I don’t know how to write this article today.
I guess I just hit the keys and words come out. If they don’t make sense, I apologize.
Arsenal lost to Atletico Madrid. Arsenal lost the Europa League. Arsenal lost in the most predictably frustrating Arsenal way.
First, Arsenal lost Laurent Koscielny to a ruptured Achilles. Here was Arsene Wenger’s most loyal and beloved defender, the one guy who has put up with Wenger’s insane defensive demands, the guy who had the pace to recover in Arsene’s high-line-two-men-against-sixty-yards-of-space-defense, the guy who had the footballing brain to read the danger in the Arsenal system, the guy whose recovery tackles and strength saved Arsenal dozens and dozens of goals, the guy who could start Arsenal’s attack from the back. Here was that guy, dying on the pitch for Arsene Wenger and Arsenal. He’s had this injury all season long and if you’ve ever had an Achilles problem you know: the first thing the doctors tell you is that it’s not if but when that thing will snap.
The second thing that doctors will tell you about Achilles problems is that when it does snap, it’s the worst pain you’ve ever felt. I’m not bitter or angry with Arsene or Koscielny over the decision to play him this season. They both knew that surgery would end his career – it’s six months, minimum, to recover and you never fully recover. Knowing that, I am sure Koscielny choose to play this final season until the tendon snapped. He consciously chose this path, he chose the inevitable pain.
More than any player, I think Koscielny symbolically represents Arsene’s Arsenal since 2008. So, of course it had to happen last night. Of course that had to be the end of Koscielny’s career. As he lay crumpled on the pitch, writhing in agony, so too did Wenger’s final days at Arsenal.
And of course once Koscielny went off, Arsenal had to be beaten with a counter attack goal. Arsenal had to fail to clear a long punt up the pitch from the keeper. Arsenal’s midfield had to be pulled apart and leave 60 yards of space on the right for one player to cover. Arsenal had to leave that space to Diego Costa, the Brazilian Didier Drogba. And Bellerin had to switch off. It wouldn’t have been the perfect example of Arsene’s final decade of Arsenal if those things hadn’t happened.
There’s a joke from the television show The IT Crowd, where they say “the thing about Arsenal is that they always try to walk the ball in.” That joke was written in 2008. Ten years ago. And last night, Arsenal tried to walk the ball in.
Arsenal could have gone to Madrid and given them possession. Arsenal could have kicked the ball out of play constantly and tried to hit them on the counter. Arsenal could have gone there with a second plan. But that wouldn’t be the Arsenal as we know it. That Arsenal didn’t even exist in the first leg, when Arsenal were up 1-0 against a team that doesn’t score many goals, against 10 men, and kept attacking like they needed to win the game 5-0. It wouldn’t have been Arsenal if they had a second plan.
It wouldn’t have been Arsenal is the big money players stepped up, either. It was Vieira’s penalty miss which lost the 1999 Europa League final to Galatasaray. It was Henry’s glaring miss that lost the 2006 Champions League final to Barcelona. It was Ozil passing twice instead of shooting which lost the Europa League cup in 2018. It had to be that way, and Ozil had to be the focus of Martin Keown’s ire after the match.
And we couldn’t be late Arsene Arsenal if we didn’t argue amongst ourselves over whether or not every player on the team sucks. There’s an argument out there right now which goes “we can’t judge the players until we see them with a new manager.” I get the logic of that, and there have been a few players who have moved on, especially in the last two years with Gnabry, Ox, and Debuchy looking pretty good, though the number of players who have gone on to be pretty poor after leaving Arsenal in that same time is just as enlightening. Perhaps Xhaka will turn out to be a Pirlo-type, if we can only play him alongside a Pogba (Ramsey) and a Vidal (Maitland-Niles?) in a system which takes advantage of those player’s attributes, then we will know for sure.
