I couldn’t help but notice something during the Arsenal v. Swansea match, and it made me quite unhappy at first: Mikel Arteta was sitting quite deep for someone who was practically a “false 9? at Everton. I’ve never pretended that my writing will shine a bright light on tactics or provide you with ground breaking insight into the “subtle nuances” of the game (because there are so many).
But there’s something about seeing a player who really thrived just off the forwards being asked to do what he was doing against the Swans that, even with his nice passing in the opening half, I find irksome in a squad so obviously desperate for chances at the goal.
I have no idea who made the decision for him to play as far back into the midfield as he did, but it seemed to me that as the game wore on, it left the forward line a bit isolated from the midfield. And of course I had to hear the standard line about how Theo isn’t really a wing player (he didn’t look like one in that match) and couldn’t deliver crosses in any kind of proper fashion and that he doesn’t have a footballer’s brain or spleen or pancreas, which if that’s the case then real chances and service to van Persie were going to be at a premium.
And yet, every account I’ve read says “Arsenal should’ve scored more goals.”
Perhaps, or perhaps Arsenal scored just as many goals as they could’ve scored. The magical footballing TARDIS doesn’t allow for the changing of events as they’ve already unfolded in a “fixed point in time.” So perhaps the lone accidental goal scored v. Swansea was exactly the number of goals such a pitiful attempts total merited?
I’m beginning to wonder how much Jack Wilshere’s injury is going to affect the tick-tock of the midfield, too. He adjusted to a “terrier” role last season perfectly and combined with Alex Song (mostly) to win as many balls and harass as many of the opposition as he could in every match in which he played. He did it with a skill that belied his age. And he did it in such a way that the midfield or the front 4 or whatever the formation was could generally get forward without worrying about being exposed if they lost possession.
I had assumed this season, with the transfers being what they were probably going to be, that he and Aaron Ramsey would begin to forge a partnership in the middle of a 4-1-2-2-1, with him handling the dirty work and pulling the strings in front of defence whilst Aaron continued developing as a more forward attacking type midfielder. Instead, because of this “unusual” (how can we call any bizarre injury to an Arsenal player “unusual” anymore?) swollen bone (is this a medical term?), Aaron has been forced into Jack’s role and I must tell you I think he’s particularly unsuited for it. I’m not trying to be rude because I think Aaron is gifted and will continue to grow as a player, but it’s just not his skill set to be chasing and harassing the opposition and winning back the ball.
Knowing this, I wondered, is this why Arteta was so far behind van Persie?
And then the boring, boring Arsenal of the lateral pass and the spurned goal attempt and the pass straight into a defender’s legs emerged. Incisive is the word I wanted to hope to use but what I saw was an off-road vehicle slogging through mud. And I started asking myself about the best formation for this group right now. And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the world’s least astute tactical analysis of the Arsenal Football Club.
I’ve said before that in order for a “continental” 4-3-3 to be effective, it has to quickly change to a 4-5-1 upon losing the ball. If you don’t play it that way, especially the brand of it that Wenger has employed because the fullbacks’ forays forward make it a 2-1-4-3, it will leave your team horribly exposed down the flanks. It may also force your centre backs to rush madly about and leave them out of position. The complaint about Meatsack losing that early challenge v. Swansea springs to mind–I think he’s been an excellent “positional” defender as long as I’ve been watching him.