Saw this on Sports Illustrated.

What Shakhtar did do well was exploit the clear weakness in the Chelsea side: both goals came from Chelsea's left flank, first Fernandinho and then Darijo Srna crossing for Willian to side-foot home. It was not the first time that Chelsea has conceded from that side this season: Reading, Arsenal, Manchester United Norwich and Tottenham have all scored goals originating from that flank.

On those occasions, Ashley Cole was the left back, but Wednesday it was Ryan Bertrand who was kept busy by the combination of Srna and Alex Teixeira taking him on. The deficiency down that side is nothing to do with either left back's ability, but rather the lack of defensive support offered by Eden Hazard, the left-sided player in front of him. Time and again, Hazard watched on as Shakhtar bombed down his zone on the right: when he made his first tackle on Teixeira, just before halftime, it was greeted with ironic cheers.

Obviously it's more than just one player but this is the first time I've seen Hazard singled out and if its true we've been conceding mainly from our left flank Hazard deserves closer scrutiny.

We have a thread for hazard not tracking back when I don't think mata tracks back well either...

Most players of his ilk are - we knew that before we bought him. The good news is that he has the right combination of pace and build that will allow him to be useful defensively if he sets his mind to it. There have been times when he's displayed a sense of combativeness by tracking back and taking the ball away from an opposing player, although it usually seems to happen after he's been dispossessed. He simply needs to bring that effort more consistently. The difference between Hazard and Mata is that Mata doesn't have the same ability to impact games defensively. He's not as fast or as strong, which limits his usefulness when he does track back. For Mata to make an impact defensively, he'll have to get in between the passing channels and disrupt distribution, whereas Hazard can utilize his physical tools to separate the opposition from the ball whilst they're in possession. He's not nearly as easy to shrug off, as we've seen happen to Mata quite a few times.

Edited November 8, 201213 yr by That Boy Brandinho

Find your football tactics app at this11.com

This is how I see it.

----------------------> = Runs

- - - - - - - > = Passes

Because our full backs are giving a lot of licence to go forward and Hazard is an Inside Forward (Right Footer on the Left Wing) it opens a lot of space for the opposing fullback on the counter. This is why we concede so much on the counter. They always have an extra man on that wing. Hazard is not technically to blame. It's the way the team are playing. Bertrand doesn't have a chance. A help would be keep the fullbacks back more, take away their licence to go forward and it will be a tad harder for them to take advantage of that wing. Attacking football has it's downsides. You can't play like this without having weaknesses. Barcelona, the greatest team in history are weak defensively but because they press so high up the pitch, they rarely rely on their defence anyway.

Certainly something to think about, we do seem very vunerable down that left sight. It was very apparent against United and again last night.

I think he does more than Mata, but much less than Oscar.

He wasnt bought to defend and I didn't see him do too much of it in France tbh.

The likes of Messi, Ronaldo and Robben who are very attack minded like Hazard are not known for this either...it's a luxury having a player like this in the team but one we need if we are to be the best.

Ramires or Mikel are more responsible than Hazard for defending down our left side, in our own half.

Ramires or Mikel are more responsible than Hazard for defending down our left side, in our own half.

This, but look at where the cutback was put to. This is Mikel or Ramires, With Mikel 8 yards in front in no mans land it should have been him. RVP's goal was an exact replica. Mikel has improved in the middle of the park further up field but in the box his defending is still a liability. If you watch the replay on the 1st or 2nd Luiz gives Mikel a look that could kill.

Edited November 8, 201213 yr by smileysmiles

It's the same down the right the big difference is that both Mikel and Ramires both prefer to play to the right of centre meaning they help the right back and more naturally see danger on that side of the pitch. I don't think Hazard has been anywhere near consistent enough yet for us but yesterday I thought he had one of his better games and in the second half his workrate was excellent. He's not a defender though and we shouldn't expect him to be.

Think this is too much of a kneejerk after last night, Bertrands issues were not caused by Hazard they were caused by Ramires and Luiz both who played on their respective left sides of their central positions, and both continually failed to support Bertrand suitably.

Normally in midfield its Mikel on the left side but for some reason RDM swapped it and last night it was Ramires and i think this stung us badly. I actually think Bertrand did really well in the end, on a very tough and demanding night for him.

As for Hazard , he is a fine player who works hard for the team, i dont think he is a defensive liability at all and if anyone up top is, its Mata.

Edited November 8, 201213 yr by bjd

This, but look at where the cutback was put to. This is Mikel or Ramires, With Mikel 8 yards in front in no mans land it should have been him. RVP's goal was an exact replica. Mikel has improved in the middle of the park further up field but in the box his defending is still a liability. If you watch the replay on the 1st or 2nd Luiz gives Mikel a look that could kill.

You are embarrassing yourself with this spurned-lover style stalker obsession with Mikel. But don't let the facts get in the way of a dislike campaign, eh?

It's the same down the right the big difference is that both Mikel and Ramires both prefer to play to the right of centre meaning they help the right back and more naturally see danger on that side of the pitch. I don't think Hazard has been anywhere near consistent enough yet for us but yesterday I thought he had one of his better games and in the second half his workrate was excellent. He's not a defender though and we shouldn't expect him to be.

every forward can defend but the best defense is attack. hazard tracks back to help out and to make himself available. to be honest he rarely tackles. correct me if i am wrong but is this what constitute to defending? i mean he dosen't have to tackle to show he is defending! the match on wednesday against manure where Mikel played one half and then Ramires the other half highlights the contrasting style of play between these 2. personally i believe that when both play Mikel has 'seniority' and this cause Ramires to not play like he did on a wednesday! oscar with his range of passing and his love of a tackle might be the ideal partner for Ramires.

