Arsenal 1-0 Udinese: Early Walcott goal gives Arsenal the advantage
The starting line-ups
Udinese constantly threatened on the counter-attack but failed to beat Wojciech Szczesny.
Arsene Wenger brought in Theo Walcott and Maroune Chamakh for Andrei Arshavin and the suspended Robin van Persie.
Francesco Guidolin ditched last season’s 3-5-1-1 for a more conventional 4-1-4-1 shape, with plenty of midfield runners trying to link up with Antonio Di Natale.
This was open and exciting, yet tense and nervous at the same time. It would have been interesting to see Udinese really go for it in the second half, but with the comfort of a second leg back in Udine, they never really committed enough men forward to overload Arsenal at the back.
Arsenal fluid
This was an extremely fluid 4-3-3 from Arsenal, with the front three rotating throughout, and the trio of midfielders also taking it in turns to get forward. Tomas Rosicky played a deepish role, where he seems more comfortable and gets more time on the ball, whilst Aaron Ramsey was the most advanced midfielder – creating the early goal for Theo Walcott with a good forward run.
The fluidity in midfield seemed to make the game open – probably too open for Arsenal after their early lead. They often left too much space between the lines of attack and defence, and it often seemed too easy for Udinese’s midfield runners to burst through the defence – Pablo Armero should have scored a one-on-one in the first half having beaten Arsenal’s entire backline with nothing more than a quick dash after a ball played twenty metres in front of himself.
The flexibility of Arsenal’s midfield created the same effect in Udinese’s side as they tracked runners. Emmanuel Agyemang was the deepest midfielder but played the role very casually, often moving high up the pitch and jogging back when Arsenal’s midfielders broke past him.
For a side that plays a counter-attacking style, Udinese defended surprisingly high up the pitch early on, which played into the hands of Walcott – who used his pace well for the goal – as well as Gervinho. Maroune Chamakh was poor and contributed little throughout.
Second half
After the break, Udinese played Giampiero Pinzi higher up the pitch to link up more closely with Di Natale, which helped force Arsenal back and gave Udinese more possession. The home side weren’t helped by two injuries to the backline – first Kieran Gibbs departed with a hamstring injury, then his replacement Johan Djourou suffered the same fate, and Carl Jenkinson came on at left-back.
As it happened, conceding the majority of possession might have worked well for Arsenal. Udinese are slightly reliant upon playing on the break, and often look less threatening when the opposition sit deep. With Di Natale they have a forward who likes drifting to the flanks and getting on the end of balls over the top – and whilst he’s a great poacher, he’s not a huge presence in the box from crosses.
A more traditional target man might have made things difficult for Arsenal – with their front three often ending up in central positions and the Udinese full-backs consequently free to get forward, 2 v 1 situations down the flanks might have yielded rewards. Guidolin played this one reasonably cautiously, however, only replacing players because of injury and/or tiredness, and keeping the same shape.
Wenger (and his assistant Pat Rice, as Wenger was banned from contact with the team) was limited in terms of substitutions because of the injury problems. Emmanuel Frimpong replaced Rosicky to give more presence in front of the defence, and it stayed 1-0.
Conclusion
A decent game, and a result that seemed to suit both sides for much of the second half. Arsenal were content with the clean sheet, Udinese knew that at 1-0 they’ve got a decent chance back in Italy – a second Arsenal goal might have been the end of their hopes.
The main tactical interest came in the overall pattern of the game rather than specific factors: counter-attacking sides need space either between the lines or in behind the opposition defence, and when Arsenal sat deep and stayed more compact, Udinese were less of a threat in open play than in the first half.
Arsenal 1-0 Udinese: Early Walcott goal gives Arsenal the advantage
How will Arsenal miss Fabregas? My statistical look… http://betweenthelinesfootball.wordpress.com/
This is spam
No it’s not, I’m just trying to get a little promotion for my new blog.
Yeah mate, promotion indeed. Which is fine except when you’re promoting your blog through the exact blog your ripping off.
