With news of Eduardo setting off, talk of Little Jack staying here next season and Tomas Rosicky playing a part in the Barnet friendly, Wenger seems to be fine-tuning the attacking options in our squad to suit the current 4-3-3 system. The formation seems set to stay, and although I've voiced my concerns in the past about us dropping the old 4-4-2, I'm feeling slightly reassured by our preparations for the new campaign. Barcelona may be talking about class and respect via Carles Puyol's pedestal/cave as part of their latest Cesc Fabregas media pack, but at this club we've learnt not to put square pegs in round holes.
The selection of players at Wenger's disposal last season wasn't fully suited to the new strategy (this became clear as soon as Robin van Persie picked up his injury) and Eduardo seemed to be the biggest casualty of our switch in tactics. Now, with three tall strikers each expected to lead the line alone, link up play with the midfield and feed off the flanks, there doesn't seem to be a place for a forward in the Eduardo mould - an adept finisher who is at his best in a striking partnership alongside a target man. He looked uncomfortable cutting in from the wings, and didn't seem to provide the kind of service to our main striker that we might expect from Nasri or Arshavin.
I am a big fan of Eduardo and wish that things could have turned out differently for him at the Emirates, as he really seemed capable of becoming that missing ingredient when he joined back in 07-08. Sadly, as we are reminded far too often as Arsenal fans, there doesn't seem to be a place for technically proficient attacking players in domestic games where simpletons who weren't even good enough for the England defence are concerned, and now there doesn't seem to be a role in our new set-up which can get the best out of Eduardo. I'll be sorry to see him leave, but I think he's making the right decision in going and I hope he can get back to his best at Shakhtar.
In addition to Carlos Vela - for whom the jury is still out regarding a place on the left wing - the players in our squad who are more accustomed to flanking the strikers will benefit from Eduardo's departure. Rosicky has shown signs in recent months that he may be close to a return to form, and he will almost certainly see more playing time if he can stay fit. Unlike last year, Walcott didn't get up to much over the summer and should be fresh in a month's time, while Samir Nasri will have a point to prove to Raymond the poodle after his bizarre exclusion from the France squad. Best of all, we might not have to watch Andrei Arshavin play as a target man again.
Tuesday, 20 July 2010
Friday, 21 May 2010
Barcarmageddon (?): What to do if your best player leaves
I for one think that Fabregas will go, particularly after his usual Barca-question-dodging gave way to that comment about sorting out his future before the World Cup. However, we don't really know what's going on behind the scenes, so there's not much point in speculating about the validity of the stories until one of these rather well-informed journalists remembers to pick up a quote... For now, he's still an Arsenal player.
But I couldn't help thinking about what we should do if he does leave. I know I'm not the only one who had already been wondering about a switch back to 4-4-2, but Wenger has made it abundantly clear that the system is built around Fabregas and our 270 wide/in the hole players.
What got me leaning slightly towards the old formation was my flatmate's recent purchase of the Arsenal season review DVDs for 2002-2006 and the subsequent nostalgiafest for the three Gooners in the house. The teams Wenger put out back then - arguably his best - were all based on a conventional 4-4-2 (at times perhaps 4-4-1-1, usually when Dennis was playing) but, as we all know, had the technique and flair to fashion their own brand of attacking football around it. There was Vieira stamping his authority all over the midfield, Gilberto keeping everything nice and tidy in front of the defence, Pires and Ljungberg wreaking absolute havoc as they cut in from the wings. Henry had support all around him - needless to say Bergkamp made sure of that at all times - and the back four was well protected by our disciplined central midfield. Watching those highlights and reacquainting ourselves with those absolute legends, seeing them winning comfortably almost weekly and putting on masterclass after masterclass, we wondered if Wenger's pursuit of quasi-total football would ever bear the same fruit.
