Drogba’s 2 full seasons with the club have asked almost as many questions as he’s answered. The Ivorian has the build of a light heavyweight boxer, an engine from the same factory that churned out Michael Essien (who frequently reminds me of Dolph Lundgren’s unstoppable block of wood in “Universal Soldier”) and, frequently, the first touch of a mugger with a baseball bat. And yet, and yet. At his best, he’s capable of tearing defences to pieces… look at what happens when his touch does click into place. Remember him turning Sammi Hyppia inside out to lay on an assist for Damien Duff in Liverpool’s worst mauling at Anfield for 40 years? Or his deft touch to set up Lampard for the second against Fulham? Or his early contender for goal of the season to win the game against the Mickeys? Now the theatrics seem to have been put to bed, he’s an immeasurably better player: so much so, that he’s succeeded in making Andriy Shevchenko’s start for the Blues look thoroughly ordinary.
Yes, Shevchenko… I was coming to him. Alongside Raul – now, sadly, a shadow if his former self - he has reasonable claim to be the world’s most consistently effective striker of the last decade. And yet his subtlety and poise on the ball hasn’t yet made the mark on the Premiership that the pundits might have hoped for. Yes, he’s been man-marked to hell and back, which has helped Drogba’s cause no end. And yes, he’s a brilliant player who doesn’t lose that mantle simply by not scoring in 3 or 4 games. Perhaps I was the only one who thought that Lampard should have let him take the penalty against Fulham, though. Shevchenko may be a team player, committed to the cause and ready to take one for the team if it means, say playing half the game in midfield. But that’s not why you buy the world’s most potent offensive weapon, as any barking mad warlord worth his salt will tell you. He’s going to need to settle, and to do that he needs to score. Lampard had a point to prove, as much to himself as to the morons who have thrown mud in his direction in recent weeks. But in Germany, and in more than one game already this year, he’s looked out of sorts: tired, and without the imaginative passing that has epitomised many of his really great performances for Chelsea. Why not give Shevchenko the spot kick, and let him use it to spur him on to the heights we know he can reach?
Surprisingly, it was Kalou that was the catalyst for the win at Fulham. Or maybe I shouldn’t be surprised… the lad doesn’t have the instinctive dribbling that Robben showed when he started at Chelsea, but his directness and pace reminds me of the Dutch maestro. He’s yet to score and will almost certainly find himself restricted to cup and sub appearances, at least in his first year. But he’s a great prospect and has certainly seen more of the ball than the much-vaunted Mikel Jon Obi. The young Nigerian has hardly kicked a ball for Chelsea so far… in fact, in the only game where I got a decent look at him (pre-season against Celtic) he was placed way back down the park in the Pirlo / Veron deep playmaker role. For someone billed as an attacking midfielder / forward, I was a little confused, and I’m still not sure what part he’ll end up playing. For the sort of money we paid, the only explanation I can find is that we’re still figuring out, on the training pitch, where he and how he should play.
Chelsea have proved, beyond all reasonable doubt, that you don’t need a 20-goal striker to win the League. Now they have one, and another (Drogba) with the potential to do the same. It would be surprising if we failed to retain the title with this injection of firepower. Then again, it took Perez 4 or 5 years to realise that a galactico transfer policy doesn’t necessarily win you things. Would it do Chelsea some good to find that out sooner rather than later?
Comments
A great article, well written and constructive, but I don't agree with the last sentence. I don't think Mourinho or Chelsea for that matter would ever let the club spiral into an out of control 'galactico' transfer policy as you put it. People have seen what has happened to Madrid, Chelsea included, and im sure that they will have taken heed of that warning. Im not sure you meant it in the way i've interpreted though...Anyway, great article, keep them coming.
Zeno says: thanks for the comments. You're right, I didn't really mean it like that. But with the way the Chelsea team is changing, I still feel as though the club is some sort of experiment to find the ideal blend of players. I'd hate to think that success in the future could be sacrificed for short-term gain... for example, great prospects like Kalou, Robben, SWP and the like struggling to get a game because Roman insists on higher profile signings.