Arsenal 2-0 Liverpool: Arsenal adapt well to Rodgers’ tactical decisions
The starting line-ups
Arsenal triumphed in a fast-paced and tactically interesting contest.
With Jack Wilshere and Mathieu Flamini out, Arsene Wenger had no real selection dilemmas.
Brendan Rodgers continued with his 3-5-2 system, although was without both first-choice wing-backs, with Glen Johnson a late withdrawal – Jon Flanagan played instead.
Arsenal were the better side – just about keeping Liverpool’s front two quiet, and dominating both centrally and down the flanks in possession.
Sturridge-Suarez v Koscielny-Mertesacker
The crucial battle in this game was Liverpool’s front two against Arsenal’s centre-backs. Liverpool’s unusual formation (in Premier League terms, at least) is clearly designed to get Suarez and Sturridge playing high up the pitch, close together. The 3-5-2 means Liverpool can field two out-and-out strikers, without being overrun in the centre of midfield.
There’s a lack of creativity from deeper positions, however – Steven Gerrard was unusually quiet – and Liverpool tend to be dominated down the flanks with this formation, conceding too much pressure. They’re yet to keep a clean sheet with the 3-5-2, and Arsenal have scored in each of their Premier League matches this season.
Therefore, a rather simplified but fairly accurate overview of the game was this: if Arsenal could keep Suarez and Sturridge quiet, they would win the game.
Liverpool play direct
Liverpool played two long balls in the first couple of minutes – which is obviously not the type of football Brendan Rodgers usually requests, but it showed that Liverpool knew where their area of strength was. Arsenal rarely face two out-and-out strikers, especially the Emirates, and this was arguably Mertesacker and Koscielny’s biggest defensive test yet as a partnership.
Arsenal had two major solutions to the threat posed by Liverpool’s front two. First, Mikel Arteta played an extremely deep role in front of the defence, almost as a forward-playing centre-back at times. Flamini would have been a better player for this role, at least on paper, and Wenger would probably have fielded the duo together if possible. Arteta isn’t a natural in a role as defensive as this, but he remained in a deep position reliably, and Mertesacker was happy to pass on Suarez or Sturridge when they dropped into deeper roles.
Arteta’s interpretation of the role is reactive rather than proactive. He’s constantly darting across to make a challenge in front of the back four, and sometimes seems a yard behind the action – but he always seemed to rectify the situation with a well-timed challenge. He doesn’t have the natural positional sense of say, a Gilberto Silva in a role as defensive at this, but overall he performed well.
Second, Koscielny was at his most proactive. When playing alongside Mertesacker he’s a very forward-thinking defender who relentlessly closes down opponents when they drop into deeper positions. It wasn’t uncommon to see Koscielny closing down Suarez (or Sturridge) even if it meant moving 20 yards in front of Mertesacker. He absolutely had to win the challenges, of course, as he risked exposing Mertesacker two-against-one if Suarez dribbled past – although Arteta, again, did a good job of filling in.
And while Koscielny’s success rate wasn’t perfect, a key feature of the game was the poor dribbling statistics of Suarez and Sturridge. Had they consistently escaped Koscielny’s pressure, Liverpool would have been much more dangerous.
A particularly telling statistic, in terms of Arsenal’s defending, was that Koscielny attempted 11 tackles or interceptions in the game, and Mertesacker none. The German remained in a much deeper position and played a much calmer role – and while his lack of pace is frequently (and fairly) cited as a weakness, he consistently positions himself excellently so this shortcoming isn’t exposed.
Liverpool breaks
Liverpool were most dangerous when Jordan Henderson, fielded at the top of the midfield triangle, broke forward on the counter-attack to join the front two. There have been suggestions that Henderson would have been better off on the right, with a more creative player used as the number ten, but Rodgers’ decision to play Henderson centrally was understandable given his excellent display in this role against Arsenal last season, when his energy was crucial in Liverpool’s pressing.
Here, Aaron Ramsey played a reasonably advanced role and often left Arteta a little exposed, so Henderson could overwhelm the Spaniard on the break.
There were three promising moments in this respect. First, on six minutes when Suarez was penalised for a high foot, preventing Liverpool breaking three-on-three after a corner. Second, one nine minutes when Henderson won the ball from Santi Cazorla and drove forward into oceans of space, before delaying a decision and eventually shooting weakly. Third, when Liverpool broke from a free-kick and Bacary Sagna cynically hauled down Suarez – again Liverpool were attacking three-on-three, and were denied the opportunity to restart their move quickly by the referee.
