LONDON, ENGLAND – JULY 01: Frank Lampard, Chelsea manager reacts after the Premier League match between West Ham United and Chelsea FC at the London Stadium on July 01, 2020 in London, England. Soccer stadiums in Europe remain empty due to the coronavirus pandemic, as government social distance laws prohibit fans within venues, causing all matches to be played behind closed doors. (Photo by Michael Regan / Getty Images)
Chelsea opened era ‘3’ with a devastating performance at West Ham. In honor of the new Blues sponsor, here are the player ratings on a 3-point scale.
As Bob Dorough and the wonderful people at Schoolhouse Rock taught millions around the world for decades, three is a magic number. Today, number three was a symbol of new beginnings, opportunities, and ultimately the demise of a team. Today was supposed to be fantastic; One of the best days in recent memory for Chelsea fans. The Blues could have jumped out of Leicester City and established themselves as spot locks near UCL. In addition, the club released its new kits and Timo Werner and Hakim Ziyech officially became Chelsea players. Unfortunately, three ruined the day.
The Blues released their home kits 2020/21 hours before their game against West Ham. The club’s new sponsorship deal with Three UK, a British telecommunications group, saw the start of a new era in the world of football fashion. However, No. 3, the focal point of Chelsea’s home teams for the near future, not only represented a new stylistic change. It also represented the number of goals the Blues came within inches of scoring, the number of points they eventually dropped, the place where they could have been on the table with a win, the number of times West Ham shook the back of their net. and ironically, the number of introductory paragraphs in this article.
In honor of the symbolism surrounding the number and the curse centered on the new sponsor, we decided to rate the Chelsea players for their abysmal performance at London Stadium. But, these are not traditional classifications. These player report cards are on a 3-point scale; a good-bad-ugly, so to speak.
Kepa Arrizabalaga (Goalkeeper): 3
Arrizabalaga had a good stop. Apart from that, he could have easily let in four or five goals. On every West Ham scoring move Arrizabalaga froze and seemed absolutely lost when it mattered most. Help us, Andre Onana; You are our only hope.
Cesar Azpilicueta (right back): 6
Azpilicueta was the worst defender today. He allowed the first goal, but whoever assigned the Spaniard to score someone six inches taller than him should be fired in the morning, so the captain was not to blame. Nothing good; Nothing too terrible. Unfortunately, that was good enough for Azpilicueta to get a solid rating compared to most of his teammates.
Andreas Christensen (center): -3
Simply put, Christensen sucked. He channeled his inner David Luiz, making positioning errors and fell asleep while looking at the ball. He contained Michail Antonio quite well in the first quarter of the match, but each mistake became an even bigger mistake as the match progressed. If Christensen starts the weekend, Chelsea fans may just be fussing, and with good reason.
Antonio Rudiger (central defender): -3
Rudiger had a fantastic first 45 minutes. He was one of the best players on the field until the first half of injury time saw him concede a pointless corner on a sloppy punt. The set piece saw West Ham equalize and, like Christensen, it all went downhill from there. One of the worst performances by a central duo in years at Chelsea. Say it with me: three negatives.
Marcos Alonso (left back): 3
Poetry in motion. No. 3 scores a three because of his lack of positional awareness of, as you guessed it, West Ham’s third goal. Need I say more?
