Every football fan loves an underdog story.
Leicester surprised many when they clinched the Premier League back in 2016; the crazy gang beat the culture club as Wimbledon ran out 1-0 winners over Liverpool in the FA Cup final in 1988.
Another underdog story occurred last week as EFL Championship side Middlesbrough defeated Chelsea 1-0 in the first leg of the EFL Cup.
The atmosphere inside the Riverside last Tuesday was reminiscent of Boro’s glory days when they won the same competition 20 years ago.
Whilst the Teesside outfit was a top-tier side back then, it was a different story this time around as their starting XI against the Blues cost a snippet of the billions paid to assemble the current Chelsea squad.
Mauricio Pochettino’s side were heavy favourites going into the tie, dominating the match with 72% possession.
The Blues did have their chances, although they hit the target with only 28% of their efforts.
It could be conceived that greater possessional play will equate to success, but as this match proved, it is not always the case.
In this tactical analysis and tactical theory piece, we will show how possessional dominance does not always lead to victory.
We will provide an analysis of what went wrong for Chelsea in their cup defeat, as well as provide examples of sides whose tactics have them dominating the possession charts but find themselves not dominating their respective divisions.
The Boro brick wall
Chelsea set up in 4-2-3-1 at the Riverside, utilising Cole Palmer as a false number nine.
Despite Chelsea failing to find the back of the net, the former Manchester City player was not short of chances.
Palmer Shots" width="1710" height="2433" />
The graphic shows that, given his efforts, Palmer should have found himself on the score sheet at least once.
But half of Palmer’s efforts were created courtesy of errors by Middlesbrough players rather than build-up play by Chelsea.