But Xhaka in particular, and go ahead and tune out right now if you’re prone to getting angry about people’s differing opinions, has shown the exact same defect for his entire career. Before we were even linked to Xhaka I was a fan of his stats. I wrote several articles describing him as the perfect replacement for Arteta. It was the long passing, see, that’s what got me. It’s one of the stats I look for in a player to tell if they are truly a talented midfielder, if you can consistently nail the long passes, you’re good.
But there were dissenting voices even back then about Xhaka’s work rate on defense. Naveen warned me, showing me clips of Xhaka sauntering back on defense time and again while at Borussia Monchengladbach. Naveen also warned us that his red cards were born out of a singular inability to read defensive plays, get into position, and make good tackles. He has been a lazy defender his entire career, he is out of position all the time, he has always dived in to tackles like a complete fool. But when he came to Arsenal, I didn’t listen, touting instead Xhaka’s “line-breaking” passes and his ability to spray crosses 40 yards to any corner like a sprinkler.
And last night, he did a weird thing again in defense. Yes, he was the only player to get a shot on target for Arsenal, yes he’s a fantastic passer who rarely turns the ball over, but after the ball was punted up field, Xhaka failed to read the danger and instead of covering the space, ran over to Griezmann and did some kind of weird “juke” defense. Remember how Szczesny used to try to “trick” people on penalties by juking around in the net? Xhaka did that. He faked going the right way (toward his own goal) to try to get Griezmann to go the wrong way. Griezmann just wrinkled his brow and made the simple pass to Costa.
In the book, Pep Confidential, Guardiola describes how you break down opponents:
“The secret is to overload one side of the pitch so the opponent must tilt its own defence to cope,” Guardiola said. “When you’ve done that, we attack and score from the other side. That’s why you have to pass the ball with a clear intention. Draw in the opponent, then hit them with the sucker punch.”*
That’s how you beat Arsenal with Xhaka in midfield. You just play the ball around until he gets out of shape, then you pass it around him to the open man 50 yards away. Atletico was doing that to Arsenal all night. So much so that Monreal was reduced to running around grabbing people well out of his area on the right. Monreal covered for Xhaka, not the other way around.
Maybe a new manager will suddenly give Xhaka a brain. Maybe. I think, however, that this line about not being able to judge players until we get a new manager sounds a lot like what people used to say about Wenger. That we can’t judge Wenger properly until the financial shackles come off. That didn’t turn out so well.
Even if Xhaka is given cover (imagine having to play a guy behind the deep-lying playmaker) teams will know that he’s a liability in midfield and they will intentionally pull Arsenal apart to create one-v-ones with Xhaka. He will be exposed. He will be Denilsoned. Probably in a big game, like he was last night.
And then there were the post match interviews. In this one thing Arsenal weren’t perfectly Arsenal. Wenger rarely lets his emotions show but in interview after interview he was clearly shaken. His eyes were red. His voice cracked. And he was asked the same question seven times and gave the same answer. It was heartbreaking to see him say that this was sad sad sad over and over again.
What makes it so difficult to watch is that this all could have been avoided. This decline of the last two seasons could have been a triumph instead. He could have left last summer instead of being pushed out this Spring. I’m not one of those tiresome people who say he’s ruined his legacy, nothing will tarnish Wenger’s legacy.
In a sense we are all Arsene Wenger. We all stay past our prime. We all hang on to things that we should let go of. We all think we are better than we are. And we are all flawed.
Do we all end the way Wenger has ended for Arsenal?
*I intentionally copied this quote from this ESPN piece which says that Xhaka will come good one day.
Beautifully put, great piece, thank you!
I don’t know, but I do know that we’re not getting a new squad this summer, so whatever manager does come in will just have to try to fix what’s already here, as I mentioned yesterday. I hope some of the players who look bad / average now will look better in a new system, in a way that appeals to their strengths and minimizes their weaknesses (even Pirlo had weaknesses…slow being one of them!). Also, I heard from several people that Xhaka was decent yesterday!
