Arsenal 3-0 Milan: Arsenal press excellently but lack options from the bench to maintain it
The starting line-ups
Arsenal got very close to the most remarkable two-legged turnaround in Champions League history.
Arsene Wenger named the logical side considering his injury problems – Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain played in midfield, Gervinho was on the left, but Wenger didn’t really have other options.
Max Allegri attacked, using Robinho and Stephan El Shaarawy in the front three. Djamel Mesbah played at left-back, with Urby Emanuelson ahead of him.
So near yet so far – Arsenal defended well throughout, attacked excellently at the start of the game, but fell away badly at the end.
Pressing
Arsenal pressed very well here, as heavily as they’ve done all season. Last season they did it brilliantly against Chelsea and Barcelona, while in 2011/12 they sit back more. But here, the wide forwards closed down full-backs and the midfield was energetic too.
Alex Song pushed high up the pitch and used his energy to pressure the Milan midfield (although he did leave gaps in behind), while Oxlade-Chamberlain dribbled with the ball and Tomas Rosicky also played in a quick, direct manner from the centre. This surprised Milan, and without Kevin-Prince Boateng bringing power and energy to the side without the ball, they got overrun in the middle. Robinho did little without the ball, and Mark van Bommel was seriously constrained by his booking in the first few minutes. Take out van Bommel’s ability to tackle (and his license to foul without fear of dismissal) and he is half the player.
Flanks
But despite the threat from the centre, what Arsenal did particularly well was to attack down the flanks, to get the ball out wide and run with the ball at the full-backs. That was what they strangely failed to do in the first leg (especially when Theo Walcott was removed at the break, and Aaron Ramsey came on down the right). Because of both shape and personnel, Milan are vulnerable at full-back, and with Mesbah making his European debut, he was the clear man to attack.
Sure enough, two of Arsenal’s goals came after attacking at speed down the right. Walcott’s run and cut-back fell to Rosicky for the second goal, while Oxlade-Chamberlain was brought down by Mesbah for the penalty for the third goal. Gervinho on the other flank didn’t contribute as much, though this may have been because Arsenal were focusing on the right (which was the correct strategy).
Allegri could have helped Mesbah out by bringing on another midfielder and getting Emanuelson to play in front of Mesbah – two banks of four seemed the more logical way to defend, but then Milan have defended with 4+3 for the entire campaign, and are more familiar playing that way.
Arsenal’s one problem was that they couldn’t actually cross the ball successfully, aside from the corner for Laurent Koscielny’s goal.
Milan blunt
Milan actually had good possession throughout the game, and completed more passes than Arsenal over 90 minutes. But Robinho is not a trequartista, at least not in this situation and with these players. Allegri loves Boateng because he has the energy to link midfield and attack and prevent Milan becoming a broken side – when he’s unavailable, Emanuelson often does a job there. Robinho ambled back, and Milan’s front three did the job of (at most) two players.
Arsenal also did very well to push their defence high up the pitch, in keeping with their pressing. This meant that Milan were frequently caught offside, although Arsenal’s closing down resulted in a lot of fouls.
Second half
It could have been different for Arsenal, had Robin van Persie not wasted a great chance midway through the half. But equally Antonio Nocerino missed a similar chance, and besides, the van Persie chance and the Gevinho effort that preceded it were the only two serious efforts Arsenal had in the second half.
Milan changed little – though were probably told to get their heads in shape by their coach at half time. However, they did sit a little deeper and were more compact from front to back – Arsenal got less space.
Tiredness
But having pressed so much at the start of the game, Arsenal were now exhausted. They desperately needed more energy from the bench to liven things up and increase the tempo, but as Wenger said after the game, he didn’t have any midfield options to introduce. Aaron Ramsey, Mikel Arteta, Jack Wilshere, Abou Diaby and Yossi Benayoun were all unavailable, and each would have been used in the second half.
Oxlade-Chamberlain got injured early on in the second period, and struggled on for an admirable period of time – but this just contributed to Arsenal’s lack of energy in the second half. It was unfortunate that both he and Walcott had to depart, because these were the two players offering the most pace with the ball, and most able to attack Mesbah.
Subs
The game was a good example of how throwing on more strikers doesn’t automatically lead to more of a goal threat. Maroune Chamakh and Park Chu-Young came on and played high up the pitch, but this allowed Milan more time on the ball in midfield, and they were actually the stronger side late on. It’s difficult to blame Wenger here – three of his available substitutes were defenders, another was a reserve goalkeeper.
However, at one point young attacking midfielder Oguzhan Ozyakup was getting ready to come on – but never appeared, and Wenger seemingly changed his mind. Whether he would have made a difference is debatable (ZM has never seen him play) but if he could run and press, he probably would have been more useful than two static strikers who contributed little.
Milan deserve some credit for their performance late on – Allegri brought on Alberto Aquilani for El Shaarawy, Emanuelson moved to the high tip of the diamond, and Milan were more compact and killed the game well in the second half – they completed much more passes than Arsenal did.
Conclusion
The preview to the tie mentioned “an interesting battle of very different styles”, and how it showed. Both sides were, at different times in this contest, both absolutely superb and dreadful beyond belief. When one got their gameplan right and played to their strengths, the other couldn’t cope. These are completely contrasting sides, which vaguely explains why we had two such extreme matches (with a large slice of pure freak football thrown into the mix).
Looking purely at the two results, the logical conclusion is that Milan maximised their period of dominance (the first leg) for longer. The truth is probably slightly different – Milan were able to fight back in the second half of the second leg and withstand pressure, whereas Arsenal never really got a grip of the away leg.
WOuld have loved to have seen two matches on proper football pitches. Hope Milan get another good team in the next round, and they are punished for their naked gamesmanship.
amen. they disgraced the san siro with their grimy move.
Hear hear. It was forseeable that on a smooth pitch at the Emirates the Arsenal wings would suddenly “rediscover their form”, and against a baying home crown Milan might look lacklustre.
I guess I must be an Arsenal fan but this year the pitch, last year that RvP sending off – not to mention that Wenger isn’t completely off base with his complaints in this last game. Milan were milking it.
Interesting point about the crossing though. Though there was certainly some wayward passing – actually some shocking crosses, more to the point is that they don’t have much to aim at. RvP is not really a target man when the defence is set, and particularly when he is isolated, as he was pretty much all game against Milan. Arsenal are simply quite unlikely to succeed if they rely on aerial crosses – that outstanding example by Sagna v Liverpool notwithstanding.
