The start to the Premier League was always going to be tough for the Gunners, as indeed it was for many other teams. Manchester United lost at home despite numerous seemingly strong performances in preseason. Everton drew, Tottenham got lucky, and the top two from last year had to fight very hard for their wins.
In that sense, and with the knowledge that the Gunners are missing key players, the result against Palace was a welcome one. As Wenger often says though, we must step back from the result and analyze the game without taking it into consideration.
It wasn’t a great game of football from the Gunners. There’s no denying that. At the same time, no one should turn a blind eye to the mitigating circumstances and the difficulties faced by other teams that are fighting for the same prizes. Our analysis must, therefore, differentiate between the problems that were understandable and excusable, and those that need to be addressed urgently.
I’d have easily accepted the reasons (insufficient preseason, key players missing, new players still adapting, etc) for the below par effort had this been a one-off performance. But look back at last season objectively and you’ll recall quite a few game against mid to low level teams where Arsenal had to grind out a result. Playing ugly and winning can be a good thing, but only when it’s a rare occurrence in an otherwise dominant run. Last season the Gunners had successful periods but they weren’t dominant ones. And that was the reason I wasn’t too excited about the title challenge. You could see it crumbling once the big games came around. The first blip came in December and then it was all over by the end of March.
Teams that have to consistently fight very hard to beat the smaller clubs will not be able to repeat those performances against the big sides who offer a much more potent attacking threat and are, as an extension, more secure at the back. So, while we should acknowledge the issues that affect the team, it’s very important to also realize there are certain deeper problems that offer genuine cause for concern.
1) Too slow in the central third
I was expecting Palace to sit a little deeper with their two lines right on top of each other with a gap of around 5-7 meters. For a while, thus, it surprised me when they seemed to be pressing around the centre line. Closer observation made things clearer.
Palace were really just sitting back, about 10-15 yards inside their own half, while maintaining good spacing from a defensive point of view. The Gunners had the ball around the centre line but instead of moving it around quickly, too many players were looking to make something happen all the time. Their desire and spirit were admirable but their tactical maturity and game intelligence were not.
When pass-and-move works as it’s supposed to, the opponents are constantly chasing the ball and have very little time to catch their breath. But sometimes the players in possession don’t make the simple pass that’s become available due to a teammates movement and instead wait for another opportunity for a better pass further forward. This discourages the teammate who’s showed for the ball while the others up front are waiting because they have very little space in a congested area. The rhythm of the possession game is disrupted and the opponent gets a chance to close the ball down higher up the pitch.
This explains how the Eagles were able to press the ball in the centre. They were not very good at it though and committed many fouls. They committed 19 fouls in this game and 12 of those came in the central third of the pitch.
12/19 fouls in the central third
Better teams would have a few successful tackles there instead of the fouls and these would lead to very dangerous counter-attacking opportunities.
To an extent, Arsenal’s problem was understandable. The two players on the right flank were debutants and the midfield combination, with Wilshere and Ramsey in box-to-box roles, isn’t the usual one. Sanogo hasn’t played too many games at the centre of the attack either. It’s hard to find fluidity under such circumstances.
Most of Wenger’s teams played their best football when the players get a run of games together and there is some stability. While it is completely understandable, it’s also not good enough to win the major titles anymore. Injury problems, need for rotations, fixture congestion, and other factors mean that the same line up cannot play bulk of the games. It is, as a result, absolutely imperative that Wenger finds a way to develop the tactical level of his players so they can find the fluidity irrespective of the starting eleven and other circumstances.
They have to rely on their passing and movement to create pockets of space rather than waiting for space to appear in which they can play the killer pass. It can be tedious, but the degree of precision and efficiency they achieve in this process will have a direct bearing on where they finish the season.
2) Defensive thought and set-piece preparation
Palace were resolute in defence and worked very hard. Credit to them for that. However, it’s impossible to say they offered any offensive threat whatsoever. Despite that, the Gunners some contrived to make mistake after mistake in gifting them a goal. This is another major cause for concern.
It started with a poor pass from Chambers. Part of it is excused by his youthful exuberance and inexperience. We can also appreciate that he was trying to do something positive. This though, was another case of a player taking unnecessary risk when many simpler options were available. It is very important that defensive players (Centre Backs, Defensive Midfielders, Full Backs in defensive positions) are constantly aware of the shape of the team at any given moment and work very hard to ensure they don’t lose the ball. And never in a central area because that completely opens the game up for the opponent.