Hardly ripping off ZM. Different style of analysis. I appreciate reading more than just what ZM has to offer.
You don’t have to. You already got a link in the name.
It’s not a direct response to the article – therefore it’s spam.
Is releted to the article, as provides a view on Arsenal without Fabregas – which this article is partly about.
I see no difference to me providing a link to my own analysis that some people may be interested in than that of someone posting a link to someone elses article they have read.
My analysis if different to that of ZM so dont see how it can be ‘ripping it off’.
If Mr Cox states he doesnt wish the link to be posted, then fair enough, but I thought people may be interested.
That’s not ripping ZM, but not cool to promote your blog about football on a blog about football. Tbf, it looks nice, but that is indeed a little douchey.
I think it’s fair to promote one’s blog post as long as it’s a direct response. This analysis has nothing directly about Fabregas, so it’s definitely off topic and out-of-bounds.
Hi:
Site certainly not ‘ripping’ ZM, but frankly it’s not to do with the piece, it’s just spam.
Can you not spam the site? Spam goal.com or something…
Liked the stats.
Asamoah should of played higher up the pitch
I only saw the second half. I wasn’t impressed at all by Arsenal; Chamakh & Rosicky were poor I think (at least in the second half). Walcott was actually the only threath. They passed the ball quite ok but lacked pace to split the Udinese defence (just one good run from Gervinho is all I saw in the second half. And I’m not sure but Koscielny doesn’t seem confident at the moment. He’s sloppy in his passing (and he runs to much with the ball) I believe. If Udinese had pressed a little bit more on Jenkinson (who also doesn’t make a good first impression on me in his first couple of games) & Koscielny I think Arsenal would have been in real problems. Even now Szczesny had to make a couple of good saves. I definitely hope Arsenal will add some more quality to the squad, otherwise I don’t see them ending in the top 5 of the premier league this year and that would be a sad thing for a beautiful club like Arsenal.
Shame,Udinese deserved a draw.
I thought Udinese played well.
Di Natale had options when he had the ball — both wingers cut into the middle; Pinzi and Asamoah both ran to support.
I like your point about playing 2v1 down the wing, since Walcott and, especially, Gervinho, don’t defend, but I wonder if this tactic would work. Udinese don’t have much height.
Perhaps they need another forward to play off of di Natale?
I look forward to the return leg.
BTW, can you ban JasonM’s IP? The guy is always plugging his crappy blog.
Links can be ignored if you do not wish to visit.
or you could grow a pair like LEFTBACKINTHECHANGINGROOM did and stop plugging your blog like a fag all the time with your pointless question leads or aimless comment
I just saw a replay of this match and I feel that ZM has offered a scintillating piece of journalism: thanks!
I was surprised by Guidolin’s formation, but perhaps in hindsight it was good for Udinese to keep an extra man at the back: it seems, from what I can tell, that Wenger has put his high-diamond shape to a rest, seeking a more fluid attack (Walcott was probably better cutting inside from the left). I also noticed Agyemang Badu playing rather casually, and I don’t know whether he did not have a clear man whose run he was supposed to track; Inler was a different fit for the role, as when he picked Hamsik against Napoli. I agree on the 2 v 1 point and the target man off Di Natale, it often goes unnoticed that Sanchez had from him countless assists last season.
For me, one of the tactical interests of this match was to see the strange conversion of two former wing-backs, Isla and Armero, into box-to-box midfielders. They tended to run diagonally all the time, and at some point they were ludicrously high on the pitch…
Am I the only person who thought Arsenal looked infinitely more dangerous when they had Walcott running the channels through the middle?
I noticed this too. Walcott is a player that seems to be heavily underated in terms of Football IQ simply because his final ball is sometimes mediocre (and he is possessed with great pace). Why he hasn’t been allowed to play the role of “central winger” that others such as Ashley Young (at Aston Villa) have is beyond me. Maybe it’s partly to do with Arsene Wenger’s system at Arsenal (Walcott, for all his talents is NOT the man to link play in a Van Persie style).