When Liverpool broke quickly, they were dangerous, but when Arsenal got men behind the ball, they lacked incision from the midfielders.
Full-backs
Arsenal’s obvious area of strength was down the flanks, where the full-backs had plenty of space to scamper into – but when both Kieran Gibbs and Sagna advanced, it left Arsenal’s centre-backs exposed. Liverpool had to strike while Arsenal’s full-backs were unable to help.
Gibbs and Sagna attacked responsibly – one was usually cautious and in position to assist the centre-backs if passing moves broke down. Nevertheless, they had ample opportunity to get forward and take advantage of the space, and Sagna provided the crucial cross for Cazorla’s opener. Crossing has been an prominent part of Arsenal’s gameplan recently – they’ve scored from crosses or cut-backs against Norwich, Napoli, Dortmund and Crystal Palace in recent weeks.
Sagna was one of Arsenal’s better performers, and consistently won individual battles against Cissokho – who was beaten for pace on the goal, was later booked for a foul on Sagna, and was withdrawn at half-time.
You can also partly blame Liverpool’s system for the concession – as Mamadou Sakho moved out of the defence they remained two-against-one with Giroud in the centre, but Flanagan’s advanced positioning meant he wasn’t able to get back goalside of Cazorla, who found a pocket of space – a proper right-back (in a back four) would probably have been covering.
Arsenal possession play
Arsenal started by using both Cazorla and Tomas Rosicky narrow. Although this is both players’ natural style and ensured Arsenal dominated the centre of the pitch, it meant that Liverpool found it easy to press and win the ball. The away side had lots of players in central positions, and when they wanted to press, they didn’t have to cover a large distance – Arsenal might have been better off stretching the play more.
Liverpool switched to a back four for the second half, while Arsenal sat deeper
However, once Liverpool’s pressing dropped after about 15 minutes, Arsenal’s passing in the midfield zone was extremely slick. Mesut Ozil was relatively quiet, but Lucas Leiva was particularly keen to stick to him, and therefore unable to stop Arsenal’s other attacking players. Liverpool’s midfield zone seemed rather disorganised, with Gerrard and Lucas often bypassed too easily.
For long periods – especially once ahead – Arsenal took advantage of the fact Liverpool’s three-versus-one against Giroud meant Arsenal had more men in deeper positions. Arsenal always had a free player, effectively nine-against-seven across the rest of the pitch – and while they didn’t relentlessly threaten Mignolet, they calmed the tempo of the game and retained control.
On a related note, it was surprising that one Liverpool’s wide centre-backs didn’t move forward when Liverpool had the ball – they stayed in position, three-against-one with Giroud, and Liverpool lacked numbers higher up the pitch. One of the back three should have advanced, which would have enabled the relevant wing-back to push on, too.
Liverpool change shape
Rodgers changed his system after the break, moving to a 4-4-2 / 4-2-3-1 with Cissokho taken off and Coutinho on down the left flank. This was a logical change with Liverpool needing to get back into the game, and Coutinho was fielded in a very narrow left-sided role, moving inside into his favoured number ten position.
This potentially made Liverpool’s strike duo even more dangerous, but although Coutinho found space by darting inside between the lines, his attempted through-balls were consistently overhit. On his return from injury, this was a fine demonstration of the concept of ‘match sharpness’ – the Brazilian simply wasn’t on his game, and that made Liverpool’s gameplan ineffective.
Wenger was more animated than usual, and repeatedly urged his midfield to drop back and be more compact. This was a particular problem, with Arteta frequently left stranded in front of the defence, and overworked as a result. Ramsey’s advanced positioning was to blame, but the Welshman more than compensated for his relative lack of defensive support with his excellent goal. From then, he played more cautiously and the wide players protected the full-backs.
Subs
The substitutions were interesting – Rodgers brought on Victor Moses for Flanagan, and moved Henderson to right-back. He scampered forward to hit a dangerous cross into the box, prompting Wenger to bring on Nacho Monreal in his familiar role as a late defensive winger, up against Henderson. A right-midfielder at right-back was playing against a left-back at left-midfield.
Thomas Vermaelen replaced Gibbs because of injury, and then Carl Jenkinson replaced Cazorla. Arsenal ended the game with two full-backs in the wide positions, summing up how keen Wenger was to protect his defence. Denied the opportunity to break directly at Arsenal’s centre-backs, Liverpool were less threatening.
