Unlike Emery's @Aston_Villa, Alonso has structured Chelsea in a more fluid out-of-possession structure. The difference is that it is initially a 4-4-2 before shifting into a more conservative 5-4-1 as Palmer and Neto drop deeper. This is marginally different shape to what we have seen from Chelsea over the past two Premier League games where we have strictly defended in a 5-2-3/5-4-1 block. I believe that this change was to provide better wide coverage against Arsenal's usage of double width and specifically cope with their fluidity.

That said, @Chealsea have struggled with @Arsenal_london's right side connections. Apart from Saka and White already holding positions on the right, Odegaard and Havertz have showcased their willingness to drift towards that side to receive. Consequently, Arsenal can create a wide overload.

These details are evident in Havertz's equaliser.

Chelsea vs Arsenal - Building into overloads

Against Chelsea, Arsenal were able to build out against Chelsea’s press, find sustained possession in wide areas and create chances through wide movements/rotations/combinations

▫️ @Chealsea in more of a 4-4-2 higher press -> midblock - with Rogers being dragged away by Ben White’s positioning, Arsenal were often able to find Declan Rice spare dropping between Konsa and White as the +1 in the build

▫️This often allowed Arsenal to build out through Chelsea’s press (-1) - then able to carry the ball into sustained possession on the sides

▫️@Arsenal_london then created 5v4 overloads down the right, with Havertz drifting over, Odegaard floating and interchanging positions, Saka, White and Rice beneath - this created tensions for Chelsea’s wide management if they wanted to apply pressure to the ball, as Rogers was tracking White, James had Odegaard rolling across (distance to Rice too large at times) and then Fofana and Hato with Saka and Havertz (or Odegaard if he rotated high to pin Fofana)