The idea of living forever had some appeal when I was young, but it becomes ever more horrifying as I age. That said, living forever in some kind of paradise, in which the horror of living forever was absent (among other things, like suffering), does hold appeal, but my finite mind can’t really fathom what that would look like.
I’m picking on the low hanging fruit of USA Evangelicals. In many other traditions hell is simply a state of being outside of God’s grace. Which is more like when you’re a child and you’ve been bad and mom or dad won’t even look at you. And heaven is typically described more in the Greek/Roman tradition as fields where you live free from suffering. But as a Buddhist (which is truly the most nihilistic of all philosophies) I struggle with the idea that you could even know pleasure, joy, and happiness without the opposite. So, while I have no direct knowledge of either heaven or hell I still believe that both would be hells of different cages. That the only true happiness is here on earth where we can both suffer and enjoy.
Unlike other Buddhists I think that while suffering is the problem and that suffering is caused by desire I embrace desire and the suffering because both are just the way of all life. There is no creation without decay. No beauty without ugliness. No joy without sadness. Thus I am always grateful for pain because it reminds me of joy and I am grateful for joy because it reminds me of suffering.
You’ve been smoking too much pot.
I would say just the right amount of pot.
True happiness, according to the concept of Moksh, is beyond the individual. It’s when you merge with God or the universal force or whatever you want to call it. I think the Buddhist concept of Nirvan is similar.
But then can you call it happiness without the concept of existence as an individual?
Anyway, I think happiness comes from fulfilling your purpose. You can have all the things that make you happy, without being happy. And you can suffer while working towards your goal and still feel happy.
Great post Timothy, I’ve read it once but need to read it again before I comment further. That will be in the morning.
One of my favorite posts, Tim. You captured the emotions of the day perfectly. I will quibble about Xhaka on the Costa goal. He is reacting to Griezmann breaking into open space, and Griezmann makes a great fake as if playing the ball back, only to quickly fire it to Costa. Xhaka bit on the fake. The bad header and Bellerin switching off are the problems there. Xhaka could have done little to prevent that pass. I think he’s gotten dramatically better at positioning. He might never be a great defender, but in a scheme where the defense works as a unit and everyone has clear responsibilities, I think he will be an asset. He hasn’t had that under Wenger.
I don’t want him to be a great defender. If you watch Matic and Fellaini play they are also slow and easily caught out. But against Brighton today both men busted balls to get back and stop their man from scoring. That’s what I want. I don’t think he has that in him.
But for the vast majority of players, surely that’s precisely the sort of thing that can be coached into him? (Mesut Ozil may be one of the few exceptions, where he *really* just doesn’t have it in him.) I mean the “yer a** is going to get splinters from that bench until you learn how to track your runners” kinda coaching.
Maybe they wouldn’t want him as their player to begin with, but if Klopp or Jose or Pep or Poch or Conte were stuck with Xhaka, I can’t see him continuing with his bad, lazy habits for long…
Xhaka came from Basel to Mönchengladbach and had his most important years under Lucien Favre who is a meticulous micromanager, he would stop traning session every second to improve positioning.
What Xhaka hasn’t learned by now from Favre he is not learning from anyone.
*few seconds
fair point.
Going out in a blaze of glory would have been lovely for Arsene, and for us. But it wouldn’t have told the true story.
The sadness of this result, and the indelibly Arsnal-esque manner of it was, as you say, a truer reflection of where we are. Koscielny’s dreadful injury, Ozil failing to step up, Costa punishing us yet again, conceding late in the first leg and failing valiantly in the second, they were all echoes of the past few years. A change is bound to be good for the club, the players, the fans and even for Arsene himself. But I’ll forever grateful not only for the good times but also for the rash, flawed, obstinate daring do of the more recent ones.
Let’s hope he gets a good send off in the final 3 games.
No excuse fro Ozil failing to shoot. A disappointing showing. I think Ramsey was also largely a no-show.
