Steven Warnock got Sky Sports’ Monday coverage going with some strong opinions, not least of all his declaration that “Chelsea are better without Enzo.”
That’s something fans are trying to get their heads around right now, it’s really difficult to disagree with any of Warnock’s points.
He says that Enzo’s relationship with Moises Caicedo isn’t working – that’s pretty true. He says that Enzo doesn’t track runners – also true.
The conclusion that Chelsea are better without him is hard to ignore, even when you consider the potential reasons for that (like Enzo’s injury).
Like Warnock, we all accept that the Argentine is a great player in some ways, but there’s no denying Warnock is correct that the manager will have a lot of thinking to do this summer as he tries to fit all these parts together.
You can see him make his point in the clip embedded here:
'Chelsea are better without Enzo Fernández!' 🇦🇷 😳 pic.twitter.com/PQRYBOqtEx
— Sky Sports Premier League (@SkySportsPL) May 6, 2024
A whole summer to consider it
As the panel point out, the move of Marc Cucurella into midfield has really made the issues we had with Enzo alongside Caicedo clear. Sometimes a player being out through injury makes their value and their positives clear. In this case it has been the opposite – losing the midfielder has made the whole team look better, and is leaving some people scratching their heads about where he might fit in next season.
There’s no need to panic just yet – we’ve got months until we have to start trying to work out next season’s team. Other players could be signed in the interim to balance things better. But if the fans are thinking it and the pundits are thinking it, you be sure that Mauricio Pochettino is thinking about it.
Perhaps we will end up with Enzo behind the striker, in much the same way we saw him used (not very effectively) at the start of this season?
Its been my opinion too. He’s been missing in many games. It’s not a coincidence that whenever he’s not playing, Caicedo excells. The only question now, is how Enzo would fare without Caicedo playing. Maybe they’re better, each without the other.
He has been suffering with hernias all season, he has rarely been fit. He is a class player
If that is it then why does the coach play him week in week out? Its either the manager is not bold enough to take tough decisions or he is not good enough to know how best to utlize players to get maximum result. He played Enzo against arsenal losing 5 :0 while previously recording a 6 nill win against everton without Enzo. More recent results show that Chelsea would have made more progress
I strongly agree. Chelsea is better without Enzo. Caicedo-Conor partnership is wow.
Great observation .. Though one would have expected a good manager to have noticed this even before Enzo’s injury and absence. Gallagher moving away from a forward position into a mid position, allowing Palmer to control the forward area, gives chelsea more strenght in formation , without discounting the inclusion and efforts of Noni on the right and Mudyrk speed on the left bringing more fluidity to the team.
Some times, it is better and reasonable to be simple; in this case, caicedo and enzo are too expensive; better for chelsea to choose the simple style- offer enzo to a big club. Caicedo, Gallagher and inverted Cucurella is already an expensive pairing, chelsea shouldn’t make it cumbersome. Up chelsea blues for life