Gunnerblog

Arsenal 7 – 3 Newcastle: Why I’m struggling to enjoy Theo’s excellence

1,066 comments December 30th, 2012

Arsenal 7 – 3 Newcastle
Match Report | Highlights | Arsene’s reaction

I ought to be revelling in this victory.  Instead, it’s strangely bittersweet.

Make no mistake, this was Theo Walcott’s game.  Although his first half performance was patchy, he went on to complete a scintillating hattrick and pick up a couple of assists along the way.  This was probably his finest performance in an Arsenal shirt, and a convincing audition to be the long-term occupent of the central striking berth.

The first goal will invite comparisons with Thierry Henry, coming as it did after an intelligently bent run, matched by an equally intelligent bent shot inside the far post.  The second was a wonderful finish, clipped with little backlift past a wall of Newcastle defenders and in to the top corner.  The hattrick goal was the best of the bunch: after collecting the ball from a short free-kick on the left, Walcott scooted between two challenges, tumbled to the ground, sprung to his feet a la Stamford Bridge last year, and lifted the ball beautifully over the goalkeeper.  It was a goal worthy of a hattrick, worthy of the crowd’s acclaim, and worthy of Sunday morning’s headlines.

It was not, however, a goal worthy of a £100,000 p/week salary.  Not in the mind of Arsenal’s board, who are still locked in stalemate with Theo Walcott’s representatives.  And so, whilst I should have been lost in ecstasy over Walcott’s outstanding display, I was instead consumed with the thought that Theo Walcott might finally be about to explode in to the player he’s long threatened to be, just six months before he walks out of the club on a Bosman free.

Yesterday, there was one man who took more delight in Walcott’s performance than Arsene Wenger, the Arsenal fans, or even Theo himself: his agent.  He will have been rubbing his hands together, as his negotiating position was enormously strengthened by this hattrick display.  The pressure upon Arsenal to meet his client’s demands has never been greater.  Equally, any potential suitors’ interest will have been piqued.  Theo holds all the cards.

I’ve long insisted that if he was going to sign, he would have done so by now.  We are just two days away from Walcott being able to formally discuss a contract with a new club.  It’s hard to question his commitment on the field; equally hard to ascertain his commitment off it.

Arsenal, of course, can’t afford to freeze him out.  In the past Arsene Wenger has had a squad so replete with options that he’s been able to leave the likes of Edu and Sylvain Wiltord out of the first-team squad once it became clear their futures lay elsewhere.  Not so this season.  The competition for fourth place is so fierce, and the squad so bear that an in-form Walcott is a guaranteed starter.

The question I keep coming back to is: if he hasn’t signed thus far, why would he sign now?  He doesn’t even have the threat of being omitted from the team hanging over him.  He can continue to play games, score goals, and let the offers from other clubs roll in.  By the end of the season he’ll have deals on the table that significantly surpass the £100k he is demanding from Arsenal – never mind the £75k or so they’re currently offering.

It’s why I was so gutted when Olivier Giroud volleyed that late opportunity against the bar.  I would have loved to have seen a hattrick scored by a player I am confident will be with us beyond May.  On the subject of Giroud, his introduction saw Theo moved out to the right.  In that position he still managed to score one and assist another inside fifteen minutes.  He’s doing well in the centre, but I’ve not seen much yet that I don’t think he could do coming in off the line from a wide starting position.  His form is not depending on his position.

Regardless of where he plays, it looks like he’ll have a tremendous goalscoring season.  Arsenal will benefit in the short-term, but as long as that contract remains unsigned, each goal will be accompanied by a familiar feeling of gloom as we achingly cheer the name of a player all but certain to desert the club come the summer.  It’s a bit like Robin van Persie last year, all over again.

Before I go I ought to give some praise to Newcastle United, who were excellent up around the 70th minute, at which point they collapsed.  It’s worth remembering that whilst our players had their feet up on Boxing Day, Newcastle were playing out a draining 4-3 at Old Trafford.  It showed, and the ludicrous scoreline in yesterday’s game can be attributed to the fact they completely ran out of gas.