Maybe if he played for a different team he would have been converted by now into a second striker type player?
Arsenal were quite dangerous, but did not have quality of Cesc or Robin in the final third.
Bendtner would have been a much bigger threat. RVP will be more than handful in the return leg, it is going to be even more open game. But who knows Wenger might do a Barca second leg with Walcott and Gervinho for counter.
ARSENAL ANALYSIS:
as ZM said, both Arsenal’s midfield and attack were very fluid. song was not semented in his holding role – when he pushed up, rosicky usually sat and filled in for him. you could often see chamakh out wide, dragging one of the centre backs with him – the created space then exploited by both walcott and gervinho. udinese seemed to be playing a medium line early on which was fully exploited by both gervinho and walcott’s pace.
the wide forwards rarely seemed to give width. this created space in wide areas as udinese’s defence narrowed, which was used by both gibbs and sagna (but mosttly sagna) who constantly bombed forward and delivered crosses into the oppo’s parked bus.
ramsey would play both infront and behind udinese’s midfield – when infront, he created space in the hole, and when behind he sucked out one of the centre backs.
when not in possession udinese formed 5-4 banks, with di natale left alone upfront. they did not press the arsenal defence and this meant the gunners were allowed to build their attacks patiently. both vermaelen and koscielny exploited the freedom they had by carrying the ball into midfield and creating overloads in that zone. a couple of threatning chances came through this route.
in defence, arsenal pressed the opposition when they lost possession near the goal and also in midfield. they used an offensive press with a style combining concentration and through-marking.
they seemed to leave the hole quite exposed with the fact that they played a lone pivot and this pivot (song) occasionally got sucked out of postion, leaving the hole exposed further.
the gap between the lines also expanded when the gunners defended long balls, with the midfield slow in retreating. udinese did not exploit these spaces, however.
arsenal seemed to be keen on attacking early after winning back possession, using the pace of their forwards to exploit the opposition’s disorganisation in transition.
A fair report and, in truth, Udinese deserved something from the game as they showed more flair in attack. As always, Arsenal failed to learn the lessons of the goal – break at pace, get men in the box who make runs across defenders into space. The quality of some of the subsequent balls into the box was very poor – Sagna generally looks to hit the vacant far post area but is it a poor ball or does it look poor because no-one has made a move into that area? Walcott’s final ball into the box was also generally not well delivered. Walcott should have scored late in the 2nd half to give a more comfortable 2-0 but his shot lacked pace – overall he and the Arsenal as a whole appear to still lack the belief and confidence that was the problem especially towards the end of last season.
Interesting comment re Koscielny and sloppy passing when coming forward – the real problem is that he has no passing options! He breaks into the space yet none of his team mates make themselves available and consequently he is forced to play a high risk pass.
- Gervinho seems to have settled in to the Arsenal system quite comfortably. He’s very direct both with and without the ball, makes clever moves but he lacks,at the moment, the killer pass.
- Vermaelen’s performance was indicative of how much he was missed last season
- I feel Arsenal could afford to attempt more shots from right outside the box.
- Szcesny again shows very good promise
- Even when Wilshere and Van Persie return the team will need one more world class player if they are to compete with ManU and the other contenders for the EPL or with every other top team for the CL
A good report ZM thank you, much better than some of the cr*p being spouted on the guardian site today. It’s great to have an accurate report from someone who can show that they actually watched the game!
You mention that Chamakh was poor, I wonder what you think is wrong with him at the moment? Is it just a (complete) loss of confidence? Or has anything changed in terms of what he’s trying to do on the pitch, or what the team is doing around him, since the start of last season (when he looked pretty good)?
I read somewhere that Chamakh is fasting for Ramadan. Not sure how credible it is as that begs the question why not Bendtner, unless he doesn’t want to be cup tied. Also fielding an undernourished striker (all due respect to his religious beliefs) in a must win game is poor judgement. Nevertheless 2 games into the season and squad depth is already a problem at Centre Forward, Centre Back, Left Back and Attacking Midfield (although Wilshere is due back soon). Very little time for Wenger to dally in the transfer market.