Great to see Rosicky recovering from his long injured spell to increasingly influence Arsenal games – though I only saw the second half of this one and by that time he and Song were clearly suffering.
Enjoyed the article as usual ZM. What do you think about Podolski?
“When one got their gameplan right and played to their strengths, the other couldn’t cope. These are completely contrasting sides, which vaguely explains why we had two such extreme matches (with a large slice of pure freak football thrown into the mix).”
Recognizing the thought process that leads to that conclusion would serve the print media, Fox Sports Soccer, Sky, ESPN, et all, very, very well.
Agreed. The conclusion sums up the tie over two legs as accurate as can be.
Imagine Milan had a different player than Zlatan y’day, (even Prince)at the positions where Zlatan received the ball, Milan would have scored more than a couple too. Zlatan looked like a block many a times in Milan’s attack. May be he had an off day, but he was really poor.
Zlatan’s workrate in the second half was very good in my opinion.
Amazing how crucial Boateng is to the Milan side. They looked like a completely different team without him, unable to play in the strikers up front with nearly the same effectiveness. Robinho was very ill suited to that role.
Having Boateng would not make an ounce of difference. Milan were paralyzed from the start, they could feel the Arsenal wrath, and retreated into their shells. This was a game played out in the heads, Milan, apart from Van Bommel just don’t have clever enough players to shut a game down. They needed to be compact and break the Arsenal flow with clever fouls, they have ashamed cynical Italian defending!
People are mentioning Boateng without much thought, just because it is logical to assume that a missing piece brings down an object, doesn’t mean it will uphold it in regularity.
Arsenal didn’t score the fourth…because they were spent.
Milan were paralyzed because their front three was too far from the midifelders, leading to too many hopeful passes to no one, and in defense none of them defended, allowing Arsenal to push forward with little resistance. The front three were also too isolated to really counter effectively.
Boateng is the link-man. If different personnel had been available (but still no KPB) Allelgri probably would’ve started Urby Emmanuelson in the “Boateng role” and Milan wouldn’t have had it so bad.
You are closer to the mark on Arsenal being spent though. Out of 4 halfs, Milan played their game for two, Arsenal for one, and in the final half neither side had the upper hand. No surprises who won, though Milan certainly made it harder than it should’ve been today.
there was a gap between the lines sure.. but your thinking is that of a coach not someone who actually watched the game. It a game charged with emotion and Arsenal smelt blood.
So it really does not matter what shitty team Milan put out, they would have been smoked regardless. Boateng is not even a top tier player, and he certainly isn’t a Pirlo or Kaka, after whos absence Milan fans have genuine grounds to regret ‘what could of been’.
In sport there is a concepts called unforced and forced errors; Milan last night were victim to both… the gaps were unforced, the defending was forced, Robinho is a tragic product of both…
If I think like a coach, that doesn’t mean I can’t have watched the game, too (I did). I’ve played in rivalry matches too, I realize that the psychology and motivation play a huge part of it, but even the most psyched-up players can be disheartened if they run into a brick wall. If Milan don’t concede a goal from a corner early, then those crucial early minutes of pressing are wasted. Arsenal were blunted in the second half by exhaustion, had Milan’s tactics limited the damage they might’ve scored and ended the tie, or at the very least not bled three soft goals in the crucial first 45 (since Arsenal were not a threat after that point).
As far as your comment on Boateng, the point is not to compare him to Pirlo or Kaka. His role is key to this particular Milan side, and besides, it’s not as if you need prime Kaka/Pirlo to beat this Arsenal side. I’m not sure any Premier League player is at that standard in terms either of attacking midfielders or registas right now, so it’s not like Arsenal couldn’t have been beaten otherwise. For that matter, it’s not like Arsenal have an attacking midfielder better than him (debatable, but still, you see the point?).
Unforced/Forced errors can be mitigated by tactics. Look at APOEL. Further than probably any English side will get this year, without a single player who would play for any of the BPL Champions League teams (or even make the bench). APOEL are well motivated, but even then, tactics are key to them.
Good players can’t prevent being smoked, either. Real Madrid are probably the world’s second best team and yet found themselves on the end of a 5-0 to Barcelona.
I thought El Shaarawy and Robinho should have switched positions, really. Hasn’t the Pharaoh played there before?
First read what someone has posted and then put your crappy reasoning into flow.
My first post clearly says that if Milan had a few more players of V. Bommel’s sort, they could ‘mitigate’ Arsenal’s attacks, but they dont, they have playboys like Silva, Zlatan and Robinho who care more about dancing than stopping opponents.
My argument still stands that an Arsenal onslaught was inevitable. You can shift individual incidents however much you like, but Arsenal wanted to redeem their reputation in front of their fans. If you watch Ars Tottham recently, it is a good proxy to your argument about tactics: Redknapp organised his team tactically, and preyed on arsenal vulnerabilities; yet they got smoked… because emotion of the players took precedence. Rosicky has recently been playing like a man possessed, and that is so infectious.
I don’t know what the hell you are chatting about with the Boateng paragrapgh… makes zero sense. I was merely comparing him to Kaka to illustrate his lack of importance, it wasn’t to reminisce about them playing in this match. When Kaka and Pirlo were absent there becomes some substance to the argument…’we lost because we didn’t have him…. ‘they are as you say key… Boateng simply isn’t.
The last point about Madrid contradicts your whole point about tactics by the way and I alluded to it as much in my previous posts.
I dont think you meant to reply to this guy ha…..
In terms of Boateng, he is an effective player that works hard, is good defensively and has fantastic movement (his late runs are killer).
Pirlo is a completely different player so can’t compare, but you can probably compare him with Kaka as they both play/ed the same position in this milan team. Kaka was overrated in terms of being a playmaker, his best qualities were his pace, dribbling and shooting. His passing wasn’t anything special and he rarely controlled games. So I think it is fair to say Boateng isnt completely out of his league. He doesnt have the same dribbling ability, but offers other qualities (much better defensively).
Boateng is a great player, as was Kaka. Kaka was lucky to win the world best player award.
Let’s not go down ad hominem road, shall we?