Ramsey played in a more defensive role vs. Atletico. He led all players in winning tackles. And he delivered two great final balls that should have been key passes if Lacazette and Monreal had not poorly controlled the ball.
Tackles or no, he didn’t play in a more defensive role, he was just less effective than usual. And while the early ball to Nacho in particular was delicious, he gave the ball away again and again in the second half.
All of this is true, including FORARSENALFANS comments
So Tim, you think Wenger had Ramsey positioned in a more defensive role than usual?
I didn’t see that, though maybe our relative lack of positional dominance meant he was making runs into the box and in traditional centre forward territory less often than usual…
Precisely, Tim. Precisely.
There’s a kind of rueful irony in Ramsey playing the way some of his most implacable critics always say they they want him to (more defensive minded) and then the self-same critics not seeing that, because they have a bee in their bonnet and can’t let go of a set narrative.
He was ineffective, sure. Every Arsenal front/mid player was.
I’m not some Ramsey fanboy, but this one-eyedness and narrativitis drives me nuts. We take ONE of those chances he created and it’s a different ballgame.
One of the puzzles for me was our lack of directness in their box. A Welbeck backheel to Lacazette deep in the second half (when youre mentally yelling at Danny to drive) summed up our approach as much as Ozil’s loss of nerve on his shooting chance. If the match was still going on to this minute, we’d still be trying to thread it through their packed middle.
Perhaps one of our most direct attacking players shouldn’t have been focusing on defense as much as he was?
Claude,
I love you, but…
If I’m a “one-eyed,” “implacable” Ramsey critic (“obsessed” I think you said last time I criticized him), then you are MOST DEFINITELY a Ramsey fan boy.
Let’s just have some consistency in our labels here. You write a reply in defense of him–without fail, regardless of his performance–literally EVERY TIME I say anything critical about him!!!!
Nothing to be ashamed of. Just own it brother.
Not an excuse but an explanation: on the ball when it broke to him in the box after tackling their RB, he had to shoot first time or the shooting chance was gone. In hindsight shooting was undoubtedly the right call, especially given how well Athletico collapse the space in their box, but once he takes a touch the chance has gone, i.e. he could have still gotten a shot off but the angle has tightened and by far the higher percentage option is to square it hard and low across the 6 yard box as he did.
And I think a ton of players take that touch in that situation, both because (a) it’s instinctive to set oneself by taking one touch, and (b) the ball is directly in front of him rather than shifted to his left, and most players want the ball shifted onto their dominant side so they can strike the ball at an angle, making it less likely to skew it well wide.
To be clear, I’m not saying the right call was to take the touch rather than hit it first time, just that a great many other players would have done the same thing in that situation. Where many others would have differed from Mesut is in opting to shoot even after the touch, when the shot has become much lower percentage. If he had done so it almost certainly would have been blocked or saved, but it would at least have allowed him to save face, sparing him from the rolled eyes and groans of all of us fans saying “typical Mesut, scared to shoot!” In the circumstances once he’d taken that ill-advised touch, I don’t think his decision process can really be faulted, but it was undoubtedly the most Ozil-y thing to do at that moment.
Folks mention a second time he should have shot but I only remember the one time (and I’m not keen to go back and rewatch for some reason).
Spot on but it’s all about that Ill advised first touch. You don’t have that luxury against Atletico. If he wants to be the guy that a team is built around, he has to shoot first touch there. Imagine how it would have been received if he had scored. Instant legend. All of the critics swooning. Instead he is the guy who disappears in big games.
Yeah, I get the point, but surely that’s simplistic, no? I mean, if Laca or Auba takes a touch there–and it’s eminently plausible that they would have, or that they would, say, at least 5 out of 10 times in a similar situation–does that mean they’re not the go-to predatory CF’s we’re going to build our attack around? (I mean, if they’re not good enough at scoring goals for us, then how many players in world football are?!)
