After watching Chelsea struggle against both Inter Milan and Man City, two games Didier Drogba didn’t have a look in, I have been asking myself if there’s truth in the accusations that The Blues are a one man team. I like to see quality defending and as John Terry’s off-field problems are preventing him from putting in half decent performances lately, I couldn’t help but admire the masterful display by Lucio on Wednesday. He didn’t let Drogba have as much as a sniff on the Inter goal and Jose Mourinho who built an empire at Chelsea based on solid defending would have been thoroughly satisfied with what he saw.
The Drog was again shut out by Man City in that infamous no-handshake encounter at the Bridge and again Chelsea lost. Martin Tyler runs some interesting analysis on the importance of Drogba’s goals to Chelsea in his SkySport column. I find it curious that even Man Utd would fare better without Rooney than Chelsea without Drogba. Strange that United only seems to win when Rooney is on the field and scoring, as he did yesterday against Aston Villa in the cup final.
My questions today are:
- Is there anything like a one man team?
- If there is, what makes the one man so important? Is it that he is so good or the team is built around him?
- Are there any modern examples of one man teams?
3. My answer to 3. would be yes, the Barcelona side of 2005-2007. They only seemed to play with one philosophy: “if you don’t know what to do with the ball, give it to Ronaldinho”.
Posts