Obviously, the less said about the end of 02-03 the better, but I couldn't help noticing how much more clinical that team was. One of the main reasons why the formation worked so well back then was that our flamboyant attack was complemented by both a rigid adherence to the system and a willingness to get back and defend a couple times when off the ball. Of course, the team wasn't quite perfect and had its lapses just like any other. But the players knew their positions and their roles, and were slightly more adept at keeping to them than the current crop.
I should also add that the physical difference really is noticeable. Take the Invincibles - the starting lineup only ever had one or two players below six feet, and there was strength and pace all over the pitch. Gilberto and Lauren weren't known for being real heavyweights, but stick them with the likes of Campbell, Vieira and Henry and you get the kind of athleticism we see today in the modern Chelsea teams. It's rare to find players like that who have such a deadly combination of skill and physical presence, but Arsene managed it.
There were two main reasons for changing to 4-3-3. First, other teams had sussed how to play against us - put out two banks of four and you shut down the strikers' entire supply. Second, Cesc Fabregas had become playmaker and, as we have seen this season, he can be almost unstoppable at the top of the midfield three.
However, the new system seems to have marginalised some of our other players. Eduardo's struggle to regain form hasn't been helped by having to return to an alien formation, and it seems like he is at his best up front with another striker - as is Carlos Vela, who has had his moments on the left wing but only really excels leading the line. Walcott has found some good form in the last couple of months but he seems to hit opposition defences harder when attacking from a slightly deeper position on the right, while Arshavin has proven himself on the flanks in both formations.
Watching Fabregas playing in these old teams, you realise that he can more than manage in a 4-4-2. At 17 years of age and well off the shape he's in now, he was bossing the midfield and playing perfect through-ball after perfect through-ball just like he is six years on. He earned his stripes by playing as a centre-midfielder (and, at times, right-midfielder) alongside the likes of Gilberto, Ljungberg, Pires, and Henry, playing in a system where he was not the chief playmaker but flourishing nonetheless. Although there's no doubt he has been sensational in an advanced role in a 4-3-3, it's clear that he can manage in a midfield four, and the 2007-8 season showed that he can get the goals regardless of the team's formation around him. Of course, this is only worth considering if we're the club that actually has him next year.
But this leads me on to the other factor in our change of tactics. Why would 4-4-2 work now if the other teams figured out how to break us down last time?
The difference is in players like Samir Nasri, Aaron Ramsey, Tomas Rosicky and, to a lesser extent, Andrei Arshavin. Pires and Ljungberg were legends in their own right, but we now have a legion of midfielders who are arguably the world's best at knocking the ball around for hours on end. With the clear exception of the matches against Barcelona (an exception which we will have to tolerate - let's be honest, they've pretty much outgrown football as a sport now) we have dominated almost all of our opposition in terms of possession. I believe that to place Nasri, Rosicky or Arshavin on the wing of a four-man midfield would do no damage to our ability to keep hold of the ball; and with a striker on the inside of each flank, our buildup play would allow us to open up into more threatening positions than we would from passing it back and forth along the 18-yard line with half a dozen players shutting us out. Additionally, a genuine 4-4-1-1 (rather than a reconceptualised 4-3-3) would give us the chance to push Arshavin forward into his ideal role and cause mayhem behind the out-and-out striker.
Of course, with Robin van Persie, Nicklas Bendtner, Eduardo and Carlos Vela all keen on a central forward role - and with the likely addition of Marouane Chamakh this summer - it seems difficult to accommodate them all without changing back to a 4-4-2. Arguably it makes sense to retain a front three so as to make use of their respective versatility. However, it has become clear that, by fielding players of their nature in the wide roles, we end up exposing our full-backs - or just exposing our entire flanks, when there's no cover for marauding wing-backs like Clichy and Eboue.
The old formation seemed to play to our strengths on the overlap. Clichy and Sagna were racking up assists in the 07-08 season, and the decline of this part of their game has been most pronounced. I can't help wondering whether this really is entirely due to the undoubted fall in the quality of their crossing, as there is still a considerable difference between choosing from two strikers who can pull their markers out of position and having to seek out one striker who is being forced beyond reach.
