Chelsea - The Masters of Anti-football

Article by Lee Beevor

Folow e-Chelsea on Twitter!

Check out the e-Football Podcast!

During the season past, a certain stigma has grown to be associated with the style of football employed by Chelsea. Perpetrated primarily by Arsenal and Liverpool supporters, it has been said that Chelsea achieves success by playing “anti-football”. The term relates to an ultra defensive strategy, with emphasis placed upon avoiding defeat at any cost. This they say invariably ensures a boring game for the spectators, albeit often with a fortunate positive result for Jose Mourinho’s dastardly team of pirates.

I find the whole affair extremely funny. Yes, Chelsea is an efficient side and yes, Mourinho often employs tactics to nullify the strengths of an opponent. However, he invariably endeavours to win and only employs a rigid defensive formation for the most testing of fixtures. For example, away from home to our title rivals, he starts with the premise that the outcome of the match will be ultimately determined by a moment of brilliance or an individual error. Against this backdrop, we will sit and wait for the home team to probe away, breaking quickly when they lose possession. With Matic and Luiz employed in front of the back four, their tackling and passing ability lends itself perfectly to this approach. They feed the likes of Hazard, Schurrle, Oscar and Salah quickly, who in turn burst through or past their often out of position opponents.

Quite why this strategy is suddenly deemed anti-football is beyond me. Every team that visits Stamford Bridge uses a variation of exactly the same plan, albeit usually a solitary forward is deployed. Those that attempt to attack are inevitably soundly thrashed, such as Tottenham and Arsenal, so why do it? Those that come with a more circumspect approach are by contrast, often rewarded. This was particularly this year, when the absence of a decent striker left many goal-scoring chances unconverted. Chelsea themselves used this tactic in, by my reckoning, just five of their thirty eight Premier League matches; at Old Trafford, the Emirates, White Hart Lane, the Etihad and Anfield. The reward was three draws and two victories.

Furthermore, this is not a brand new master plan drawn up by the Special One to conquer the world. Teams have been trying for decades to achieve the same sort results in exactly the same way. However, for some strange reason, these were classified as glorious triumphs against the odds! Question Liverpool fans about their awful football under Benitez and all they remember is Istanbul. For those a little older, the European campaigns of the time of Alan Hansen were based on defensive solidarity. When on their travels, rolling the ball back and forth across the back four was commonplace, with no attempt whatsoever made to attack. This type of pedestrian plan led eventually to the change in regulations relating to the back pass.

Turning to our North London neighbours, Arsenal, the self-proclaimed paragons of virtue in all football matters. Prior to their FA Cup victory against Hull, their previous trophy came way back in 2005 in the same competition. I know this is a very long time ago, so no doubt the game itself has been long forgotten, but fortunately I am here to remind you! On this occasion, a particularly strong Manchester United was the opponent, leading Wenger to opt for a 4-5-1 formation. By extra time, the Gunners had given up all pretences of trying to earn an outright victory, preferring to play for penalties. However, anti-football was not invented in 2005, as older supporters who can recall when Arsenal’s ground was not named after a sponsor will attest. In those days, “One-nil to the Arsenal” rang around Highbury, acclaiming George Graham’s duffers grinding out another three points (or was it two then?) in the dullest manner imaginable.

I’ve singled out these two clubs as their fans are by far the quickest to levy such accusations at Chelsea, despite the dross they’ve endured on their own terraces. The strange thing is many of our greatest memories as fans come when our side is the underdog, defeating a more gifted team on their own patch. The buzz of escaping a mauling, with last ditch blocks and goal line clearances a-plenty, is a wonderful feeling. Quite why this is suddenly given such a negative connotation is beyond me. Granted Mourinho’s millionaires are hardly minnows, but faced with a rampant Manchester City at the Etihad, it would have been madness to blindly attack. After many others were soundly thrashed, Chelsea did what no other was able to do and won, deservedly so. You can call it anti-football if you wish, but I found it beautiful!

© e-Football 2014 All rights reserved no part of this document or this website may be reproduced without consent of e-Football