Manchester United 1-0 Arsenal: Clever Park header sends United back to the top
The starting line-ups
Manchester United came out on top in a game where neither side played their best football.
Sir Alex Ferguson sacrificed Dimitar Berbatov to go with a 4-5-1 / 4-3-3 formation. Paul Scholes was not fit enough to make the squad, so the side essentially picked itself after the decision about formation.
Arsene Wenger kept the usual 4-2-3-1 shape. Cesc Fabregas was only fit for the bench, and Tomas Rosicky was picked ahead of Robin van Persie in the central attacking midfield role.
The game took a long time to really get going. It was scrappy because of the concession of too many free-kicks in the central midfield zone (Arsenal more at fault than United here) and too many misplaced passes from both sides.
That was the main reason for the lack of goalmouth action, and it’s also worth considering that both managers selected slightly more conservative XIs than they could have done – if Berbatov and van Persie were playing, the midfield battle would have been less congested – instead we had six central midfielders who weren’t really looking to create, though Michael Carrick did well in the first half, and Anderson was good throughout.
Wide zones
With nothing happening in the middle, we had to look wide. Arsenal’s wide players often made diagonal runs into the centre of the pitch (and occasionally to the opposite flank) which allowed the full-backs forward well, though the crossing of Gael Clichy and Bacary Sagna was disappointing.
United’s two wide players should get some credit for that – Park was typically hard-working but Nani has also become a good player defensively. There was a stark contrast with Arsenal’s equivalent players – Andrei Arshavin and Samir Nasri played higher up the pitch, and then Arshavin dwelt on the ball to concede an unnecessary free-kick when he did find himself on the edge of his own box.
The energy of Park paid off most obviously going the other way, however, and his stooped backwards header for the only goal of the game was excellent. It came from a (deflected) Nani cross, and Nani was the best of the four wingers in an attacking sense – he also won the penalty in the second half.
Goalkeepers
The distribution of the goalkeepers was an interesting difference between the sides. Wojciech Szczesny had a good debut overall, but his distribution was wayward throughout – sometimes it looked as if he hadn’t even considered that his side would want to retain possession of the ball, and simply hoofed it high into the air towards no-one in particular.
This was nothing more than inexperience and he improved in this respect after half-time (possibly after a word from his manager) but it’s not unreasonable to suggest that Arsenal’s passing, which was amazingly poor by their standards,suffered because they weren’t able to get into a steady rhythm from the back.
Edwin van der Sar had definitely been given instructions what to do with the ball, though – at various points he thumped quick, pinpoint balls downfield for Rooney to pick up and take on Arsenal’s centre-backs, as if United were trying to do what Spurs and Braga have done so well in recent weeks – hit Arsenal with direct attacks from back to front.
Arsenal were scared of Rooney. Although he didn’t turn in a stunning performance and his most notable contribution was a penalty miss, Arsenal defended much deeper than usual – probably because of both (a) his raw pace in behind and (b) the fact that Arsenal’s high line was massacred by Rooney’s brilliant false nine role in the previous fixture between the sides.
Second half
Arsenal were better after half-time. They moved the ball more quickly and more ambitiously, and they had a spell when they should have got back into the game. Marouane Chamakh didn’t react quick enough to convert their best chance on 56 minutes, and a double substitution came soon after.
Robin van Persie and Cesc Fabregas replaced Rosicky and Jack Wilshere (who was Arsenal’s brightest player but had picked up an injury) and Arsenal moved to a more attacking version of their shape, that became 4-4-2 when van Persie moved upfront.
They didn’t look particularly good after this change, however, and throughout the game Arsenal lacked invention on the ball from individual attackers, as well as quality movement in the final third.
United’s back four all had superb games, winning 19 of 28 challenges between them. Rio Ferdinand’s return to the side to replace Jonny Evans has resulted in United’s “average goals conceded per game” statistic being halved.
Conclusion
Neither played as well as their manager would have hoped, but United remain the side more able to get results in this situation.
In various games this season (West Brom, Newcastle, here) Arsenal’s passing ability has completely deserted them. Arshavin was particularly wasteful, Rosicky couldn’t find space to work in, and the substitutes had little influence.
United also lacked invention, with only Nani consistently providing an attacking threat – but after going ahead every member of the side played their role excellently, summed up by the fact that Ferguson only made one change to the side, and that was after 85 minutes.
Manchester United 1-0 Arsenal: Clever Park header sends United back to the top
This wasn’t a very interesting game, was it?
i expected a bit more from this game. However, the defending from Man Utd was brilliant.
Defending from Manchester was excellent, Rio and Vidic were outstanding this evening.
It was OK. Arsenal were poor and more than toothless in attack. Wenger has, of course, found an excuse and blamed the pitch (which to be fair did look slightly dodgy) but they didn’t pass the ball accurately enough let alone rapidly enough. Chamakh was abysmal I have to say, once again showing his inability to play “the Arsenal way” i.e. with neat close control and quick interchanges along the ground. They defended well enough, but weren’t forced to do much more. Can’t say either of them moved out of 3rd gear. The Arse were far too static and pedestrian in the final third. Quite how Wenger hasn’t started VP or introduced him earlier – as well as allowing Chamakh to complete a full 90 – is beyond me.
i thought chamakh was arsenal’s best player. he was the only one who looked remotely like holding on to the ball – without him, and his work rate, it would have come back at our fragile defence more quickly, and we would have lost by more
I agree with Steve; Chamakh was quite good IMO. His hold-up play was far from poor.