I thought he actually tracked quite well last night. Made some important tackles/headers.

Ramires or Mikel are more responsible than Hazard for defending down our left side, in our own half.

No they're not. If they go out wide then they leave a gaping hole through the middle. Responsibility for providing help to the full backs is with the two wide players in the three - usually Hazard and Mata/Oscar. However, the main form of defence when playing high like we are comes from aggressive and co-ordinated pressing from the front 4 and the deeper midfield duo. Any decent player with a bit of time on the ball will kill you if you leave so much space out wide. That is where we really need to up our game against the bigger sides.

the best defense is attack.

You try telling Barca that, they seem to have trouble going to the C sides .

I thought he actually tracked quite well last night. Made some important tackles/headers.

I thought this to! Don't know where this has all come from tbh. Ryan didn't have his greatest game and I think people are just looking for excuses for him. I'm sure if bertrand gets another chance sunday he will be great and therefore we won't be talking about hazard not tracking back!

Edited November 8, 201213 yr by Bluehatter

As I recall, the following happened for their opener:

Ramires gets dragged out (forwards) and is beaten (man on)

Bertrand gets dragged out (forwards) and is beaten (covering Ramires)

Luiz gets dragged out (left) (covering Bertrand)

Mikel gets dragged out (backwards) (covering Luiz)

Willian drops into the space vacated by Mikel and scores

On the counter, but the first line of resistance was the two centre mids. Had we had some sort of cover (even one extra player) down the left, we wouldn't have had this mad rash of covering which led to Willian scoring. Bertrand and Ramires were a little more at fault than the others but it seems to me like a good old-fashioned team f**kup. Either we still need to make tactical provisions for cover down the left or Hazard is pulling a Joe Cole.

Hazard probably had his best game defensively last night...this is just another classic case of the media trying to pick holes in our team. Ashley cole was given a run for his money against shaktar so we were always going to struggle down that side tonight. Our game will work itself, we are still in transition and once we start to press from the front the game will open itself up more. I can also remember the mourinho days when we had the likes of Joe cole, robben, duff, gudjohnson who were not anything special defensively. The fact is we came up against a very strong attacking team last night and more importantly we battled to get the three points

No they're not. If they go out wide then they leave a gaping hole through the middle. Responsibility for providing help to the full backs is with the two wide players in the three - usually Hazard and Mata/Oscar. However, the main form of defence when playing high like we are comes from aggressive and co-ordinated pressing from the front 4 and the deeper midfield duo. Any decent player with a bit of time on the ball will kill you if you leave so much space out wide. That is where we really need to up our game against the bigger sides.

Disagree. The reason we play 2 in the holding role is so that, when defending, one can support the full back while the other covers the area in the middle. Obviously at least 1 but preferably 2 of the attacking players would drop deeper to contribute but it doesn't necessarily have to be the winger on that side. The defensive mid's should be organised enough to deal with most situations wherever the attack is coming from.

Edited November 8, 201213 yr by CunningStunt

Disagree. The reason we play 2 in the holding role is so that, when defending, one can support the full back while the other covers the area in the middle. Obviously at least 1 but preferably 2 of the attacking players would drop deeper to contribute but it doesn't necessarily have to be the winger on that side. The defensive mid's should be organised enough to deal with most situations wherever the attack is coming from.

I think that's fair enough when the play is in front of them. It doesn't work so well if the ball is played out wide with the full backs up field. If they cover across then that leaves the opposition midfielders space to stroll through the middle - as we saw last night. One man's 4-2-3-1 is another man's 4-4-1-1. In a 4-4-1-1 there would be no doubt that the two wide players would cover their full backs.

Let's not forget that this is a transitional season, we're changing what we're asking players to do and as a result mistakes will happen, we're really lucky that so far the mistakes have been few and far between and we're still competing on every front, but let's give this team time to develop and evolve.

I think that's fair enough when the play is in front of them. It doesn't work so well if the ball is played out wide with the full backs up field. If they cover across then that leaves the opposition midfielders space to stroll through the middle - as we saw last night. One man's 4-2-3-1 is another man's 4-4-1-1. In a 4-4-1-1 there would be no doubt that the two wide players would cover their full backs.

Have to agree with CunningStunt here, i think one of the main points of 2 deep midfielders is to provide extra width cover. Thats why i maintain, Ramires (last nights left hand sided midfielder) let Ryan down last night. Still bemused by those having a pop a Mikel as well, at least for last night anyway!

Have to agree with CunningStunt here, i think one of the main points of 2 deep midfielders is to provide extra width cover. Thats why i maintain, Ramires (last nights left hand sided midfielder) let Ryan down last night. Still bemused by those having a pop a Mikel as well, at least for last night anyway!

Ramires is the reason we won so much ball up the pitch, Mikel is the reason we shipped two goals.

As I recall, the following happened for their opener:

Ramires gets dragged out (forwards) and is beaten (man on)

Bertrand gets dragged out (forwards) and is beaten (covering Ramires)

Luiz gets dragged out (left) (covering Bertrand)

Mikel gets dragged out (backwards) (covering Luiz)

Willian drops into the space vacated by Mikel and scores

On the counter, but the first line of resistance was the two centre mids. Had we had some sort of cover (even one extra player) down the left, we wouldn't have had this mad rash of covering which led to Willian scoring. Bertrand and Ramires were a little more at fault than the others but it seems to me like a good old-fashioned team f**kup. Either we still need to make tactical provisions for cover down the left or Hazard is pulling a Joe Cole.

This is wrong Mikel covers no one. watch it again. Ivan and Cahill had it covered Mikel got sucked into no mans leaving anyone on the edge of our box free. Happened twice we ship two goals.