His verdict, shared in post-match analysis on TNT Sports and echoed across punditry circles, has ignited heated discussions among Blues supporters, with opinions split on whether the blame lies fairly or if systemic issues overshadowed individual errors.
The game at the Stadio Diego Armando Maradona saw Chelsea take an early lead through Enzo Fernández’s 19th-minute penalty, only for Napoli to roar back. Antonio Vergara leveled in the 33rd minute with a dazzling solo effort—spinning past defenders before firing home—before Rasmus Højlund put the hosts ahead in the 43rd minute, reacting quickest to a low cross from Mathías Olivera. João Pedro’s second-half brace (61’ and 83’), assisted by substitute Cole Palmer, sealed a remarkable comeback, securing Chelsea’s top-eight finish and direct entry to the round of 16 while knocking out Antonio Conte’s side.
Cole, speaking after the match, refused to pin everything on centre-back Wesley Fofana—despite widespread criticism for being turned by Vergara and outjumped by Højlund. Instead, he directed primary blame toward the midfield shield, particularly Moisés Caicedo and Andrey Santos, for failing to provide adequate protection. “The goals come from the same problem: no-one in front of the back four,” Cole said. “Caicedo lets Vergara drive through too easily on the first—doesn’t engage, doesn’t block the space—and then on the second, the midfield is bypassed completely. Olivera gets in behind because there’s no tracking, no responsibility. Fofana gets spun, yes, but he’s isolated because the midfield isn’t doing its job. That’s where the blame starts.”
Cole acknowledged Fofana’s difficult night but argued the Frenchman “stood firm in other moments” and was let down by positional lapses higher up the pitch. He highlighted how Napoli exploited transitions, with Vergara holding off Caicedo before the turn and Olivera gliding past unchecked for the assist. “It’s not about effort—it’s concentration and structure,” Cole added. “The midfield has to take more responsibility; otherwise, you’re always leaving your defenders exposed.”
The comments align with pre-existing fan frustrations over Chelsea’s midfield balance under Liam Rosenior, where young or inconsistent performers have struggled against pressing sides like Conte’s organized Napoli. Many supporters agree with Cole, flooding social media with calls for better screening from Caicedo (who was subbed at half-time in some reports) and Santos, describing their positioning as “costly” and “unacceptable.” Others defend the duo, pointing to the experimental backline—Reece James at centre-back alongside Fofana—and broader tactical vulnerabilities, arguing individual blame overlooks Rosenior’s setup.
Cole’s analysis contrasts with Reece James’ earlier blunt accusation (implying a single “switch-off”) and ratings that harshly marked Fofana low (e.g., 2/10 in some outlets for being “beaten all ends up”). It has fueled debate: some fans hail Cole for “telling it like it is” and shifting focus to midfield frailties, while others feel it unfairly singles out players amid a resilient win. With Cole Palmer’s introduction at half-time proving transformative—assisting both winners—the victory masked issues, but Cole insists addressing them is crucial for sustained progress.
As Chelsea shift focus to Premier League battles, Cole’s verdict serves as a reminder: even in triumph, defensive lessons must be learned. The debate rages on—individual errors or tactical shortcomings?—but the Blues’ fightback ensures they live to fight another day in Europe.