I don’t seem to be able to click on a ‘Reply’ to either of your msgs so I’ll have to write it here. Are you actually kidding me??? I am not an Arsenal fan and ironically enough during the first half I was explaining to my (equally-non-Arsenal-supporting) friend how Arsenal fans don’t seem to mind him as he’s been scoring and how it’s easy when the team you support brings in a new player who seems to be doing OK to think he’s wonderful and extremely useful and gifted etc. I can’t deny he’s been scoring a bit here or there, but he is the point whereby most of Arsenal’s attacks break down. He might win the odd header here or there like yesterday but I’m afraid technically, when the ball is on the ground, he is not good enough. The sheer amount of times he stumbled over the ball or was easily dispossessed after failing to bring it under his spell was shocking. His passing (even simple, two yard passing) left a lot to be desired, and was for much of the game painful to watch – more painful than the poor balls played by a lot of other players (from both sides).
Don’t delude yourselves guys. He ain’t no VP, and Wenger’s stubbornness at fielding him consistently has already started to screw you over.
The pitch was poor on purpose. It was watered to freeze hard and bumpy on top and remain soft and insulated under the crust. If you were to walk on it the pitch would feel firm but you really needed to treat it like a muddy surface. If I had to guess there was alot of rain followed by a cold snap just prior to the game or it was cold and the pitch was purposely wattered to obtain those conditions within 4 hours prior to the game. Which team benifited from the field conditions?
It left a lot to be desired from both teams to be honest, didn’t help that united were playing defensively. Interestingly enough after the game Wenger talked about the quality of the pitch having an effect in the game:
“Overall the technical quality of the game suffered from a very bad pitch and that was why on both sides you’ve seen unusual technical mistakes.”
Don’t think he’s off with that comment, any thoughts?
he just needed an excuse, you know, arsenal were totally outplayed by man utd in the first half and rooney even missed a penalty in the second half
Never a penalty though. Not in a million years.
Yes, the ‘deliberate’ in ‘deliberate handball’ needs to be emphasised. Not sure what Clichy was meant to do, surely the ball was kicked at his hand?
Clichy shouldn’t have had his hand away from his body and on the ground in position to block the cutback – that’s why the penalty was given. It could have gone either way and anyone with a biased point of view is going to see it the way they want. “Deliberate” doesn’t only mean he has to move his arm into the path of the ball, it also means when a player places his arm in a position that gives him an advantage. That’s what Clichy did and that’s why the penalty was given. Could have gone either way and I don’t think there’d be room for complaint if it wasn’t given either. As close to a 50/50 decision as there is.
he was on the floor and had his weight on his arm, making it very difficult for him to get it out of the way. the linesman made a sweeping gesture when he flagged as if clichy had moved his arm towards the ball. it was a very harsh decision
@ SamF – It’s no different than if he’d jumped to block a cross with his arms outstretched to the side in order to balance himself jumping: it’d be a penalty if the cross hit his arm. It’s why some coaches teach their players to put their arms behind their backs when jumping to disrupt crosses. Sure, Clichy was unlucky, and as I said, there couldn’t really be any complaints if Webb hadn’t given it, but there’s no real basis other than bias for arguing the decision he made.
And the linesman’s gesture could simply have been to emphasize to Webb that the ball had struck his arm; trying to interpret signals like that without knowing what was said between the two is grasping at straws in a manner reminiscent of today’s column on 365 from the notorious half-wit Pete Gill (not saying at all that you are too, just that Pete Gill’s column usually combines some good points with some fantastic Daily Mail levels of journalism and punditry.)
Excuse or not, the surface was comically poor. The number of times players for both teams tried to cut only to fall face-first was unusually high for anything other than a U-8 game.
I wouldn’t say totally outplayed considering their goal was a bit lucky and the penalty call was very harsh. Wenger did give credit to United for playing great defense and I really think he has a point about the pitch, United didn’t look as fluid as usual not to mention Arsenal who misplaced passes all day.
Wouldn’t be surprised – didn’t see pitch close up or hear commentators say anything to judge, but would explain why, passing from both sides was very bad…
It was a terrible choppy mess of a pitch. Think how the Wembley pitch looked but not quite as bad.
No, it wasn’t. I thought the goal would’ve opened it up a bit in the second half, and it did a bit early on when Arsenal were on top for 15 mins. But both sides were too ‘responsible’ for this to be entertaining. Arsenal didn’t push their defensive line up because of Rooney (only after 80 mins or so did Koscielny make a few forward runs, but that’s not the same really), and that allowed United a bit of time in transition when they won the ball. In turn, only the ’senior’ fullbacks (Evra and Sagna) got forward for their respective sides – they each attempted (and I think also completed) the most passes for their particular teams, followed by each team’s holding midfielders, Carrick and Song. Rafael and Clichy got forward far less than usual, since the dangermen (Nani and sometimes Nasri) were on their sides.
one of the post that’s really make sense..
how could you say clever, just lucky
It was a lucky goal, but park’s header was also a clever one. like Hernandez’s several weeks ago
He put thought behind it because had to move back to get the header, he could have just headed it more normally but then it would’t have gone towards goal.
Well he tried to head it in, and it went in, so I’ll go for clever
the luck came in terms of the cross deflected to him. i dont see how the header was lucky, it was excellent – inventive perhaps is the word
the header was undeniably good. It was not, however, a cross. Nani was clearly shooting and clichy closed him down well, which he did throughout the game with very little cover. It was clever of darren fletcher to often make overlapping runs on that side to exploit this.
I thought nani and rooney were both a bit too greedy when in promising positions, there was was one occasion where rooney took down a high ball excellently and then turned and had a shot rather than playing in one of two onrushing man utd midfielders who would have been going at arsenal’s centre halves with pace (which on recent evidence is not something any arsenal fan would want to see).
I’d say that’s the spot on. Maybe I was wrong when saying lucky header. I should’ve said lucky goal. The fact is what you said, that the cross was lucky.
It pretty much epitomised what we’ve known for some time now:
A) Man United win when they really need to
B) Park Ji always has a habit of popping up with vital goals
C) Wenger still doesn’t have a plan B
D) Arshavin goes missing more often than not
E) United’s defence is once again looking top notch
F) Rosicky puts in yet another anaemic performance
I actually expected United to put more past Arsenal but a combination of lacking fluidity and poor choices in the final third ultimately put an end to that. I think this game just like the Arsenal – Chelsea one in September shows that Arsenal are still quite some way off winning this league
It was horrible, watching all those misplaced passes in the first half almost hurt physically. Premiership is really bad this season. Hope it will get better come new year, otherwise Champions League will be a cause of two Spanish teams.