That could be true about ramadan, but has he been fasting since january?!!
w/r/t the strikers at Arsenal, given how woefully Chamakh has been playing and the clear efforts to sell Bendtner, I do not understand why Vela has been loaned to La Liga (Sociedad, I think). I have always like him after seeing him play well for Mexico in the past, and it seems like he would fit into Arsenal’s style better than either Bendtner or Chamakh, so why not sell/loan Bendtner and keep Vela?
I’m not sure Vela would fit in very well in the current system, certainly not as the main striker anyway. I think that might be a reason he hasn’t had many first team chances. Could see him doing a job in the wide positions maybe, but then there are plenty of options there.
As much as Arsenal need a new playmaker (a Mata or a Hazard who can cut in from the wing or play centrally would be ideal for them), they also desperately need a new striker. Chamakh has faded horribly after a decent start – Walcott is surely a much better option up front at the moment.
Having a new striker who RVP can play off of (as a number 10 rather than a false 9)could also allow them to compensate for the loss of Fabregas.
Not convinced by Koscielny either. Whilst I don’t think Arsenal should go out and spend £30m on some overrated English centre-back (Cahill or Jagielka), he’s surely not the answer. A left-back would be a decent idea as well, given Gibb’s age and injury record.
I think if we need a new striker, its as backup to RVP rather than having him play deeper as number 10. I’m sure he could do that job, but it just seems a waste of his talents when he’s so dangerous close to goal and his movement and link play from that position is so good.
Early days I know but Koscielny seems to be forming a decent partnership with vermaelen and we look a bit more solid than last season (change in keeper plays a part in this too). I think we do need another centre back though, otherwise we will surely have to rely on squillaci at some point this season. not good.
Hmm…interesting point on RVP dropping back to help cover the creative burden lost by Fabregas leaving. I think Wenger likes RVP in that position and he could do that job, but don’t know if i can see it happening. Do you think it would be easier for Arsenal to get a world class playmaker or world class striker in the current market? At an Arsenal style price.
I think Koscielny is very underrated. A bit raw and does struggle bringing the ball out of defense, either dribbling into midfield or passing into midfield. But i think that he will only get better and it isn’t like he is incompetent with the ball, just needs to improve. And i think he will continue to get better and better over this season and the next. When fit we are strong at CB, but of course we know that hardly happens. Interesting to see Bartley go out on loan again, i would love to know who sits higher on Wenger’s plans between him and Miquel (short term and long term). But i don’t think splashing out inflated prices on players marginally better but more ‘highly rated’ by the English media, is really the answer. Who would be your CB of choice?
Fun game to watch, if sloppy on both fronts–appreciate the analysis though. I wish more Italian sides would play like Udinese, although the dangers are obvious.
Two thoughts on Arsenal: 1) This is exactly the type of game that they needed to win last year, but didn’t. 2) Appreciated the way that certain players stepped up and took charge; Walcott should have scored a second goal–but at least he is shooting, and from good positions.
Will be an interesting return leg.
Udinese deserved a 1-1 draw for their performance. However the game is still open at 0-1, which is fair.
i’ve always said Walcott is best as an inside right (Between centre-forward and right-wing) because of his pace down that gap between centre-half and full-back. To me walcott is an incomplete forward ; he has the pace to go down the wing, but not the final ball/ cross / but he has the finishing of a centre-forward, but can’t hold the ball up/take it past his man (With anything other than sheer speed). He should decide what position he’s going to play and stick with it, or maybe Wenger is responsible.
Ramsey filled in Fabregas’ boots quite well. Who else on the squad could have provided such a cross? Persie maybe ? on his right foot? possibly, possibly not.
also ; stop hating Koscielny ; best ball-playing centre-back Wenger has signed. Shame he can’t defend.