Conclusion
Wenger will be pleased Arsenal managed to stop Suarez and Sturridge from scoring, which was Arsenal’s major task. Koscielny’s aggressive positioning and Arteta’s role in front of the back four were particularly important in this regard.
Going forward, Arsenal weren’t at their best – but they passed the ball slickly and were aware of the need to push the full-backs forward, taking advantage of Liverpool’s weakness out wide. They were too open at the start of the second half, but Wenger urged his side back into a good defensive shape.
Rodgers’ side were eventually well beaten, but it’s hard to fault many of his decisions. It was understandable to start with the 3-5-2 given its recent success, and the decision to keep Henderson central made sense considering his performance in this game last year. His forward charges from the top of midfield allowed Liverpool to break dangerously.
It was also a logical early decision to revert to the 4-4-2 with Coutinho coming inside off the flank – he was dangerous, if frustratingly ineffective with his passing. Moving Henderson to right-back, in order to accommodate another attacker also made sense, with Liverpool having a good spell of late pressure.
I think that Liverpool were too defensive in their midfield structure with little or no creativity.
Suarez and Sturridge received passes too far from goal, and from there they had two blocks of players to break.
Henderson is runner with little creativity, and Steven can’t play in no 10 positions anymore.
And, they used full backs wrong in this game like you noted there.
They were simply attacking with 2-3 players, with rest of the team to far from them. Nobody can score 2 vs 5, except leo messi
A very well considered article. More like this please.
Good write up, as ever. Two points from me:
For a while in the first half I wondered if Liverpool’s formation should be called 3-5-0-2. There was such a huge gap between Gerrard/Henderson/Leiva and Suarez/Sturridge. I think that allowed Arteta to help cover the Liverpool strikers and Ramsey to bomb forward. Maybe Rodgers will try 4-3-1-2 in the future. Still gives gim two up top and 3 in the centre without having a centre back too many against single striker opposition.
Mertesacker being named in quite a lot of “teams of the week” for his performance in this match shows that accumulating interceptions and tackles is not neccessarily a sign of a good or bad defender.
What’s the difference between Liverpool’s 3-5-2 and Juventus that consistently do well with it?
It is the class of the oppositions are simply at a different level from Serie A? Or Juventus simply have better players?
Or are there tactical variations that allow Juventus’s 3-5-2 to be more successful against its’ formational weakness?
In this case its the quality of the players. Liverpool use the 3-5-2 simply to get the best out of Suarez and Sturridge while Juve have the appropriate players all around to make the system work consistently. If Johnson and ENrique were healthy then Liverpool’s 3-5-2 would have worked much better I think. Back three formations depend on high quality wingbacks, flanigan and cissokho are mediocre fullbacks let alone quality wingbacks. Rodgers should have used a back 4 this game and used his proper wingers (Moses, Sterling) to attack Arsenal directly.
An attacking 4-4-2 like that would have left themm completely outnumbered by Arsenal’s very strong midfield. Playing 4-3-3 with Suarez or Sturridge on a flank might have been an option but like ZM says, it’s hard to argue with wanting them both up front, so 3-5-2 was the most sensible option even if it has it’s deficiencies.
I agree that a 4-4-2 would concede the midfield, a 4-2-3-1 like this might have worked better.
Sturridge
Moses Suarez Henderson
Gerrard Lucas
Cissokho Sakho Agger Flanigan/Kelly
Mignolet
Your comment almost assumes that Liverpool’s 3-5-2 won’t work because they were outplayed in this one game, which I find strange. Saturday, it was exposed, as Zach says, because the wing backs were very poor, but otherwise I don’t think the loss had anything to do with the formation. (The midfield was obviously second-best as well, but the midfield has had trouble in whatever formation they’ve been in–it’s definitely a personnel issue, but is just as true whether LFC is in a 3-5-2, 4-3-3 or whatever you want.)
I think the problem with liverpool’s 3-5-2 in this match was the selection of central midfielders, compared to juventus, they supposedly have a stronger 3 starting midfielders in marchisio, pirlo and vidal and especially marchisio and vidal is an engine for juventus to press, defend and attack. I think if liverpool’s central midfielders were more aggresive and its wingbacks less adventurous liverpool would be able to control the game better than arsenal considering that ozil does not track back then liverpool will always have a majority in central midfield. Like ZM says the centrebacks should move forward to put more numbers in midfield when liverpool had the ball, this way the arsenal would be deprived of possession play. With a more patient play and especially with 2 good strikers in suarez and sturridge combination I think liverpool should have the advantage in this game. sorry i didn’t watch the match but this is what i think.
