As I have mentioned, this has become something of an obsession of mine. Despite being a fan of the "special one", I was shocked by Jose Mourinho's continued insistance on picking Drogba ahead of Crespo earlier this season and whenever he thinks he can get away with it. I've heard all the arguments for it - "Drogba suits the system better", "Crespo doesn't suit English football", "Drogba does more for the team and works harder" - ALL nonsense, utter nonsense!
"Crespo doesn't suit Mourinho's system" - what does that mean? Mourinho plays is called a 4-3-3 but in reality it plays like a 4-5-1 with two advanced wingers (any two of Damien Duff, Joe Cole, Shaun Wright-Phillips or Arjen Robben) and a lone striker (Drogba or Crespo). Now what does Drogba offer there that Crespo doesn't? Height? No. Pace? A little more. Strength? Yes but what does it amount to other than a whole lot of huff and bluster? Crespo offers so much more. What he lacks in physical strength he more than makes up for with his intellegent runs and unrivalled positional abilities. He is also a more lethal finsher than Drogba which, I'd argue is vital for Chelsea's dour, cagey, "nick one now and defend for 90 minutes" style of play.
The proof of the effectiveness of any striker is surely in the stats - let us compare the two players so far this season (as of 21st January 2006) see here. In just 17 appearances Crespo has scored 8 goals with a staggering 68% shot accuracy rating... compare this to Drogba 7 goals in 19 appearances and a horrible 44% shot accuracy rating. It is a FACT, Crespo is simply better than Drogba as a goalscorer and as a striker. Not only that, Crespo oozes class, whereas Drogba oozes nothing but sweat and missed opportunities. Case closed.
