Rogers leads Chelsea ratings as Arsenal comeback exposes attack

Morgan Rogers gave Chelsea an early lead at the Emirates, but the Blues were beaten 2-1 by Arsenal. The community ratings placed Rogers at the head of Chelsea’s individual scores, while suggesting the attack did not sustain its impact after the opener.

A quick lead that didn’t last

Chelsea lost 2-1 to Arsenal, according to NBC Sports, despite Rogers volleying the Blues into the lead after 71 seconds. It was an emphatic start, but Arsenal recovered to turn the match around and leave Chelsea without a result from the Emirates.

David Pasztor’s community ratings report for We Ain’t Got No History focused on how little Chelsea’s attack offered after Rogers scored. The report also noted the influence of Arsenal centre-back Ezri Konsa and referee Chris Kavanagh, while arguing that Chelsea needed to respond more effectively once the conditions of the match changed.

Rogers and Estêvão the standouts, Palmer and João Pedro quieter

Rogers topped the community ratings with 6.7. His opening goal kept him in the report’s good category, even though the assessment said his involvement diminished after that early contribution. Estêvão followed on 6.5 after appearing as a substitute. His late shot curled back into a saveable area rather than finding the top corner, denying Chelsea a potential equaliser.

Pedro Neto received 6.4, with the report assessing his work in a right wing-back role positively overall. Cole Palmer was rated 5.9 and João Pedro 5.7, both in the average category. The ratings report portrayed Palmer as present but ineffective and João Pedro as having little impact. Danny Welbeck, introduced from the bench, was Chelsea’s only player in the subpar category, with a 5.4 rating.

What the numbers actually tell us

The full spread placed only Rogers and Estêvão in the 6.5-7.4 good range. Neto, Josh Acheampong, Emiliano Martínez, Reece James, Maxence Lacroix, Palmer, Roméo Lavia, Wesley Fofana, João Pedro, Pep Chavarría, Jorrel Hato and Malo Gusto were all rated in the 5.5-6.4 average band.

No Chelsea player was rated excellent or exceptional, while none fell into the bad or terrible categories. That distribution reflects a performance with several broadly adequate individual displays but too few players reaching the level needed to preserve the advantage Rogers created so quickly.

For further reading, see our analysis of Chelsea’s defensive performance against Arsenal and our look at the midfield gap Chelsea still need to address.