They have some superb players, though.  I was impressed by two young midfielders who aren’t even regular starters for them.  First off, Sylvain Marveaux continued his impressive adaptation to English football, providing one particularly sumptuous cross for their third goal.  Then there was Gael Bigirimana, a 19 year old who last season was playing for Coventry City, who moved the ball intelligently and accurately all afternoon.

As for Demba Ba, if we don’t try to sign him for £7m then it is tantamount to mismanagement.  I made a point of watching him carefully from behind the goal, and his power, movement and finishing is outstanding.  Walcott and Giroud’s goals were heartening, but we’re still in need of more attacking options, and with Premier League experience and an affordable price tag, Ba fits the bill.

–

Further reading: Player Ratings for Bleacher Report

Why I’m not convinced Olivier Giroud is the right striker for Arsenal

760 comments December 18th, 2012

Reading 2 – 5 Arsenal
Match Report | Highlights | Arsene’s reaction

I considered writing this article several weeks ago, but was temporarily dissuaded of my view.  After the Fulham match in which he scored a brace, Olivier Giroud was briefly flavour of the month at Arsenal.  He followed that  impressive performance with a goal in the North London Derby, and all seemed well in the world.  At long last, Arsenal had a centre-forward again.

I had slated Giroud early on.  His lack of goals seemed to be me to be down more to poor technique than ill fortune.  I’d been a bit harsh, no doubt, and when he began to score I was relieved and delighted that I appeared to have been wrong.  I, like the rest of the Arsenal fanbase, have been willing him to succeed.  He’s French, he’s handsome, he works hard.  We paid a fair bit of money for him, and he’s got a cracking song.  Naturally, you want him to do well.

Since that derby game, Giroud has made six appearances without scoring.  He is starting to feel the pressure again, as his heavenward glances and angry reaction to not being allowed to take a penalty against West Brom show.  It’s not entirely his fault: he’s been benched on a couple of occasions, and hasn’t had fantastic service.  But therein lies the rub: without good service, Giroud offers very little attacking threat.  And it’s also a very specific type of service he seems to thrive on.

Whenever Giroud is on the pitch, I find myself willing us to cross the ball in to the box.  Of his seven goals this season, four have been headers.  Six have been from crosses.  It’s an impressive conversion rate, but I’m not sure that we’re set up to play as a team with a traditional target man.

Arsenal’s best team performances this season have come when they’ve played with a fluid front three based on pace, movement and dynamism.  Take, for example, the games at the Etihad, against Southampton, or Monday night’s thumping of Reading.  On those occasions it’s been one of Gervinho or Theo Walcott in the central striking role.

It’s a team game, you see.  Giroud might benefit from a style based around crosses, but I’m not sure anyone else does.  I’m not even sure we have the type of wingers who are prepared to get to the byline and swing it on a regular basis.  Podolski can cross, but he’s far happier making darting runs inside to try and get in to goalscoring positions.  Giroud is a significant aerial threat, but Arsenal would have to change their entire playing philosophy to get the best out of him.  The simple fact is that he isn’t good enough to justify that sort of sweeping philosophical shift.  It is rarely wise to mould your tactics around one player.  Admittedly, last season Arsenal did evolve a style that was built almost entirely to provide ammunition for Robin van Persie, but he responded with almost forty goals.  Giroud can not be expected to emulate that kind of efficiency.

I’m not saying he’s a bad player.  I think he’s a very good one.  I’m just not sure he’s the right one.  For years, people talked about Arsenal needing a target man as a Plan B.  Finally, they have one.  Giroud looks twice the player of Chamakh at the moment, and will doubtless become an important part of the squad.  There are times when we will need him.  But his style is opposed to that of the team.  He doesn’t fit Plan A.

Watching the Reading game it was impossible not to be struck by how the selection of Theo Walcott, a far more mobile player, at centre-forward immediately helped restore the buccaneering swagger of old to the Arsenal side.  But don’t be fooled: Walcott does not represent the long-term solution, largely because I suspect he won’t even be here in six months.  The very fact he’s being selected in such a crucial position when his future is in doubt shows that Arsene Wenger is having to be pragmatic to ensure results.  He cannot afford to take a stand.