I think the game was decided by the point that united were able to both (A) pressure high up the pitch and (B) defend deeper when lost possession – usually it’s impossible to do both at the same time but the endless energy of Anderosn, Park, Fletcher made it possible. Song was often forced to get back to help the miserable arsenal defenders and United dominated the match except 15 minutes in the middle of the second half and the final couple of minutes.
I was very impressed with United’s defending from the front. Rooney didn’t have a great game in an attacking sense but he was absolutely tireless in closing down Squillaci and Koscielny, and Arsenal had real trouble building from the back in the first half. As you say, ZM, Szczesny’s distribution didn’t help.
Flooding the centre of midfield is an excellent tactic against Arsenal. It’s safer to cede space on the flanks, because both Arshavin and Nasri prefer to cut in, and neither Clichy nor Sagna are great crossers. Even if they were, I’m not sure it would make much difference; with Arsenal’s formation only Chamakh/Bendtner is going to be a real threat in the air, and it’s always going to be a struggle for one forward to get much change out of Vidic and Ferdinand aerially.
The trouble is, as an Arsenal fan, I can’t quite see what Wenger could have done to change things around. He could maybe have pushed Van Persie (or Bendtner) up alongside Chamakh, switching to a fluid 4-4-2, but then you’re exposing the centre of midfield. Steve McManaman on the broadcast I was watching kept asking for Walcott, but Theo isn’t particularly good at beating players in one-on-ones, and by the time he came on United were dropping deep so quickly that there weren’t really many opportunities for him to get in behind the defence.
Do you see anything Wenger could have done, ZM?
Arsenal is similar to Chelsea. no second option in tactics. The team needs diversity in style of players.
I agree, I’m slightly at a loss. I think Fabregas could have played higher up when he came on, but apart from that…I think Wenger made the right changes
i was hoping for bendtner instead of walcott. to be fair, theo did ok, but i thought with nasri drifting in from the left and clichy motoring up the wing, a cross to the far post finding bendtner up against evra, with rvp and chamakh in the box too, was a better option
in the last 15 minutes, utd sat so deep and conceded possession. bendtner would have offered a real, direct threat
Good shout with the idea of Bendtner but Clichy has a cross similiar to Wayne Bridge! Although the Arsenal fullbacks, as always, have space and time to put in a cross, so why doesn’t Wenger put on Vela, RvP or any left footer with a decent cross at LB for the final 10-15mins. Or is that just crazy?
Imagine RvP or Vela at LB up against Nani. Yeah, crazy.
Everyone keeps talking about a what Arsenal could have done differently offensivly…IMO plan “B” would have been more of a change in point of attack. For example, multiple time in the game when Arsenal pushed the ball deep into ManUs half they pushed it out wide and let either Sagna or Clichy clip the ball into the box…this did not work, with the exception of the header that Chama put in straight away to VDS in the 1st half. The only effective moment came when Nasri cut in diagonally towards the goal and had a pop.
Again it was same ol Arsenal, trying to create the perfect goal and not taking multiple shots on goal just to see what came out.
Arsenal could have more luck running towards the touch line and cutting back into the box as Nasri and Walcott have done all season.
Simply humping the ball into the box, and not really on frame, will not work against such a dominant defense.
Arsenal’s lack of movement in the final third let them down and throughout they didn’t have enough possession of the ball. Nasri was too isolated on the right in the first-half. He should have been in the middle. Arsenal’s only chances came from long range efforts and they should have resisted crossing high-balls when Ferdinand and Vidic are there. Not a good game overall. Song was rubbish and that was such a harsh penalty, 2-0 would have been very unfair. I think Fabregas’ piece of skill was the highlight for Arsenal, although he didn’t end up keeping the ball in.
Interesting point about the centre backs being scared of Rooney, I kept noticing that neither was challenging for balls in the air until late in the 2nd half. This seemed very strange and could have caused heaps more problems for the back line.
everyone is talking about the lack of a plan b, but what would it have been? Presumably a more direct game, with more balls peppered into the box toward Chamakh. The flaw in that is Vidic and Ferdinand’s utter dominance in the air. A stereotypical plan b would have been swallowed up today by United’s in form Center Backs. The real flaw was lack of dangerous passing, with Arshavin in particular rarely being a threat. Their real plan B is to use Walcott’s pace to get behind the opponent, even that couldn’t destabilize United’s back line
Arsenal’s midfield trio, for all their creativity lacked some penetration.
Had Van Persie instead of Rosicky being playing in the advanced role, I think it would have caused Utd problems, in that he could have been a Sneider-type trequartista, looking to benefit from the movement of |Chamak ahead of him.
I think the main differences between the two teams atm are:
1. Defence (especially in the centre)
2. Tactical versatility.
Koscielny looked skahey again (eg. he lost the aerial ghallenge, which resulted in ManU’s goal) and was in all kind of problems with Rooney’s physical presence. Also Arsenal’s full-back’s offer very little support to their attack, Sagna having the defensive qualities to make up for it, but Clichy is, well, just fast. I don’t know is it just his form, but Clichy isn’t just good enough at the moment. If I was Wenger,a quality left-back would be topping my list in january.
It also seems strange to me, that when you have players like Walcott and Vela in your team, and your playing at Old Trafford, which is a freaking landing strip, you don’t try to utilise their pace. On a pitch of that size, there’s allways space somewhere, whether it’s behind the d-line or on the sides, but it’s there. In the match Arsenal merely banged their head to the wall, trying to play it trough the middle since Nasri drifts to the centre and Arshavin is cutting inside 90% of the time. ManU did far better in that department with Nani and Jurassic Park. (Late in the match Fergie played Nani very high up on the pitch for counter attacking purposes, which almost matearialized. He really likes to terrorize Clichy, doesn’t he?)