If Udinese had Sánchez for this season, it would make all the difference going into the game in Italy
Koscielny best ball-playing centre-back? Did you see him giving the ball away in a very dumb manner when he ran into space with the ball whilst he could have played back to the keeper (ok not the best option but always better then losing the ball in that space), or just played to Song (in front of back four) or even kick it long. No, he runs with the ball, almost lost it but kept it, and then he tries a very sloppy pass to Djourou and he loses the ball. Against stronger (fitter?) teams this is going to be deadly time after time. And it’s really not the first time I have seen him do that.
a stronger team like, perhaps, Newcastle, when he was named MOTM and completed 85% of his 59 passes? sometimes he does get overambitious with the ball at his feet, but that’s a decision-making issue – his passing and technical *ability* are extremely good. I can remember 2 or 3 defense-splitting through balls that became goalscoring opportunities from these first 2 games alone.
I thought that Arsenal looked poor, and of most concern was that many of the problems were identical to those which destroyed last season. First was that Song played far too high up the pitch, especially for the first half an hour of the match. He doesn’t have the technical ability to influence the game in the final third, and his absence from the base of midfield leaves a gaping gap between the lines, exposing the back four, and leaving nobody of a robust and defensively adept nature to break up nascent attacks in the middle of the park.
Second, the back four looks tremendously vulnerable, and a better — or even just a more practised and match-fit — team than Udinese would have scored several last night.
Third, Chamakh is clearly a busted flush. He was hopeless last night. He was literally a passenger in the team. Or perhaps worse than that, because he consistently slowed down the play, didn’t do anything to drag defenders out of position or make space, and lost possession.
Fourth, and speaking of losing possession, Arsenal’s ball retention in the last 15 minutes of the first half and first half hour of the second was abysmal, with Rosicky especially guilty.
Fifth, Gervino and Walcott surely can’t play in the same team. It’s too narrow up front, and defensively, they don’t do enough work to close down the opposition high up the pitch, or track back to provide cover on the flanks or bolster the midfield.
It’s not looking good for Arsenal at all. On that form, one or two players won’t do it. They need a left back, a commanding centre back, a midfielder with some positional sense, defensive nous and, most importantly, competitive spirit, a substitute centre forward to cover the 20-30 games Van Persie will no doubt miss this season, and a winger. And they need all these players to be of the highest quality. On their form against a weak Newcastle side, and an Udinese side without match practice and without a few of their star performers of last season, they have looked poor and as if they’ll struggle to qualify for the CL.
“First was that Song played far too high up the pitch, especially for the first half an hour of the match. He doesn’t have the technical ability to influence the game in the final third”
The same lack of technical ability that allowed Song to collect the ball, dink it past two defenders, then play a through ball to (an offside) Gervinho?
“Second, the back four looks tremendously vulnerable, and a better — or even just a more practised and match-fit — team than Udinese would have scored several last night”
There is a difference between looking vunerable and being vunerable. The Udinese back 4 didn’t look vunerable, but they conceded. Our back 4, which often gets exposed by lack of midfield support, didn’t concede. CLEAN SHEET M8.
RE:Chamakh. He didn’t score, but he covered lots of ground. A whole Km more than Song did. He also won us headers, and dragged the CB’s around by drifting to the wing.
“It’s not looking good for Arsenal at all. On that form, one or two players won’t do it. They need a left back, a commanding centre back, a midfielder with some positional sense, defensive nous and, most importantly, competitive spirit, a substitute centre forward to cover the 20-30 games Van Persie will no doubt miss this season, and a winger.”
Apart from the fact that we have held two clean sheets in a row, debuted two new youngsters, and WON the F**king match, Yeah i agree, things look dismal for the Arsenal.
