With six goals conceded in two league games, wondering what's wrong with Chelsea's defence is a perfectly legitimate way to spend one's time. After all, Stoke and Sunderland aren't exactly attacking powerhouses. What does Jose Mourinho make of it?
I didn't see defensive mistakes against Sunderland. I was analysing the game for an hour, slow motion, going over every incident, seeing what we had done wrong, but we did nothing wrong. The ball was just going here or there.
Now, this is a perfectly reasonable opinion. Goals don't have to come from mistakes; they can come from sublime opposition play (i.e. you are facing Eden Hazard in beast mode) or simple bad luck as well. There's no shame in admitted that there was nothing your team did wrong in conceding a goal. That said, it's a bit weird when your team concedes three and none of them were your fault.
Do we trust in the random back luck theory, even when the Sunderland match was followed by misfortune at Stoke? Or is Mourinho missing something? Personally, having gone through the Sunderland goals as well, I can't see a whole lot wrong either, but any footballing expertise I might have most certainly does not lie in defending set pieces.
Either not much is going wrong and Chelsea are getting bad breaks, or there's a structural problem that everyone -- including a two-time Champions-League-winning manager -- is missing. So let's hope it's not the second one, I guess.