All in all, it really wasn’t a match to remember, but it was well deserved victory for ManU. Solid defending, creating few good chances and they somewhat nullified Arsenal.
Ps. Angry-face-Wenger is pretty much the funniest thing in the world.
even funnier is ppl laughing at others who are far more intelligent, influential, significant and successful than themselves. so thanks!
Even funnier is people who say Arsenal play good football and have an attractive style and praise their ‘youth project’.
Face it, Arsenal are a poor man’s Barcelona. A mockery of Barca just like Orcs are a mockery of Elves.
And elves have infinitely more class than Barca players.
Please, this should be a discussion about tactics, not a place to throw banter around. Let’s stay on topic.
I didn’t see this, people talking about fantasy games in ZM. And being serious about it.
the difference was made by defenses: while united were precise and dominant, arsenal were all over the place, clichy had a horrible game against nani, it didn’t help that arshavin didn’t track back, koscielny took some very bad positions and lost a few headers (one at the goal), squillaci didn’t attack the ball as soon as possible and was pretty slow against rooney.
from the back 4 only sagna was decent.
on the other side the 2 centre backs were superb, winning everything thrown at them, evra took nasri out of the game, even rafael didn’t have any problems against arshavin.
on top of that song is going backwards after being so good last season, now he misses tackles, gets caught to high on the pitch and his passing is dreadful.
as much as i would like arsenal to win i know that won’t happen as long as our defense is so poor and i can’t see AW sorting that out too soon, he just hopes arsenal will outscore the opposition.
Not sure where you getting this. Thought Clichy generally played well against Nani, handball aside and made a lot of vital interceptions. I suppose it’s just easier to trot out cliches, no pun intended
in general arsenal didn’t get enough men into the box. as you said ZM, they were forced out onto the flanks as a result of united packing the midfield. but in all of their attacking moves nasri, rosicky, and arshavin we’re all playing around the perimeter of the box (which at this point would be packed full of united players). then when they were finally forced out onto the flanks chamakh was the only man in the box.
united on the other hand always looked to get men into the box and it ultimately worked out for them.
Poor performance for Man utd, Defending at home after one goals that’s not what Fergie use to do, but i do that because this year he think that Arsenal can come back to his team if he was trying to score another goal, and i think the same thing. Tonight i think united show his lack of offensive issue. The Game at Emirates gonna be something different with Diaby at the midfield and Vermaelen in defence supporting Koscielny. Koscielny best arsenal player tonight with wilshere. If Utd don’t play much better i think Chelsea can beat them we the come back of lampard do give drogba and anelka some good ball
what are you talking about?
this fool doesn’t know anything about football ,what a dumbass
I think it’s a theme over the past few seasons that Arsenal’s goalkeepers punt the ball upfield more often than not (unless there’s a quick counterattack on and the keeper can throw it into the midfield area – Lehmann had an especially good throw). this was true even when we had no height up front (eg. Arshavin playing as a central striker last year). in this regard, Szczesny was fine – Lehmann and Almunia both had pretty bad long kicks, and Fabianski is OK at best (certainly not a Paul Robinson). his problem was in the short distribution – he caused his defenders a couple of problems with unwise throws / passes, and at the very beginning he kicked the ball straight to a Man Utd player in yards of space, about 30 yards away from goal.
the interesting thing about van der Sar was that he played the ball short at every opportunity, once they had the lead. I think he was able to do that because of Arsenal’s deep line, which meant their midfield (especially Song + Wilshere) couldn’t press as high up the pitch and prevent Man Utd from playing out of the back. also Man Utd defended really well around their penalty area.
I find Rosicky an extremely frustrating player. He can dribble past people as well as many things but when it comes to scoring goals or making the killer pass, he goes missing. If he could develop those aspects of his game, he would be making a bigger contribution to this Arsenal side and staking a claim for the starting berth.
Im very suprised that Walcott didn’t play in the right-wide-attacker berth with Nasri playing more centrally to be honest. Well not suprised actually.. disappointed. Rosicky was pretty useless and Arsenal could have used Walcott’s pace on the counter… any thoughts?
Absolute defensive gem from United. Swallowed Nari in the first half. I thought United’s fullbacks outclassed Arsenal’s. I think Anderson’s coming into his own — think the next test at Chelsea with Essien will show us if he’s ready to become out starting center mid for the future. And while I love Park’s all around game — especially defense — I think we’ve got to get a mid/winger in the transfer window.
For Zonal Marking to suggest that Arsenal were scared of Rooney is a bit unusual as one would expect an unbiased report of the match from ZM. Yes the Arsenal defense played deeper than usual but also pushed up when Arsenal pressed United for an equalizer. I think their defensive positioning was to contain Rooney rather than due to fear of. Could one say that Man U was scared of Arsenal (especially in the 2nd half) when the entire team apart from Rooney was in their last third defending their goal area? I think Ferdinand should have been sent off for that high karate kick on Sagna that ripped his jersey….. and the linesman who took a rather long time, then bizarrely waved for a penalty, claiming Clichy deliberately handled the ball! It only happens at Old Trafford doesn’t it?
Yes it only happens at Old Trafford and because Referees love United so much, they decided to hand Chelsea 6 points last season as consolation to the rest of the league. Get off your high horses, this hypocrisy is nauseating.
without defending his entire comment, I think it’s pretty clear that the karate kick on Sagna warranted heavy sanction.
i agree ferdinand should have been sent off. But what referee has the balls to send of rio ferdinand at old trafford
he didn’t even give a foul though. I think honestly he didn’t have a good view of the incident – if he’d seen it properly, I’m sure he would have at least blown for a foul…
“For Zonal Marking to suggest that Arsenal were scared of Rooney is a bit unusual as one would expect an unbiased report of the match from ZM.”