You didn’t actually say they needed more Van Bommels (see, I can read!). You said they lacked players like Van Bommel who were clever enough to shut the game down. My point with Boateng is that his extra defensive workrate would’ve made it far easier to cope, while his running on the break would’ve helped Milan gain a greater foothold (so even if Boateng himself is not a “tactician on the pitch” like Van Bommel can rightly held to be, the tactical effects upon the team would’ve blunted Arsenal considerably). Boateng is a playboy sometimes, but not nearly as bad as the others you mentioned, and would’ve gone a long way in preventing the bleeding.
I didn’t try and shift individual incidents, I shifted the tactical input into the match to what it might normally have been for Milan, a perfectly reasonable move (my point was not just about stopping the corner, but how important it was to avoid an early goal since minutes spent pressing can’t really be kept up). From what I saw of the 5-2, Spurs were utterly disorganized and open, and although maybe Redknapp thought he was being a clever tactician, Spurs clearly didn’t implement his plans effectively, or the plans were inefficient, as ZM pointed out (i.e. the whole point of tactics). The onslaught may have been inevitable, but it’s relative success was not (like Barca-Inter, Barca had an onslaught with I think over 80% of the ball, but damage limitation won the tie the other way).
To give a counter-example which is far more congruent, England are a highly emotional international side, prone to sparks of passion (probably also going some way to explaining their poor shootout record and infamous non-tactical red cards recorded). Germany are cool, calculated, and tactical. No points for guessing which country is better (surely even the English retort “two world wars” to “three world cups” is an example of the mentality?). The English fans sometimes slate their team for lacking heart, but maybe if they had any brains they’d succeed (worthy of pointing out, the ‘66 England side, dubious goals notwithstanding was tactically innovative).
To be clear (on Boateng/Kaka/Pirlo), I was pointing out a category error on your part: my argument was that Boateng was the link man (to further clarify, I pointed out that Urby probably would have had a similar effect played in that role, albeit less effective), not that he was a top tier player (though my entertaining of this proposition in relative terms to the match may have been confusing, I admit).
Madrid are completely motivated against Barca. It doesn’t contradict my earlier point at all – Mourinho was widely criticized for his tactics after the match.
@Kane: Pretty sure it’s not his fault. For some reason I can’t always reply to every post either.
First of all, i love Arsenal, they disappoint me alot but i love them, played their hearts out and i rate them so much for that.
Looking at the game, as said above, the lack of Boateng was a really big factor. I just look at the first leg and ponder as to why Arsenal didn’t even attempt it seemed to use the wings, i dunno if it was the appearance of the wings putting off the players or what. As seen tonight, it was extremely effective, i thought Arsenal would’ve employed that style of play in both legs and gone through prior to the games.
One thing that made me happy was that at times Arsenal’s slick passing play returned, although at times sloppy play was very prevalent. Defensively we were also very sound for alot of the game, players didn’t seem to do too badly tracking back in the first half especially, that kind of play saps energy though, as seen in the second half.
What tonight highlighted for me overall though is Arsenal’s lack of strength in depth, our bench can be shocking at times, seemingly made of players who come on just so we have 11 players on the pitch, it’s clear we still need to buy.
Arsenal should hold their heads high though, and continue playing this well for the rest of the season, I wanted to ask, against Spurs and Liverpool did Rosicky play slightly higher, in more of a AMF position?
We had 6 first team central midfielders injured (ZM forgot to mention Coquelin). Considering that means we have 8 players fighting over 3 positions, how can you say “we need to buy”? I know it sounds like an excuse, but this smacks of bad luck. For the past 5 years or so, Wenger has been screwed over by RVP getting an injury at a crucial time, and not having a capable backup in his place. So he signs Park and what happens? RVP has the first healthy (touch wood) season of his career. Meanwhile he has 8 midfielders and somehow, 6 of them end up injured at the same time, at a crucial point in the season. How is that not bad luck?
Oguzhan Ozyakup, i think that was one person Wenger should have considered using yesterday especially when Walcott came off injured probably. I do not rank Chamakh and I would have thought in the 2nd half Wenger could have taken out Gervinho (He was loosing lots of his balls) and brought in Park. When Walcott left, Park should have taken his place. The Moroccan in my opinion adds very little and even yesterday you could see Park hustling but not Chamakh. The other is Afobe(Where is he?)Wenger should have drafted him into the side (or maybe you cannot do that in the mid of competition) but with the injuries we had i think he had an excuse to include Afobe in the Champions League side. Why in the world would Wenger remove OX unless there was injury scare? I hope it was not a decision that adding more pressure with strikers coz OX and Walcott looked more goal threat and they looked like they could run all afternoon. I would have fancied bringing RVP back in the midfield with park coming to the fray. I think Walcott was a bit trying to do too much and loosing balls and should have been told so. RVP was not selfish enough and the chance he lost because of passing other than going it alone with a one time strike like we know he knows how to do. (remember RVP is abit slower and very skilled and so the moment he opted to run in he was quickly closed down by the opponent in i think in two instances that happened.)
Do you think 4.2.2 is the future for Arsenal? Think about the goals we got and the clean-sheet we kept against a quality side that knew exactly what we wanted to do! Maybe we should try it though i feel somehow 4.2.2 gets RVP to become a worker and not a scorer in my view. Many a time we switch he stop scoring freely or it’s just me who sees that?
Oh no doubt, Arsenal’s medical team have some crazy bad luck, it leaves us in a predicament really, do we buy just incase or leave it and hope our players don’t get injured, such an odd situation
But aside from injuries, i wouldn’t mind another winger, Walcott IMO isn’t providing on a consistent enough basis, he plays amazing seemingly one week and poor the next, we need consistency, i really like him but if he doesn’t show consistency what’s the point?
Also, players like Chamakh are really not doing it, what do they offer? Getting rid of the poorer benched players and replacing them with better players can’t hurt us surely
Nikko, Ox was indeed injured so he had to come off, Walcott got injured after as well, both didn’t seem serious but enough to warrant them both being taken off
I dunno about 4-4-2 being Arsenal’s future, i think right now the 4-3-3 is working well, however IMO it depends on what style of play Arsenal want to play, a more counter attack orientated Arsenal, based on more speed would benefit from the more direct 4-4-2, however if Arsenal wanna be the possession keeping side of more recently, due to more numbers in midfield, the 4-3-3 would work better. Problem is, if we use 4-4-2, who are we gonna pair RVP with? Unless ofcourse he stays and we get Podolski as well
the best option for Arsenal in the future:
4213 with Rosicky/Wilshire/Ramsey as CAM, Song/Arteta/Wilshire/Ramsey/Diaby/Frimpong/Coqueline/Lansbury as potential CMs, Gervinho/Walcott/Park/someone new or young out wide.
