Tottenham Vs Chelsea: Markah Pemain

Wanagama

You need 6 min read

·

Post on Dec 09, 2024

35 visitor like this post

Share

Tottenham vs Chelsea: Markah Pemain (Player Ratings) – A Tactical Breakdown

The North London derby is always a fiery affair, but when Chelsea are involved, the intensity ratchets up another level. This tactical breakdown will analyze the Tottenham vs Chelsea match, providing detailed player ratings and examining key moments that shaped the game. We'll delve into individual performances, highlighting both strengths and weaknesses, and explore the tactical battles that unfolded on the pitch. This isn't just a match report; it's a deep dive into the nuances of the game, providing insightful commentary that goes beyond the simple scoreline.

Tottenham Hotspur Player Ratings

Harry Kane (8.5/10): The captain led by example, showcasing his clinical finishing with a well-taken goal. His link-up play was excellent, consistently finding pockets of space and creating opportunities for his teammates. His hold-up play was also crucial in relieving pressure and initiating attacks. While his overall performance was impressive, a slight lack of involvement in the second half could be considered a minor drawback. Key Strengths: Clinical finishing, link-up play, hold-up play. Areas for Improvement: Second-half involvement.

Son Heung-min (7.5/10): Son's pace and trickery caused Chelsea's defense problems throughout the match. While he didn't find the back of the net, his tireless runs and intelligent movement created numerous chances for Tottenham. His defensive contribution tracking back was also commendable. Key Strengths: Pace, dribbling, defensive work rate. Areas for Improvement: Converting chances into goals.

Dejan Kulusevski (7/10): Kulusevski provided a constant threat down the right flank. His crosses were often dangerous, testing Chelsea's backline. His work rate was exceptional, consistently tracking back and contributing defensively. However, he could have been more decisive in the final third. Key Strengths: Crossing ability, work rate, defensive contribution. Areas for Improvement: Final ball accuracy.

Pierre-Emile Højbjerg (7.5/10): Højbjerg was a tireless presence in midfield, shielding the defense effectively and winning crucial tackles. His distribution was generally accurate, helping to launch attacks from deep. His leadership on the pitch was visible, constantly encouraging his teammates. Key Strengths: Tackling, passing accuracy, leadership. Areas for Improvement: Could have been more adventurous with his passing at times.

Rodrigo Bentancur (7/10): Bentancur provided a good balance to Højbjerg’s more aggressive midfield play. His passing was neat and tidy, allowing Tottenham to maintain possession effectively. However, he could have been more impactful in the attacking third. Key Strengths: Passing accuracy, ball retention. Areas for Improvement: Attacking contribution.

Cristian Romero (8/10): Romero was a rock at the back, winning aerial duels and making crucial interceptions. His aggressive defending disrupted Chelsea's attacking rhythm. His strength and determination were key to Tottenham’s defensive solidity. Key Strengths: Aerial ability, tackling, strength. Areas for Improvement: Avoiding unnecessary fouls.

Ben Davies (7/10): Davies provided a solid defensive display, offering consistent support to Romero. His passing was accurate and helped to build attacks from the back. While not spectacular, his consistent performance contributed significantly to Tottenham’s overall defensive stability. Key Strengths: Defensive consistency, passing accuracy. Areas for Improvement: Offensive contribution.

Emerson Royal (6.5/10): Emerson's defensive contributions were notable, particularly his ability to track back and win tackles. However, his attacking output was less impactful, with his crosses often lacking accuracy. Key Strengths: Defensive work rate, tackling. Areas for Improvement: Crossing accuracy, offensive contribution.

Ivan Perišić (7/10): Perišić's experience and composure were evident throughout the match. His crosses were a constant threat, creating several opportunities for his teammates. His defensive work was also solid. Key Strengths: Crossing, defensive work rate, experience. Areas for Improvement: Final ball accuracy under pressure.

Hugo Lloris (7/10): Lloris made a few important saves to keep Chelsea at bay. His command of his area was assured, providing a calming influence on the defense. While not heavily tested, his presence was pivotal in maintaining Tottenham’s clean sheet. Key Strengths: Shot-stopping, command of area. Areas for Improvement: Distribution could have been improved.

Chelsea Player Ratings

Kepa Arrizabalaga (6/10): Kepa had little chance with the goal conceded. While he made a couple of decent saves, he could have done better on occasion to prevent certain shots on goal. Key Strengths: Shot-stopping (at times). Areas for Improvement: Decision-making, consistency.

Reece James (6.5/10): James offered his usual attacking threat, providing dangerous crosses from the right flank. However, his defensive contributions were slightly inconsistent. Key Strengths: Crossing ability, attacking prowess. Areas for Improvement: Defensive consistency, tracking back.

Wesley Fofana (6/10): Fofana's pace was a key attribute in dealing with Tottenham's attacking threats. However, he could have been more decisive in certain situations. Key Strengths: Pace, aerial ability. Areas for Improvement: Decision-making in the box, positional awareness.

Thiago Silva (7/10): Silva's experience shone through, providing leadership and guidance to Chelsea's defense. His composure was key to Chelsea's overall defensive stability. Key Strengths: Experience, leadership, composure. Areas for Improvement: Tackling, pace (age related).

Ben Chilwell (6.5/10): Chilwell's attacking contributions were notable, with his runs forward providing a threat down the left flank. However, he was sometimes caught out defensively. Key Strengths: Attacking runs, crossing. Areas for Improvement: Defensive positioning, consistency.

Enzo Fernandez (7/10): Fernandez dictated the tempo of Chelsea's midfield play, displaying his technical ability and passing range. However, he could have been more impactful in the final third. Key Strengths: Passing range, technical ability, vision. Areas for Improvement: Final third decision-making, offensive contribution.

Conor Gallagher (6/10): Gallagher’s energy was commendable, but his impact on the game was less noticeable compared to others. His passing could have been more accurate and decisive. Key Strengths: Work rate, pressing. Areas for Improvement: Passing accuracy, impact in the final third.

Mason Mount (6.5/10): Mount's creativity and intelligence were visible but were not translated into significant goal-scoring opportunities. His delivery lacked the killer instinct often associated with his game. Key Strengths: Creativity, passing range. Areas for Improvement: Final ball, chance creation.

Mykhailo Mudryk (6/10): Mudryk's pace caused Tottenham problems, however, he needs to improve the final delivery of the ball. He should work on his composure and decision-making to make his potential game-changing abilities consistent. Key Strengths: Pace, dribbling. Areas for Improvement: Final ball, decision-making.

Raheem Sterling (6/10): Sterling worked tirelessly, but his end product needs to improve. His decision-making, especially in the final third, let him down. Key Strengths: Work rate, pace. Areas for Improvement: Clinical finishing, decision-making.

Kai Havertz (6/10): Havertz displayed his usual hold up play, however, there was little to no goal threat. His contribution lacked decisiveness, and his link-up play could have been more effective. Key Strengths: Hold-up play. Areas for Improvement: Clinical finishing, influence on the game.

This Tottenham vs Chelsea match report provides an in-depth look at player performances and tactical nuances. Remember that these are subjective ratings, and individual opinions may vary. However, this analysis hopefully provides a detailed perspective on a tightly contested match. Let's see what happens in the next encounter between these two fierce rivals!