Arsenal 1 – 0 Man City: Tactical Observations
744 comments August 26th, 2007
Well, another win, another three points, and as arseblogger points out, it’s our first 1-0 to the Arsenal at the new ground. That’s what matters: last year we would’ve drawn this match.
The goal came from Cesc Fabregas, who clearly enjoys scoring belters against Manchester City. If Kasper Schmeichel hadn’t saved an unusally poor Robin van Persie penalty, it could have been slightly less tense entering the last fifteen minutes.
The overriding feeling is one of positivity. Our result yesterday mirrored that of Chelsea, who overcame a Portsmouth side who, like City, created chances and defended well. Victories like this will give us momentum, inspire confidence, and allow the side to grow.
However, rather than just let everyone be merry for a day, there are a few tactical points I have an urge to point out. Some of them are specific to yesterday, and some of them are more general. Perhaps they’re things that will be addressed as the season progresses:
Do we need a gameplan?
With a manager as astute as Arsene, it’s slightly odd that our side lacks any kind of tactical identity. There seems to be no specific gameplan – no “Plan A” as regards scoring goals. In the days of The Invincibles, for example, it was a concentrated attack down the left-hand side, with Henry drifting out to support the combination of Pires and Cole. Now, I’ll grant you that a lot of those players have moved on, and to a large extent this is a new side still gelling. But that hasn’t seemed to prevent Manchester City. Sven has introduced a fluid 4-3-3/4-4-1-1 system whereby Hamman holds as Johnson and Ireland look to play in the wide threats of Elano and Petrov. It’s simple, but effective. Perhaps Arsene feels that with the talented players he has at his disposal, no strict tactical plan is neccessary. But the result of that is that too much pressure is heaped on individuals. Our current tactic appears to be, “Give it to Cesc”. Perhaps our young players would benefit from a degree of tactical adherence? Just something to think about.
Is Robin van Persie too selfish?
I can’t believe I’m asking this question of a player in an Arsenal side with a tendency to try and pass the ball into the net. But at times yesterday, Van Persie seemed to completely ignore his strike partner, Emmanuel Adebayor. I counted three opportunities when Van Persie looked to play Ade in, then checked and tried to play a one-two with Rosicky. Now, Adebayor was having a terrible game, but it seems to me that Van Persie might’ve got a little to used to being upfront on his own. If 4-4-2 is the way we’re going to go, he needs to show more awareness of his strike partner, whomever he may be.
End product doesn’t release Hleb from defensive responsibility
Congratulations to Aleksandr Hleb, who has finally started to add tangible end product to what has been, for the past year, a frustrating succession of near-misses. Yesterday he won the penalty and had a hand in the goal. In the first-half I felt he gave the ball away needlessly several times, but you can’t argue with results. However, we very nearly suffered by a real reluctance to help out the stand-in full-back, Mathieu Flamini. Martin Petrov could quite seriously have had a hatrick, and that was largely because Hleb’s failure to get back when City countered often left Flamini outnumbered. Hleb must remember that in a 4-4-2 he has more defensive responsibilites than he does playing behind the striker.
IN SUMMARY
Positives
- Another goal from midfield
- Gilberto and Adebayor’s return to fitness
- Hleb’s good form going forward continues
- A solid display from Almunia
- The injuries to Senderos and Sagan aren’t serious
Negatives
- Adebayor didn’t look close to his best
- They looked like scoring on almost every counter-attack
- We struggled to break them down
However, at the end of the day, the biggest positive of all is three points.
Man U vs. Spurs today. I hope they both lose.