Unless, of course, he brings someone in.  If I had the key to the safe at Arsenal, I’d be plying all the resources I could in to bringing in a top drawer centre-forward.  As Manchester United showed when they got Van Persie, sometimes it’s worth paying big money to secure that extra cutting edge.  We need someone with electric movement, frightening pace and lethal finishing.  There are goalscorers out there, it’s simply a question of showing the will and commitment to bring one in.  I genuinely believe it could transform the fortunes of this team.

Q&A with Philippe Auclair: “I hope Thierry doesn’t return this year”

1,160 comments December 6th, 2012

The love affair between Arsenal fans and Thierry Henry will surely come to be remembered as one of the defining narratives of this period of the club’s history. He was brightest of the galaxy of stars that have become known as ‘The Invincibles’, and in the increasingly nomadic world of modern football it is hard to imagine how his Arsenal goalscoring record will ever be beaten.

However, the affair between fans and player, between club and captain, was occasionally a complicated one. Thierry was not without his flaws, and his idiosyncratic personality is an ideal subject for discussion in a book. Who better to tell Henry’s story than Philippe Auclair: an authoritative voice on French and English football alike, and particularly Arsene Wenger’s Arsenal. The result, ‘Thierry Henry: Lonely At The Top‘, is a fantastic read. I would heartily recommend it to any Gooner.

I was delighted that as part of his promotional work for the book, Philippe agreed to speak to Gunnerblog. When I originally posed these questions to him I had intended to publish a select few within a feature piece. However, his answers were so full and so detailed that I think it’d be a shame to condense them. Go and make a cup of tea, and come back and enjoy the thoughts of one of the most informed Arsenal commentator’s around – and don’t forget to read on to the end of the blog, where you’ll have the chance to a copy of ‘Lonely At The Top’ for yourself.

–

·         What inspired you to write this book about Thierry?

Two things. First, I was puzzled by the fact that, despite the wealth, if that’s the word, of football biographies and autobiographies which are published in this country, there was none of one of the greatest players to have ever played in this country – apart from a purely factual account of his career which had been written in the wake of the Invincibles season. It’s not as if there was no story to tell, even if Thierry wasn’t the sort of footballer, or person, who jumped at you as an obvious subject as a Cantona, whose every action or pronouncement, it seems, produced drama of one kind or the other.

Second, most people seemed unaware of the dichotomy between the troubled image of Henry in his own country, and his status as a genuine hero for Arsenal fans (and many English neutrals). How could these two perceptions co-exist? What explained them? Could they be reconciled? It was also a superb opportunity to reflect on France’s love affair with its national team, and the subsequent unravelling of that romance. Thierry had been there all along. That made the idea a difficult one to resist .

·         He certainly captured the imagination of Arsenal fans during his time in England.  Did the artistry of his game – and the Arsenal team he excelled in – make him easier to write about?

At times, yes, because I could just let the pen flow guided by my own emotions. He’d given us so much joy. It’s far easier (or it is easier for me) to write about someone you love. I also felt that neither he, nor the Arsenal teams he was part of, were given their proper due when they were at the top of their game. I still think the greatness of the player and of these teams isn’t recognised as it should be – it would’ve been different if Chelsea hadn’t won 2-1 at Highbury in 2004, of course. That missing Champions League trophy throws an unidissipable shadow over other achievements.

·         Thierry Henry has always managed his public image very carefully.  In spite of that, do you feel his professed love for Arsenal to be genuine?

Absolutely, despite the fact that he sometimes expresses this love in a very awkward fashion – again, that’s my own perception of it, based on seeing him, and talking to him, quite regularly over the eight seasons he spent at the club. I have no doubt his love for the club is that of a genuine fan, albeit a unique kind of fan. I should add that others, such as Robert Pires, feel as strong a connection to the club, but find it easier to wear. It is a question of personality, not of depth of feeling.

·         Is there a moment, or a goal, that you think sums Thierry up?