Sorry for the longness but this guy needed some sense knocked into him =)
You’re committing a pretty fundamental logical error with your Song argument. He may have SOME technical ability, but a team can only have a certain number of players in attacking positions at any one time. So, it’s not about Song’s technical ability in NOMINAL terms, but about his technical ability in RELATIVE terms, compared to the rest of his team. So, if you’d rather have Song in an advanced position than, say, Ramsey, then that’s up to you, I guess; however, I would venture that it would be a foolish preference. And you still, despite your woolly argument, didn’t address the fact that being there left the back four without protection early in the game.
On the back four, I have no idea why ‘looking’ vulnerable is irrelevant. The point is that if Udinese had scored a couple of goals, it wouldn’t have seemed such an injustice. Meantime, looking vulnerable means, without improvement, that you are likely to concede more goals in future matches than would a competent defence. And what about when you play against Liverpool or Man U? If you were that rickety against a ring-rusty Udinese, how will you fare against other teams? If I were an Arsenal fan, I’d be concerned.
I will concede, however, that Szczesny is an underrated keeper and will serve you well.
Finally, if you thought Chamakh had a good game, then you were watching something different from me.
I have no idea why I need sense knocked into me. I’m a Newcastle fan, but Arsenal are one of the few other EPL sides I don’t loathe. They’re a well run club who do business and play football in the right way. I genuinely wish them well. But they look as if they’ll struggle to make the CL on current form, look significantly worse than last season, in my view.
All valid points–but I wonder about the (possible) double standard. For years Arsenal have played beautiful football and done nothing more. Here, they looked awful but still won by getting the goal they needed and not conceding.
Why is it considered so poor for Arsenal to win ugly? Would we make the same complaint about Man U? Wouldn’t the pundit’s laud such an effort: “It wasn’t pretty, but MU got the win and kept a clean sheet too…”
I don’t think there’s a double standard in my points. Arsenal have spent the last decade and more qualifying for the CL, winning leagues, winning doubles, and getting to the latter stages of the CL — all playing fantastic football. So, it’s not as if they were losing that many games, is it?
Sorry, but Anonymous above (August 17, 2011 at 5:45 pm) is me.
I disagree with two of your points.First of all the fact that Song bursts forward at times doesn’t mean he needs to be as skilled as a No.10 in order to do so. His role there is to mix things up and confuse the opponent’s defense, which he does rather efficiently. I agree though that neither Rosicky nor Ramsey can cover for him in the base of midfield. Wilshere on the other hand is better than those two at winning balls and since he’s going to be a regular starter, this particular strategy is in my opinion very useful.
Other than that,from my point of view, neither Gervinho nor Walcott lack defensive discipline.The narrowness you refer to stems from the fact that they both play as the man who takes advantage of the space freed by the centre forward, when the latter has moved wide.In any case the reason for me that they shouldn’t play together is that for all their qualities they both lack the “Luis Suarez factor”,which means none of the two is unpredictable enough to spice things up now and then
Can anyone please tell me about a site where I can get the advanced stats used in this blog? I don’t have an iPhone, so Stats Zone is not an option for me.
Would it be ridiculous to suggest that Van Persie could take over the playmaking duties at Arsenal? Along with Wilshere he is the most intelligent player left at the club, perfectly capable of linking play effectively. This would also mean Gervinho or Walcott (or both) could play higher up the pitch, which is where they are much more effective.
Not at all. Van Persie could easily do the same job David Villa does for Barca, only on the right. I remember early in his Arsenal career he played on the right, and when he cut in onto his left, he looked incredibly dangerous.
But then Arsenal would probably need to play with a false nine, which aren’t easy to find, or integrate into a team, for that matter.
I agree RVP could help out with the playmaking duties at Arsenal but think maybe David Villa is a bad example. Considering is he really a play maker at all? In that Barcelona side, of the 5 or 6 possible candidates for playmaker he would be near the bottom. Villa is a very good finisher and makes very good runs. Undoubtedly he is better in possession than say Pedro, who is more cut and thrust, but calling him a playmaker might be a stretch. Maybe i am wrong.