Once Chambers gave the ball away and the counter-attack was on, the second mistake came from Szczesny. He’s been trying to play the sweeper, as was obvious from a couple of preseason games, but he clearly doesn’t know how to pick the right moments. I thought Koscielny was in a good position to deal with the ball and the Pole could have stayed back without any problems.
Having decided to charge forward, Szczesny again betrayed his inability to assess danger as he lumped the ball forward into a very dangerous area where there was no teammate to challenge a grateful opponent. I don’t know whether he was trying to play a pass-cum-clearance, in which case it was poor execution, or if simply didn’t think about what he was doing. The best option for the ‘Keeper in such cases is to put the ball out of play. This gives everyone a chance to get back into position. Obviously, he’d have to adjust his body shape as he arrived at the ball in order to hit it towards the touchline. Time would not have been a problem had he been clear about it from the moment he sensed danger.
The errors by Chambers and Szczesny show a lack of defensive thought that has repeatedly plagued the Arsenal defence over the years in one form or another.
Koscielny made a good block (although the shot was probably going wide) and then a good tackle as the ball went out of play. The danger should have been averted but for Arsenal’s set-piece vulnerability.
There must have been some analysis in the summer that suggested that the Gunners didn’t need a man on any post. Maybe there is merit to it, which will be proven in the long run. This is something we should keep an eye on.
The main problem in defending that corner seemed to be a poor understanding of roles.
For instance, Sanogo was at the near post. Usually strikers are needed there and do a good job of clearing such balls. However, when Chamakh made a run and took up a position just in front of him, the youngster seemed confused. Koscielny then pointed, and presumably said something, after which the lanky forward went a couple of steps ahead to mark one of his predecessors. That little movement probably meant the ball was able to float over his head and drop perfectly for Hangeland.
The goalscorer’s run and Arsenal’s response to that also showed the problems with the requirements of the system as understood by the players. Initially, it was Sanchez marking the giant defender. In fairness, the Chilean was simply marking a zone (probably pre-assigned in training) that the Norwegian was occupying. At first Alexis went with the run of the former Fulham man, as if by instinct. And then, confused, he let him go, glancing back with a worried look to check if his zone had been compromised. All this while, Koscielny was not aware of his counterpart’s movement and it was too late by the time he reacted.
A lot of these things came together for that goal to materialize. Had Arsenal put a man on the back post, or if Sanogo had held his ground, or if Sanchez communicated to Koscielny the moment Hangeland made that run, this goal could have been averted or at least made much harder to score with pressure on the header.
Mertesacker’s return should help things but I think a lot more work is needed on the training ground.
3) Too many take-ons
The Gunners attempted 37 take-ons and lost most of them.
Alexis was successful with 3 of his 10 attempts. Ramsey managed 1 out of 6. Sanogo had a fifty percent success rate from his four attempts and Cazorla did just better with 5 out of 8 (although he lost a couple that broke promising moments down).
This numbers are too high and corroborate the tendency to do too much as discussed earlier. When things are not going your way it’s better to revert to the basics and keep things simple. I’d rather they lost possession trying intricate combinations with quick touches, or when making more runs in behind, or via intercepted through-balls rather than lost take-on attempts.
That said, we should see some improvement on this front once the players get their sharpness back. Nevertheless, it would be better if they’re aware of their sharpness levels and make appropriate choices based on that.
The Positives
Apart from the result of course, there were a few other details that were appreciable.
The equalizer was well worked and Koscielny’s header was clever because it was a tough angle.
I also liked the way the team kept going till the end. Wenger made good substitutions. Their concentration levels right at the end were excellent and I also enjoyed the way Koscielny and Giroud directed their headers purposefully.
Debuchy took up really aggressive positions and that can lead to threatening moments if used well.
Some other positives are covered in individual analysis.
This section is much smaller than the problem areas discussed above but don’t take that to be a ratio of the bad and the good from this game. Areas of concern need some elaboration and thus that write up is much longer. We expect Arsenal to win such games, which in turn implies the team is really good. There is no need to explain the strong points we see every day.
Individual Performances
Szczesny: Was a spectator for long periods. Handling was good when the ball did come at him. Didn’t have any saves to make. The lack of defensive thought discussed above is a concern. Could he have done more to organize the defence for the first corner?
