It’s only a few weeks back I thought it’s all going very well for Chelsea, probably too well. We had made a great start to the season – we were playing great football, it was raining goals and many even thought we were running away with the league title. Things seem to have taken a turn now. We’re not in the same phase anymore. We’re still on top of the league but so much has changed between our being top then and now. So what’s changed between then and now.

We’ve lost too many matches and there’s a sorry pattern in our losses. Last season we lost 6 matches in the league whole season. Now we’re done with one-third of the league season and we’ve already lost 3 matches. The fact that we’re still on top of the league even after this high loss ratio tells us about the relative strengths and performances in the league. Despite that fact more losses only show that Chelsea are more vulnerable. They make the opponents to play us with a hope that they could do us – even at Stamford Bridge.

To lost to Sunderland 0-3 at Stamford Bridge was probably the lowest point for Chelsea in the recent past. Honestly, I’ve still not digested Chelsea’s 3-0 defeat by Middlesbrough at the Riverside in the 05-06. It was so humiliating. We ultimately won the league title that season though. Still I’ve not been able to digest that defeat till date. Very similar was our 3-1 defeat against Wigan in the last season and we again ended up being champions. This time though, this 3-0 defeat has been inflicted on us by, of all teams, Sunderland and right here at Stamford Bridge. This is a result at the Bridge that Rednose, Voyeour etc would die for and we gifted that to Sunderland, a team that we are used to beating with tennis scores.

The worrisome pattern is that, the moment we see teams showing more desire and passion on the day, we seem to hand them over the win. The days when we are watched in awe, we are the best team in Europe. But as soon as teams take the fight to us, we seem to surrender. This is very Arsenalish. This is not Chelsea’s identity. This is not how we play and this is not what we’re known for. the toughest team to beat in all of Britain is Chelsea FC and the reason is, they play like their lives depended on this match, every match. Giving up is never an option at Chelsea. So what’s changed?

Ray Wilkins’ departure has put Chelsea back into the papers with the usual ‘arrogant billionaire owner sacks club legend’ stuff. It’s kind of clear that the players and the coaching staff including Carlo were very happy with Ray and they were disappointed with his leaving. Which also tells us that Ray could have left for non-footballing reasons. I’m not judging anyone here. We have no clue what was happening behind the scenes. I won’t be quick to jump in defence of Ray and shower my sympathies. Having followed Roman for many seasons, I can safely say that this man knows what he’s doing. In the last 7 years, he has proved beyond doubt that he respects the club and he wants good things for this club. He is not a megalomaniac billionaire who’s having fun with a real time fantasy league.

No matter how good or right the intentions are, we seem to drop ball when it comes to public relations. We don’t yet act and communicate tactfully enough. We’ve had several PR disasters because of lack of communication or poor communication. I think they did not decide last week that Ray would move on. I’m sure these discussions may have been on for weeks or months. It’s just that we didn’t do a good PR effort in this instance as well.

The behind the scenes developments around Ray were one of the reasons why Chelsea weren’t focussing well on the pitch? To say no would undermine Ray’s impact and relationship with the players and coaching staff. To say yes, to undermined the professionalism of our top class players. I tend to think that our recent drop in form is more to do with issues on the pitch than off the pitch.

Injuries have been difficult. Rumours are emerging that Terry could be out for several months. For now, Terry does not have a return date and same’s the case for Alex. There goes our first choice centre back pair. Lampard has been missing for an uncharacteristically long period and he’s not back until the end of this month. Benayoun will be back for the last few matches of this season. At various points, we had Drogba and Essien missing as well. Injuries aren’t new to Chelsea, so why we talk them up now?

The injuries have had a major effect because of the performance gap between our first choice and second choice players. It’s not easy to replace Lampard. His absence leaves such a big hole in the midfield that it’s so obvious in every single match we played in his absence. Ramires is not there yet. I remember even Essien not being all that good in his first season. Luckily, he had a Frank Lampard who hadn’t missed a match for seasons and the maestro Makelele. Essien had the luxury of acclimatising to the new league while Lampard and Makelele did the job for us. Similarly Mikel had Essien while he was busy getting red cards and arriving late for training sessions. Relocation is a massive challenge. I’m speaking out of my personal experience here.

