Victor Moses: From fringe player to commander-in-chief

The institution of Chelsea’s robust 3-4-3 system has been nothing short of a revelation. When Chelsea were trailing 3-0 at half-time against Arsenal, no one could’ve foreseen the series of five successive clean sheets that would follow, attaining the maximum 15 points available in the process. Despite the impracticality and the unlikelihood of this absurd turn of events, this is exactly what the Pensioners have achieved.

A side tainted with defensive ineptitude and a frustrating tendency to concede ‘soft goals’ have been transformed into a rigid and formidable defensive unit, currently flaunting the second best defensive record in the league. This evolution has been utterly staggering, especially considering the pitiful standards achieved last season. One of the most prominent beneficiaries and influencers of this new system has been Victor Moses.

Victor Moses’ journey to become a Chelsea regular has been a truly unorthodox expedition. Following an impressive debut season, scoring 11 goals in 43 appearances, Moses was primed to continue his development as a Chelsea player.

The Blues’ successful Europa League conquest was an excellent indicator of how vital the winger could be, contributing four goals in the knockout stages. To further reinforce his efforts to claim a place in Chelsea’s first-team, he was exceedingly impressive during the following pre-season — not for the last time in his Chelsea career.

Contrary to expectations, Jose Mourinho was not a fan, claiming instead that a loan move would be the best for both the player and the club. The Nigerian spent the next three seasons traveling around the Premier League, spending time with Liverpool, Stoke City, and West Ham United before eventually returning to South West London. In a total of 71 appearances on loan, Moses had managed just a tame total of 8 goals.

It seemed that Moses was always on the periphery of a starting eleven, yet failing to receive consistent opportunities to demonstrate his abilities. His loan career was largely reduced to substitute appearances; combined with the constant relocation from team-to-team was a disastrous concoction that appeared destined for failure. Without any sense of continuity or regularity to guide his progression, was it any surprise that Moses had failed to flourish at any of his respective loan clubs?