Three man defenses work in Italy because nobody presses over there and you have the time and space to pick good passes from the back to set off your 2 strikers. If you look at Liverpool they have struggled hard against Stoke, Southampton and Arsenal, all teams that press well, play at a high tempo and make it extremely difficult for Liverpool to take advantage of their numbers up front.
You say the truth, nobady in italy press so high and so intenesvly, and more important to play the back-three is to have, at lowest, one of the trhree defender good to play the ball. juventus has Bonucci and Barzagli, very good passer, and the strongest of the tactic is this: one of the wide centre back have to play more high on the pitch, particulary on the opposite flanks respect the position of the ball. When the team beat the first phase you must use the wide centre back to create superiorities. the WCB are the real advantage of the 3-5-2. As ZN said: “On a related note, it was surprising that one Liverpool’s wide centre-backs didn’t move forward when Liverpool had the ball – they stayed in position, three-against-one with Giroud, and Liverpool lacked numbers higher up the pitch. One of the back three should have advanced, which would have enabled the relevant wing-back to push on, too.”
Few times Toure and Sakho staied up and they never start the action from deep. Ok, Arsenal press very well, but Rodgers have to know this, and he have to know how arsenal full backs push too.
When fiorentina plays 3-5-2 Roncaglia spend lots of time into attacing third, and chiellini and barzagli do the same.
p.s.: sorry for my english.
I think it’s the creativity in the centre of midfield. Pirlo is the archetypal deep-lying playmaker, Lucas is not. A big part of Juve’s play is the energetic pair in more advanced positions (Pogba-Vidal for example) giving Pirlo the protection he needs to be creative from deep, but Liverpool’s 3 midfielders were all fairly industrious players with less creativity. While Gerrard can unlock most defences on his day, this definitely wasn’t his day. Henderson has talent, but is more of a runner than a passer, and Lucas is a pretty stoic destroyer, not a creator.
I just looked liverpool’s current squad, to reproduced the juventus trio with liverpool’s player. What I found? Well, Gerrard, Lucas, Henderson, Joe Allen, are the only midfielder who can play in that trio… it’s obvious that the team wasn’t build to play the 3-5-2, cause Coutinho, Sterling, Moses, are unable to play as wing-backs or midfielder, and Liverpool loose quality without them.. So I don’t understand why Rodgers wants to play with 3-5-2..
About Henderson I have to watched him again: he can plays as marchisio, he had the run.. but marchisio had more sense of position to exploit the defence in behind, and his first touch it’s more good than henderson’s…
i really dont understand ur analysis . how can u say liverpool adapted very well to rodgers tactics and what happened .did he asked them to sit or what .
let us take liverpools 3-5-2 structure i thought it was 5-3-2 at times you could see defending with 5 at the back . now is suppose this structure is meant to dominate the centre so that even with playing with 3 men at back you dont feel exposed .now to dominate that centre you have to play a high line the front 2 also needs to help press or even do some defensive work . out of which struddige is another hopeless overrated english players who thinks too much of himself ( had he been that good chelsea wouldnt had sold him ). now in the middle henderson is stupid idiot with no quality . gerrard hasnt got legs to go up and down anymore and lucas cant leave his place since gerrard isnt that good at game reading to protect his back three . now even though arsenal were playing with one at top but they had 5 midfield runners . arsenal could just chose the zone they want to exploit .
now at times you just dont need to beyond the back four you can just play in the space and can cause problem and that is what czorla and ramsey did . i had already said problem with gerrard he cannot go with his marker and cant keep up with him . he cannot marshall that team properly because of his poor game reading . you already had highlighted as to how arsenals fullback got the space on the flanks .
now about liverpools offense . now whenever the ball was going to come from the deep in the liverpools midfield they were 3 against 4 even if we dont count arteta who was deep and protecting that hole . i had already told the characteristics of players in liverpools midfield they are not that mobile . but then credit to rodgers he changed the system after interval removed cissoko and brought coutiniho but i suppose his positioning was wrong he was positioned on the left of the midfield and that limited his workspace . had rodgers asked stupid struddige to move left and coutiniho in the middle the game would had been interesting . with his introduction he started to exploit that space behind the arsenal back four and especially considering mertasackers pace they exploited that space and there been a more better player along side suarez then arsenal were in trouble . there was immediate impact of coutiniho’s introduction and you could see that after just 5 min wenger was seen shouting at his back four to move deeper. arsenal moved deeper and liverpool got the space to come forward but then again that nagging truth of stupid players in midfield and no creativity left suarez and coutiniho frustrated .