Why do people say someone is biased when what they mean is “I am biased and I want you to agree with me,”?
To be fair, Howard Webb is okay with people kicking each other during matches.
I can honestly say that watching barcelona this season has spoiled me. I just could not enjoy this game.
That’s because this game sucked. :/
When attacking all the Arsenal players did the same thing, came to the centre and passed the ball around the front of the box. Sagna and Clichys crossing was too poor to worry Uniteds defense from wide. All too easy to defend for United. Any side with good positioning will intercept Arsenals attempted killer ball in the final third over and over.
zonal, you like manchester, yes?
he made one slip in the first weeks of the site indicating his preference for Arsenal, but he’s been admirably neutral ever since, other than a love of tactically fascinating teams (Roma, Barca, Man Utd etc…)
I think this gives it away
A below standard game, the pitch might have contributed. I expected better from both teams, the wayward passing almost negated any notion of executing a game plan.
surely you jest. That “we” certainly seems to refer to Mr. Cox and his fellow tactical mavens, who have to collectively examine the wide zones because “nothing is happening in the middle”.
I use ‘we’ all the time
http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/12/15/offside-goal/ – “In this article, we are dealing with a very specific outcome of the changes.”
Link?
ZM im honestly a bit suprised you did not go with this headline:
“united Park the bus”
Nice pun, but no, United didn’t.
i mostly think it was fiting for the defensive effort and well…the pun in itself, even if it was not strictly the case much like you say
pretty funny thought that this United side vs Arsenal was set up to play pretty much exactly like City have been playing all session and they get praised for it, while there’s a constant bullshiting about Mancini’s somewhat conservative style
Difference is Man United actually create chances, are extremely dangerous on the counter attack and when they have possession, do not spend most of it passing among the back four.
United don’t use 3 holding midfielders, though.
yeah, should’ve been ‘Walk in the Park’ like some newspapers gave it.
I must applaud Arsenal for trying to play proactive football in this day and age when reactive football seems to be the way to go. However, Wenger sets the team up with too many ‘creators’ and not enough ‘runners’. Arshavin, Nasri, and Rosicky will always search for the ball to feet and don’t make off the ball runs to drag defences out of position. They play infront of their opposition and make it very predictable to defend against them.
Now take Barcelona for example. They have Pedro and Villa making constant runs off the ball disrupting the shape of the oppositions backline. Not to mention Messi who also makes these types of runs when necessary. It’s not just movement that is the key to playing possession football, its movement in behind and off the ball movement. Some may say that Arsenal move alot, but that is just the creative players swapping positions and doing the same thing.
I think Arsenal need to play Theo Walcott to help this problem. Sure he may have a terrible football brain and makes bad decisions, but his willingness to move off the ball will help Arsenal. He actually can finish quite well I might add, but I digress. Cesc has also added a movement element to his game recently so his return from injury will help. Maybe a midfield of Song,Wilshere;Walcott,Cesc,Nasri behind RVP playing as a false 9?
Nasri/Song/Wilshere have been making more useful runs recently, but yeah, they went back to their previous form in this game. Can’t create anything when there’s no one in a dangerous position to pass it to!
I think Wenger’s got a bit lost with his side. I’m not sure whether his somewhat trying to mimic the current Barca side or not, but it’s really a mission impossible if he is. Barca has the brilliance to play the game they play and Arsenal quite frankly hasn’t. It’s not a coincidence that they have three players nominated for the ballon d’or. Their technical ability is above any team in the world atm, propably they are more gifted side than this world has ever seen. Not to say that Arsenal isn’t a great side, but none of their players would be starting players at Barca (possibly Sagna, if Maxwell was to motor the other flank and Sagna playing a role similar to Abidal’s).
Wenger should try to find some kind of middle ground here. It’s incredibly frusturating to see a talent like Walcott’s to go to waste in playing those few odd minutes he has been given lately. I’d bench Arshavin in a blink, and bring some direct running to the side in form of Theo.
And RVP will probably be Wenger’s biggest headache this season. Where do you play him? Chamakh is obviously doing a decent job in scoring goals, creating chances and offering a differerent kind of an approach. RVP on the other hand, has never been too clinical in front of goal (I know Arsenal fans are going to remind me of his form before his injury, but that’s just form in my mind.) He also seems a bit sluggish after his injury, so playing him on the ”flank” isn’t the answer. He just doesn’t seem to fit the system Arsenal is playing now.
I think his talent would be best utilised in playing just off to Chamakh, bit of a VDV thing going on there. But then Arsenal should use out-and-out wingers to create space for him to operate in, which they don’t have in their current side. It’s going to be a tough nut to crack! It’s a shame really, since he is a wonderfull player.
Thought Fergie saw this one coming…
Pack the centre, let Arsenal have enough of the ball in front of their defence and midfield, push Arsenal wide, and let Rio/Vidic dominate in the air.
Oh yes, and smack long quick passes to Rooney – the shakey non-dominant Arsenal CB’s will likely wobble.
In past few seasons, Arsenal in the big games (even the ones they lost) looked assured and confident in possession, and incisive going forward. Usually out-done by a shonky GK or CB.
Not with this team – flimsy, impatient, panicked on the ball. Just not the Arsenal the neutrals enjoyed to watch. There were flashes of nice stuff, and it’s normally a joy to watch Nasri, AA, Wilshire, Rosicky et al link up – but not last night.
Such a brittle performance – Man Utd allowed Arsenal to have plenty possession with the confidence they could press and defend their own half. By contrast the slightest of pressure and Arsenal crumbled.
This comes from an Arsenal well-wisher btw….
Great to see Carrick playing well again.He was very good today doing what he does best keeping it simple.
ZM what do you think about a 4-2-3-1 for England with Carrick and Wilshere as the two with a trio of Ashley Young ,Adam Johnson and Seteven Gerrard/Lampard Behind Rooney,could it work well ?