But important to play the right way – wingers press fullbacks, RVP let’s the CBs have the ball but seeks to cut off the simple lanes for them to make forward passes, and everyone else likewise plays ball denial when the CBs have it and presses as soon as it moves to any other player.
If we are weighing hypotheticals, don’t we count RVP’s miss more than Nocerino’s because it came first?
At 4-4 on aggregate, maybe Arsenal plays differently and Nocerino doesn’t get that opportunity?
What’s your point? That Arsenal should be considered more unfortunate?
Well, I was responding to a bit in the article about RVP and Nocerino’s misses being equal (the phrasing is actually an “equally” transition, so maybe I’m being too literal), but more importantly, this is the type of analysis/debate I’d like to think is typical post-match. You don’t have to have some grand idea or winning tactical point.
Although I thought it was strange for Milan to play a front 3. They looked better with Aquilani playing.
I believe the issue was that they only had three fit midfielders in the squad; Aquilani was clearly not fit to start, considering this was his first game since returning from injury.
it wasn’t strange they didn’t use the wings in the first leg. Boh wings had been turned into ploughed fields by the crucial “turf relaying” – that’s what I call zonal marking. They looked like first world war trenches.
IF Camebrlian had stayed fit tonight they would have done it. You are only allowed 25 players and of those Arsenals midfield how many were unfit? Benayoun, Arteta, Ramsey, Wilshere. Song wasn’t fit either.
Surprised to see AOC playing as part of a double-pivot. I’d heard that his best position is through the middle, as an attacking midfielder. He’s obviously capable on either flank, but it’s difficult to imagine a winger having the patience to play as a deep-lying playmaker (Giggs being a possible exception, whose game has changed hugely over the years – but who wouldn’t have played in that position at AOC’s age.) Did he play a playmaking role, or was he mainly driving forward to link attack and midfield?
There was no deep playmaker, both song and Oxe pressed high up the pitch and left loads of space. This lost them the game in the second half when the pressing wasnt possible and they needed someone to slow the game down and get them playing. Missed Arteta in that sense.
This. Arsenal’s full-gun approach worked in part because AC Milan had very limited selection of players (so did Arsenal, of course) and got shell-shocked when they couldn’t cope against an Arsenal side attacking with as many as nine men at times (Vermalaen in particular got forward well) against seven defending and three standing too high to counter with. Had Arsenal had Arteta, they could’ve adapted to the change in tempo of the second half, but they didn’t, and that half went nowhere.
Interestingly, Arsenal (I felt) were at their best in the second half when they played the ball over the midfield to Van Persie who was too deep for the CBs to pick up. This got around their lack of a Regista, and didn’t necessitate many players running forwards to press or provide passing options in the initial phases of attacks.
I don’t know what to expect from this AC Milan side. At times they look capable of competing with Madrid and Barcelona for the Champions League. Then there are games like today, where they don’t have a clue. Get Nesta, Aquilani, and Kevin Prince Boateng in the lineup, and they obviously become a lot stronger. Ibrahimovic is fantastic though (yes, even while playing CL matches), and he is Milan’s ticket to glory I feel. If they win anything this season, it will be down to him.
Also had no idea Robinho was such a slow player. He was out sprinted all day by Gibbs and Varmaelen. Zlatan’s long strides make him much faster.
Robinho is quick on the ball, but he is not really a sprinter. I’m pretty sure Ibrahimovic would destroy him in a 50 meter dash.
which 1,94m guy wouldn’t destroy his 1,70 (or so) opponent in a 50m dash (comparable athletics provided)?
That’s not an accurate assumption. Speed comes stride length and turnover (how quickly the runner can re-position his legs for the next stride). Mechanically speaking, height sacrifices turnover speed. It also adds unproductive weight. You’ll notice that most professional short-distance sprinters are slightly on the short side. The obvious exception is Usain Bolt, who is ridiculously fast because he (miraculously) equals the turnover of much shorter men.
Arsenal had a pretty good first half, exploiting the terrible Mesbah. On the other hand, they ran out of gas by half time. After the half it seemed Arsenal were only going to score on a counter, an unlikely proposition considering the situation, and on one of those counters Van Persie botched a very good chance. Had Wenger had a better bench he could’ve made two changes at the 55′ mark or so and been able to resume the pressing which had died down in the last third of the opening half.
Walcott is unfortunately not a great winger. He has pace, but his awful crosses and sometimes first touch let Arsenal down. If Wenger were to have a new winger, Ox, Walcott, and Gervinho all to call from next year they might be very dangerous, though.
For Milan – their front three were defensively useless, and they looked much better with Aquilani on the field and Emannuelson in the hole. Depleted by injuries, Mesbah exploited, only seven men defending, and many individual mistakes, it got a bit ugly for them.
So what exactly are Arsenal good at? Well, they are not bad at playing on a normal football pitch, it seems….Yes ZM I am taking a dig at you…:)
Lack of any options from the bench absolutely killed them tonight. When Ox was injured, it was over.
Arsenal – Impressive performance and they have to be given credit for at least restoring pride. But they did indeed run out of steam late on and their bench lost it for them.
In defense, the CB’s defended well, especially Kol who dealt with Ibra much better than the last game. Shaarawy got in behind Verm a couple of times, but the two CB’s played the offside line really well. Both fullbacks didnt have an opponent so got forward a lot, with sagna seeing more of the ball, but perhaps looking a bit tired as he wasn’t at his best. But both getting forward in the first half helped give arsenal an outball and improved their pressing game.
In midfield, the midfield 3 was a weird one. I half expected Rosicky to drop deep next to song and Oxe play higher up. But fair play to Wenger as he went for it and overwhelmed Milan. But using these 3 meant they never really had a grip on the game and couldnt hold onto the ball (they were exposed on the counter a few times). In the second half exposed this problem more, as Arsenal needed a wise head in midfield to keep the ball and pick the right options, as the pressing was no longer possible. Instead we saw Song and Oxe both press high up the pitch leaving massive gaps behind but forcing the Milan team back and into errors. Rosicky played his normal role and kept his good form going, with a good finish and a good all round game. He pressed well with the rest of the team and created a few chances, though he maybe went for the killer ball too much, but in a game like this it was understandable.
