The sport sites are buzzing with news that Atletico Madrid striker, Radamel Falcao will be signed up by Chelsea in the January transfer window. While the Colombian is a real potent force in front of the goal, something that Chelsea saw in the Super Cup loss,one wonders whether we really need Falcao at the club. There is no doubt that Falcao is a really good striker but the question is whether he will be beneficial to us?
Chelsea are playing exciting football while scoring a lot of goals in the process. With Torres slowly but surely thriving in the main striker's role, the arrival of Falcao will spoil the current set up. With RDM preferring the 4-2-3-1 formation, there is simply no place for two strikers on the pitch. With the likes of Mata,Hazard,Oscar,Marin and Moses behind the lone striker, changing the formation to one that fits in 2 strikers will again spoil the balance. Can we go for a 4-2-2? Well its possible, only that it will mean that the we might not get the best out of our midfield trio. Another possibility is to have just one defensive midfielder, with the attacking midfield trio behind Torres and Falcao, but this will mean our defense will get exposed more often than not and with the likes of Hazard and co needing to track back and support the defense every now and then. This will again limit their threat going forward. So it does look like the only formation we can use to get the best out of our attacking midfielders is the 4-2-3-1 formation.Which again means that only one of either Torres or Falcao can play and after spending 50 million on Torres and finally getting back the value from him, it wouldn't be a wise decision.
The academy graduates Islam Feruz and Lucas Piazon are two exciting prospects for Chelsea and if the Barcelona style is what Chelsea wishes for, giving the youngsters a chance is also really important.Lukaku,Feruz and Piazon may well want to leave Chelsea if another striker is signed.
All this brings me into one conclusion. We don't really need to sign Falcao. He is brilliant and there may be times when we would feel that he should have been signed but for a team that is not at all struggling in front of the goal at present and with exciting young talents at their disposal, the wise decision would be a "NO".
 |
| Falcao - Do we need him? |
Torres isn't the only reason I think that we shouldn't sign Falcao. What happens of our young strikers? The likes of Islam Feruz,Piazon and Lukaku needs game time and if Falcao arrives, it will send them again down the pecking order. Sturridge is presumably on the way out in January and this will leave Torres as the lone striker in the team. The easy decision for the Chelsea hierarchy would be to sign another striker like Falcao. But the wiser decision would be to bring Lukaku back from his loan spell at West Brom. While the Belgian impressed at West Brom,already scoring 2 goals, he isn't getting enough playing time there and it would be better for him to return to Chelsea and with only Torres as the striker, he will surely get his chances at his parent club. The Belgian has the pace and power to easily fit into the current setup and should Torres get injured, we will have an adequate replacement in Lukaku.
 |
| Lukaku has impressed at West Brom |
All this brings me into one conclusion. We don't really need to sign Falcao. He is brilliant and there may be times when we would feel that he should have been signed but for a team that is not at all struggling in front of the goal at present and with exciting young talents at their disposal, the wise decision would be a "NO".
Do should your opinions by commenting on the article.
No comments:
Post a Comment