The issue is not that one chance in one split-second moment in one game (and it was hardly a guilt-edged sitter in the 6 yard box anyway). The issue is Ozil’s history: he’s just not assertive in terms of taking shots. His first instinct is always to pass.
So you’ve got two options: you can say “he’s just not good enough at scoring goals for him to be the centerpiece of our attack, period”; or you can say, “it’s not ideal that he doesn’t score more goals, but his other attributes make him incredibly worth it, provided we put the right guys around him.” In some combination of Laca, Auba, Ramsey, and Micki, we arguably have enough of the right guys around him going forward (maybe one more direct speedy winger would do nicely), provided we get a more modern, innovative manager to play 2018 football (pretty sure e.g. Klopp would have Ozil and company playing much better going forward than they have been). The areas of the team to address are in the positions behind Ozil, not in front of him.
Your best ever.you recognised we all can be arsene wenger staying beyond our prime.thats wat I tell evry1 it ain’t easy letting go.always this thought that it will get better.now arsenal moves on and I hope d next manager brings urgency intensity and hunger.d rest will follow
This is one of the worst articles of yours I have ever read – of course Wenger has massively tarnished his legacy and horribly divided the fanbase – stubbornly staying on 4-10 years too long depending on your point of view. (the 8-2 was enough for me). And he has left a hugely overpaid, terribly coached unbalanced dysfunctional mess of a squad behind. And was paid £8-10M a year for this.
You are normally very analytical but this is sentimental tosh.
somewhere between “live free and die” and “famous potatoes” lies the truth. George Carlin
Amen, Tim.
There is a silver lining to this terrible loss, this terrible season. The silver lining is we’re still in the Europa, and will be favorites next year. The hope is we don’t get unusally good teams dropping into it from the CL. The hope is a team with a new coach with a new philosophy (or no philosophy), in a competition where they are favorites, can go on and put a nail in the coffin of all the Wengerisms you described above. A new start to a new era, putting the misery of the last decade behind us. That is my hope.
The silver lining is no sane person can say now Wenger was let go prematurely.
One of your best ever…
Wonderful analysis. Nailed Arsene’s Arsenal.
We did hop it would be different this time, though.
**hope, not hop.
Theyre right, though. It’s the hops that kills you 🙂
My one real frustration with this tie is that we never really just went for it.
We made stupid and costly errors on both goals. We huffed and puffed in the first leg, and did much less in the second leg.
As much as you say this is a fitting account of Wenger’s Arsenal days, I suppose I am disappointed that we were so focused on things we know we are at risk of doing wrong (and did them anyway) and forget what we do right, which is just go on the attack. I know that hasn’t been the theme the past couple of seasons where the attack hasn’t been as free flowing. But the intent. The will and belief to play an attacking game and take the game to them. The only time we had it was for the first 8-10 minutes of the first leg, until the sending off which seemed to make us more cautious and scared about making a mistake. And for me that is the disappointment. More than the errors and more than the result even.
This side is good enough to be better than this. We made the errors we did and they cost us, but we had it in us to absorb those errors and still beat this Atletico side. But we didn’t do that. We didn’t play the Arsenal way.
You are right about Xhaka’s defensive problems, but I think he is improving, and he will get better at it (provided he wants to) Our defenders also view things too optimistically. Monreal jogged back in the first leg for the goal until it was too late, and did the same on Diego Costa’s early chance in the second. He wasn’t alone in this. This will have to change. And a better keeper will help immensely. Not just in terms of shot stopping, but also reading the play and having the skill (and power) with the ball at feet to find open players, or go long into space for our attackers to run onto.
I haven’t wanted to think too much about Koscielny because this just makes me sad. That might be it for his career, but even if it is to be so, I hope he is remembered fondly for his contribution to us. His absence will make an experienced defender an absolutely essential buy for us.
Whoever the next guy is, I just hope he gets us playing attacking football with belief and intent to score, while protecting us from the individual errors that all our defenders seem to possess in their locker.
