Chelsea’s Xabi Alonso faces tactical question over current system

Chelsea’s difficult start to the season has raised questions over whether Xabi Alonso’s current tactical system is getting the best out of the squad available to him.

The Blues have largely operated with three centre-backs and wing-backs under Alonso, but the early results have not provided much evidence that the additional defensive protection is working.

Chelsea have conceded eight goals across their opening three Premier League matches, while the system also limits the number of natural attacking players Alonso can select.

From a Football Place perspective, that is becoming the bigger concern.

Chelsea have assembled a squad containing several exciting young attacking players, yet the current structure makes it increasingly difficult to get them onto the pitch in their strongest positions.

Estêvão is perhaps the clearest example.

The Brazilian is at his most dangerous higher up the pitch, where he can receive possession in the final third, attack defenders and create chances.

Using him as a wing-back would require significantly more defensive responsibility and potentially take him away from the areas where his attacking qualities can make the biggest difference.

Jamie Gittens and Geovany Quenda present a similar tactical question.

Both are young, direct attacking players who appear naturally suited to operating as wingers or advanced wide forwards. In a system with three centre-backs and two wing-backs, however, there are fewer genuine attacking positions available.

That leaves Alonso having to make compromises.

Chelsea have invested heavily in young attacking talent. Football Place believes the priority should now be finding a structure that allows those players to develop and influence matches rather than trying to reshape them to fit a system.

A switch to either a 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3 could offer Alonso a potential solution.

Moving from three centre-backs to two would immediately create another position further forward.

That could allow Chelsea to field natural wingers alongside a striker while still retaining enough midfield protection behind them.

It would also potentially give players such as Estêvão, Gittens and Quenda a clearer route into the starting XI.

Losing Enzo Fernández during the summer undoubtedly changed the composition of Chelsea’s midfield, and Alonso deserves time to establish the right balance without such an influential player.

However, the opening weeks suggest adding another defender has not necessarily made Chelsea more secure.

That is perhaps the biggest argument for Alonso considering a change.

Playing three centre-backs is not automatically defensive, and some of Europe’s best attacking sides have successfully used similar structures.

The issue is whether the system suits the players available.

Chelsea have conceded eight times in three Premier League matches despite regularly having five players forming their defensive line.

If the system is not providing greater defensive security while simultaneously reducing the opportunities available to Chelsea’s attacking players, Alonso has to consider whether the trade-off is worthwhile.

Football Place believes Chelsea’s current system has yet to demonstrate that it is the best way to maximise this squad.

That does not mean Alonso should abandon his principles after only three Premier League games.

It does mean there is a legitimate tactical discussion to be had.

Chelsea possess exciting young attacking talent in Estêvão, Gittens and Quenda. Finding a structure which allows those players to operate in their natural attacking positions could ultimately give Alonso a more dangerous team without necessarily sacrificing defensive stability.

A 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3 would provide that possibility.

The next few weeks could therefore be important for Alonso. Chelsea need greater defensive security, but they also need to find a way of getting more of their attacking talent onto the pitch.

Alonso now has to decide whether to persist with his current structure or begin experimenting with a back four.

Chelsea’s young attacking options give him plenty of alternatives, and players such as Estêvão, Gittens and Quenda could become increasingly important if the manager decides his team needs more creativity and attacking threat.

With the current system yet to provide defensive stability, the argument for giving Chelsea’s attacking talent greater freedom is only likely to grow if results do not improve.