On Wednesday evening, Chelsea succumbed to a 5-2 defeat away to defending champions Paris Saint-Germain in the French capital for their UEFA Champions League round of 16 first leg. 

This leaves Liam Rosenior's side with a mountain to climb in the second leg, particularly with the French side being granted a weekend of rest by Ligue 1 ahead of the second leg, whilst the Blues face Newcastle United in the Premier League. 

As we saw in the FA Cup match against Wrexham on Saturday, the squad's depth cannot be relied on. So either Rosenior plays a side that could quite easily lose to Newcastle, or he plays the first XI, and risks serious fatigue ahead of the second leg. Either way, suboptimal. 

So, what put Chelsea in this situation with their defeat last night? 

The truth is, it was actually a very good performance for the most part. PSG had just nine shots in the game. Those shots came to a total of just 0.9 expected goals. Their third goal of the game, in the 74th minute, was their first shot since their second goal, in the 40th minute. 

Even the most anti Rosenior amongst the Chelsea faithful would find it hard to disagree that, in general, he set the team up well, and that PSG just simply have better players. 

However, he made one mistake in particular, which was nobody's fault but his own. Choosing to go with Filip Jorgensen in goal instead of Robert Sanchez felt like a gamble at the time, and now it just looks like downright stupidity. 

We had an example just the night before of why playing your second-choice goalkeeper is risky. You don't do it. Maybe in a cup game at home to Barnsley. Not at the Parc Des Princes.  

The worst thing is, there was a suggestion that Jorgensen is preferred because he is better with the ball at his feet. Well, the third PSG goal comes from a stray pass to the edge of the box, before being lobbed by Vitinha. 

That was not his only mistake, with Khvicha Kvaratskhelia's second goal squirming past him, despite not being the cleanest strike, a goal he 100% should have done better with. 

The primary reason for the defeat was that. It was not the only one, though. The game could have been completely different if Joao Pedro had scored after five minutes, having been found well by Reece James. Just minutes later, Bradley Barcola fired home a much harder chance. Those are the fine margins at this level. 

It feels hard to criticise Enzo Fernandez after scoring and assisting, but his lack of athleticism was apparent throughout the night. PSG are a very physical and athletic team, and too many times he was found lagging behind from a transition attack. 

Finally, Cole Palmer's performance was just so disappointing. Having played so well against the same opponents in the Club World Cup final whilst playing off the right-hand side, he simply failed to make any sort of impact in the game last night. 

A little over five minutes before the half time interval, the Englishman missed an opportunity not too dissimilar to his goal away to Bayern Munich in the league phase, but his effort this time lacked the requisite conviction. Within 30 seconds, Ousmane Dembele had scored for the hosts. Again, it's all about fine margins. 

So, in short; a poor goalkeeping selection, a big disparity in athleticism, and missed chances cost Chelsea on a night where they played well. Two goals would have felt a possible result to overturn. Three goals feels like too many. We will see. 

Don't miss out on our ROUNDTABLE community and the latest news!

It's completely free to join. Share your thoughts, engage with our Roundtable writers, and chat with fellow members.

Download the free Roundtable APP, and stay even more connected!