Debuchy: Saw a lot of the ball and used it well. I loved his shot on the swivel in injury time and the positions he took up in the box when the ball was on the other flank. Wasn’t really tested in defence. I’m not sure if his aggressive positioning was just natural or part of the game plan. Will have to keep an eye on this in other games and see how it changes based on the opposition. It’s important that the full back doesn’t lose sight of his defensive duties or get in the way of his more talented teammates.
Chambers: One mistake, bad as it was, shouldn’t take too much away from an otherwise assured outing. Was confident on the ball, got tight to the attackers and made tackles when he had to, didn’t commit unnecessary fouls and was wise enough to make one when the opponent got away from him (we’ll have to see how he handles better and faster opponents). Had these moments of stepping out of the defence with the ball, but they seemed hesitant. He can do more with the ball but it’s only fair that some time and experience is needed.
Koscielny: Excellent goal, great block and tackle, good helping hand (or head) for the winner, could probably have done something more to prevent the goal, reliable distribution, seems like he’s picked up where he left off last season.
Gibbs: Was a lot more conservative when compared to his teammate on the other flank, which was a safe choice. Passing could have been better. Seems a little bit off his best at the moment.
Monreal: Was very good in the attacking areas with his positioning, runs, and passing. Gibbs could learn form that. His weakness in one-v-ones was not tested.
Apart from the mistakes discussed above, the defensive players had a very comfortable game. There were times when the full backs were diagonally opposite in the opposition half with Debuchy near the penalty area and Gibbs around the centre line. I’m not sure if this was a conscious tactical choices based on their qualities or if it just worked out that way.
Arteta: Typical game from Arsenal’s captain. Helped with ball circulation constantly, kept things simple and brought others into the game, got into good defensive positions, I liked the way he dropped back at times to let Chambers step up.
Ramsey: Another player who saw a lot of the ball and worked hard constantly. That said, it wasn’t a particularly good performance. He really needs to simplify his game and learn to pick his moments. I don’t know how long these decisive moments are going to last and it’d be a shame if the team dropped points when players are trying too hard.
Wilshere: Was a foul magnet. Played deeper than Ramsey and didn’t venture forward as much. A decent outing but passing could have been crisper/quicker.
Cazorla: He hasn’t looked at his best all through the preseason and this game wasn’t very different. Just seems a little off-the-pace and a couple of promising moves broke down when he was tackled. Movement is good and I think he will do better if the central midfielders and the wide player on the right make full use of his vision and technique. Wenger will probably give some thought to starting him in a central attacking midfield role while Ozil finds fitness.
Sanchez: Saw so much of the ball he seemed more like a midfielder than a forward. Came inside all the time and made a few runs in behind. I’d have preferred it if he spent more time on the defensive line threatening the space behind. Passing needs some calibration. His dummies, the angles on some attempted through-balls, and general movement highlight a great football brain. Now Wenger has to get it to synch with others in the team. Had some interesting moments when playing on the left. I think he can do better from there if he wants to keep coming inside because that provides a more natural passing angle for him as a right-footed player.
Chamberlain: One powerful run that lacked end product. Steady effort otherwise. I think his running on the right and Sanchez on the left can be very interesting in some games.
Crystal Palace completed 123 passes in the game. Arteta was on 100, Ramsey 92. The midfield was in complete control of the ball and territory. But they have to convert that control into greater incisive threat.
Sanogo: His technique is poor and that will limit the contribution he can make, particularly in games where space in the attacking areas is very tight. Also showed his immaturity at times. For instance, he had a great chance to play a one-two with Sanchez and get in-behind but he went for a wildly ambitious shot from outside the box.
Giroud: Had greater presence than Sanogo and was a lot more involved. Good header in the build-up of the winner. Had a couple of other moments in the box that could have troubled Speroni on another day.
Wenger: Some of the problems mentioned above are not new ones, even if the players are new. He’ll have to solve these issues if any sort of a challenge has to last the distance.
Posted by desigunner 
Thoughts On Debuchy, Ospina, Chambers, Jenkinson, And Emirates Cup
August 1, 2014The last couple of weeks have been good for Arsenal as some of the obvious holes in the squad have been plugged with quality players who are, for the most part, comparable to the ones they are replacing or even somewhat better.
This being a late article, here are some quick observations that stand out about each of transfers including comparisons with departing players.
Debuchy
Even though the new Arsenal right back started over his predecessor for France at the World Cup, I’ve a feeling he will have to prove himself all over again at Arsenal. It’s not because his quality is questionable, but more due to the important role that Sagna played for the Gunners.
