By Joël Che, October 19, 2008
I didn't see Francesc Fabregas' goal. I left after the Sunderland goal. But I thought Arsenal might score so I kept my mobile phone on and kept checking. Had Arsenal lost, the punters would have been, rightly, asking the question this morning whether a team can win the league after losing 3 matches – especially given that Arsenal has had an easier start and the statistics of the previous years don't favour more than two losses per season for the title.
About the game itself, Arsène Wenger's take was this: "I like to think usually the team that takes the initiative should be rewarded, but it is not always like that in football."
True but more importantly, Arsenal should be ready for that by now. We have seen this now for five seasons, it should not surprise us.
Roy Keane's take was this: "We played Arsenal a number of times last year, we played Chelsea, we played United - we played United here and went 4-4-2 and we lost 4-0, and it could have been seven."
Also true. Roy Keane was right to pick his team for a draw or to minimize the chances of a confidence depleting thumping. Sunderland would not have deserved a win the same way Hull City did.
Since I'm a Gooner I have to wonder what we should have done to win. Wenger has been experimenting with an away team since the start of the season. It is clear that Wenger should not play Samir Nasri and Theo Walcott at the same time away from home in a 4-4-2 formation so he has been working with 5 midfielders with Alex Song, Denilson, Fabregas and Theo Walcott plus 1.
In Kiev it was Emmanuel Eboué. In Bolton it was also Eboué as the fifth man but it didn't work all that good until Arsenal scored. What really worked for Arsenal in that game was that although Bolton were compact, they were adventurous and allowed Emmanuel Adebayor time to take long balls.
Against Sunderland, the fifth man was Robin van Persie. Having him there is like wanting to have your cake and eat it. You can't want to play 5 in midfield but want to have 2 strikers. It is not easy to make it work unless you have a true winger / striker like Eduardo or Carlos Vela.
At half-time, it was pretty clear. Adebayor could not take long balls because Sunderland were extremely compact. If a team is compact and playing 5 in midfield and if your big boys can get the space to out-jump and out-muscle then you need different kinds of players up front. You need movement players. Cute players who can find the variation in small spaces to create chances in a packed defence.
At half-time, it was pretty clear that van Persie, Adebayor and Fabregas as a half-striker were not going to give Arsenal the cutting edge against a 10 man defence. For one thing, the two variations that Arsenal have (thankfully) added to their game this season – crosses and long balls were not working.
Bacary Sagna's crosses met with Adebayor surrounded by 4 defenders and a short Fabregas who was standing way outside the box and RvP way out on the left wing. Fabregas was too far forward to launch earlier long balls to Adebayor but when Kolo Touré or Denilson did, he was surrounded by three players.
Good news then that Wenger has learned to substitute earlier. Nicklas Bendtner and Vela are much better in movement. Nasri is also good in tight spaces but his vision is still extremely poor compared to just about any other player at Arsenal right now. I keep repeating myself that Vela has the most fantastic movement that I have seen at Arsenal for 12 years in the final third – better than Freddie Ljungberg at his best. Above all, Vela can take the ball in tight areas and so can Bendtner.
Bendtner came on and Arsenal changed instantly. He started a move that ended with an assist that RvP should have scored. I really wanted Vela to come in but instead Sunderland scored and I left.
My verdict on the Sunderland game is as follows. First we should know by now how these games work and not complain about teams putting 10men behind the ball. Like Roy Keane rightly put it: "The bottom line for any of these top teams, they will tell you, part of the game is breaking down the opposition."
Second, we should always try to score in the first 30 minutes because we rarely lose when we score first and early. It's almost worth throwing everything at a game early against a mid to low table opponent because you don't want 0-0 at 70 mins even 60 minutes. Most Premiership teams are good enough to score one goal against anybody.
Third, if a team is playing tight and compact let's start with mobile, movement players. Fourth, If we want to play 5 in midfield let really play 5 players in midfield not try to have our cake and eat it by playing a striker there. Lastly, if we are playing low-table teams away who play 5 in midfield should we really do that same? Should we not play a strong midfield quartet instead? They will only have one up front anyway so why go negative too and disrupt our natural balance.
Arsenal had the easiest start of the top four. Manchester United looked like they had lost their way. Right now after 7 games Arsenal are a notable distance behind and United whom we all agreed were in danger of being left out could go above Arsenal with their game in hand. It's definitely not over but it is difficult not to start asking the question now – can Chelsea be caught? They have played big opponents with a significant absentees.
Can we afford to keep Bendtner on the bench?
No comments:
Post a Comment