Share
4th February 2017
02:33pm GMT
From the moment Marcos Alonso gave Chelsea the lead here at Stamford Bridge, Arsenal had a grievance.
Alonso’s goal could have been disallowed as his elbow smashed into Hector Bellerin when he headed the ball in, but it wasn’t. Arsenal had started well, but they had conceded within 13 minutes and they lost Bellerin, who was shaken up by the challenge. It seemed unfair and it wasn’t a reflection on the opening spell, but that didn’t matter. As so often at Stamford Bridge, Arsenal had found a way to lose.
That may be an unfair reflection on the turning point, but for Arsene Wenger’s Arsenal there is always a turning point in these games and it usually turns things against Arsenal.
By the end of the game, with Arsenal losing 3-1, the ongoing sense of crisis seemed more pressing than the manner of Chelsea's opening goal. There will be more anger directed at Wenger who sat helplessly in the stand here, but while the manner of the protests can appear unpleasant, the point is unfortunately valid. If Arsenal want things to change on days like these, they might have to make fundamental alterations.
This time, Arsenal could point to Alonso’s elbow, even if Bellerin was always at a disadvantage against a player running at the ball, but they might also have highlighted Theo Walcott who managed to lose Alonso in the time between Diego Costa’s header smashing against the bar and when the ball was headed into the net.
They could complain about Alonso’s elbows or they could wonder why they seem to be trapped in a season they can’t get out of, a season which is disintegrating in the same old fashion where the details are the only difference.
Arsenal had the moral high ground which may provide some consolation but as the game developed, it was familiar in so many ways.
After Alonso’s goal, Chelsea didn’t set out to punish Arsenal. In fact, they sat back and their retreat could be seen as tactical or evidence of some weaknesses in Antonio Conte’s side that haven’t been exploited too often by their rivals.
Arsenal had chances. Gabriel, who had come on for Bellerin, headed at Thibaut Courtois when he could have placed it away from the goalkeeper. Mesut Ozil was found in space on the right of the Chelsea box, but he shot tamely at the goalkeeper
Those moments might have turned out differently, but instead everything was the same.
Arsenal last won at Chelsea in October 2011 when Roman Abramovich’s club was enduring the Andre Villas-Boas era, but in recent years it has become too predictable.
After the defeat to Watford on Tuesday, Wenger needed something to quieten the mutinous mob, but a complaint about a goal which should have been disallowed is probably not enough.
The bright start suggested there might be something more, but Arsenal are always full of promise which is a problem if they never deliver on it.
Under Antonio Conte, Chelsea will not be allowed to underperform. Before the opening goal when N’Golo Kante played a sideways pass, Conte spun with frustration on the sideline, moving a little like Freddie Mercury when he used to prowl the stage.
Chelsea had moments of magnificence, reaching their peak with Eden Hazard’s goal when he held off Francis Coquelin, glided into the box, swerved past Arsenal defenders who were too anxious to tackle him and finished sublimely past Cech.
It was both a magnificent goal and one which highlighted Arsenal’s flaws. In the first half, Hazard had turned in his own box and run thirty yards with the ball without Arsenal stopping him and, now, they did the same with more important consequences.
Again, there was a moment of brilliance to place alongside the moment of injustice but it all added up to the same thing, the same old thing.
The sight of Petr Cech teeing up Cesc Fabregas for Chelsea’s third goal brought an element of sadness to the collapse.
Chelsea had a victory which moved them twelve points ahead of Arsenal and has probably ended the hopes of any side below them who had ambitions of catching them.
Arsenal will say they were one of those teams who had those ambitions. But the problem is, that when it comes to demonstrating those ambitions, something always gets in the way.