Also with his age and injury history slowing him down i don’t think he could be as prolific on the right as he was in those days. Goals like Blackburn; where he would pull out right, beat people and jink down the line only to cut in and bend it far post might be a bit out of his reach now. I have a feeling intelligent defenders would realize his intentions of cutting back onto his left with no real threat of being beaten down the line. But again i may be wrong.
I think VPs can create from his current position, but if he was to be at his best creative position he would start deeper behind the lines (where he ends up sometimes in his false 9 role) where he can be behind the midfield and recieve the ball off a frontman where he is facing forward and his first touch can be a throughball, a shot or driving at the defenders. But as you said they would have to find a pretty good replacement. Think he is best suited where he is. Just me though.
I agree that Van Persie isn’t a playmaker, but he could definitely play in an inside-forward role that teams like Barca are so successful with. He, like most Dutch footballers, is very intelligent with his running off the ball in finding space for himself and creating it for others, he has excellent technique, and I believe that he could score a lot of goals cutting in from the right onto his left boot.
But, like I say, it’s a far more complex system to institute than a straight 4-4-2 or 4-3-3, as it requires very fluid, intelligent movement for all the front players, and probably a false nine. Man U can do it, because they have Rooney, but I’m not sure if there’s anyone at Arsenal who can do that, so I guess Van Persie is going to be the number 9. Not that he’s bad there, of course.
ARSENAL – They did well to beat Udinese 1-0. Many pointing out the misses; not focusing on all the bad press they’ve had to deal with. MM
Buy Parker, Aquilani, a couple of defenders and a centre forward.
That’s about right, I think they also need a replacement for Sánchez and they surely must have the money.
Arsenal were terrible. Udinese deserved something. They will have a hard time finishing in the top four. The quality is just not there. Rosicky was terrible. Chamakh was non-existent.
Arsenal will go through unfortunately. Ude won’t be able to keep a clean sheet at home.
Way to substantiate your assertions with fact or analysis.
I had a question about Andrei Arshavin. When he played for Zenit, was he fielded on the wing or predominantly in a central role? I’m curious as to why Wenger doesn’t attempt to play Arshavin more centrally where he can drift between the opposition midfield and defense in the final third. I thought that little chip pass he provided to RvP over the weekend at Newcastle showed some definite promise.
both. in the Russian league he played a lot as a #10 or even a false nine (which he did for Arsenal as well, two years ago, due to injuries). in the tougher games, such as their UEFA Cup winning campaign, he played mostly on the left. also, it changed when Advocaat arrived because he’s a firm advocate of the 4-3-3 formation, so during his final season (the 2008 calendar year) he played almost exclusively on the left. that’s true of his current position on the national team too (which is also coached by Advocaat).
I agree, I am yet to see him be the playmaker, during matches he sometimes drifts inside and across to the other wing,he has all the skills required IMO. I would also like to see vanPersi start with Chamakh/Walcott/Gervinho uptop,Wenger did it a few times when chasing a lead. I think it is worth risking the number of goals given up when RVP plays as ‘the man’.
Iam also interested in seeing who our new signings will be. In the mean time I would be happy to see away with the double pivot and force song to stay back and give wilshire some freedom, like the match against Man United
http://www.zonalmarking.net/2011/05/01/arsenal-1-0-manchester-united-tactics/
in a game like this, that would be suicidal. Arsenal’s defenders were under enough pressure already (Udinese had more shots and more shots on target – and they were playing away from home). it’s true that Walcott and Gervinho are pretty good at tracking back, but the problem with moving RVP back to midfield is that it almost negates the man advantage in midfield, from a defensive perspective.
on the other hand I would love to see that more attacking approach from the games where we expect to dominate, but for some reason can’t score (eg. 0-0 Sunderland last season, although we were incorrectly denied a goal for offside and also had a good penalty claim, so maybe that’s not the best example). I think a double pivot of Song and Wilshere is good enough to handle those kinds of games. just look back to the team when we played 4-4-2: we went with Henry / Bergkamp / Pires / Ljungberg…
Way to substantiate your assertions with fact or analysis.