Wenger’s team uses the flanks as an outlet almost all the time when they are trying to build from the back and the opponent is working hard to close the options down in the centre of the field. Sagna’s technical ability, the willingness to receive the ball under pressure, composure in holding and passing it, and other skills like concentration, physicality, and tenacity made him a vital cog in this process. Debuchy is coming from a team that didn’t pass the ball as much as Arsenal. According to stats on Squawka, there is a clear difference in their passes per 90 (Sagna – 53; Debuchy – 36) and pass accuracy (S- 85%; D- 73%).
It won’t be a surprise if Debuchy improved his numbers just by virtue of being in a technically stronger side this season but this is an aspect I’ll be watching closely in the first few competitive games. His passing accuracy for France at the World Cup was just below 78% but total number of passes was still close to his Newcastle number. Any breakdown in the buildup play can lead to defensive problems as well as that situation of the attack being separated from the defence without a link in between. The adjustment here has to be very quick.
It’s interesting that the two are very close to each other in terms of aerial duels contested and won because that’s another outlet for Arsenal when the opponent is somewhat successful with their pressing.
Debuchy seems busier of the two when comparing some of the defensive metrics. He wins more tackles, loses more tackles, makes more interceptions and blocks, and commits more fouls. Again, it’s hard to pinpoint just how much of this is down to the playing styles of the two teams rather than individual qualities. That said, I do get the feeling that Debuchy is slightly more aggressive as a defender and is looking to break forward and get into attacking areas compared to Sagna who was more about providing width and options on the flank even when he got into advanced areas.
Despite his relatively reserved style, fighting spirit, tendency to chase back at full tilt, and endless stamina, there were enough instances in the last couple of years when we all have thought the full-back was not where he should have been. Part of this is down to the manager’s instructions and this is another area where I want to see how Debuchy performs. I’m not convinced he has some of Sagna’s aforementioned qualities and there could be trouble if he keeps getting caught higher up the pitch.
On the positive side, there is a greater chance of getting decisive attacking contribution from the man who’s come to London than the man who’s gone to Manchester. A clever and quick interception just inside the Arsenal half, for instance, could provide a great launch pad for the pace that Wenger could have at his disposal if key players remain fit. I’m also hoping for slightly better crossing, timing of overlapping runs, and attacking contribution on set-pieces from the former Newcastle man.
All-in-all, Debuchy seems like a reasonable replacement for an important player with some risks that will have to be identified and mitigated, and the potential to be a little more exciting and decisive.
Ospina
Fabianski’s Arsenal career has been crazy. From some unbelievable howlers to keeping goal in the title-drought-ending FA Cup win, he’s evoked all kinds of extreme emotions. I thought it was nice that he left with a trophy, but it also felt like something that was good for all concerned. There was something about Fabianski, maybe just the multitude of mistakes from the past, that made it very hard for me to trust him as main goalkeeper at the club.
Given that I’m not a big Szczesny fan either, it seemed essential that the club brings in someone who can do better. Wenger’s answer is Colombian international David Ospina.
In case you haven’t read/seen these already, here are a couple of interesting articles on the Nice guy
And here are a couple of videos…
I haven’t seen much of him outside of the World Cup and some video YouTube, but even in this limited watching experience a few qualities are immediately obvious.
He seems like a goalkeeper with great reflexes and one who keeps his eye on the ball till the very end. That latter part is a big improvement on Szczesny who has this tendency of committing far too early. Training with the Colombian can help the Pole improve. Arsenal’s latest Ligue 1 import is also better than the current goalie when it comes to recovering after making the first save. It’s another crucial detail because both have the tendency to put the ball back into the danger area from the initial save.
None of the Arsenal goalkeepers in recent years have been particularly good in the air and Wenger has finally found some degree of control at the back in such situations by getting his outfield players, mainly centre backs, to take more responsibility. The Colombian does seem the aggressive type but I’m not convinced he will be any better than Szczesny at commanding the air in the penalty box. In that sense, this will still be a work in progress for the coaching staff as they have to ensure the ‘Keepers don’t drop the ball, so to speak, on set-pieces and crosses.
