🔗 Share this article

At the time Chelsea were looking for a successor for Mauricio Pochettino in May 2024, a number of managers were in contention. It was an comprehensive process that involved the club holding talks with Thomas Frank before they ultimately opted for Enzo Maresca.

The opinion was that Maresca’s tactical system and priority on possession rendered him the ideal candidate for Chelsea’s team of skilled players. Frank, who had achieved great success at Brentford, had to remain patient for his big break. Passed over by Manchester United after they dismissed Erik ten Hag, his moment came when Tottenham hired the Danish manager after sacking Ange Postecoglou last summer.

Currently, Frank and Maresca face each other, both occupying prestigious roles. Theirs is not yet a established rivalry, but they had some hard-fought matches last season. Frank’s Brentford were unlucky to suffer a 2-1 loss at Stamford Bridge last December and created the better chances when they drew 0-0 with Chelsea in April.

Those were two engaging games, made more intriguing by the tactical differences between the managers. Frank is considered a adaptable coach, more likely to be direct, play on the break, and wait for opportunities to execute an variety of effective set-piece strategies, whereas Maresca tends towards ideological rigidity. The Italian comes from the Pep Guardiola school; he prizes dominance of the ball.

Chelsea’s possession average of 59.7% so far this campaign is bettered only by Liverpool in the Premier League. Frank mixes it up more. Spurs are not instinctively a defensive side – they are seventh in the possession rankings, ahead of Manchester United and Newcastle – but it is notable that their best displays have come in games where they have surrendered the possession. They were outstanding with a back five in the Super Cup against Paris Saint-Germain, executed an exceptional counterpress when they won 2-0 at Manchester City, and overwhelmed Everton with set pieces last Sunday.

Those results point to Spurs ought to sit back when they host Chelsea. Tottenham, it must be noted, have one win from their past seven home league games. The statistics are concerning. Spurs’ return of 13 points from their last 18 home fixtures is the lowest of any team to have been in the top flight throughout that period.

This is a hard game to call. Spurs are five points off the summit and unbeaten in the Champions League. Chelsea are world champions and reached the last eight of the Carabao Cup this week. Yet, fans of both sides remain doubtful about Frank and Maresca. Spurs supporters have expressed frustration about a lack of creativity when the responsibility is on their team to attack; Chelsea’s complain about their young side’s immaturity, indiscipline, and toils against low blocks.

The situation is that both managers are doing fine. Chelsea could drop to 12th if they lose to Spurs, but there is background to their mixed results. Injuries to Cole Palmer and Levi Colwill have had an impact. A interrupted pre-season, resulting from the club competing deep at the Club World Cup, cannot be dismissed.

However, there is room for improvement, especially when it comes to keeping 11 players on the pitch. Liam Delap’s unnecessary red card during Wednesday’s Carabao Cup victory against Wolves was Chelsea’s sixth red card in nine games, including Maresca’s removal from the technical area during the win over Liverpool.

Maresca was angry with Delap, who is banned for the fixture to Spurs. But he is also considering how to make his team more penetrative against low blocks. The goals have decreased for João Pedro, and more consistency is necessary from Chelsea’s young wide players.

Disappointment mounted during last weekend’s 2-1 home defeat by Sunderland. Chelsea had 68.4% possession, their highest of the season, but their xG was 0.97. Sunderland’s adjustment to a back five baffled Maresca. Régis Le Bris had done his homework. Data revealing that it is one win from the six league games when Chelsea’s possession has been at its maximum this season suggests that their key approach is being weaponised and used to their disadvantage.

This is not a recent issue. It was zero victories from the four league games in which Chelsea had their most possession last season, underscoring a flaw when Maresca’s pursuit for control is taken to extremes. The risk is drifting into unproductive possession, to borrow Arsène Wenger’s expression. José Mourinho’s comment about the team with the ball having the worry also applies here.

Maresca contests this view, but it is worth noting that Chelsea had 33.5% possession when they delivered their most impressive performance under the Italian and routed PSG in the Club World Cup final. Adaptability is a advantage. Chelsea have a number of fast attackers and are dynamic when they have room to attack.

Will Frank grant them space? Chelsea took advantage of Postecoglou’s gung-ho tactics on their past two visits to the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium. Frank will undoubtedly be more cautious. Is a shift to a back five possible? Chelsea have allowed goals from three long throws this season. Spurs could have Kevin Danso throwing balls into the box. They will take into account that Chelsea have improved at offensive set pieces but are allowing too many chances.

Being so long-ball oriented does not necessarily align with Spurs’ history. But with James Maddison and Dejan Kulusevski absent, there is a significant creative burden on Mohammed Kudus. Xavi Simons, pursued by Chelsea last summer, has not performed to expectations since arriving from RB Leipzig. Spurs are lacking variety in from open situations. Their forwards remain inconsistent.

But this is one game where the outcome may justify the approach. Spurs fans will not object if a pragmatic approach halts a four-game losing run against Chelsea. Victory would energize Frank’s tenure. How he would love to win this contest with Maresca.