Chelsea ran into a problem from the start of the second half.
The protection the two holding midfielders provided for the defense was no longer as tight.
One of Meireles and Mikel would always push forward, leaving the area in front of the box vulnerable. As a result, a top scorer like Su Dong could often find more space.
It looked very similar to what had happened against Bayern.
Before conceding, Di Matteo had even wondered whether he should bring on another midfielder, ensuring that two players were always protecting the defense. Would that suppress the problems caused by Man City's tactical adjustments in the second half?
But if the back line stayed unchanged, there would only be three midfielders, so any substitution would have to come from the front line.
Ramires had done an excellent job suppressing Marcelo throughout the match, so he obviously could not be replaced. Drogba, meanwhile, had to hold back Man City's two center backs. He was the team's final hope in attack. Taking him off would be like telling the whole world that Chelsea had stopped attacking.
That left only Juan Mata.
Juan Mata was the attacking initiator Di Matteo had designated, but the results had not been good, and he had not put in a satisfactory performance. Taking him off seemed perfectly reasonable.
However, that was precisely where the problem lay.
Chelsea had managed only one shot all match, and advancing the attack was already difficult. If Juan Mata came off, progressing the ball would become even harder. Could they really expect Lampard to send brilliant passes to Drogba up front?
It could be said that if Juan Mata came off, Chelsea's attack would be almost completely severed.
That was the situation. Whether to make a substitution, and how to make it, left