I hope the goal against Leeds United at the Emirates last season will come to be the defining image of his relationships with Wenger, the club, and the club’s fans, as it encapsulated all that is best in them, whilst being a fine example of ‘the’ Henry goal, coming from the left, finding the opposite corner of the net, etc. But this isn’t quite your question. Summing Thierry up is quite a different thing. The Carragher-on-his-backside goal against Liverpool in 2004 is probably Thierry’s own favourite (that game certainly is), but it doesn’t sum him up. There was also the Thierry of that wretched game at Fulham – after which Song was slaughtered by Arsenal fans, as you’ll remember -, all anger and frustration. You can’t have one without the other; the thing was that what we saw 90% of the time was the Henry who left Carragher, well, on his arse. So the answer is ‘not quite’.

·         Arsenal lost another great striker, Robin van Persie, this summer.  Historically, Arsene has always been able to secure the succession of his centre forwards – from Wright to Anelka, Anelka to Henry, Henry to Adebayor, and finally Adebayor to Van Persie.  Do you think Olivier Giroud is able to take on the mantle?

I’ve spent a lot of time ‘defending’ Giroud in the early weeks and months of the season, when a missed chance against Sunderland (comparable to dozen of such missed chances of which Henry and van Persie were culpable, and seemingly hundreds in Adebayor’s case) made him an easy scapegoat for genuine problems which affected the team as a whole.

Some strikers adapt immediately: Aguero, for example. Others take time to settle in: Henry is the most relevant example in Arsenal’s case. Giroud belongs to the second category. He runs on diesel, not unleaded. He’s not a ‘supersub’ a la Solskjaer, who can immediately feel the pulse of a game; almost all of his goals for Montpellier were scored when he’d been part of the starting line-up. Now that he’s established himself as first-choice striker, you can see the difference. He’s become a bit more greedy, which is good for a centre-forward. Even when his finishing is not quite up to his usual standard, he’ll provide others with chances.

I sincerely believe that he’s the best back-to-the-goal number 9 in the league –  far superior to Andy Carroll, to name a centre-forward who is always mentioned when the talk is of ‘target men’ who win ‘the first ball’. He’s much cleverer in his use of the ball, in his runs off it as well. He’s also got a fierce shot on him. But he’s no Robin van Persie who, in terms of sheer technique, belongs to the elite of world football. Giroud doesn’t, yet, and until he’s become a two-footed footballer (which van Persie did), if he can, won’t be able to aspire to such a status. We should remember Giroud was a very late starter in professional football, and that his margin of progression is huge. He’ll still score over twenty goals for Arsenal this season if he stays injury-free. Not too bad, no?

·         Arsene’s recruitment record from France seems to have got patchier as his time at Arsenal have worn on.  It was never perfect – for every Thierry there was a Kaba Diawara or Christopher Wreh – but in recent reasons it seems to have become particularly erratic.  There are success stories like Bacary Sagna and Laurent Koscielny, but the likes of Park Chu-Young, Marouane Chamakh and Gervinho have failed to adapt as expected.  Do you think Arsene’s default instinct to use Ligue 1 as a hunting ground has lead to errors of judgement? 

You naturally turn to what you know, and you can’t know everything. Look at Martinez at Wigan. He is one of very few PL managers who, in terms of recruitment, still think of Scotland as a genuine market (and has exploited it remarkably well). Why? Because he was at Motherwell. Mourinho brought Portuguese-speaking players to Chelsea. Ancelotti and Leonardo at PSG raided Milan, yes, but also Palermo and Pescara (Verratti). You could go on like this forever. Foreign managers will, by default, almost always look towards where they come from.

The players you mention have failed to adapt (there were other examples in the past, by the way. Remember David Grondin?), but each of them failed for different reasons. Park was a – supposedly – cheap punt on a guy who captains his national team. Chamakh’s problem is one of temperament rather than talent. Gervinho is infuriating at times – often -, but can have a genuine impact because of the directness of his play. He seemed to represent good value at the time, ‘seemed’ being the important word: L1 has declined, and rather a lot, since the time Wenger was managing there. He’d been a crucial player in Lille’s title-winning season. I’ll confess that I was amongst those who thought that he was a very decent buy, considering the price LOSC was asking for Hazard (who, by the by, is finding it more difficult by the week after a storming start).

