When the team was announced before kick off there were many who thought that Mauricio Pellegrino had lost the plot, perhaps his selections appeared strange, but Saints nearly nicked a point.
The two real talking points about this game where the team selections and Fraser Forster's part in Chelsea's goal, but lets start at the beginning.
Mauricio Pellegrino made it all change again for the trip to Chelsea, the most surprising decision being that Virgil Van Dijk was dropped to the bench and we appeared to be starting with a back three, none of whom have appeared to have been the managers first choice at some stage over the past few months.
This is the worry about Pellegrino, good managers are consistent, they know what their best teams are for any given game and who their best players are, when you get wild changes week in week out, both in the starting line up and substitutions, there is something wrong.
Most puzzling is that Pellegrino has tinkered with what had been a side that looked like it was coming back to something approaching decent form, there was no need for too many changes.
Wild changes it was on Saturday at Chelsea and you have to surmise when a manager is suddenly starting to play players he has virtually ignored for several months that something is not quite as it should be.
Like the Arsenal game it was a game where Saints were soon pressed back and forced to spend a lot of time beehind the ball and this perhaps suited the side they had put out at the back.
There was a setback early on though when Cedric Soares was smashed into the advertising hoardings and unable to continue, but perhaps that was not the disaster it could have been, with a shuffle bringing on Lemina whose tackling ability helped , although he did not look like the driven player of a month or so ago.
The goal in the 2nd minute of first half injury time was another lapse of concentration, firstly a silly free kick was given away 30 yards out, it was needless and it would cost us dearly.
Many will blame Fraser Forster for the goal, but most will blame him for the wrong reason, the keeper was not slow in getting down, indeed he got quite near a ball that was shaving the bottom of the post, perhaps the most difficult save to make, but the real mistake was in setting up the wall.
Forster had assumed that Willian would hit the free kick and set up the wall appropriately, but it was Alonso who hit the ball, probably because Chelsea had noticed that the Saints wall was too far over to the left, meaning that there was the opportunity to bend the ball into our right hand corner.
So yes Forster was at fault, but his blame lie in not setting up the wall properly to cover that angle meaning that he had to try and scramble across in vain from a starting position that was all about William striking the ball to the left of the goal, if the wall had been set up as it should have been the ball would not have got through.
Ironically if Forster had saved the shot or the wall blaocked it then he would have unquestionably have been Saints man of the match making half a dozen decent saves and dealing with just about everything else compently, but that is what a keeper is all about, a striker can miss several sitters and have an awful game, but if he scores one and wins the game then he is a hero, in reverse like Forster on Saturday, a near perfect performance is ruined by one lapse in concentration.
till we
Our tactics seemed to be to hang on, get to the last 15 minutes and then try and have a go, we were scared to leave our own half for long periods and it was only after Charlie Austin came on that we offered any sort of attacking threat.
Overall this game was one that ponders a lot of questions off th pitch rather than on it, Saints put in a good display on it, although it was all about sitting back and defending rather than matching Chelsea in all areas.
But Pellegrino cannot say this was a tactical team selection, if it is then why have our best players been on the bench in the past three games, that is not tactical it is about issues in the dressing room and that is worrying.
I would guess that Pellegrino has issues with Van Dijk, Hoedt and Lemina, undoubtably these are his best players, but given the change in attitude on the pitch yesterday, certainly it was miles better than on Wednesday, it seems that the manager is in a quandry, the likes of Yoshida, Stephens and Ward Prowse will give 100% and a good attitude, but that still does not make them a better player than either of the aforementioned trio.
Van Dijk is better than either Stephens and Yoshida even at 75% effort, but that lack of effort is seemingly damaging the team in other areas.
So the manager appears to have a dilemma, does he try to play his best team and get a result, or does he go for one that will play for him and give 100% but ultimately is not going to be able to compete in the same way.
Something has to change and that is the worry for Pellegrino, it is easier to change one man than replace several players, if he isn't getting the results then his position will become untenable.
This was a result that most Saints fans would have taken before kick off, especially when they saw the team, but that is the problem at the moment, we are lowering our standards, we are accepting second best and that has to change.