Marouane Fellaini Is Not The Answer To Chelsea's Midfield Problems

Don't be surprised if you're feeling a sense of deja vu, this isn't the first article I've written on these lines. If you haven't read my previous article on Fellaini, you can read it here.

There has been a lot of speculation in the media recently that Fellaini could be on his way out of Goodison Park, with Chelsea firm favourites to land the Belgian in January. The fact that rumours linking both Oriol Romeu and Frank Lampard away from the club have surfaced means that many fans feel that signing Marouane Fellaini is now a necessity. Throw in the fact that Chelsea's midfield hasn't exactly been performing up to their full potential. But is Fellaini really the solution to Chelsea's midfield problems?

Fellaini can be described as a versatile box-to-box midfielder who has the ability to score goals when needed. He can play as a defensive midfielder or in a more advanced position. Seems decent enough, right? But these are just the good points.

People have pointed to Fellaini's vast improvement this season and cited it as a reason he would fit in well at Chelsea. What lots of people have failed to notice is that the reason Fellaini's performances have improved so much this season is because David Moyes has deployed him as an attacking midfieler and not in the middle of the park. That's not only because of his ability to influence the game better from a more advanced position but also because of his inability to influence the game well enough from a deeper position. When he plays in a deeper position he is ineffective. This is due to the fact that he has a limited passing range and a tendancy to get caught in the wrong positions which leads to him making rash challenges. That's the last thing we need from someone who has to play in Chelsea's double pivot.

Another suggestion I've heard is that because of his ability to play as a defensive midfielder, Chelsea can play him in the pivot alongside Ramires. This will increase our attacking prowess as Fellaini is an attack-minded defensive midfielder and will be able to join in on the attack more often than Mikel does. This argument reeks of a lack of tactical understanding. First of all, there's no such thing as an "attack-minded defensive midfielder", such players are referred to as box-to-box midfielders (and their job is VERY different from that of a defensive midfielder). Secondly, a double pivot of Ramires and Fellaini will leave us horribly exposed at the back as the defensive shield that someone like Mikel provides will not be there due to Ramires' and Fellaini's tendancy to bombard forward at every opportunity.

Thirdly, if we are indeed to spend £30M on a CM, it would be wiser if the club spent it on someone who could be a creative influence from the middle of the park. We have plenty of creativity in the form of Mata, Hazard and Oscar in the attacking third, but it would be nice to have someone who can be a creative spark from the middle of the park. Fellaini isn't the type who can cut open defences with his passing, so why spend so much money for someone whose style of play will not be suited to Chelsea?

Hopefully my argument is sound enough to convince you guys that Marouane Fellaini, good as he may be, is the last player Chelsea need.

Shayne Dias

TweetFollow @CFC360Official

Follow @ShayneCFC360