The Colombian’s aggression will also be worth watching when it comes to one-v-ones. Szczesny is adept at giving away penalties and been lucky to get away without a red card on more than one occasion. Fabianski’s wanderlust has given many a gooner a nervous breakdown. Can Ospina do better? I don’t know the answer to that but I’m very eager to find out. He can offer a marked improvement to the Gunners if he combines his concentration and ability to watch the ball till the very end with intelligent decision making, something which might take a bit of time to develop in a new, faster, and more physical league.
While I don’t encourage drawing direct conclusions from it, the following stats comparison using the Squawka tool is quite interesting.
click to enlarge
All things considered, it’s hard to make a case for Szczesny being the first choice. I hope Wenger is ruthless and decisive here.
Chambers and Jenkinson
There has been a need for a versatile defensive player at Arsenal for at least a couple of years now. Wenger has tried to sign a few such players during this period including the likes of Smalling and Jones, who are, in part, comparable to the latest young gun that Wenger has signed.
Calum Chambers seems like a talented prospect with potential to be a very good multifaceted defensive player. He seems to have composure, technique, and game intelligence, which should provide a solid foundation. He lacks experience, obviously, and his mental attributes haven’t really been tested yet to the fullest extent. This will happen over the next season or two as he takes the field in high pressure games. I’m hoping to see a steep learning curve along with the burning desire to get better with every game.
In recent years I’ve felt that a lot of young players have hit their performance ceiling just after or shortly before starting their top flight Arsenal careers. Afobe, Aneke, JET, Miquel, Frimpong, Coquelin, Eastmond, Eisfeld, and others have been on the fringes without quite making the cut in a convincing manner. At this moment, it’s hard to say even the likes of Szczesny, Wilshere, and Chamberlain deserve to be first choice for Arsenal even though they came in with much higher talent than their aforementioned young teammates. The likes of Djourou and Senderos didn’t fulfill the promise shown in their younger years either. Exploring this in depth calls for a separate article so I won’t get into the merits and demerits of the observation.
Nonetheless, Jenkinson is another example. I can’t say he’s improved a lot during his stay at the Emirates. There is a common misconception – Even leading to amusing suggestions that he should start ahead of Sagna after the Frenchman returned to fitness – that he did very well in a phase when Sagna was injured but the reality was that he was used in a more conservative role to hide his weaknesses. His performances were effective but hardly excellent. This was covered in various articles on this blog during that period and was pretty evident once the Frenchman got back to fitness and showed everyone what Arsenal had been missing.
Chambers is undoubtedly an improvement on the West Ham bound Arsenal fan in almost every aspect, except maybe pace and stamina but we’ll have to watch and see on that. That said, I hope Jenkinson has a good time at West Ham leading to a respectable top flight career and potentially bringing a substantially higher chunk of change to the Arsenal coffers than the 3 Million reportedly offered by Hull recently.
I’m also hopeful that Chambers will have a better time at Arsenal than many of the young players listed above mainly because of his better game intelligence. It should allow him to absorb more from his teammates and coaches, which in turn should result in a higher yield from the same hard work.
Emirates Cup
To say that the World Cup has been disruptive to Arsenal’s preparations for the upcoming season would be a massive understatement.
From the first choice eleven that I’d pick, Koscielny, Giroud, Debuchy, Sanchez, and Ospina have only come back to training in the last week or so. Mertesacker and Özil are still on vacation while Walcott is injured. Even if Szczesny starts in the first few games, that’s seven first choice players with little or no preseason training.
Furthermore, those who have been training didn’t quite look up to speed in the last game against the New York Red Bulls. Even with the caveat that it’s relatively early days in preseason, there is some cause for concern in my opinion because Arsenal have a tricky start to the season.
With those thoughts in mind, the importance of the Emirates Cup cannot be overstated. I don’t mean that they have to win the trophy. That’s pointless. But the players have to click together and find their sharpness/rhythm back. Wenger’s teams are generally extremely dependent on flow/momentum because so much of the play is instinctive and interlinked. Mertesacker and Özil might not be physically ready for those games and the lack of a centre back signing along with the uncertainty around Vermaelen only makes things more complicated. Arsene Wenger has to figure out his starting line-up for the first couple of games, at least, and he doesn’t have too many friendly games to suss his options out.
The training camp in Austria was a permanent fixture not too long ago and I believe bringing it back on the itinerary instead of a prolonged overseas visit was a good idea for this season. The performance of the team in the Emirates Cup will tell us if I’m right in thinking that. And more importantly, it’ll give us a good idea about the team’s readiness for a serious challenge.
Follow @goonerdesi