In the most important match of the weekend in the English Premier League, Chelsea and Arsenal played to a 0-0 draw. While the match was not the most exciting of the season, it had its moments of drama and intrigue. That did not stop Arsenal supporters from chanting that Chelsea was boring (Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho said in a post-match press conference “Boring? I think boring is 10 years without a title. That’s boring.” Well played, Jose Meow-rinho). Ultimately it was a match without scoring, which begs the question, what should we make of 0-0 draws and the idea of pragmatic football?
For Chelsea, it was a great result. With the lead that they have at the top of the table in the league, only a loss would have threatened Chelsea’s chances to win the trophy. Yet Chelsea came out fairly aggressive in the first half and had two questionable penalty decisions go against them that could have blown the match open (with a small claim on another that ultimately led to a Cesc Fabregas yellow card for simulation). After halftime, Chelsea did what it does best under Mourinho: it shut the game down, played smart, organized, defensive football, and got the result that it needed.
Arsenal was the more aggressive team in the second half, as it needed to win to have any chance at catching Chelsea in the table. It threatened Chelsea’s goal on a few occasions, but never really got close to scoring thanks to some outstanding defending by Chelsea. In fact, Mourinho said after the match that it was the best performance of John Terry’s career. Arsenal could not break through and at the end, Chelsea’s players were celebrating on the pitch like they had won. Which, in a way they had.
The most common complaints I hear from my friends and family here in the U.S. that are not soccer fans are that it’s boring and there isn’t enough scoring. The two are lumped together, but while both of those things can be true about a given match, often times they’re not mutually exclusive. Given the stakes and the run of play, there was not much about Sunday’s match that was boring (granted I’m a Chelsea fan, so I’m biased). Arguably, if Chelsea had been granted and converted one or both of its penalty clams in the first half, the match would have been MORE boring as Chelsea would have “shut the game down” even earlier and would have had no impetus to push the ball forward.
For those complaining that Chelsea was boring, the question that needs to be asked is: why they would have played any other way in that second half? Why go for the knock out when a draw is really all that they need? Chelsea has been criticized for years for playing negative football (despite the number of goals they score), but as it sits on the verge of its fourth league title of the Roman Abramovich era (plus a Champions League, 4 FA Cups, and 3 League Cups), obviously it works.
It also was interesting that Arsenal was not throwing everything forward in a desperate attempt to score a goal. Perhaps Wenger and Co. were content in some way for a draw that coupled with Manchester United’s loss to Everton further secured the Gunners’ second-place slot.
The point of the game is to put the goal in the back of the net and so the focus on every game is (and rightly should be) the goals. And yes, there is less scoring in soccer than other sports, but that also makes the goals that much more special and exciting...right?
Or is it really that a 0-0 draw truly exists in the eyes of the beholder? For soccer fans, we can justify to ourselves that the match had merit, there were good scoring chances, and that it was a fair and equitable results for both sides (or one side got completely screwed because of X). For non-soccer fans, it supports their already-held belief that a game without scoring cannot be exciting and those of us that spent 90+ minutes watching a match without a goal just wasted time in our lives that we will never get back. It is the same thing for sides that play “pragmatic” or “negative” football: supporters of that club will say the club was just trying to get a result, which is the point of the game, while their opponents will claim that club is making the game boring. Both sides are right...and both sides are wrong.
But while nothing significant may have happened on the pitch during the Chelsea-Arsenal match, the result will loom large in the most important contest of them all: who will win the Premier League this year?
And as of now, things are looking awfully blue.
Follow Mike Smith on Twitter @thefootiegent