The front three rarely got involved in build up play and stayed high up the pitch, back to the more direct Arsenal of this season. Walcott had a field day against Mesbah, beating him for pace easily and setting up the second goal. Strangely Silva had a poor first half as well, so Walcott managed to get a lot of opportunities, and probably should have produced better final balls. Gervinho wasnt as influential against a stronger Abate and struggled to get into good positions. Van Persie dragged silva out of position for the whole of the first half, which was major contributor to Walcott having a great game. He also got into great goal scoring positions and should have scored in the second half.
In the second half, Injuries and a poor bench (caused by more injuries) lead to Arsenal not being able to compete anymore. They really missed Arteta in the second half.
Overall, Arsenal returned to their direct tactics, which they should have used in the first half. The midfield and fullbacks pressed forward, the wingers stayed high up and Van Persie was well supported in the first half. Without the energy Arsenal lost momentum and the subs of two strikers just made matters worse.
http://economicinterest.wordpress.com/ Have a read of my blog if you get the chance
It feels like Allegri he had the starting lineup wrong, but I’m not really sure what he could have done differently (maby a different left back?). Milan has so many injuries that they even had two goalkeepers on the bench (!).
I believe that the Aquilani substitution (removing El Shaarawy) was key for Milan, and really changed the game. After that, they were a much more balanced side.
Instead of having two runners as carrileros and a striker as trequartista, they were then back to Allegri’s usual passer+runner midfield with a runner connecting midfield and attack.
Combined with Arsenal just throwing on any striker they could find, they were able to take over the midfield and stop with the long balls over the top, making the strikers (especially Ibra) much more involved in the play.
Arsenal had no midfielders on the bench because of injuries to Benayoun, Arteta, Ramsey, Wilshere and Diaby. That’s why they had no other option but sending in the strikers.
They had a youngster in midfield on the bench Ozyakup and also Gibbs has played in the CM role for the under 21’s. I think that Wenger killed his teams chances with the Park and Chamakh subs.
I saw Ozyakup warming up but Wenger changed his mind. I think you are being a little harsh on Wenger.
Arsenal looked deflated in the second, Miyach would have been a good option off the bench if has available.
I am abit shoscked by milans approach, i expected them to sit really deep, but they did’nt and let ox/theo/gervs run at/by them
overall its been a fantastic tie, a shame for the Italian champs to be in a group with spanish/ucl champs aswell and therefore have to face a group winner, unlucky for arsenal drawn against the best runner up despite winning their group, the ucl system can be very harsh
Rosicky looks more like the player he once was before all those injuries. His bursts of pace after turning hurt Milan time and time again especially in the first half. Seems to be revelling in that central role lately, maybe why they weren’t too fussed about selling Nasri?
I agree. As an Arsenal fan I regret not seeing more of Rosicky as a central attacking midfielder in the years he has been here so far.
Rosicky has played well this year when Arsenal pressed and played a high-tempo game. He’s also done a decent job killing games off by hoarding possession. He can play a fast, direct, one-touch game, or he can play a plodding, unpenetrating game. But he’s not very good at playing the deliberate, tactical, tika-taka style that was preferred during the past few years with Fabregas and Nasri in the squad. I think he’s failed to impress over the past few years because he was being asked to play a style of football incompatible with his capacities.
Yes, and he was also used very often either on the left or on the right.
Milan – didnt play too badly, but couldnt handle and over attacking Arsenal.
In defense, Silva was dragged out of position far too easily, and with Mesbah being dominated on the same side, it allowed Walcott to slice through the defense time and time again. They were stronger on the other side where Abate took care of Gervinho and Mexes covered for his team mate admirably.
In midfield, Milan missed the link to attack that Boateng provides. MVB didnt have a great game, though he wasnt helped out by his team mates. His early booking stopped him from his usual antics and meant he was scared to tackle an in form Rosicky, who was able to provide the killer balls to his forwards. He did provide solid passing though and helped make sure Milan kept possession in the second half. His team mates did far worse, with Urby and Nocerino both pressed back into positions they didnt want to take up and also forced into errors in possession. They couldnt get the ball forward consistently and Milan lacked an outball. They looked better when aquilani joined in, as could provide a better quality of passing from midfield, and it also meant Urby moving into the boateng role and providing a better link and outball.
In attack, the front three were not as fluent as in Italy. Ibra was up against a much better Kol, who dealt with him much easier at the emirates. When Ibra did drop deep to link play, Kol pressured him into mistakes and never let him get into his rhythm. Robinho was forced into playing deeper and kept having to get the ball in deep positions where he was no threat. He was often to far away from Ibra to link up and open up Arsenal. Shaarawy provided some much needed penetration to the attack when he got in behind Verm, but usuall he got caught offside by the well timed offside trap.
Overall, Milan were opened up by Mesbah being poor and Silva getting dragged out of position. They also missed a link between midfield and attack without Boateng and couldnt get both Robinho and Ibra into the game. But a much better defensive game in the second half, based around keeping possession, helped win Milan the tie over both legs.
the main factor why Arsenal had so much success was their willigness to finally attack out wide – Walcott was aided by the fact the inexperienced Mesbah struggled tonight admittedly. Milan defend as a very narrow and compact 4-3-2-1 so it makes sense to attack out wide and push your full backs forward to create either:
1)an 2v1 overload situation against the Milan fullbacks
2) stretch the midfield 3 and therefore create an overload in the centre of the pitch
It was also vitally important to move the ball quicker in the Milan half which Arsenal also did and press higher up the pitch then usual. The latter was achieved i believe beacause of Rosicky. Was it me or did he play a lot more advanced than usual in the hole? I personally felt he played a lot closer to RVP than in recent games and as a result forced Walcott and Gervinho further forward making it easier/more natural to press higher up the pitch. Just a theory anyway!
http://thompsontalkstactics.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/arsenal-3-ac-milan-0-ac-milan-win-4-3-on-aggregate-6th-march-2012/
Would have been nice if arsenal get a easier draw. both this and last year they showed character vs strong opponents.
