The midfielder needs to find a balance between being an
attacking player for his country and a defensive Trojan for the Blues
Mikel Obi can be described as a player with multiple personalities.
He performs as one kind of midfielder for Chelsea and a totally different kind
for the Super Eagles.
As club and country are miles apart in their physical
locations, so the performance of Mikel is widely different when he is in the
blue of his club and when he is adorning the green of his fatherland.
You can see Mikel the introvert at Stamford Bridge and
the extrovert when he plays for Nigeria. But why is he so different?
At Chelsea, it has been ingrained in him to win the ball
and release it, but under Stephen Keshi, he has been given the freedom to
assert and make the plays for his team.
He confirmed this in a recent interview where he said he
has to find a balance for his future: "I always try to do what my coaches
tell me. At Chelsea, I have to play for the team and be more defensive but in
Nigeria, the coach allows me to express myself and I enjoy myself.
"Now, I have to find a balance between the two
because it is important for my future,” Mikel added.
But it all could have been so different. At the time when
the ownership tussle raged in 2006 between Chelsea and Manchester United,
little could we see into the future that the attacking gem would be turned into
a defensive stalwart.
Jose Mourinho was just into the Chelsea saddle and was
building an all-conquering side that did more than win – they tried to
pulverize opponents which meant that there was no need for more than five
passes from one end of the pitch to the other. Then there was the enigmatic
Claude Makelele (who gave his name to the position in defensive midfield) from
whom Mikel was supposed to take over.
That in itself was the start of a downward spiral in the
offensive abilities of the spindly young man that had wowed the fans and
Nigerians at the 2005 U20 Fifa World Cup in the Netherlands.
At that championship, he was second onmhly to the
inimitable Lionel Messi, who has gone on to win four consecutive World Player
of the Year awards while Mikel has never been nominated for that exalted award.
Though there is no denying the fact that no one can say
for sure what he would have transformed into at United because there is the
example of Anderson, hailed as the next Ronaldinho when he was in Portugal but
his career has been stifled at Old Trafford where he has been turned from a
purely offensive player into one whose attacking qualities have been nullified.
For Chelsea, the midfield has been built around Frank
Lampard – a player that scores like a striker and in the event that he is to do
what he does, there will always be pockets of space that can be exploited by
opponents in the midfield when he goes forward so the likes of Mikel have to
keep the shape and that takes away any offensive traits.
Though he has been widely acknowledged as a player that
plays well in the big games – Mikel showed in Brazil that he just needs the
conducive environment to show off his attacking nous as the goal against
Uruguay had him doing a Kanuesque dribble on Diego Lugano while the left-footed
curler was simply sublime.
But what stands out in his performances for Nigeria in Brazil
was the fact that he was getting near and into opponents’ boxes which almost
never happens when he is playing for Chelsea. He again showed this in the game
against Spain in which he almost scored but his shot was blocked.
The difference really is in meters – Mikel needs to add
more meters to his mileage when he plays for Chelsea in the Premiership – if he
stays, and then he will be become the same kind of player for club and country.
0 comments:
Post a Comment