But it’s not Wenger you should be focusing on exclusively, it’s the whole scouting network, which is far more active in some regions than in others, a point I’d make about almost any club you’d care to mention. It surprises me, for example, that the huge pool of talent that is Germany is not better exploited by English clubs, when they’d be able to compete, and very easily, against domestic clubs. I fundamentally agree with you, but don’t think it’s a specific Wenger trait, or problem.

·         Arsenal are light on strikers at the moment.  Do you think there’s any chance of Thierry returning one final time in January of this year?

It looks that way, but I hope that’s not the case. The final chapter was written, and beautifully, last year. There’s no way that a Thierry in his 36^th year can do better than what he did eleven months ago, especially when the club has more attacking options than was the case in 2011-12. He would in no case represent a ‘solution’; whereas last year, given the van Persie-dependance, he could make a difference at times. Even with Gervinho off to the ACN, you still have Podolski, Giroud, Walcott, Oxlade-Chamberlain, young Gnabry, and, whatever you think of him, Andrei Arshavin, whom I know is rumoured to be on his way out, but could still bring an awful lot to the club, should Wenger share that opinion (which he clearly doesn’t – apologies, I’m very partial to the Russian). I genuinely don’t look forward to another ‘return of the King’.

·         Regardless of whether he returns as a player, do you think Arsenal fans could see him in the dugout at the Emirates at some point in the future?

I doubt it. A question of personality, rather than capacities. Thierry has an encyclopaedic knowledge or world football, and an understanding of the game that is exceptional among current players. But he’s never been a natural leader, even when he was captaining his teams (including France at every age level); I’m not sure he could cope with the media attention either; and he’s very prickly when criticised. But – I’ve just realised that I answered a different question, ie ‘would Thierry make a good Arsenal manager?’, which is perhaps the one we’re all asking ourselves. Bergkamp, on the other hand…

—

A tantalising way to end. Thanks to Philippe for taking the time to answer my questions. If you’re keen to hear more, then you’re in luck: we’ve got ourselves a copy of the book to give away. All you have to do is answer the following question:

Q. Against which team did Thierry Henry score the last goal of his first spell of the club?

Send your answers to thierry@gunnerblog.com by midnight Sunday (UK-time). The winner will be announced on Monday.

For those of you who a) don’t know the answer to the question, b) know themselves to be unlucky, or c) disagree with internet competitions on ethical ground, you can get yourself a copy of the book through the conventional route here. I’m off to dream of Thierry.

Arsenal 5 – 2 Spurs: History Repeats Itself

1,544 comments November 18th, 2012

Arsenal's scorers against Spurs | Image via @ShahrizanDB10

Arsenal 5 – 2 Tottenham 
Highlights | Arsene’s reaction 

Yesterday, Arsenal came from behind to thump Tottenham Hotspur 5-2.  History, it seems, repeats itself.  At the heart of matters was the controversial figure of Emmanuel Adebayor, who scored a significant goal only to become the perpetrator of a violent and crude act that will grab the headlines.  History, again, repeating.

Some say that Adebayor was a little unfortunate to be sent off, and that his fate (a sending off for a thigh-high lunge at Santi Cazorla) could have befallen any player on the field.  That would be easier to believe if we hadn’t seen it all before.  Adebayor’s previous conviction was, you’ll remember, whilst playing for Manchester City.  On that occasion, a goal against his former club fuelled him with such a rush of adrenaline that he stamped on an Arsenal player’s face and celebrated distastefully in front of our fans.  On that occasion, punishment was belated, requiring an FA disciplinary panel.  Yesterday, retribution was swift and immediate.  Howard Webb pulled out the red card, and the game was turned.

Spurs had started so well.  They fielded an ambitious 4-4-2, and looked sturdy at the back, confident in possession, and threatening on the break.  Their goal typified their direct style, borne of a lofted ball down the left that exposed our defence as horribly muddled.  Per Mertesacker stepped up while the rest of the back four remained in position, Jermain Defoe raced in to the chasmic gap, and his shot was only palmed in to Adebayor’s path for the simplest of tap-ins.

