Chelsea’s form has been up and down as of late. In the Premier League, in their last five games, every win has been followed up by defeat, cementing how inconsistent the Blues have been since their return from the international break.
Midweek saw Thomas Tuchel’s men look uncharacteristically leaky at the back in a 4-2 loss to London rivals Arsenal, so a response was required when they faced another capital city opponent in West Ham. While the Hammers have impressed this season, they have only managed one win in their last five, with the Europa League their main remaining focus.
While they struggled to find a breakthrough during the game, a chance presented itself when Craig Dawson was sent off for fouling Romelu Lukaku in the box, giving away a penalty. Jorginho stepped up for the spot kick, but fired his shot at Lukasz Fabianski.
READ MORE: Every word Thomas Tuchel said on Chelsea vs West Ham, Rudiger departure, Jorginho, Pulisic, more
It seemed as though the game was destined for a draw, until the ball was cut back to Christian Pulisic, free in the area. He made sure he didn’t miss in stoppage time, handing the home side all three points.
Discussing the game after in his post-match press conference, Tuchel said: “We grew into it and created more chances minute to minute in the second half and then got the winner. Me personally, I don't know if there is any other way to play against them. I don't want to confuse it that we don't give everything.
“It can feel like this if you play against West Ham with a lot of possession, but at the same time, you have to be careful and disciplined to control the counter-attacks." With that said, the UK media has reacted to the victory and here’s a look at what they thought.
The Guardian discussed the game, claiming the Blues were unconvincing: “Jorginho’s run was stuttered, unconvincing. Like Chelsea, some might say. Lukasz Fabianski will scarcely save an easier penalty. Mercy then. But no: on 90 minutes Marcos Alonso’s cross was converted by another substitute, Christian Pulisic. Football can be cruel.”
As for The Mirror, they believed that the side looked blunt in their attacking phase: “If there was a moment which summed up Chelsea's lack of attacking threat throughout the first half, it came in the 30th minute as Kai Havertz chose not to shoot but instead take another touch and turn out as the ball was pulled back to him in the area.
“By the time he identified a pass, the chance had gone begging as West Ham's defence was able to shut off the shooting angles and the danger was ultimately averted.”
The Independent were equally as scathing in their judgement of Chelsea’s attacking play: “Slow build-up from the back, a lack of dynamism in the final third, devoid of spark or creativity. The home fans urged then groaned throughout a drab first half as they demanded a degree more urgency. On the rare occasions West Ham found themselves out of shape, Chelsea counters often fizzled out through a lack of ideas.”