Thanks for the good news.
I think arsenal dont actually need to buy many players for the first team, though i would totally agree there squad is very weak now, and they need to bulk it up with players who could actually come in and make a difference in games (ie not just youth players)
But for the first team, i think really they just need a speedy centre back to partner with verm, and they kind of have that with djourou (cant spell), its just he needs a few seasons to grow and become a better player and get more experience, and arsenal need a solid back two now, so i think they needed to buy one, a centre back that is fast on the ground so he can cover verm’s movement forward to intercept the ball, and also be intelligent. DONT think they need a big penalty box defender like samba, cos arsenal are usually playing with a high line. Plus verm is actually good in the air (great leap to cover lack of height)
But otherwise, i think GK is talented and good enough, sagna is a quality RB both attacking a defending, Gibbs is young bit i think he is talented and this could be his breakthrough season if he stays fit and he is good attacking and defending. Moving onto midfield, i think song and ramsey could play as the deep midfielders, with ramsey playing as a deep playmaker, and starting most moves, and song disrupting play physically with his tough tackling. song could also move forward like he likes to and ramsey could cover. (reminiscent of fab and flamini). Then wlishere could be pushed forward into the fab role, where i think he would actually be much better because despite his rooney like aggression, i think technically he much more suited to a attacking midfield position. Then wilshire could help press further forward (winning back the all higher up the pitch, something he is good at) and i bet his goal return would surely increase, as would his assists.
Up front, the forward three of gervingo walcott and vanpersie can work i think. With van persie playing the falso nine role, walcott and gervinho are both great at making runs into the penalty area, and both could at least get up to 15 goals for the season (im backing theo for 20). And van persie is excellent at both making space for those two, and at playing the killer ball. He is also much more of a penalty box presence than he used to be, as he has improved in the air.
So a centre back partner for a Verm, and some beefing up of the squad is all that is needed i believe, and the only serious money needs to be on the CB, as the squad players can be cheap.
I agree with most of your points but the Wilshire and Ramsey situation is a bit of a dilemma in my opinon. Who should play the deepest?
At bvb last season Sahin played deeper while the less expirienced Gotze played higher up i wondered weather that would have work with Arsenal last season. Fabregas playing deep like he used to in his earlier days and Wilshire playing higher up. It would definitely increase the tempo of play. Playmakers generally improve their passing when they see more of the field. I just didn’t think it was that important to have Fabregas so high up.
Anyways now he’s gone(ironically so is sahin and both to spain)
I can imagine Ramsey racking up alot more goals than Wilshire would if he was playing higher up, because he has a better shot and has an eye for goal. Wilshire wouldn’t have to adjust his game because he is playing the same position, and he formed a good patnership with alex song.(he played with frimpong alot in his earlier days so they would also form a good partnership)
I can see upsides with either wilshire or ramsey playing higher up, which is why in my earlier post i suggested doing away with the double pivot and have song on his own. But then again Song seems to be developing from a destroyer to a more complete box to box player. An argument could be mad that Arsenal can play with a flat 3 midfield.
Does any descent team play with a flat midfield?
Onto another topic where will Sahin play at midifeld?
I agree both could play in eachovers positions, and maybe the best way would be to swap them every few games and see the changes in performances, both would still do a good job. I myself would keep the double pivot, but actually keep ramsey as the deepest player, as the spare man, and allow song and wilshire to play a good pressing game further up the pitch, then allways have ramsey as the open player. I would go for ramsey as well because he has a better range of passing (long an short) while i think wilshire is better at dribbling and playing killer balls. The only thing is ramsey would have to learn how to tackle better, but more so, to intercept in front of his defense, which i think he could learn.
I cant think of a team that plays that way, though you could argue man united havnt in the least two games, and lacked a true holding player in the last run games last season with carrick and giggs.
Sahin is a great player, and i think he will be battling out with xabi alonso and could be the long term replacement. great signing by real, and not one they usually make.