Arsenal start their Europa League campaign on Thursday at home against FC Vorskla with just one small problem: Emery still hasn’t figured out his best lineup.
I’m not saying I would pick a better one nor that this is a surprise. Despite the high turnover in players last season in many ways this is still Arsene Wenger’s team and players like Özil and Ramsey embody the “jazz quartet” spirit of Arsene Wenger’s playing style. This leaves Arsenal with some problems up front and at the back, problems that Emery has to solve.
Both Özil and Ramsey play the same, neither player is a strictly positionally conservative player. Nor is Mkhitaryan. Pass maps from the win over Newcastle show this:
Ozil’s first half was very central, something which changed slightly in the second half:
But Ramsey played almost exclusively on the left, Welbeck played on the left, and Granit Xhaka played on the left. Here’s Ramsey first half:
And Ramsey second half:
It’s clear what the problem is, no one is playing on the right with Bellerin. Why this problem exists is the question.
I will admit that I’m not a fan of blaming the positional problems on Guendouzi. Yes, he is too eager and ran around too much. But the fact that Arsenal don’t have anyone playing in the right forward position isn’t Guendouzi’s fault. And the problem isn’t solved by bringing on Torreira. As we saw, Arsenal conceded a goal from play down the right and Torreira gave the ball away a lot. His pass map is awful:
And he was one of the players who failed to track the runs of either of the two players who were wide open for their goal. Apparently he’s injured which explains the poor performance, though it doesn’t explain why Emery put him on rather than just tell Guendouzi to stay away from Xhaka’s side of the pitch or tell Ramsey/Ozil to stay wide right.
I don’t have the answer. I’m not in training. I don’t know the players other than what I see on the weekends. I do know that there’s a lot of work to do to clean up from the Wenger party and I’m giving Unai plenty of time to do it.
That idea that we are cleaning up from Wenger’s party lead me to start thinking about the old guard in the League. All my fan life English football was epitomized by teams like Bolton (Notlob), Cardiff, Burnley, Stoke, and even Manchester United playing a specific style of football. You know the one I’m talking about: it’s got “pashun” and it’s usually about running at people quickly down the wings, putting in a cross, or getting it up to your big man (Kevin Cyril Davies?) and having him hold up the ball. Defensively it’s characterized by a low block, two banks of four which eliminates the half space, and in the most Allardycian examples, killing the game off through clock management (get a restart). Jose Mourinho is one of these managers. He’s just a rich-man’s Tony Pulis. Everywhere he goes he makes the team’s football uglier, but less error prone, and sometimes he wins things.
But as money has flowed into the League and as every team can now afford to buy players from the continent, players with impeccable technique and well drilled football brains, the League has started to attract managers who want to play beautiful football.
Watching Wolverhampton beat Burnley yesterday was one of the most lopsided matches I’ve seen in years. Burnley looked like they had no clue what to do when Wolves were in possession. The passing and movement of that team was hypnotic. It’s not at all a stretch to say that they looked like a Peak Arsene Wenger side. They don’t have a Thierry Henry (if they did they would have scored 5 goals yesterday) but they play stunning football.
This is a newly promoted team. The League Championship used to be the “blood and guts” tournament in England, and teams would get promoted playing smashmouth football. But Wolves won it by playing football the Arsenal way. And they have continued that project in the Premier League to their immense credit.
This isn’t an isolated phenomenon. As teams like Stoke have disappeared from the League, Wolverhampton and Bournemouth have replaced them. I used to laugh at the people who gave Bournemouth manager Eddie Howe too much credit but watching them play over the years, you have to say that he’s doing a great job with that club. They could be one of those Stokes or Boltons but they try to play possession based football, they want to pass and move, and they want to entertain.
Not only are teams changing the way that they play but the best managers in the world are moving to England. West Ham have hired Pellegrini – a manager who won the Premier League. Fulham came up through the Leagues playing attacking football. Even small clubs with no history, like Chelsea, are able to attract managers like Maurizio Sarri.
Yes, there are some holdouts: Cardiff, Burnley, Southampton, Man U, Brighton and Hove Albion. But the table isn’t going to lie. Those clubs will be fighting for relegation and boring the pants off their supporters all season. I think we’ve seen a change in the League and we are better off for it.