Sorry, but not until after Euro 12. Capello will never switch from 442. Although on paper that seems like it would be absolutely perfect for England.
Maybe watching too much Barcelona is spoiling me. That was horrible. Awful passing, hardly any chances created. Solid defending by United was the only bit of quality, but then they were never really tested. I hope it was just a bad pitch because that was a terrible advertisement for the league, following on from another one yesterday. Is Modric the only player in England who can pass ffs?
Once again Arsenal show that despite common perception, their defence is not why they lose these games. Their inability to score or exert serious pressure is. Utterly anaemic in attack as usual. Even if they had a perfect defence they’d still only be getting 1 point from these games because they’re so toothless. They get killed on the counter because they overcommit – again a sign of toothlessness.
Oh and the terrible penalty calls at OT are getting really tiresome. Not even Madrid or Barcelona are quite so fortunate with those.
Arsenal are Barcelona, if they didn’t have Messi, didn’t press as well, sat deeper in defence, were static off the ball, and had a slightly reduced collective first touch and passing ability. And didn’t have the width and industry of Alves, or the calm, stick-to-your-instructions presence of Busquets.
Yet they try to play down the middle in the same manner, and against Utd and Chelsea, and anyone whose midfield are positionally intelligent and capable of pressing, they come unstuck.
With Xavi (and that weird turn he always does, which seems to lose his marker every time) and Iniesta, then you can leave the pressing CMs running in circles, but Rosicky can’t shake a man so comfortably; Chamakh can’t draw three markers like Messi can; it seems very easy to deny them space.
Nasri could be turning into a Messi-like “he’ll get us a goal, if all else fails” but he’s far from it at present, at least against the good sides. And unlike Guardiola, Wenger seems to have no interest in exploring Plan Bs. It’s even looking like Bendtner, and his height, will leave.
An additional interesting tidbit I saw on the BBC minute-by-minute: prior to last night, Ferdinand hadn’t given away a foul for 246 days, dating back to April 11th vs Blackburn.
It’s not quite the “Blanc has never made a tackle” level that the French used to talk about, and he has been injured for quite a few games in that stretch, but it’s still a pretty classy stat.
Are you going to make any type of preview before Espanyol vs Barcelona ? I think its gonna be an interesting match!
any idiot knows that nasri should have been playing centrally.
yes because moving your most in form player from the position he’s been tearing teams apart from is generally a great idea
Tactically speaking, do you think 4-5-1 has slight advantage over 4-2-3-1.
Song and Wilshere were over ran by Park, Anderson, Fletcher, and Nani in midfield.
Arsenal’s order of the substitutions was wrong….
Pretty uninteresting game in terms of goalmouth action. But quite a tactical battle. And Man U came on top at the right time. They really know how to shut up shop wen up 1-0.
The key to all of Man U’s forays forward were their wingers Nani and Park. Both team’s central midfielders were too sloppy in possession. Nani and Park had very little defensive duties as the Arsenal fullbacks were never considered a threat in attack. So they were allowed to cross again and again and as expected they delivered no end product. Wojciech made some key saves and looks like he will be Arsenal’s future no.1. But yes, his distribution was wayward but that is down to lack of experience which can be dealt with. The centrebacks were ok and made some crucial interceptions.
Wilshere and Song in their holding role were good but while going forward were sloppy in passing esp. Wilshere. Song made some crucial interceptions. Now comes the main part of the story. Wenger’s front 4 were the fittest he could select. But they were up against the resolute back 4 of Man U. That was really a top class defensive effort from Man U with a deep line. Rosicky and Nasri were not given any time on the ball while Arshavin self destructed at times. Chamakh held up the ball at times but he is not as clinical when it comes to these type of matches. Arsenal did find some rhythm in the second half. But just when the steam was building, off came Rosicky and Wilshere – in came Van Persie and Fabregas. Both were not fully fit (esp. Fabregas) and did not play aggressively to win the ball back. After their introduction the game slowly lost momentum and teetered to a United win. IMHO, Walcott for Rosicky was essential at 65 minutes. A fresh Walcott is a handful and he needs some time to get going. Nasri was always there to feed him from the centre. Then later van Persie and Bendtner could have been introduced. I really think that Walcott as plan B could have worked against the deep line of United as some of his finishes this season have been exceptional and instinctive. Fabregas should never have been thrown into the cauldron.
Another option was to throw Bendtner and Chamakh up front for a Stoke like long ball tactic playing 4-4-2 which might seem crazy but might also have worked. A rather poor game from both sides and if Arsenal had also played cautious football, it would have been an exact replica of Man C – Man U, the dull 0-0 draw. Wenger’s men tried too hard, gave away the goal and couldn’t get back. Need to show more resilience to win anything…
Park and Nani did a very good job defensively, working extremely hard throughout the game to help out their fullbacks, especially during the first 15 mins of the second half when man utd were penned in and had 9 men behind the ball.
Watching the game yesterday, I believe Arsenal went right into the wolve mouth. Man U is known to play counter attacking style, and I believe Arsenal should have waited for Man U to venture up front. Also they should have sacrificed Chamakh by leaving him upfront to cut the supplies between the defenders and Van der Sar. This of course would mean he would not be able to receive a pass from his mate, but at least would stop Man U from being dangerous.
There was a moment early in the first half when Szczesny tried to find Sagna with a strange lofted pass to the right wing. Sagna turned and gestured as if to say “just fucking hoof it up the pitch”.
In the first couple of minutes the keeper also played a very casual short pass to one of hos defenders which was played back to him and led to him scuffing an attempted hoof.
So his intent was to play more short balls early on but either he lost confidence or his defenders lost confidence in him so his approach changed.
I’m sure it won’t be an issue for him once he plays more regularly but kicking is definitely something he needs to work on. His attempted long clearances were often mis-shit and barely reached the opposition half.
I felt this was a result of the intense pushing from Utd. Was quite difficult for the keeper to make or receive low ground passes with the divets in the pitch as well.