Thanks designed for sharing such a good thinking, paragraph is good, thats why i have read it entirely
I think Park was not given the chance, how do you expect a guy who is rarely given the chance to play, all sudden given 9minutes to play, that is not enough time for one player to get into the game, especially against a big club!! i felt Arsene should have subbed OX earlier when he look like he was in a bad condition already and not wait till 75min to put Chamakh in, and i would have chose Park over Chamakh because RVP was best up front not Chamakh, and Chamakh has only more of a air threat in which not what we needed during the 2nd half. In my opinion Park was better to sub for the Great OX, compared to Chamakh. Park needs more chances to prove himself.
Mesbah – Could you play any worse? Why didnt Bonera start??
El Sharaawy and Robinho contributed very little, and let the team down at times.
Mexes played well, but he had to since T. Silva had such a stinker.
Arsenal got lucky in this game. The 3 goals are all down to massive individual defensive errors that, 9 days in 10, those players dont make (Except for Mesbah, quite possibly the worst performance of a footballer i’ve ever seen – Save perhaps Caldwell for Scotland against Norway…)
In Milan, perhaps 2-0 would have killed the game more than 4-0 (strangely) since at 1- or 2-0 Milan still have to defend well.
Milan set up attacking – with inexperienced players – and it did not work. they need to have a backup formation or two ready – 4-3-1-2 has its benefits but theres nothing wrong with going to a 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 ish shape to kill a game or whatever. Or even having the ability to switch to a 3 at the back system to cope with teams like Napoli.
I also think arsenal was poor defensively. Milan werent attacking with particular gusto, but they did cut open Arsenal almost every time they went forward and attacks usually broke down due to bad Milan play (particularly Robinho/Ibra pair – not good enough tonight) than good defence. The fullbacks of Arsenal particularly seemed very easy to get out of position. If Milan had played [anyone on the squad] other than Mesbah, and played [anyone on the squad] other than El sharaawy], they would have at least not conceded two and at least scored one.
You cant really tactically analyze individual mistakes. Both teams were very open and the quality of the game – passing, pressing, defence, tackles, shooting – was quite low.
Of course the English media will be fawning over this for weeks to come, but dont be too easily lulled into believing an Arsenal renaissance. Their team still needs a huge overhaul, and if RvP gets injured (quite likely) then their season is over, pretty much.
And dont be too easily lulled into thinking Milan are whipping boys now. This was a bad performance by the 2nd string team – Milan drew 2-2 away to Barca (Defensively, but thats how England beat Spain… has to be done sometimes) and narrowly lost 2-3 to Barca at home… results that arguably only Madrid could replicate. AC Milan will still (rightly) see themselves as 3rd favourites to the trophy this season (Behind the big Spanish two obv) and Arsenal will still (Rightly) see themselves as in a state of flux.
If Mesbah just puts a tackle in for the 2nd or 3rd goal, they do not result in goals. And if Van Bommel/Abate tracks Koscielny the first goal is far more likely to be defended.
You’re an idiot.
How is Robinho/Ibrahimovic/Silva/Abbiati/Van Bommel/Nocerino/Emmanuelson/Abate second string??
Arsenal did not have their first string midfield (Wilshire/Ramsey/Arteta), their first choice center back and left back (Mertesacker and Santos) and literally anything resembling a football player on the bench (Park/Chamakh vs players like Aquilani, ostensibly valued at 16 mil pounds).
Rightly as 3rd favourites? You’re having laugh.
Fuckin tool.
I agree with you that Arsenal are not at their strongest after the events of the last 12 months, but clearly you have a biased opinion. Arsenal were dominant, and that had nothing to do with luck.
Further more, AC Milan are still not as close to the Spanish giants as you may want to see them.
You should realize that while AC Milan were able to draw 2-2 against Barcelona, Arsenal actually beat them at the Emirates, and though they may have inevitably been beaten, they only lost the tie after RVP was booked for a red. If performances against Barcelona are your litmus test, then you prove only that Arsenal are trophy favorites on par with AC Milan, if not ahead.
AC Milan will still (rightly) see themselves as 3rd favourites to the trophy this season (Behind the big Spanish two obv)
Only possible if bayerns plane crashes
I noticed one peculiar thing in these 2 matches. In San Siro, Arsenal had more possession but Milan were clearly the dominant side. In the Emirates, Milan had more possession and they dominated the second half but they still lost the match by 3-0. I must compliment Milan(my favourite team) and Arsenal. Arsenal did well in the first half and tried to fight back and were deservedly rewarded with 3 goals. Milan , on the other hand after a torrid display in the first half,did not panic and had the nerves to see out the game and actually were the dominant side in the 2nd half. I am amazed how Allegri was able to implement Plan B in the 2nd half. Its good to see Milan in QF’s after an long time.
I think another factor was the San Siro pitch at Milan, which was awful. Arsenal could not cope and Milan could as they have played on it more often.
Zonal Marking, could you tell me what your team of the season is to this point?
Most Arsenal fans would have been relieved to see the back of Arshavin not me. Arsene has shown a lot of patience with the likes of Djourou, Chamakh, Rosicky but Arshavin got a rough deal specially after starting brightly but fading away. Still he could have contibuted to the midfield and always had the ability to put a good delivery in the final third as in Sunderland game. No matter how proud I am with this team’s performace off late we are out of the last trophy chance of this year.
One of the reason Arsenal being better defensively was the role Ibra played. He consistently dropped deeper after being caught offside early on and that nullified his strength, had Aquilani played from the start he would have been able to stretch the defence.
Is it a coincidence that Arsenal have won every game since Arshavin left?
It must be pretty demoralizing in the dressing room for a bit-part player who clearly doesn’t want to be there to be making higher wages than almost all his teammates.
Oguzhan Ozyakup, i think that was one person Wenger should have considered using yesterday especially when Walcott came off injured probably. I do not rank Chamakh and I would have thought in the 2nd half Wenger could have taken out Gervinho (He was loosing lots of his balls) and brought in Park. When Walcott left, Park should have taken his place. The Moroccan in my opinion adds very little and even yesterday you could see Park hustling but not Chamakh. The other is Afobe(Where is he?)Wenger should have drafted him into the side (or maybe you cannot do that in the mid of competition) but with the injuries we had i think he had an excuse to include Afobe in the Champions League side. Why in the world would Wenger remove OX unless there was injury scare? I hope it was not a decision that adding more pressure with strikers coz OX and Walcott looked more goal threat and they looked like they could run all afternoon. I would have fancied bringing RVP back in the midfield with park coming to the fray. I think Walcott was a bit trying to do too much and loosing balls and should have been told so. RVP was not selfish enough and the chance he lost because of passing other than going it alone with a one time strike like we know he knows how to do. (remember RVP is abit slower and very skilled and so the moment he opted to run in he was quickly closed down by the opponent in i think in two instances that happened.)