“As much as you say this is a fitting account of Wenger’s Arsenal days, I suppose I am disappointed that we were so focused on things we know we are at risk of doing wrong (and did them anyway) and forget what we do right, which is just go on the attack. I know that hasn’t been the theme the past couple of seasons where the attack hasn’t been as free flowing. But the intent. The will and belief to play an attacking game and take the game to them.”
Honestly Shard, I think we tried. Athletico are just really good at defense, and we’re not nearly as good as Arsenal sides of (even) the recent past at moving up the pitch and then breaking teams down with passing football.
In the first leg I thought we got the patience/urgency balance *mostly* right (exception being late in the first half, and then after they scored their goal) against a team determined to sit very deep (I know plenty disagree about that). In the second leg, it was noticeable that Athletico were determined to not park the bus and spend all the time defending in their box letting us lay siege to it (we did score from a cross after a period of sustained pressure in the first leg, after all). So they defended from the front, pressing us high or in the middle third, and we had trouble dealing with that tactic, as we pretty much always do these days.
So while we had our attacking moments, it was only in fits and starts, but I’m not sure this was because we weren’t prepared to “go for it”. Rather, it was because without the ball they’re about a thousand times better than us, so they made it difficult for us to build the play from back to front the way we like. In fact, if we had “gone for it” in the typical desperate Arsene way, that probably would have meant just throwing more forwards on, which would have meant less midfield control, which would have meant even less successful attacking.
When I say we didn’t go for it, I didn’t mean effort. I know we tried. But I don’t think we dared.
Surprisingly, I thought we did well enough most times to break through their high pressure. Certainly no worse than they dealt with (less organised) pressure from us. We won some duels in midfield too. In fact I was quite encouraged for the future by the manner in which we could play through the high press.
After that though, they got back to cover very quickly, while we stood around and waited to build play. I think this was because we know we are weak in transitions and were afraid to lose the ball. The few times we found space in their box, we either miscontrolled, didn’t shoot, or just overcooked the cross. Also, the couple of times that Ozil flashed the ball across goal there was nobody running onto it.
I get that Atletico are very good at defending the centre and they close down the crosses too. I don’t say we have to dominate them. But I was very disappointed and after much thought I figured out it’s because I think we didn’t really have the courage to go for it. We spent the majority of the 180 minutes worrying about what Atletico could do to us. Which is as far from a Wenger philosophy as anything.
I mostly agree about the first leg. I did think we were ‘timid’ after the red card, though this can also be called controlled. But yes, for the most part we were trying to move them around to find space, which we did. There was a certain lack of conviction which could be justified if we didn’t do exactly what we were afraid of. Ok, fine. 1-1. But then you go to Madrid and do what you must. I don’t think we played like we could, even against Atletico Madrid’s famed defense.
If I explain what I mean through psychobabble, we wanted to win and gave all our effort for it. But we equated winning with not losing and focused on that.
Yeah, fair enough. I think you’re probably right. Your psychobabble makes sense to me.
One of the most astute takes on the game, Shard. We did not go for it.
Arsenal in Madrid tried to Hleb the ball into the net. Intricate pussyfootery that didn’t muster a single shot on goal, a throwback to one of the more forgettable traits of one of Wenger’s latter teams. Who did? Xhaka from distance. Football is a game of steps and seconds. If Atletico shows you a half ajar door, shoot. Because by the time you look to score just SO, they’re going to adjust and slam it shut. They massed ranks in front of the D, and dared us to either thread it through the middle, or look to penetrate them from the flanks. And neither fullback played well.
While our only goal of the tie came from a header from one of our smaller players (something that hinted at an Atletico vulnerability), Im struggling to recall if Nacho or Hector crossed it in Madrid. Nope, we tried, time and again, to thread it through and around the massed ranks of Atletico defenders.