It would be a slight untruth to say the game hinged entirely on Adebayor’s moment of madness.  There was another incident, just a couple of minutes before, that was almost as significant.  A lightening Tottenham break led by Gareth Bale ended with Aaron Lennon receiving the ball just inside our penalty area.  He fizzed a shot across goal, and it escaped the far post by a matter of inches.  Had that gone in, Arsenal would have been two down, and the whole shape of the game may have changed.

As it was, Lennon missed, and Adebayor followed up with an even greater aberration.  Immediately, Arsenal came to life.  Santi Cazorla suddenly found the space he’d hitherto lacked, and the game turned in our favour.  We were helped, too, by Andre Villas Boas’ selection of the inexperienced Karl Naughton at left-back.  He struggled against Theo Walcott all day long, and it was Theo’s perfectly clipped cross that found Per Mertesacker.  The big German leapt and planted a beautiful header in to the far corner for his first Arsenal goal.  It was a goal that had all the game-changing thump of Bacary Sagna’s in this fixture last season, and Per’s celebration showed just how much it meant to him.

Suddenly, Arsenal were flying.  In the two minutes before half-time they all but put the game beyond Tottenham.  First Lukas Podolski capped a hard-working display by squiring a deflected shot past the otherwise impressive Hugo Lloris, before Olivier Giroud put the icing on the cake.  He was helped in no small part by Santi Cazorla, who in one dribble overcame both a foul and a tackle from one of his own team-mates to get to the byline and square for the Frenchman to fire home.

At this stage, the half-time whistle brought welcome relief for Tottenham.  I turned to a friend and said that with our defence, I wouldn’t be confident until we got a fourth.  Fortunately, soon after the restart I got my wish.  The goal was possibly my favourite of the day, as it involved all four of our attackers.  Olivier Giroud nodded a goal-kick to Theo Walcott, who in turn played in Lukas Podolski.  The ruthlessly efficient German squared for Cazorla to slide home a well-deserved goal, and with that the game was pretty much done.

Spurs did put a few jitters up us when Gareth Bale fired home from the edge of the area with twenty minutes to go.  I have to say, I don’t get many opportunities to watch the Welshman up close, but he’s clearly some player.  Fortunately, he’s also far too good for Spurs, so I can’t imagine we’ll have to worry about him there for more than a season or too.

With only ten men, Tottenham weren’t ever able to put us under serious pressure.  All that was left was for us to replicate last season’s scoreline, which we did in added time.  Theo Walcott had been given a four minute cameo in the central role he craves, and he used the opportunity ably to grab a goal, sidefooting home after an impressive burst from substitute Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain.  It is genuinely frustrating to watch Walcott in such a rich vein of form, knowing all the time that we are creeping closer to his likely departure.  At the moment, however, pragmatism dictates that we must continue to play him.  He is simply too valuable to the team to relegate to the bench.

So there we have it: 5-2 again.  Same result; different sensation.  Because of the sending off, I feel like this game won’t have the same seismic impact on either of these teams’ seasons as the previous 5-2.  Last time, Spurs’ collapse came from a greater position of dominance, and was more complete in its cataclysmic hilarity.  This time, they have mitigating circumstances.  They can blame Adebayor’s stupidity rather than their own inadequacy.  I expect their wheels to wobble, rather than come off entirely.

For Arsenal, however, there are still plenty of positives.  Arsenal’s front six were excellent.  In midfield Arteta was solid, whilst Jack Wilshere had arguably his best game since returning from a seventeen month lay-off.  Santi Cazorla recaptured his spectacular early-season form, admittedly helped by the holes in midfield left vacant by a fast-tiring Tottenham side.

I was particularly taken with the performances of our attacking trio.  Theo Walcott and Lukas Podolski could both feel justified in laying claim to a centre-forward role, but both put in real shifts on the flank and reaped the rewards with a goal apiece.  Olivier Giroud’s adaptation continues apace – whilst he occasionally lacks pace, his aerial ability and movement generally make up for that.  It was notable how many crosses Arsenal put in yesterday – as long as Giroud is in the side, we have a genuine plan B to our conventional ‘tippy-tappy’ style.