Do you think 4.2.2 is the future for Arsenal? Think about the goals we got and the clean-sheet we kept against a quality side that knew exactly what we wanted to do! Maybe we should try it though i feel somehow 4.2.2 gets RVP to become a worker and not a scorer in my view. Many a time we switch he stop scoring freely or it’s just me who sees that?
I think that I would have brought on Ozyakup and Jenkinson for Walcott and Ox-Chamb. Gibbs has been a winger before and Jenkinson could get some match fitness. I thought that with the subs, we lost the game. They were terrible substitutions.
Walcott played well in 1st half but in second half he went back to his usual “headless chicken” & showed why is not among world class…
in second half there are 3-4 situation where he got ball on right corner on penalty box , where rather than going outside & dragging full backs to right to make space in middle for midfielder run in & put some gud deliveries , he opted to come inside & crowding already crowded middle area & loosing ball altogether ..
i am not putting all blame on walcott but this is the games where he’s most worth to arsenal where he could use his pace & right flank to attack milan where they are weakest ..but still failed to do that in second half which he already did 1st half..
During Milan’s period of dominance, in the first leg, they scored a goal from a blatant offside position and were awarded an extremely soft penalty (to put it mildly). At the end of the tie these two key decisions were the difference between the two teams.
That penalty wasn’t soft at all. Djouru played the man with his arms/body. Ibra may be a flopper, but if you put an arm on Ibra impeding his way to the ball in the box, you’re so dumb you deserve to concede a penalty (even if it is on technicality). But beyond that, the whining is entirely unnecessary on a blog that tries to promote intelligent conversation about the game. If Arsenal (and Wenger, who always does this) cannot accept failure then they cannot grow as people and professionals. That’s not to say “refereeing doesn’t matter,” or “ref is always right,” but when you lose 4-0, don’t get a single shot until after the 70′, and then only show up for half the game in the return leg and blame referees it just displays a mentality which ought never to win a thing. That’s not to say Arsenal weren’t unlucky in some sense (so were Milan, albeit to a lesser extent), but there is no perfect plan that works 100% time if it wasn’t for those “darn meddling kids,” and you should treat your opponent with respect.
As a disclaimer, I don’t support any English sides, and the only Italian side I feel any attachment to is Roma (which gives me good enough reason to dislike AC Milan, even if it’s not outright hatred like Inter or that club to despicable to name).
maybe aquilani should have played from the start, or at least be brought in earlier. he has a better long pass than van bommel, reads the game better and he is a bit more technical too. the difference in milan’s game after he was in was obvious.
Why don’t Liverpool want Aquilani? He seemed to me to find some form late in his spell playing for them.
Frimpong, Denilson, Arshavin…
What a game this was! Unfortunately Arsenal didnt score the fourth but beautiful spirit nontheless!
This was really a game of two halves. Arsenal were absolutely bulldozing Milan in the first half with a combination of intense pressing, intent down the right flank and a “nothing to lose attitude”.
It´s a shame really, that so much attention is being put on that missed chance by Van Persie. The fault was first and foremost their inability create chances in the second half not the taking of that single one. Obviously a goal would have changed things dramatically, but this was the only chance Arsenal were able to create in 45 minutes of football at home, when they knew they had to produce a goal.. How can that be?
The key moment was Chamberlain´s injury early in the second half. Arsenal had been great a pressuring from all over the pitch up until then. The front three pressured the defenders while Rosicky and Chamberlain focused their energy on hassling Milan midfield trio and Lian couldn´t cope with that energy. When OX got injured this entire game plan was ruined. It´s really a shame how ineffective Chamberlain became after his running were restricted. According to the commentators Chamberlain was the player who did the most running of all players on the pitch in the first half. He retreated to a defensive midfield position alongside Alex Song and clearly looked unwilling and unable to leave that right defensive midfielder zone for the entirety of his time on the pitch.
This meant that Arsenal lost the link between the front 4(including Rosicky) and the rest of the team leaving Arsenal a broken team. Especially Van Bommel got alot more time on the ball and Milan started to be able to control things. Alex Song desperately tried to proactively prevent this from happening and abandoned his position several times in order to put pressure in midfield. This turned out to be counterproductive as space were left, in the position where Song would have been. This provided Milan with an easy outlet to escape Song´s lone pressure even though both Vermaelen and Koscielny did very well to step out of defence and pressure the player receiving the ball.
With Chamberlain injury and the rest of the team tiring Arsenal lost all control of the match almost from the start of the second half and I were surprised to see that Milan didn´t manage to put one past Szcezny in the second half. Unfortunately for Wenger, as ZM mentioned himself, the options from the bench, were absolutely abysmal and Arsenal put on so many attackers that the last remaining pressure from midfield disappeared entirely the minute Chamakh stepped on to the pitch. This left Arsenal with a bunch of attackers either exhausted or alien to the concept of hard work.
When Iaquilani came on Milan had effectively gained all control of the contest and the last 20 minutes felt rather flat and deflated to me.
I genuinely feel though, that if Chamberlain had been able to retain his he manner of pressing, Arsenal would have scored at least one more time. Rarely have I seen a game plan like this rise and fall with the presence of one player. As already mentioned if Arsenal had more options from the bench the pressure might have continued. The injury problems of Arsenal is a whole other chapter, but I find it very hard to believe that the injury woes are just all down to the concept of “luck”.
Points of interest:
- It will be interesting to see if Wenger is willing to give Chamberlain more playing time in a central midfield role. Against big teams his energy is priceless and against small teams his skill on the ball would be decisive.
- The adventurous nature of Allegri. In the good ol´ days we would have seen an Italian side sitting deep content with defending a lead. Instead Milan were started in their usual formation with minimal pressing from the front. Even when they were battered in the first half Allegri never ordered his team to sit deep. To see an Italian team fight fire with fire like that was… unusual.
- The right back Mesbah was above out of his depths. Rarely have I seen a player in the Champions League getting exposed everytime the ball came near him.