It wasn’t working, Mr Manager and players. How about switching Welbeck to target man and trying to whip in a few after, say, 70 or 75 minutes?
Three players of very recent membership could have made a difference. Ox and Walcott, who can both cross the ball; and Giroud who can head it and bully defenders. Funny, that.
Ive said for years that I like players who can play as traditional target men, and Costa (again) gave us a lesson in big man centre forward play. The run into space was great, but it was the way in which he held off Bellerin with embarrassing ease (not just because it was a boys to men situation) but because he was already goalside/inside the fullback.
We need such a player, and Welbeck is not it. He hid in Madrid. Yes, we’re going to hear all the talk about defending from the front and all that jazz, but this big guy just doesn’t impose himself physically on defenders.
From the comments on the previous post.
I think 6th place gets us into the group stages of the EL next year. No qualifying rounds.
Top 4 teams go into CL group stage automatically.
2 teams get automatic entry into the group stage of the EL. 5th place and FA Cup winner.
Regardless of who wins the FA Cup, they would already have qualified for the EL or CL through league position. Which means 6th place gets the second automatic entry.
At least that’s how I see the rules.
Whoever the next guy is I hope he has enough gravitas to execute a total commitment from players, and enough autonomy to cut them when they fail.
There’s a fine line between running a club like a business and a sporting entity.
Under Wenger’s Arsenal , for all the talk about values, the club put more emphasis on financial aspects and not the sporting ones.
Covering ones self for next season one way or the other…lets hope changes makes changes…so Arsenal.
One of the most astute takes on the game, Shard. We did not go for it.
Arsenal in Madrid tried to Hleb the ball into the net. Intricate tactical tiptoeing that didn’t muster a single shot on goal, a throwback to one of the more forgettable traits of one of Wenger’s latter teams. Who did? Xhaka from distance. Football is a game of steps and seconds. If Atletico shows you a half ajar door, shoot. Because by the time you look to score just SO, they’re going to adjust and slam it shut. They massed ranks in front of the D, and dared us to either thread it through the middle, or look to penetrate them from the flanks. And neither fullback played well.
While our only goal of the tie came from a header from one of our smaller players (something that hinted at an Atletico vulnerability), Im struggling to recall if Nacho or Hector crossed it in Madrid. Nope, we tried, time and again, to thread it through and around the massed ranks of Atletico defenders.
It wasn’t working, Mr Manager and players. How about switching Welbeck to target man and trying to whip in a few after, say, 70 or 75 minutes?
Three players of very recent membership could have made a difference. Ox and Walcott, who can both cross the ball; and Giroud who can head it and bully defenders. Funny, that.
Ive said for years that I like players who can play as traditional target men, and Costa (again) gave us a lesson in big man centre forward play. The run into space was great, but it was the way in which he held off Bellerin with embarrassing ease (not just because it was a boys to men situation) but because he was already goalside/inside the fullback.
We need such a player, and Welbeck is not it. He hid in Madrid. Yes, we’re going to hear all the talk about defending from the front and all that jazz, but this big guy just doesn’t impose himself physically on defenders.
Thanks Claude. I had to figure out why I was disappointed because neither the result nor the defensive errors were unexpected. But I can accept those as part of an attacking philosophy. And that requires courage. I thought we lacked that and that’s what was disappointing to me.
Atletico actually do well to shuffle the ball towards the flanks, and then they put on a double or even triple team to prevent it from being a free cross. The reason you don’t remember us crossing is because they do a good job preventing crosses, and the few times the fullbacks did get free they overhit the crosses to the other side of the pitch.
I’m not sure Welbeck hid. I just think he’s not a great player in the box. He doesn’t instinctively know what runs to make. On the flank he can drive at players and occasionally break through, but not happening with Atletico.
As for the big CF. I don’t think we’re getting that. Who would be better at this than Giroud who would be in our price range? We’ve just revamped our forward line. Instead I would suggest going to a system which either has 2 CFs playing together so as to have more bodies in the box, or a narrow front 3 with a false nine (Maybe even Ozil).