Sagna was swamped, the CB’s didn’t have the technique or confidence to split Rooney appropriately, and so the hoof to midfield was the preferred option…
no, man, I think what happened is that Sagna made a backpass and Szczesny was too far away, giving Rooney time to chase it, so he had to clear it into the stands. Sagna was telling him to come closer when he had the ball, so he could receive the backpass without such danger.
I looked forward and was very disappointed by the match and Arsenal in particular.
3 points I want to add to the good ZM-report:
1. The most interesting point from a tactical view was for me that Wenger fielded all the 3 less defensive-minded players left sided on the pitch. (Clichy, Arshavin, Wilshere vs Sagna, Nasri and in particular Song) But that side was actually the attacking flank of Man U and the lack of defensive work caused some dangerous 1 on 1 situations Nani vs. Clichy without any support for Clichy. Exactly such a situation led to the goal. I guess Song, if he would have been fielded left sided, might have doubled on against Nani in that situation what probably would have solved the problem. Arsenal defended much better against the “defensive” Man U-winger than they did against the actual danger.
2. Chamakh had a tendency to drift to the left wing when Arsenal had possesion there (i miss the arrow in the formation diagram). Actually that should have created room for Arshavin cutting in but he completly wasted it. Also he didn’t manage to create interplay with Chamakh in these situations and I would partly blame Chamakh for this as his movement was very poor in my eyes.
3. Arsenals frustrating weak performance after the penalty deserves a mentioning. There were situations with Arsenal in possesion lined up in a row of 5 in their own defense without any player ambitious to make a run forward. They looked lazy and not willingly to turn the game. The lack of movement was incredible for me. I can’t understand that. In a top game, one goal behind, less than 20 minutes on the clock, after the opponent missed a crucial penalty…actually the team should have looked as motivated as possible.
My last comment is about “Rosicky couldn’t find space to work in” – I found it much more eye-catching that he had no options there in the rare ocassions when he found space. Arsenals crappy movement in the final third was the decisive feature of the match in my eyes (maybe beside to their weak passing).
Regards from Germany
PS: I love your blog.
My take on the game was that first of all yes the pitch was poor (although Wenger should have kept quiet about it as that would just allow people to attack him for making excuses, but I don’t think he cares about that) which would affect a passing team like Arsenal more than it would United. Second, United defended excellently for two reasons, they utterly shackled Chamakh and made sure the through balls didn’t get in from on top the box (by flooding the midfield) and they pressed the Arsenal fullbacks relentlessly to make sure the Arsenal attack had no width, as their wingers both cut inside. I think this was made more obvious when Walcott was brought on as he provided more width down the right. I recall seeing van Persie put in some excellent crosses from the left wing during the World Cup and was wondering why Wenger didn’t station him out there to get to the byline, as I don’t think Man U could defend as well if they had to defend both wings as well as shackle the creative players in the middle. Checking the Guardian Chalkboards there were hardly any tackles or interceptions on the right side of Man U’s penalty box which may highlight the impression that Arsenal are rather toothless on the left hand side. Funny enough, either stationing van Persie on the left for Arshavin, or bringing on Eboue, (if he’s not injured, which I’m not sure about) judging by his performance against Partizan would have given them a lot more impact down the left.
surprised it hasn’t been mentioned that arsenal were without key players in the centre of defence, midfield and attack. it seems to me like having your captain, vice-captain and best defender missing is kind of significant. i can’t understand judging teams and managers without taking this into account.
as for the pitch thing, it’s clearly more of a disadvantage for a team playing an intricate, possession based game as opposed to a direct, counter-attacking game based on long balls and wide players getting crosses into the box. while arsenal should be looking at themselves and what they could have done better, i don’t see how anyone could deny that the pitch favoured utd and their playing style. does anyone know if ferguson had anything to do with it, or was it just the weather? it looked much better when they played blackburn but this may be just coincidence …
what arsenal should have done was work harder, i think someone already said this. it was an awful game quality wise, but utd’s higher work-rate is why they deserved to win, despite being average with the ball themselves.
also i’m so glad someone made the point earlier that its actually arsenal’s shocking use of the ball in the final third that is the main cause of their problems, as opposed to their fragile defence. even playing as poorly as they did, arsenal worked the ball into some great positions in the first half, yet chose terrible options, gave the ball away cheaply and invited the counter-attack. what defence would not look fragile behind a team that constantly floods forward, throws away a really dangerous opportunity and turns attack into defence time and again? when united work such dangerous openings, some sort of chance almost always comes with it, which in turn pushes the opponent back.
when utd see arsenal streaming forward they think ‘if we stay organised, WE are gonna score from this’. arsenal have to change this mentality in big games, and the only way to do that is to create chances out of promising situations – it has very little to do with the defence. if barca were as wasteful in offensive positions, their defence would look a mess too
total agreement re: selection problems, work rate, and failure to capitalize on working the ball into dangerous positions, though with the integration of the failure to threaten from wide areas as well. When I (relatively recently) started watching club football, I was enthralled by Arsenal’s swashbuckling mentality and intricate passing. Lately, though, I’ve been just amazed at how they screw around on the edge of the box or lay it off out wide for Clichy to cross poorly.
At the same time, it seems to me that they lose the players they need at crucial moments (Fabregas, RVP, Vermaelen, etc) and then other are inconsistent (Rosicky sparkled against Liverpool but seems to have lost confidence following that penalty miss, for example, while Diaby and Arshavin seem to drift from game to game, sometimes playing like world-beaters and other times like chumps).
What really gets me is the lack of work rate. As someone who plays the game without nearly the technical skill of these pros, I’ve observed firsthand the value of busting your ass in service of the team, and what Arsenal really need, it seems to me, is (a) a rigorous system of pressing and (b) drilling it into their heads that as soon as they lose the ball they need to switch to defense and work harder on D than on O. it’s like Pep said about how Barca suck without the ball so they work hard to get it back. Press full speed as much as possible, get Djourou (and Vermaelen) back in the defense so there’s some speed in the middle to facilitate a higher line, only let one fullback go up at a time, and count on transition opportunities. Then, sit Chamakh and get the speedy finishers (Vela, RVP, Walcott) on the field to take advantage of turnovers caused by the press and turn them into goals.