Good comment, tho Mesbah was at LB*. Thought they really missed boateng as a link player in the game, plus Ibra was well shackled in this game.
Great effort by Arsenal, but I do think they failed in their game plan after half time. It looked like they tried more of the same, but soon realized they couldn’t. When they did get their break, they stressed enourmously and it was a lot of bad desicion making. Songs poor pass in their last effort was kind of an image of Arsenal in the 2nd half. They should have shown more patience in the 2nd half as they were so close even then.
“(to get the ball out wide and run with the ball at the full-backs) That was what they strangely failed to do in the first leg”
Arsene Wenger revealed his complaint about the pitch quality at San Siro regarding this issue. Apparently the flanks at San Siro was poorer in quality when compared to that of the middle.
ZM I ORDER YOU TO COMPLETE A REVIEW/ANALYSIS OF MANCHESTER UNITED VERSU ATHLETIC BILBAO. THE REASON BEING THAT I WAS LUCKY ENOUGH TO WATCH BIELSA’S MEN TRAIN AT MANCHESTER UNITED’S CLIFF TRAINING GROUND. I CAN COMPARE THE PREPARATION OF THE SESSION TO THE PRACTICAL NATURE OF THE GAME. YES I EVEN SAW MARCELO, THE MAN HIMSELF!!
Sorry, just to confirm this is a serious post, It was only completely capitalised to attract attention. I read all your work and you have taught me much about the game. Thank you
iQTYWj I truly appreciate this article. Cool.
sTlMiq Im grateful for the article.Really looking forward to read more. Awesome.
Nice post! Keep up the great work!
Great insights as ever, but I feel you missed mentioning 2 key points:
1. You failed to mention the shocking state of the pitch at the San-Siro which hampered Arsenal’s game. Probably because you didnt want to court any controversy? Fair enough.
2. In you conclusion you say that Milan dominated more of first leg than Arsenal dominated the second leg. Again you couldve mentioned that Arsenal’s main force (other than RvP of course) is their wingers (Theo, AOC and Gerv are pretty decent at their job), and because of the state of the pitch they were handicapped. When the conditions were better it was the wide players who caused the Milan defense much more problem.
1. The pitch condition will ultimately hamper both team’s game as Milan doesn’t really play like Stoke and enjoy a passing game as well. Arsenal acutally had more possesion in the first leg and higher completion rate (57% and 83 %) so they coped with the conditions well. They just couldn’t produce any shots on target.
2. I’m not really sure that the wing play of the likes of Walcott is hampered by pitch conditions as he is really on his best when he gets in behind the defence as against Spurs. Robinho on the other hand prouced an excellent game cutting in from the right and his game is hardly suited for bad pitch conditions.
Milan were the better team and pitch conditions didn’t play a major role. The second leg doesn’t count as a evidence that as Arsenal played on pure desire which they lacked in the first leg. Milan controlled the seceond half as they regrouped and started playing with a higher tempo as they did in the first leg.
Man! Every Milan team in the 10s would have shut this game down from the first minute. And later Inzaghi would have sniffed one in to kill Arsenal
I have no clue why it is still not common practice to cover both posts on corners.
AVUod2 Thank you for your article.Thanks Again. Great.
The Author is crazy..!
Is anybody strong in radio here? We need a colleague who would tell us briefly about the transistor T2. I hope there are radio amateurs here. If it`s not on the subject at all, then I`m sorry. I have to write because I have no choice. PS: if the spelling is not right then also I’m sorry, I’m just 13 years old!….
I am amazed with the abundance of interesting articles on your site! The author – good luck and wish you the new interesting posts..!!
I decided to help and sent a post to the social bookmarks. I hope to raise it in popularity!!….
Hooray! the one who wrote is a cool guy..!!
Hello! How do you feel about young composers?!….
Honestly, not bad news!….
Fantastic blog.Really looking forward to read more. Fantastic.
Im grateful for the post.Thanks Again. Fantastic.
wow, awesome blog article.Thanks Again. Great.
Appreciate you sharing, great post.Really looking forward to read more. Much obliged.
Say, you got a nice article. Fantastic.
Sent the first post, but it wasn`t published. I am writing the second. It’s me, the African tourist.
Im thankful for the blog post. Awesome.
It’s pleasant sitting at work to distract from it�to relax and read the information written here:D
Really appreciate you sharing this article post.Much thanks again.
As I have expected, the writer blurted out..!
Hello! Read the pages not for the first day. Yes, the connection speed is not good. How can I subscribe? I would like to read you in the future!…
The author deserves for the monument:D
I would add something else, of course, but in fact almost everything is mentioned!…
Develop the topic further! It is interesting to know more details..!
Current blog, fresh information, I read it from time to time!!….
I subscribed to RSS, but for some reason, the messages are written in the form of some hieroglyph (How can it be corrected?!…
I do`t regret that spent a few of minutes for reading. Write more often, surely’ll come to read something new!…
Thanks a lot for the blog post.Really looking forward to read more. Cool.
Hey, thanks for the blog post. Fantastic.
Yeah !… life is like riding a bicycle. You will not fall unless you stop pedaling!!….
I really like and appreciate your blog post. Great.
I am glad that your blog is constantly evolving. Such posts only gain in popularity!….
I think this is a real great article.Much thanks again. Cool.
Appreciate you sharing, great blog.Thanks Again.
Major thankies for the blog article.Much thanks again. Really Cool.
Im thankful for the post.Really thank you! Will read on…
I truly appreciate this blog article.Much thanks again. Keep writing.
I loved your blog article.Really looking forward to read more. Awesome.
Wow, great article.Thanks Again. Want more.
Is anybody strong in radio here? We need a colleague who would tell us briefly about the transistor T2. I hope there are radio amateurs here. If it`s not on the subject at all, then I`m sorry. I have to write because I have no choice. PS: if the spelling is not right then also I’m sorry, I’m just 13 years old!….
I loved your blog article.Thanks Again. Awesome.
Are you interested in webmaster`s income?!….
Looking forward to reading more. Great blog.Much thanks again. Awesome.
Thanks for the article! I hope the author does not mind if I use it for my course work!…
The Author is crazy..!
This article is for professionals..!
The author deserves for the monument:D
Excellent! Got a real pleasure..!!
I value the blog post.Much thanks again. Really Great.