Regardless of whether Fabregas leaves, I really think a switch in formation is worth considering. There is certainly a strong case to be made for 4-3-3 and at times it has worked very well, but to me 4-4-2 seems both defensively safer and likely to give us further options going forward. I've put up a poll on the side so you can vote for one of the two systems, and feel free to add your thoughts below. After that, get outside, enjoy the sun and try to forget the rumours for a few minutes - can't be thinking about Cesc every seven seconds.
But I couldn't help thinking about what we should do if he does leave. I know I'm not the only one who had already been wondering about a switch back to 4-4-2, but Wenger has made it abundantly clear that the system is built around Fabregas and our 270 wide/in the hole players.
What got me leaning slightly towards the old formation was my flatmate's recent purchase of the Arsenal season review DVDs for 2002-2006 and the subsequent nostalgiafest for the three Gooners in the house. The teams Wenger put out back then - arguably his best - were all based on a conventional 4-4-2 (at times perhaps 4-4-1-1, usually when Dennis was playing) but, as we all know, had the technique and flair to fashion their own brand of attacking football around it. There was Vieira stamping his authority all over the midfield, Gilberto keeping everything nice and tidy in front of the defence, Pires and Ljungberg wreaking absolute havoc as they cut in from the wings. Henry had support all around him - needless to say Bergkamp made sure of that at all times - and the back four was well protected by our disciplined central midfield. Watching those highlights and reacquainting ourselves with those absolute legends, seeing them winning comfortably almost weekly and putting on masterclass after masterclass, we wondered if Wenger's pursuit of quasi-total football would ever bear the same fruit.
Obviously, the less said about the end of 02-03 the better, but I couldn't help noticing how much more clinical that team was. One of the main reasons why the formation worked so well back then was that our flamboyant attack was complemented by both a rigid adherence to the system and a willingness to get back and defend a couple times when off the ball. Of course, the team wasn't quite perfect and had its lapses just like any other. But the players knew their positions and their roles, and were slightly more adept at keeping to them than the current crop.
I should also add that the physical difference really is noticeable. Take the Invincibles - the starting lineup only ever had one or two players below six feet, and there was strength and pace all over the pitch. Gilberto and Lauren weren't known for being real heavyweights, but stick them with the likes of Campbell, Vieira and Henry and you get the kind of athleticism we see today in the modern Chelsea teams. It's rare to find players like that who have such a deadly combination of skill and physical presence, but Arsene managed it.
There were two main reasons for changing to 4-3-3. First, other teams had sussed how to play against us - put out two banks of four and you shut down the strikers' entire supply. Second, Cesc Fabregas had become playmaker and, as we have seen this season, he can be almost unstoppable at the top of the midfield three.
However, the new system seems to have marginalised some of our other players. Eduardo's struggle to regain form hasn't been helped by having to return to an alien formation, and it seems like he is at his best up front with another striker - as is Carlos Vela, who has had his moments on the left wing but only really excels leading the line. Walcott has found some good form in the last couple of months but he seems to hit opposition defences harder when attacking from a slightly deeper position on the right, while Arshavin has proven himself on the flanks in both formations.
Watching Fabregas playing in these old teams, you realise that he can more than manage in a 4-4-2. At 17 years of age and well off the shape he's in now, he was bossing the midfield and playing perfect through-ball after perfect through-ball just like he is six years on. He earned his stripes by playing as a centre-midfielder (and, at times, right-midfielder) alongside the likes of Gilberto, Ljungberg, Pires, and Henry, playing in a system where he was not the chief playmaker but flourishing nonetheless. Although there's no doubt he has been sensational in an advanced role in a 4-3-3, it's clear that he can manage in a midfield four, and the 2007-8 season showed that he can get the goals regardless of the team's formation around him. Of course, this is only worth considering if we're the club that actually has him next year.