ZM, thought on pressing out of the 433 vs 4231 vs 4213? I know they’re relatively minor variations (and maybe the 4231 implies less pressing from the wide attackers in the very notation), but I wonder if you’ve got a perspective on who’s doing that best from which formation…
Diaby I think needs to get some consistent game time, which is difficult when you’re always injured. His driving runs in midfield were sorely missed Monday when the passing was off. Nasri’s dribbling ability and quick one-twos give him a similar value which is why I really feel that as fast and as good a passer as he is, he is wasted on the wings. That he was not used in CM with Cesc on the bench is a major error on Wenger’s part. His weaving run through the defence to shoot (VDS save parried to Chamakh) is the third game in a row he has done that (goal vs Partizan & 2nd goal vs Fulham). How many more times must he do that before Wenger plays him in the middle? Walcott got behind the packed Man U defence on a few occasions after he came on, so I don’t think he is useless on the wing against deep defending teams in the slightest. There is no reason why Walcott shouldn’t have started on the right with Nasri as trequartista.
We missed Hargreaves, Scholes, Valencia. Case closed. It doesn’t help to think that your team is the only one dealing with injuries.
haha? ferguson doesn’t select scholes or valencia to play against arsenal, and would have been planning this season (and the last 3?) without hargreaves.
i’ll repeat: captain, vice-captain, best defender. best central defender, best central midfielder, best striker.
i didnt say my team was the only one dealing with injuries did i? but in this match, arsenal were undeniably the only team missing all 3 of its most crucial players. now, i think you’ll find it hard to disagree, it is indeed ‘case closed’
Except Scholes did play in United’s last game against Arsenal at the Emirates, and Valencia played in the game at Old Trafford last season.
Perhaps people don’t mention the players who were missing because it’s about analysing the performances of the players who were involved (Also isn’t it a bit disingenuous to list six titles when you’re talking about three players?). I didn’t see anyone mentioning that United played at the Emirates last season without their first choice centre-backs, the 2009 PFA Player of the year, or their usual starting right winger. Then again, they won that game so there was need to look for excuses.
except the key point is that it is about one team playing at possibly full strength, and the other clearly not. you can argue if you like that scholes and valencia would have played, i’d argue that they wouldn’t. but there is no argument that fabregas, van persie and vermaelen would have started. the equivalent would have been a utd side without vidic, nani and rooney.
so the point you make about utd winning with an understrength team at the emirates is irrelevant – its obviously about the relative strengths of the two teams. furthermore, the enormous amount of money utd have spent in comparison with arsenal ought to guarantee them a stronger squad to call upon as well.
i wasn’t being disingenuous at all – i was just pointing out that not only are they arsenal’s 3 most influential players, they all play right through the middle of the pitch – where utd were able to dominate.
you say it’s about analysing the players that played, and i agree – i said that utd deserved to win the game. but making judgements about the relative strengths of the two managers, and the two squads, and what’s likely to happen over the course of the season on the basis of this one game is silly, especially given the players arsenal were missing. that’s all i was saying.
i cannot see how any of that is controversial in any way, i’d like you to explain why that’s an excuse and not just a statement of fact
Excellent analysis, as ever. Thanks.
Strange (and quite worrying) for Arsenal that the arrival of Van Persie and Fabregas absolutely killed them stone dead.
Here’s hoping they’re still firing blanks when Leeds United visit in the FA Cup in January!
Well Fabregas isn’t fit, and hasn’t been for a while (even when playing). He should take some time off and sort his hamstring, really.
RvP still looking so rusty is strange, but he really wasn’t helped by the rest of the team not doing that whole “movement” lark.
How are Manchester United winning these games? They’ve been terrible…..all the time
They weren’t terrible, I thought they defended extremely well and were probably the better team. Their goal scoring opportunities were a bit lucky though, 1st one was from a deflected cross, 2nd opportunity was when Clichy immediately gave the ball back to Nani and the 3rd opportunity was a harshly given penalty.
If you defend well, just one goal is enough to secure wins
For the love of God, there’s no way Nani was crossing for the goal. It was a shot that looped up.
Wenger failed to plan his passing out of the back correctly. His plan works against Fulham’s of the world, but teams that are as tactically disciplined and physically gifted as Manchester United require something different. The issue was not the first pass. Wilshere, playing at the base of midfield was a constant option for the central defenders. The issue was the second pass, where it seemed that Arsene set his team up to have the only passing option as Song, a player who cannot operate under pressure in this zone and even if he is able to receive, will almost never get the next pass forward right. It’s a shame that Cesc was not healthy because of he could have taken Wilshere’s spot at the base of midfield and then Wilshere taken Song’s spot, Arsenal could really have caused trouble with the speed of play through midfield. As it was, Arsenal were slow, stagnant and predictable in possession. Man United looked comfortable throughout the game.
Cesc never plays in the deep-lying role – this game was the first time all season. Nasri plays there more often (although still, only when they’re chasing the game), so if Wenger decided to bench Song (which would never happen by the way), Nasri or Denilson would be the replacement, not Fabregas. if Fabregas were fit, he would have played instead of Rosicky, in the attacking midfield role.
Not exactly… Cesc provides driving runs from the attacking midfield position but this year he has switched between holding and attacking midfield… Jus look at all the games he has played after 60 minutes of game time carefully…
Don’t understand why Song is off limits when it comes to benching. You want to play flowing football ala Barça? Well Song has no place in such a team. Absolutely no sense of how to position himself to give fluidity and speed to possession. If you want a ball winner and not much more, Song is your man. But then don’t go to Old Trafford with designs of playing free flowing football.