Chelsea’s ambition to return to Wembley Stadium in the Carabao Cup was crushed as Arsenal secured a 1-0 victory in the second leg of the semi-final, resulting in a 4-2 aggregate win for the Gunners. Kai Havertz's late goal at the Emirates sealed Arsenal's place in the final, a moment celebrated by the team and fans alike. The defeat has sparked a critical examination of Chelsea's tactical approach, which many observers felt was overly cautious and ultimately played into Arsenal's hands.

Chelsea's manager, Liam Rosenior, opted for a tactical setup that prioritized defensive solidity. The team lined up with a back three, featuring Wesley Fofana, Trevoh Chalobah, and Jorrel Hato, with Marc Cucurella and Malo Gusto operating as wing-backs. Enzo Fernandez captained the side in midfield, alongside Moises Caicedo and Andrey Santos, while Joao Pedro and Liam Delap led the attack. The intention was clear: to stifle Arsenal's attacking threats and frustrate their rhythm.

However, this cautious approach seemed to backfire. Chelsea struggled to create clear-cut chances, with their expected goals (xG) tally in the first half a meager 0.16. While the defensive structure initially succeeded in limiting Arsenal's opportunities, it also stifled Chelsea's own attacking intent. The Blues appeared hesitant to commit men forward, resulting in a lack of penetration and creativity in the final third.

As the game progressed, Rosenior was compelled to make changes, introducing Estevao in place of a central defender around the hour mark. These substitutions did inject some urgency into Chelsea's play, as they began to push higher up the pitch. However, Arsenal's defense remained resolute, limiting Chelsea to very few genuine chances.

In the dying moments, as Chelsea desperately sought a goal to force extra time, they were caught on the counter-attack. A long clearance allowed Havertz to break through and score, confirming Arsenal's victory and Chelsea's exit from the competition.

The result has led to questions about whether Chelsea's tactics were too focused on negating Arsenal's strengths, rather than exploiting their weaknesses. Some analysts suggest that the overthought approach stifled the team's natural attacking instincts, making it easier for Arsenal to control the game. The lack of creativity and dynamism in Chelsea's play was evident, as they struggled to break down Arsenal's organized defense.

Arsenal, on the other hand, executed their game plan effectively. While they too struggled to create numerous clear-cut chances, they remained patient and disciplined, waiting for the opportune moment to strike. Their defensive solidity, combined with Havertz's late goal, proved to be the difference.

Mikel Arteta's side now advances to the Carabao Cup final, where they will face either Manchester City or Newcastle. For Chelsea, the defeat serves as a harsh lesson. While a solid defensive foundation is crucial, it must be balanced with a proactive attacking approach. The Blues will need to find a way to unleash their attacking potential if they are to compete for silverware this season.