As the 2025/26 Premier League season approaches its end, it’s now safe to say both Liverpool & Chelsea have performed way below expectations this campaign, especially after coming into this season as Premier League champions and Club World Cup champions respectively.
The weekend’s game at Anfield was a battle between two flawed teams going head to head. Two sides with lots of potential in personnel, but lacking some ingredients to enable them elevate to the next level to compete with the likes of Arsenal & Manchester City.
Liverpool, the home side, lined up in Slot’s customary 4-2-3-1 shape with Mamardashvili in goal in place of the injured Allison. Jones started at RB with Konate, Van Dijk & Kerkez completing the backline. Gravenberch and Mac Allister started as a midfield pivot, behind a front four of Frimpong, Szoboszlai, Ngumoha & Gakpo.
Chelsea lined up in a similar 4-2-3-1 shape with Jorgensen in goal in place of Sanchez. A back four of Hato, Colwill, Fofana & Gusto. Caicedo was partnered by Santos in the pivot, behind a quartet of Cucurella, Enzo, Palmer & Joao.
CHELSEA’S TECHNICAL QUALITY WAS A CATALYST FOR THEIR EQUALIZER
Despite conceding an early goal, Chelsea managed to regain their composure and looked to build up in a 3-2-5 shape. Chelsea’s structure in possession created natural overloads against Liverpool’s 4-4-2 shape out of possession, due to having a 3v2 in the first line, a box midfield against Liverpool’s midfield duo, and Joao Pedro dropping deep to form a +1 which exacerbated Chelsea’s control in the middle of the park.
.jpg?format=pjpg&quality=60&auto=webp&width=380)
Substack.jpg?format=pjpg&quality=60&auto=webp&width=380)
SubstackChelsea managing to control possession and pin the home side back for long spells drew consistent moans from the Anfield crowd who were getting agitated by what they were watching their team produce, especially after multiple failed attempts to regain possession, as Chelsea continually passed them around with Liverpool players often caught chasing shadows. The way Caicedo and Santos especially dovetailed fluidly as a midfield pivot, manipulated Liverpool’s press by baiting and playing through it like a knife through butter.
.jpg?format=pjpg&quality=60&auto=webp&width=380)
Substack.jpg?format=pjpg&quality=60&auto=webp&width=380)
SubstackCaicedo admitted in a recent interview that Maresca gave Chelsea a ‘structure and identity’ which still remains etched into these players muscle memory till this day and this was on display in this game.
The build up patterns from Maresca’s dogmatic 3-2 base shape continues to live on in the heads of these Chelsea players, and the performance against Liverpool was a subtle reminder of that. The Chelsea players often operated like a well oiled machine in moments, akin to poetry in motion as they managed to get themselves back into the game, while exploiting Liverpool’s flaws to a tee.
Unlike Liam Rosenior, who tried to change things too quickly and also admitted to trying out a new pressing style after that Newcastle defeat, showcased his inexperience regarding ‘continuity’ which ultimately made the players lose confidence in his style which cost him his job in the end.
Callum McFarlane, the current interim manager on the other hand, has been smart to leverage Maresca’s automatisms from his first game against Leeds and it’s no surprise that the Chelsea team is starting to pick up some steam, albeit too little too late, but at least he’s laying down the groundwork for the next Chelsea manager to build upon.
CUCURELLA’S RUNS IN BEHIND LOOKED TO EXPLOIT LIVERPOOL
Cucurella was seen replicating the role of a wide runner on Chelsea’s LHS in the absence of Chelsea’s quartet of wingers who all missed this game through injuries. What made Cucurella’s movement particularly dangerous in this game was the timing of his runs. Rather than occupying the space early, he frequently arrived on Jones’ blindside after Liverpool’s defensive line had already shifted towards the ball.
.jpg?format=pjpg&quality=60&auto=webp&width=380)
Substack.jpg?format=pjpg&quality=60&auto=webp&width=380)
SubstackChelsea looked to exploit these movements through Caicedo’s long passes to find him on multiple occasions. This was a clear pattern of play as the game went on that looked to exploit Jones playing as Liverpool’s makeshift RB, who’s not naturally a defender but a midfielder by trade.
This is because most players playing in an unnatural defensive position often struggle with checking their shoulders, defending blindside movements and tracking runs effectively, so this was a plan that made sense in theory and repeatedly threatened the Liverpool defense throughout the game even though it didn’t lead to a goal.
The Chelsea interim manager, Calum McFarlane, admitted this post-game: “Cucurella is not a winger. He has played there before, he told me, but even when he plays left back or when he rolls into midfield, his movement off the ball is of real high quality, the timing, the understanding of when to do it. So, it’s something that we knew with him in that position we could maybe expose. I thought he’s unlucky not to get an assist and create a lot of problems for them.”
LIVERPOOL STRUCUTURAL ISSUES OUT OF POSSESSION REARS ITS HEAD AGAIN
Arne Slot’s side have consistently struggled when facing top technical teams this season. The back to back defeats against Manchester City and PSG validated this point even before the Chelsea game. These technical sides have an elite positional structure in place that is built to exploit the tiniest of gaps within an opposition shape when they fail to close space quickly, press unintelligently or regroup structurally when their press is bypassed. Liverpool often get away with this against inferior sides due to their overall qualitative superiority, but against the top sides its often a different story.
Chelsea made sure to take advantage of these reoccurring issues that have now become a pattern under Slot, as they were able to find a free player within the Liverpool shape time and again. Liverpool’s biggest issue wasn’t simply that Chelsea played through the press, but that the press itself lacked compactness. The distances between the first and second line were repeatedly too large, allowing Chelsea to access the free man after only one or two combinations.
.jpg?format=pjpg&quality=60&auto=webp&width=380)
Substack.jpg?format=pjpg&quality=60&auto=webp&width=380)
SubstackOn multiple occasions, Liverpool’s front two pressed aggressively without midfield support arriving quickly enough and this often caused the distances between Liverpool’s lines to become stretched. Mac Allister and Gravenberch who played as a pivot were often caught in-between situations as they were unsure whether to jump onto Chelsea’s pivots or protect central passing lanes.
CONCLUSION
In many ways, the game felt like a reflection of where both clubs currently stand. At full time, the result did little to change the wider narrative surrounding either side, yet the performance itself revealed plenty. For Chelsea, the performance hinted at the potential ceiling of this young squad if the club finally stabilizes the managerial situation and builds upon the positional principles already embedded within the team. For Liverpool, however, the recurring out-of-possession issues against top technical sides remain an area Arne Slot must solve quickly if they are to re-establish themselves among Europe’s elite next season.