But this leads me on to the other factor in our change of tactics. Why would 4-4-2 work now if the other teams figured out how to break us down last time?
The difference is in players like Samir Nasri, Aaron Ramsey, Tomas Rosicky and, to a lesser extent, Andrei Arshavin. Pires and Ljungberg were legends in their own right, but we now have a legion of midfielders who are arguably the world's best at knocking the ball around for hours on end. With the clear exception of the matches against Barcelona (an exception which we will have to tolerate - let's be honest, they've pretty much outgrown football as a sport now) we have dominated almost all of our opposition in terms of possession. I believe that to place Nasri, Rosicky or Arshavin on the wing of a four-man midfield would do no damage to our ability to keep hold of the ball; and with a striker on the inside of each flank, our buildup play would allow us to open up into more threatening positions than we would from passing it back and forth along the 18-yard line with half a dozen players shutting us out. Additionally, a genuine 4-4-1-1 (rather than a reconceptualised 4-3-3) would give us the chance to push Arshavin forward into his ideal role and cause mayhem behind the out-and-out striker.
Of course, with Robin van Persie, Nicklas Bendtner, Eduardo and Carlos Vela all keen on a central forward role - and with the likely addition of Marouane Chamakh this summer - it seems difficult to accommodate them all without changing back to a 4-4-2. Arguably it makes sense to retain a front three so as to make use of their respective versatility. However, it has become clear that, by fielding players of their nature in the wide roles, we end up exposing our full-backs - or just exposing our entire flanks, when there's no cover for marauding wing-backs like Clichy and Eboue.
The old formation seemed to play to our strengths on the overlap. Clichy and Sagna were racking up assists in the 07-08 season, and the decline of this part of their game has been most pronounced. I can't help wondering whether this really is entirely due to the undoubted fall in the quality of their crossing, as there is still a considerable difference between choosing from two strikers who can pull their markers out of position and having to seek out one striker who is being forced beyond reach.
Regardless of whether Fabregas leaves, I really think a switch in formation is worth considering. There is certainly a strong case to be made for 4-3-3 and at times it has worked very well, but to me 4-4-2 seems both defensively safer and likely to give us further options going forward. I've put up a poll on the side so you can vote for one of the two systems, and feel free to add your thoughts below. After that, get outside, enjoy the sun and try to forget the rumours for a few minutes - can't be thinking about Cesc every seven seconds.
Monday, 19 April 2010
Five problems which Wenger MUST address before next season
These are a few points which I feel need to be brought up today, not just because of the Wigan game but because of certain flaws which have manifested themselves for much of the campaign and have been behind our recent collapse.
1. The goalkeeping situation is serious. We cannot afford to have two first-team goalkeepers like Almunia and Fabianski, neither of whom would get a look in at a top six club, performing so poorly and almost constantly making mistakes. It is highly unlikely that both will leave this summer and, unfortunately, it is even possible that both will stay. But both of them have stood in the way of several results this season and it isn't at all like Arsenal to have two goalkeepers costing the team so many points rather than winning them. Almunia is the elder and supposedly at his peak so in some respects it seems more sensible to let him go; however, this would require bringing in a very good goalkeeper who could slot into the first team immediately. Selling him only to promote Fabianski would not be a productive move, and it is clear that real quality is needed between the sticks next year. Anything less than one in, one out would most likely be a failure.
