This is the same Chelsea that had 65% possession against Liverpool. I sometimes lament that our reputation has outpaced us, that teams fear us much more compared to how good our players are.
That’s a weird thing to lament.
You don’t want to fear your opponent.
Yes but now they don’t come out to play against us, and we are not yet as good as City or Liverpool in attack.
So everyone saying Chelsea were the better team, this says otherwise?
This doesn’t match what I saw
Yeah especially since if we go by this stat then Chelsea were only dominating more when we were scoring so this doesn’t make any sense at all
We didn’t have a single shot on target in the first half. Field tilt is a useless stat unless you’re getting in the penalty box/getting shots on target, which we weren’t doing.
I think they looked more threatening when they broke and we were scampering back a lot specially zinchenko. We had very good control over the game but no threat.
Numbers don’t lie. They had 93 touches in the final 3rd and we had 171. They had more touches in the penalty area though - 24 to our 17.
" They had more touches in the penalty area though - 24 to our 17"
Only touch stat that actually matters tbh
Odegaard and Jesus didn’t have the best game. When they were subbed off Arsenal became more threatening.
They had a lot of those penalty area touches in the first 15. I think it was 12-2 around then, so we led 15-12 after.
A lot of people are saying they saw it differently but honestly I felt this way about what I saw. I am surprised it’s quite this contrasting but otherwise I maintain that Chelsea were not as good as people are giving them credit for, but I suppose viewer bias and subjectivity is hard to truly measure.
There was a stat popped up that possession was 80-20 in our favour after they scored which lines up with this. However it still felt like Chelsea were dangerous with the minimal possession they had in our final third
That’s because they were almost all on the counter while ours were against at least 8 men behind the ball. Odd man breaks are gonna lead to more dangerous actions rather than trying to cut through a low to mid block.
Yeah they had a few moments, and and derby, especially with Chelsea away is never going to be a walk in the park. I mean it shouldn’t be at least.
This threat chart by Opta sort of explains a bit better how I felt or saw
https://theanalyst.com/eu/2023/10/chelsea-vs-arsenal-stats-premier-league-2023-24/
Chelsea red, Arsenal blue.
Why
Simiar to most of our games; territorial dominance but not creating enough chances with it
Now add how many shots we had on target lol
wow, what a terrible performance from us and we still managed to get 1p!
You can argue Chelsea benefitted from one lucky handball decision and a miskick cross, but otherwise didn’t create that much. While Arsenal didn’t do that much either, we did dominate possession. That said I thought we passed the ball around a lot in midfield, not the final third
Yeah exactly. I do think game state is doing something for us here… Behind for 60 minutes, they had little incentive to open up and go attacking. That said they were broadly “on top” for long periods and did very little. I don’t rate them in the slightest (but we were very poor).
Was exactly this. We dominated the game but didn’t control it. Field tilt is probably the best representation of a team’s performance hence why City have ranked top of it pretty much every season of the last 5 years. It’s a good thing that we pretty much always win this because it means we are better than the opposition every game.
Uhm, you dominated possession(which Chelsea allowed you to)but not the game.
Also, any objective person knows Chelsea was the better team in this game, and Field tilt without context is borderline useless
Also, any objective person knows Chelsea was the better team in this game
I don’t think you know what objective means.
I do, tho, and that’s why everybody bar a certain section of Arsenal fans, knows Chelsea was the better team.
I don’t see how you can claim to be objective as a Chelsea fan considering you’re happy to ignore all the statistics that show Arsenal were comfortably the better team.
But sure “everybody” agrees with you. Clearly you’re being reasonable, objective and unbiased.
Lol… Not really… Chelsea had a 1.8xG vs 1.5xG for Arsenal… 0.9 of Chelsea’s XG was the penalty… They looked like they dominated but created jackshit… It was more of our own slow start than Chelsea being any good tbh…
Chelsea only has 1.8G because they squandered great attacking opportunities and because they were in the lead and didn’t need to force the action.
Also, Arsenal’s sloe start was because of Chelsea’s fast start. They were correlated
You do realize that great attacking opportunities translate to an XG right ? If they couldn’t complete the attacking sequence coz of a bad pass or good defending, then it isn’t an opportunity at all…
There’s a difference between creating attacking opportunities and creating chances. Opportunities just mean that you were in a good position to make something happen, but you let the opportunity pass by. Creating chances tho is you going one step further and taking the opportunity(not necessarily scoring, tho)
It’s also somewhat amusing that we scored our second right in their strongest period of the whole game according to this.
I don’t think there’s really any point in stats like this, we all saw the game and we were good enough in the last 15 mins to save a draw from a pretty shit display
No shame in it it was a great comeback but there’s no point in trying to make out like we were secretly dominating
Possession is meaningless if you’re not doing.shit with it.
Yeah you can say they got lucky with their chances, but in football you create your own luck. They don’t get a handball if they’re not there to force one out of saliba
I think we just made Chelsea look better than they actually are. Every team will have their off day and this was one of those. Great resilience to bounce back but need to ensure there is no room for complacency going forward. What is giving me some hope is that we still aren’t even out of first gear yet and we are getting results. Hopefully we will slowly snowball into winning convincingly and consistently.
The narrative around this game has been skewed massively by what the expectations were, the fact that it was at Stanford bridge, and how the commentators talked about it. We did not get dominated, nor did we dominate them. The openings that we created were so much better, though our final ball was lacking. Odegaard could’ve had 2 easy goals in the first half if the simple cutback to him had been played.
I think there’s times in recent games that we’ve ended up with too many players forward, and in turn that means the defenders tend to play it back and make the safe pass. We’re seeing fewer triangles being created on the pitch, Odegaard isn’t getting as close to Saka and Martinelli often ends up isolated on the left.
It’s great that Saliba and Gabriel are comfortable on the ball but I feel the midfield leaves far too much build up to them.
I feel vindicated when I was arguing to people yesterday that Arsenal were not dominated in the midfield.
Chelsea were far more effective in the final pass and that was basically it
but touches in whose third?
does the red mean arsenal’s touches in chelsea’s third or all touches in arsenal’s third?