This Brazilian Ramires was playing in Brazil until he arrived at Europe to play in Lisbon. Now this season, he’s playing in London for the champions of England. This is not easy at all. The best thing for him would be to play a dozen matches with Essien and Lampard around him. He hasn’t got that luxury. He’s into the deep end already. He’s expected to take the larger responsibility at the Chelsea midfield, much earlier than he would have wanted. I would pity him before judging him. And I wouldn’t judge him so soon. He wouldn’t have thought of playing such a crucial important role in the Chelsea midfield ahead of Lampard, Essien and Mikel.

If you look at the new midfield combination of Ramires, Mikel and Zhirkov it’s clear that it’s not the same as Mikel, Lampard and Essien. The abilities are different, the experience levels are different and the levels of understanding of each other is also different. There’s no point in expecting Ramires to do an Essien or Zhirkov to do a Lampard. They are what they are. And this is where Carlo should come in. Knowing the difference between these two midfield combinations, we should have adjusted our tactics and style. Carlo could have done that but that’s not so visible on the pitch. If we play with the same style and tactic as we would play when the combination of Lampard, Essien and Mikel was around, we are going to find ourselves vulnerable and that’s what is happening.

As you know, I do belong to the JM school of football tactics. When our team is depleted, the first focus should be on defence and the midfield should support the defence more than the attack. We anyway had Drogba, Malouda and Anelka upfront. Solid defence and decent counterattacking would have helped. I didn’t see this approach from Chelsea. The midfield discipline was poor and we didn’t help each other enough. When you don’t have your best players, the first thing you do is, start being content with a win. 1-0 is not a bad thing, after all it’s better than a 0-3 mauling at home. Basically, play a bit defensive so the new players and the combination gathers some confidence while we manage to win with wondergoals, individual efforts and counterattacks. You know what, our current situation is perfectly suited for us to try out a four man midfield with 4-4-2 diamond. I hear you saying ‘what? four man midfield when we have a mini-crisis in the midfield?’. Fair, we seem to be too 4-3-3 oriented these days. We don’t have the versatility in our squad to be able to switch to a 4-4-2. Too many flank players and too few players who can play in the centre midfield or centre attacking midfield.

How do we then address this issue? I think, Carlo should not hesitate to experiment his options, albeit cautiously. ‘Cautious experimentation’ may sound like an oxymoron but that’s a very practical approach that would help in the long run. We all believe Josh McEachran could be more effective in midfield than Zhirkov but unless Josh starts ahead of the Russian, we’d never be able to confirm that belief. Carlo needs to allow Josh to get more playing time with a proper role in the midfield. I would stick with Ramires in midfield. I would like to see Mikel, Ramires and Josh forming the Chelsea midfield. When Essien is available, I’d use more of Josh than Ramires in the key premier league matches while Ramires should get the nod in the European matches.

In the same lines, it’s better to play Patrick van Aanholt or Bruma in centre back than having a more experienced but less specialist Paulo Ferreira play in the centre back. I always believe in playing the specialists than the makeshifts. Remember Michael Essien playing so well for us as a right back but at key moments his instincts didn’t help him because he is not a natural defender. Zhirkov is not a player suited for a three-man midfield. He is either a side midfielder in a 4-4-2 or the winger in 4-3-3. If he is a midfielder in our 4-3-3, we are weakening ourselves defensively. Which is why I support playing Josh over Zhirkov in the midfield. The more we play specialists, the more compact we are and tougher to play against.

To summarise, I want to see us play with more caution and conservatism with an intention to win and not rake in goals. Once we are get our best players in best shape, we can get back to our flamboyant best. And I really hope Carlo to use his available options very carefully and sensibly. We need some good, solid performances resulting in wins in the next few matches. We should retain our winning mentality but that shouldn’t mean we throw everyone forward. This team does know how to play and win by not taking too much risks. Carlo has certainly changed the identity of this Chelsea team but it would help him to bring back some good old fashioned efficiency back into our game.