2. A reliable midfielder is needed to supplement our current options. Several members of our midfield cannot play without experienced first-team players around them (with the possible exception of Aaron Ramsey and the wavering Samir Nasri when out of position), and Abou Diaby is a main offender. He has at last shown his quality this season but his form nosedives without the likes of Fabregas, van Persie and Song around him, and his attitude is largely to blame. His body language is simply unacceptable at times: head dropped and shaking, shoulders slumped, face hanging with the expression of a teenaged X Factor reject. He has shown that he can play very well as part of a virtually full-strength first XI, but he cannot be relied upon if he isn't surrounded by the players who bring out the best in him. He is nearly 24 and should be showing far more maturity, without which he will never be a spine player for Arsenal; I believe he should be kept on because of what he brings to the team, but Wenger must realise that Diaby cannot function in an otherwise makeshift midfield. A player who can play in both the holding and box-to-box midfield roles - a fairly experienced one with true quality - is needed to address this and ensure that our midfield is stronger next season when the injuries begin.
3. Mikael Silvestre should not stay on next season. Again, he is not the only one to blame for our poor recent form, but the moments of ineptitude have really piled up and become damaging. Wenger has said that Silvestre is a big influence in the dressing room, but I have seen little evidence of this on the pitch. Many of the younger players already demonstrate far better communication than the Frenchman, and his work-rate in recent matches would have been barely acceptable in the pre-season friendly at Barnet. I wasn't particularly keen on him being signed from United in the first place, but was willing to accept that he could do his bit as a back-up player. However, Ferguson's decision to sell him for a small fee has proven a wise one, as he has clearly been on the wane ever since he arrived. He will be 33 next season; at this age any central defender will be losing his fitness, but one with the quality to play in the Champions League will still have the defensive nous to stay near the top of his game. Sadly, Silvestre has not shown enough of either since he arrived and simply won't cut it at a club of our stature next season. If Arsenal let him go, I doubt we'll see any team in the top half of the table showing much interest.
4. Conversely, Sol Campbell - three years his senior - really should stay on. His pace isn't exactly electrifying but his general fitness is absolutely superb for someone of his age, and the technical side of his game is as good as ever. Most importantly, he can play to our standard while adding certain characteristics which the rest of the team often lacks in the tricky games: confidence, commitment, passion and pride. It is unlikely that he will maintain his current standards all the way through the next 13 months, but he offers more than enough to merit at least back-up status. With Gallas' future at the club uncertain (the Frenchman being another defender who must stay on next season after excelling all year and developing a highly effective partnership with Thomas Vermaelen), the renewal of Campbell's contract is important if we are to maintain consistency in this position.
5. We must plan not only for the next game, but for the matches following. Wenger has made some questionable decisions this season, not least waiting to bring on Robin van Persie, a player who has missed five months of football and who needed a good run around before a couple of fairly big fixtures, until after we had thrown away our two goal lead at Wigan. But I believe a massive turning point was the match against Wolves, in which he fielded all four of our remaining fit centre-backs and both of our holding midfielders. Sol Campbell should have been rested for the away leg against Barcelona, a match that would have been tremendously important for him and in which Mikael Silvestre was poor in his place. Silvestre should have played in the centre against Wolves with Armand Traore on the left; Traore's crossing (arguably the best out of all our full-backs) and ability to hit opponents with pace could have helped to wrap up the win earlier than the 94th minute. Instead, Campbell was too tired for Barcelona, Vermaelen played in yet another match when a rest could have helped to prevent his eventual injury at Spurs, and Alex Song picked up a knock which ruled him out for the last few games - two of these problems could have been prevented on the day. Wenger's policy of focussing the players only on their next match is a sensible and professional one; however, he is the manager and should himself be planning ahead.
1. The goalkeeping situation is serious. We cannot afford to have two first-team goalkeepers like Almunia and Fabianski, neither of whom would get a look in at a top six club, performing so poorly and almost constantly making mistakes. It is highly unlikely that both will leave this summer and, unfortunately, it is even possible that both will stay. But both of them have stood in the way of several results this season and it isn't at all like Arsenal to have two goalkeepers costing the team so many points rather than winning them. Almunia is the elder and supposedly at his peak so in some respects it seems more sensible to let him go; however, this would require bringing in a very good goalkeeper who could slot into the first team immediately. Selling him only to promote Fabianski would not be a productive move, and it is clear that real quality is needed between the sticks next year. Anything less than one in, one out would most likely be a failure.
