Jose Mourinho wasn't playing for a win but Brendan Rodgers gave him one

Jose Mourinho manager of Chelsea gives his team instructions as Liverpool manager Brendan Rodgers walks away showing his dejectioin during the match between Liverpool and Chelsea at Anfield.

Since this was the league’s best attack colliding with its best defence, the pattern of play was expected – although the result will have surprised many.

The most ironical feature of this result is that Liverpool gifted it to Chelsea. And I’m not referring to the Steven Gerrard slip, which was plain unfortunate.

Chelsea did not come to Anfield looking for a win. Jose Mourinho’s starting formations in big away games are often defensive, but one significant – and unusual – feature today was the constant time-wasting. In league matches, sides usually waste time when in the lead; when was the last time you saw pointless back-passes and delayed goal-kicks from the second minute? Chelsea just wanted a point, and would have been happy to end the game without a single goal being scored.

But that outcome would have suited Liverpool as well. Before the game they were six points clear of City, who had a game in hand; a draw today would have kept Liverpool in the lead by a point. Yet Brendan Rodgers chose to take a risk and attack Chelsea at the start. He ordered his defence high up the pitch and unleashed Sterling down the right, leaving gaps at the back for Chelsea to break into when they had the ball.

On paper, this was a fascinating tactical contest: proactive versus reactive football. Yet any notion of sentiment was killed off by Chelsea’s lack of initiative. After an opening flurry where they sought to negate Joe Allen and Lucas Leiva in central midfield, the Londoners created very little in midfield. They had the game’s first shot on goal, but thereafter retreated into a shell. Liverpool recorded 75% possession, yet could do little against a well-organized Chelsea defence.

By the end of the first quarter of the match, Chelsea had managed to nullify Liverpool’s initial blitz. By now, it was clear that they were playing for a draw, and perhaps Rodgers could have changed his approach. But rather than go in for a war of attrition, Liverpool began knocking the ball directly into the box and pressing upfront. This was pretty much why they lost – a more calculated approach might have seen them sit back and tonk it around till the safety of full-time and a point. Still, that’s not how Rodgers wants to play, so props to him for that.

It is unlikely Chelsea would have scored from open play unless Liverpool literally handed them the ball. The Reds were launching one final (and completely unnecessary) attack in first half stoppage time, and their centre backs Skrtel and Sakho were both up wide, which left Gerrard as the sole centre-back. Demba Ba had been physically cancelled out by Sakho till then, but when Gerrard tumbled he took his chance gratefully and Chelsea were one up.

If the hosts had found it hard to break Chelsea down till now, it was going to get tougher still. Daniel Sturridge and Iago Aspas were both brought on to supplement Luis Suarez (who endured another frustrating top 4 outing), but to no avail. Unable to work their way in, Liverpool resorted to numerous long range strikes, most of which went right at Mark Schwarzer and were dealt with capably. Tomas Kalas was making his full Chelsea debut and Branislav Ivanovic hasn’t played centre back in a big game for years, but today they were far from inadequate. Along with Nemanja Matic, John Obi Mikel and Frank Lampard they provided a solid central wall that Liverpool’s attackers could not negotiate.

And to equalize, the Merseysiders had to get even further up the pitch and lay siege to Chelsea’s box. This had an obvious danger, and the coup de grace came when two Chelsea forwards (both substitutes, fresher than the exhausted Liverpool backline) sprinted up the field and passed around Simon Mignolet for another stoppage time goal.

Conclusion

You can’t blame Chelsea for being cynical, given their pre-match position. Yet a charge of hypocrisy will stick against Mourinho, having criticized Sam Allardyce for “19th century football” a few months ago. It will be heralded as a tactical masterclass, but in truth Mourinho’s tactics were so predictable that Liverpool have only themselves to blame for getting it wrong. Had it not been for Rodgers’ stubbornness, both sides might well have ended this game with an unsatisfactory but adequate point.