Chelsea’s Eden Hazard nullified by Crystal Palace to leave Maurizio Sarri wondering how best to deploy him

There is a temptation to compare Hazard to Napoli's Dries Mertens, so successfully transformed under Sarri's coaching, but as Chelsea's star has stressed he carries a different type of attacking threat

Maurizio Sarri passes instructions to Eden Hazard (Reuters)

At Selhurst Park this was one of those games in which Eden Hazard was nullified to the point of impotence; muzzled, leashed and tied to the railings as the match went on just out of reach. There was the odd flicker in the second half, like his little Cruyff-turn throughball for Willian, who probably should have scored. But for the most part Hazard was quiet, and as a result Chelsea were flat.

He had been expected to start through the centre having thrived in that role against Watford on Boxing Day, scoring both goals and winning the crucial penalty with a dart in behind that drew a foul from Ben Foster. But Pedro’s injury forced Sarri’s hand at Crystal Palace on Sunday, and instead Hazard started on the left of Olivier Giroud as Chelsea eked out an underwhelming 1-0 win.

And so the questions linger: is Hazard best on the left of a front three or through the centre? Is he best sniffing around Giroud’s knockdowns and ricochets or weaving webs with Pedro and Willian? Is he a winger, or is he a false nine?

Perhaps the biggest problem for Chelsea right now is that Hazard and Sarri don’t agree on the answer. The manager explained last week that Hazard’s mobility through the centre made the team more “solid in the defensive phase”, that through the centre he combines well with his midfielders, and that against Watford “for the second goal, he attacked very well the spaces” in behind the defence.

Yet Hazard has been more circumspect about his abilities as a false nine. He noted pointedly in one interview a few weeks ago that he touched the ball less in the central position and had less influence on the game, surely not the desired outcome when deploying your best player. “I would [also] score more goals if I play as a winger,” said Hazard after the Watford game. “It’s difficult [getting more chances through the middle]. My position is winger, you know, I feel better as a winger.”

Hazard added an interesting point. There has been a natural inclination to compare him to his Belgium teammate Dries Mertens, who Sarri converted from flighty winger into ruthless striker at Napoli, who filled the vacuum left by the departed Gonzalo Higuain with 28 league goals in 2016-17 as Napoli finished third in Serie A. But Hazard is not convinced by the idea he could do something similar for Chelsea.

“Dries is more of a striker than me,” Hazard said. “I am more like a playmaker. Since I started football I like to come, touch the ball. Dries is not like this. He just wants to stay in the box. That’s why he scores a lot of goals. We are different, but yeah I know with Sarri he likes to change some positions sometimes.”

Palace largely kept Eden Hazard quiet (EPA)

Hazard may have done a slight disservice to Mertens’ purposeful link-up play, but the main point holds: at his instinctive best, Hazard is a player who wants the ball played to his feet, with a nervous defence retreating in front of him, options left and right, envisaging the spaces he is about to prise open. Comparing Sarri’s Chelsea with Sarri’s Napoli makes sense – they share the same formation, the same Italian metronome Jorginho, even the same attacking tilt to the left – but Hazard is yet to prove he directly replicates the player Mertens was transformed into. What’s more, he doesn’t really want to.

Why would he? Think of Hazard’s best moments in a Chelsea shirt and they tend to start from that shallow area on the wing, typically the left: the slalom through Liverpool’s defence static defence in 2016, the FA Cup quarter-final strike against Manchester United bent in from that side in 2013, the brilliant goal in the Carabao Cup against Liverpool in September from the other side. Stretching defences with probing runs in behind seems almost a waste of those things that make him one of the league’s supreme talents.

Of course it is not only about Hazard’s strengths – there are some virtues to Giroud stationed in the vision of opposing defenders. He remains a ruthless finisher and scored two magnificent goals in this game, both of which were ruled offside, although he could probably still sneak them into his YouTube compilation of stunners with an EDM soundtrack and his grandkids wouldn’t know the difference.

Hazard seems to thrive with a man to bounce balls off, a giant French sponge to soak up defensive attention and energy that creates space and time in the opposition’s half. Perhaps more importantly, whether by nature of nurture they have developed an understanding, best evinced by a brilliant goal against Cardiff in September when they combined with an almost telepathic combination of dummies and one-touch passes.

Then again, against Palace there was no such telepathy on show. Hazard was shackled and as a result Chelsea were a shadow of the team that has, in fits and starts, looked like something resembling a cut-throat attacking force akin to Napoli of recent years. Perhaps the reality is that neither Giroud nor Hazard can replicate the impact of Mertens, and until a player arrives at Stamford Bridge who can, Sarri-ball will remain a project incomplete.