2. A reliable midfielder is needed to supplement our current options. Several members of our midfield cannot play without experienced first-team players around them (with the possible exception of Aaron Ramsey and the wavering Samir Nasri when out of position), and Abou Diaby is a main offender. He has at last shown his quality this season but his form nosedives without the likes of Fabregas, van Persie and Song around him, and his attitude is largely to blame. His body language is simply unacceptable at times: head dropped and shaking, shoulders slumped, face hanging with the expression of a teenaged X Factor reject. He has shown that he can play very well as part of a virtually full-strength first XI, but he cannot be relied upon if he isn't surrounded by the players who bring out the best in him. He is nearly 24 and should be showing far more maturity, without which he will never be a spine player for Arsenal; I believe he should be kept on because of what he brings to the team, but Wenger must realise that Diaby cannot function in an otherwise makeshift midfield. A player who can play in both the holding and box-to-box midfield roles - a fairly experienced one with true quality - is needed to address this and ensure that our midfield is stronger next season when the injuries begin.
3. Mikael Silvestre should not stay on next season. Again, he is not the only one to blame for our poor recent form, but the moments of ineptitude have really piled up and become damaging. Wenger has said that Silvestre is a big influence in the dressing room, but I have seen little evidence of this on the pitch. Many of the younger players already demonstrate far better communication than the Frenchman, and his work-rate in recent matches would have been barely acceptable in the pre-season friendly at Barnet. I wasn't particularly keen on him being signed from United in the first place, but was willing to accept that he could do his bit as a back-up player. However, Ferguson's decision to sell him for a small fee has proven a wise one, as he has clearly been on the wane ever since he arrived. He will be 33 next season; at this age any central defender will be losing his fitness, but one with the quality to play in the Champions League will still have the defensive nous to stay near the top of his game. Sadly, Silvestre has not shown enough of either since he arrived and simply won't cut it at a club of our stature next season. If Arsenal let him go, I doubt we'll see any team in the top half of the table showing much interest.
4. Conversely, Sol Campbell - three years his senior - really should stay on. His pace isn't exactly electrifying but his general fitness is absolutely superb for someone of his age, and the technical side of his game is as good as ever. Most importantly, he can play to our standard while adding certain characteristics which the rest of the team often lacks in the tricky games: confidence, commitment, passion and pride. It is unlikely that he will maintain his current standards all the way through the next 13 months, but he offers more than enough to merit at least back-up status. With Gallas' future at the club uncertain (the Frenchman being another defender who must stay on next season after excelling all year and developing a highly effective partnership with Thomas Vermaelen), the renewal of Campbell's contract is important if we are to maintain consistency in this position.
5. We must plan not only for the next game, but for the matches following. Wenger has made some questionable decisions this season, not least waiting to bring on Robin van Persie, a player who has missed five months of football and who needed a good run around before a couple of fairly big fixtures, until after we had thrown away our two goal lead at Wigan. But I believe a massive turning point was the match against Wolves, in which he fielded all four of our remaining fit centre-backs and both of our holding midfielders. Sol Campbell should have been rested for the away leg against Barcelona, a match that would have been tremendously important for him and in which Mikael Silvestre was poor in his place. Silvestre should have played in the centre against Wolves with Armand Traore on the left; Traore's crossing (arguably the best out of all our full-backs) and ability to hit opponents with pace could have helped to wrap up the win earlier than the 94th minute. Instead, Campbell was too tired for Barcelona, Vermaelen played in yet another match when a rest could have helped to prevent his eventual injury at Spurs, and Alex Song picked up a knock which ruled him out for the last few games - two of these problems could have been prevented on the day. Wenger's policy of focussing the players only on their next match is a sensible and professional one; however, he is the manager and should himself be planning ahead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