You’re right about Welbeck, and I’m being unfair to him. I’m just frustrated that we kept trying for the intricate final pass through that thicket of players, when it became clear after a while that it wasn’t working. I didn’t like to to see him backheeling it to Laca (easily cut out by Atletico). Which is also why Ozil’s decision to take a touch when he should have shot, made me want to tear my hair out.
When you run at players or shoot first time or from unpromising situations, you create percentages in your favour (deflections, handballs, penalties etc). You’re not always going to get the call, but you still increase your favourable percentages offensively. Near the end, it simply looked like we didn’t know what to do next. And I agree with PFo… it wasn’t for lack of effort. Oh and we clearly faded physically, a surprise given that the majority of the team had been rested. Atletico were atletico… much fresher and stronger in the last 10 minutes
Oh I know we’re not getting the big CF. Auba has a lot of those attributes, including surprisingly high proficiency at heading. But man, I do like Costa’s bull-with-finesse play. A quicker Giroud, if you like.
1. Yeah, we faded physically, which makes me think, despite all our famed fitness gurus, we’re not as fit as we probably should be against these kind of teams. I mean, their pitch was huge, and they just never stopped closing down space. They weren’t perfect, they were even vulnerable at times–their two strikers aside, they’re really not all that talented as individuals–but the way they function as a team is really impressive. I think we tried to take the game to them but were just worn down.
2. On Claude’s question about our fullbacks crossing: I think one of our main attacking tactics in both legs was trying to get overloads on the flanks and find the free man on the overlap, usually the fullbacks, which is part of the reason that we were so patient in our buildups. And both Monreal and Bellerin absolutely did get free, but every time THEIR CROSSING WAS TERRIBLE. That’s probably why you don’t remember any of those crosses.
I agree that we faded, but I really think that whenever you compare a continental team with an English one the winter break will have an effect. And of course the more combative conditions of the PL (under which Arsenal suffer more than most teams)
Also, and you can roll your eyes, but I find it very unlikely that football doesn’t have a doping problem. Wenger has hinted at it previously. I’m not saying Atletico were doped up. But beyond the obvious signs of us fading in the later part of the game, I’m not sure how much we can say about the causes for it. (It can even be mental to an extent.)
This isn’t meant as a counter to Arsenal needing more fitness work, or fitter players in general. But I seriously wonder how much gap there really can be between teams at the top in terms of fitness knowledge and training.
Who wants to live forever? Well in answer to your question Timothy. I do!
For someone approaching seventy-five, who has survived a heart attack for nearly six years and an embolism that threatened the loss of my right arm, forever means maybe a couple more years.
In whatever time is left to me I would like to see the team that I’ve supported for sixty-eight years win the Premiership at least one more time. A win in either of the European club completions would be the icing on the cake.
Thankfully the main obstacle to my dreams coming true is leaving the club after just three more games, I will, for as long as possible, continue to live in hope.
Orson, you’re what they call a survivor. Bless you and your health.
Everyone feels time differently and it’s central to how Wenger’s time at the club is perceived. Frankly my least favourite thing about the last 3-10 years is how we’ve wasted time. Life is too short for some of our longest-serving Gooners, and football careers are too short for players like Koscielny and Cazorla who were good enough to win a title but destined to play for us during a period where that wasn’t our priority.
Ranieri’s victory in 2015 exposed the narratives used to explain our “sustainable failures” as mere excuses. We have at least 3-4 years of catching up to do on rivals who did learn lessons from that season, but at least the process has begun and the big decision’s been made. Time to dream again.
Aw s**t Arsenal 0 – 1 Chelsea. 48 minutes Women’s FA Cup Final.
0 – 2.
1 – 3.
I wish a speedy and complete recovery to Sir Alex Ferguson who has undergone surgery for a brain hemorrhage.