now most of the times statistics are provided as to much a player made the pass or was successful in his passes . but what i want to see as to how much time struddige lost the ball . koscienly had him for breakfast lunch and dinner .
haha.. good. i think sturridge is certainly overrated and average, the real quality is suarez, gerrard should probably be playing upfield as an attacking threat instead of a defensive one and coutinho plays between the lines and cause trouble for arsenal. and why henderson? i think there are better players than him like i don’t know who, but he shouldn’t really be at the front of the midfield 3. probably lucas should be playing at the center of the midfield 3 with gerrard either strictly the defensive midfielder or attacking midfielder and somebody playing the other vacant role. it looked as if all the 3 center midfielders are in wrong positions.
i mean good in a sense that sturridge is certainly overrated player who thinks too much of himself and u called him stupid..haha
well at least he looks very stupid:DD massively overrated because hes english
It’s interesting that even though Arsenal fielded three central mids behind Giroud (Ozil, Cazorla and Rosicky) Liverpool were so unlucky with their injured fullbacks that Arsenal where the ones who took advantage of LIVERPOOL’S weakness out wide. If Johnson and Enrique had been healthy Rodgers could have taken advantage of Arsenal down the flanks but they both were out and he was unwilling to start Moses or Sterling in some capacity to take advantage, a mistake I think.
good piece as usual. thought you might do this one, as tactically very interesting. as J Wilson explains in inverting the pyramid, 5-3-2 was dying out due to teams playing 1 up against it, and then ending up with 2 spare defenders and m/f overwhelmed as a result. this is pretty much the case here as per MOTD analysis. not necessarily a 5-3-2 problem just the way you play it or players you have. i.e you could have a libero to step out into m/f to make the numbers up at the right times, but not sure skrtel and sakho good enough on ball to do that. toure orig was a def mid so maybe he could. or whether you play your c/b’s as a flat 3. per MOTD they did seem fairly flat in clips shown. etc. btw, noticed Koscielny had 100% pass accuracy..only 28 touches but still impressive in 90 mins. arsenals real test will be away from home v big teams. so far only 1 away clean sheet..(v palace) , they have scored well away from home to cover this, but history suggests goals dry up for odd games quicker than clean sheet issues are resolved. credit BR for giving the 5-3-2 a go in the face of ultra tactical conservative uk media etc. really baffles me why Moyes doesn’t give it a try…Rooney fed up off dropping deep to help out m/f 2 last yr caused ruptions. kagawa no real position for him- not happy on wing. all wingers performing pretty poor ..valencia, young, nani. m/f getting over run or lack of defensive/creative balance. plenty of cb’s in rio, vidic, evans, smalling p jones. rafael better going fwd than def.
because obviously moyes is too conservative or stupid for that – all he knows is tried and tested 4-4 -2 with plenty of crosses.. that a pathetic state united is at the moment if they have such a mediocre no trophies no wins away against top teams coach.
for periods of the first half I thought Liverpool’s midfield trio were a bit overrun, they could have done with Suarez dropping just that little but deeper to help pressurize Arteta and Ramsey to a lesser degree.
Liverpool’s problem was the lack of attacking quality in deep positions. Of the back three only toure ventured forward to provide attacking thrust, a player far past his prime and unlikely to be a game changer. The wing backs were second choice and showed it. Gerrard was pressed and therefore unable to dictate play like usual for Liverpool, as he lacks the close control or acceleration to bypass the opposition pressing. Finally Henderson was the player with the most freedom to move forward but is ill suited to such a role. He is a runner at the best of times and needed someone else to orchestrate the play.
Liverpool’s best shot was to free up Gerrard and get him playing direct long balls into the runs of Suarez, Sturbridge and Henderson. But arsenal were smart enough to focus their pressing on him and not let have the time to play incisive balls.
I think Rosicky deserves special mention for his great work rate throughout. What stood out the most to me in the game was Arsenal’s energy to press the ball. Very impressive. Very appreciative of your analysis on ZM, always helps me to think in new ways as a coach.
agreed.
f8fNwV Thanks so much for the blog article.Really thank you! Really Great.
Y4Oy2V I am so grateful for your article.Thanks Again. Want more.
4LJsRb Wow, great article.Really thank you! Cool.