The truth is that the long term repercussions don’t really matter.  In the immediate term, the here and now, we thumped Tottenham 5-2. Feels pretty good, doesn’t it?  Just, you could say, like last time.  Let’s make this an annual thing.  Enjoy your Sunday.

Arsenal 3 – 3 Fulham: Giroud’s excellence clouded by defensive incompetence

1,129 comments November 10th, 2012

Match Report | Highlights | Arsene’s reaction

This game should have been all about Olivier Giroud.
I said before the game I fancied the Frenchman to score – I should have put some money on it.  He scored two fantastic headers, taking his tally to six goals from his last seven starts.  It’s worth remembering that this performance came against the titanic Brede Hangeland.  Giroud competed with the Norwegian tirelessly and this ought to have been the day that he announced himself to the Premier League with a brace in a vital Arsenal win.  Of course, as it was, the defence had other ideas and Giroud is relegated from the headlines.

Some will say he spurned a final chance to make it his day by not volunteering to take the stoppage-time penalty.  It was interesting to note his body language – as soon as the kick was awarded, he started doing a ‘calm down’ gesture with his hands.  Perhaps he sensed the game was far from won.  Having missed his last kick, perhaps he also felt the added pressure of a possible hatrick meant he wasn’t best placed to take it.  After all, he’d looked far more lethal in the air than with his feet, and he couldn’t exactly head a penalty.  Anyhow, Mikel Arteta seemed pretty keen, taking the ball of Santi Cazorla – the only man to initially volunteer.

Was this Mikel Arteta’s first bad game for Arsenal?
After the Spaniard conceded the penalty, I pondered whether that was the first major mistake he’d made in an Arsenal shirt.  He was obviously keen to amend matters with the spot-kick, but unfortunately didn’t manage it.  When you look at Arteta’s performances since signing for the club, it’s hard to hold him too responsible.  This wasn’t his best game, but you can never question his commitment.

The missed penalty is a red herring.
Like Jack Wilshere’s sending off last week, or indeed Santi Cazorla’s goal, the penalty miss should not detract from the true story of the game: that Arsenal squandered a 2-0 lead for the second time in five days.  Scoring three goals at home should be enough to win any game – especially one in which you’ve led by two clear goals.  As it was, we allowed Fulham time to play, and they duly punished us.

Dimitar Berbatov and Bryan Ruiz were excellent.
Clubs like Chelsea, Liverpool, Tottenham, and indeed Arsenal should be asking themselves how this pair managed to end up at Fulham.  I don’t mean any disrespect to the Cottagers, but both plainly have the talent to be playing at a much higher level.

Our midfield were a mess.
Forgive me, but I don’t understand why a holding midfielder, Francis Coquelin, frequently found himself in a more advanced position than the more creative Mikel Arteta.   Also, I am conscious this may be heresy, but I’m not sure about the validity of keeping Santi Cazorla in the central three.  He drops in to wide areas to look for space, which means that the two left behind occasionally look a little isolated.  In the unlikely instance that everyone is fit and available, I’d like to see Arteta, Diaby and Wilshere in the middle with Cazorla drifting in from one of the wide positions.

The ‘Steve Bould effect’ myth has been destroyed.
After Arsenal kept a clean sheet in the first three games of the season, I said this:

“I’d like to go on record and say I think our defensive excellence has been somewhat overstated in the early part of this season.  Just as us conceding ten in the first three games of last season was anomalous, the three clean sheets could be a similar statistical oddity.  It will take a longer run of consistency before I declare that Steve Bould has replaced the current back four with clones of our well-drilled mid-90s heroes.”

I wish I had been wrong.   After today’s game, Arsenal no longer hold the statistic title of meanest defence in the league, and it’s easy to see why.

The “Steve Bould has fixed everything” narrative was a myth created by people who wanted to use it as stick to beat Arsene Wenger with.  And as for the ‘zonal marking’ on the corner from which Berbatov scored, I have to confess I simply can’t see the logic in leaving opposition players to make untracked, unmarked runs and attack the ball.

With Spurs at City tomorrow, this weekend ought to have been a time to put us in a powerful position ahead of next week’s North London derby.  Instead, that game is looking very crunchy indeed.