Clash of Approaches Looms as Frank and Enzo Maresca Face Off in Emerging Contest

When Chelsea were seeking for a replacement for Mauricio Pochettino in May 2024, multiple managers were in contention. This was an extensive process that involved the club holding talks with Thomas Frank before they finally opted for Enzo Maresca.

The feeling was that Maresca’s structured approach and focus on possession rendered him the most suitable for Chelsea’s squad of skilled players. Frank, who had excelled at Brentford, had to remain patient for his next chance. Overlooked by Manchester United after they dismissed Erik ten Hag, his break arrived when Tottenham brought in the Danish manager after sacking Ange Postecoglou last summer.

At present, Frank and Maresca confront one another, both occupying major roles. Theirs is not currently a full-fledged rivalry, but they shared some hard-fought matches last season. Frank’s Brentford were unlucky to suffer a 2-1 loss at Stamford Bridge last December and had the better chances when they drew 0-0 with Chelsea in April.

Those were two decent games, made more interesting by the contrasting styles between the managers. Frank is more of a practical manager, more inclined to be straightforward, play on the counter-attack, and wait for chances to unveil an range of clinical set-piece strategies, whereas Maresca tends towards ideological rigidity. The Italian hails from the Pep Guardiola coaching tree; he emphasizes control of the ball.

Chelsea’s average of 59.7% this season is bettered only by Liverpool in the Premier League. Frank mixes it up more. Spurs are not instinctively a defensively-minded side – they are seventh in the possession table, ahead of Manchester United and Newcastle – but it is telling that their most impressive performances have come in games where they have relinquished the initiative. They were excellent with a back five in the Super Cup against Paris Saint-Germain, implemented an impressive counterpress when they won 2-0 at Manchester City, and overwhelmed Everton with set pieces last Sunday.

Those performances suggest Spurs ought to sit back when they face Chelsea. Tottenham, it must be noted, have one win from their past seven home league games. The statistics are disappointing. Spurs’ return of 13 points from their last 18 home fixtures is the lowest of any team to have been in the top flight during that period.

This is a difficult game to call. Spurs are five points off first place and unbeaten in the Champions League. Chelsea are world champions and advanced to the quarter-finals of the Carabao Cup this week. However, fans of both sides remain unconvinced about Frank and Maresca. Spurs supporters have expressed frustration about a lack of creativity when the responsibility is on their team to attack; Chelsea’s moan about their young side’s immaturity, indiscipline, and difficulties against defensive setups.

The truth is that both managers are performing adequately. Chelsea could fall to 12th if they are defeated to Spurs, but there is context to their indifferent results. Injuries to Cole Palmer and Levi Colwill have taken a toll. A disrupted pre-season, resulting from the club reaching the final at the Club World Cup, cannot be ignored.

Yet, there is potential for improvement, especially when it comes to keeping 11 players on the pitch. Liam Delap’s rash sending off during Wednesday’s Carabao Cup victory against Wolves was Chelsea’s sixth red card in nine games, including Maresca’s banishment from the dugout during the win over Liverpool.

Maresca was furious with Delap, who is banned for the fixture to Spurs. But he is also pondering how to make his team more incisive against defensive teams. The goals have dried up for João Pedro, and more reliability is necessary from Chelsea’s young wide players.

Frustration grew during last weekend’s 2-1 home defeat by Sunderland. Chelsea had 68.4% possession, their maximum of the season, but their xG was 0.97. Sunderland’s change to a five-man defense baffled Maresca. Régis Le Bris had done his homework. Numbers showing that it is only one victory from the six league games when Chelsea’s possession has been at its maximum this season implies that their fundamental philosophy is being exploited and turned on them.

This is not a recent issue. It was no wins from the four league games in which Chelsea had their most possession last season, underscoring a vulnerability when Maresca’s drive for control is taken to the limit. The risk is falling into ineffective control, to borrow Arsène Wenger’s expression. José Mourinho’s comment about the team with the ball having the fear also comes to mind.

Maresca differs in opinion, but it is worth noting that Chelsea had 33.5% possession when they delivered their most impressive performance under the Italian and thrashed PSG in the Club World Cup final. Adaptability is a advantage. Chelsea have a number of fast attackers and are exciting when they have room to attack.

Will Frank allow them freedom? Chelsea took advantage of Postecoglou’s adventurous tactics on their past two visits to the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium. Frank will surely be smarter. Is a switch to a back five likely? Chelsea have conceded from three long throws this season. Spurs could have Kevin Danso launching balls into the box. They will observe that Chelsea have improved at offensive set pieces but are conceding too many chances.

Being so long-ball oriented does not necessarily fit with Spurs’ style. But with James Maddison and Dejan Kulusevski absent, there is a significant creative load on Mohammed Kudus. Xavi Simons, pursued by Chelsea last summer, has not made an impact since joining RB Leipzig. Spurs are predictable in from open situations. Their forwards remain unreliable.

But this is one game where the ends may justify the approach. Spurs fans will not object if a cautious approach halts a four-game winless streak against Chelsea. A win would energize Frank’s tenure. How he would relish to win this duel with Maresca.