“Even small clubs with no history, like Chelsea, are able to attract managers like Maurizio Sarri.”
Ah, Tim. You made my day.
The small clubs* are hiring well on the playing side too. How did Richarlison, who scored a brace for Brazil last week, get under the radar of the big clubs? We thought that Everton overpaid, but he looks a 70m player.
*Everton are not, technically, but hopefully you get my drift.
Gazidis to Milan confirmed.
Good riddance.
Don’t blame him for going, Arsenal fans have this loathing for him which I don’t completely understand. He’s a chief executive, which means he’s a slimy politician by definition, we just needed him to be a better slimy politician than he is. But I also think he did a lot of good for the club which goes unmentioned and unappreciated, and the power struggle between him and Arsene didn’t do either man any favors.
I think one of the things that bothered people about him was how he’d disappear for ages, especially when things were going badly.
Fair enough, but would it have done much good if he stood up at a podium to face the music? Just more of a distraction for everyone and perhaps a public admission of failure, not a good look for the club or him personally.
Swiss Ramble had an excellent thread on twitter about why he was an abject failure. He really just did the bare minimum. Plus he allowed Wenger to stay on three years too long. He also let contracts run down, signed ancient players which we aren’t even going to play, and generally is the reason why the squad is so weirdly imbalanced.
https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/1032534955342086146
A brilliant expose. Consider me a convert. Gazidis seems eminently replaceable.
I’d agree. My only worry is that Sven and Raul’s longterm presence at our club is less likely now than it was with Ivan here (and perhaps Burgess as well).
Maybe that’s a good thing, I don’t know. But they were supposedly hired, and we were supposed to be happy excited about the fact, because they were supposed to be really good at their jobs. Plus, stability in a club’s hierarchy is, all things considered, a good thing.
Plus, not thrilled about the prospect of JKronk taking over….
I second that
This the the world we live in, particularly at the c-suite level. Executives get headhunted, often with lucrative offers. It is hard to say no to a club with Milan’s storied history. It is one of the best jobs of its kind in football.
And yet, the timing DOES screw Arsenal over somewhat. We’re in Y1 of Emery, and managerial/structural changes that Gazidis painstakingly made.
To weave-in the comment from above of
‘Plus, not thrilled about the prospect of JKronk taking over….’
I’m actually going to have some optimism about this.
KSE has been spending on player salaries for the LA Rams (NFL) this Summer. Signing some of their own to big, long-term deals. Each of the major KSE sports franchises have taken on new and/or younger head coaches the last 2 years. Likely we’ll know by next Summer’s TW — whether or not this model might extend to Arsenal.
If Josh K/KSE finds the right replacement for Gazidis– it could be a new and vital cog for the club.
As far as Gazidis motivation? Weighed against what was in process at Arsenal? I was a bit stumped myself. IIRC, it was Shard who had mentioned (weeks ago I believe, and possibly on another site) that he’d seen details of part-ownership of AC Milan being offered for Gazidis to take the leap.
jw1
Yes, he’s supposed to get some shares in AC Milan too.
I have no special love or hate for Gazidis. He was a smooth speaking executive who did his job well enough. What I do have a problem with is that, especially in hindsight, over the last couple of years, he seemed to be more about himself than the club. Certainly since Wenger left he took front and centre stage for himself. And I think the transition in the last 2 seasons of Wenger could have been better managed. I know the popular theory is Wenger was this old territorial dinosaur unwilling to modernise, but maybe he just didn’t think Gazidis was going about things the right way. One thing’s for sure, Wenger cared about the club more than Gazidis does.
But Gazidis leaves us with a new team we all hope is capable of seeing us through these current challenges and on to better things. It’s just a bit cowardly to leave at this stage, but I don’t think we’ll miss him.
About time as well. Poor old Arsene, swimming against the tide all those years, must feel a strange sense of bitterness and satisfaction witnessing this change taking place now in his retirement.
I haven’t made time to watch Wolves yet but I will have to after this glowing endorsement. I admit to being put off by them being so obviously a clearinghouse club for super-agent Jorge Mendes, but if they can use his players to enhance the product in the PL then I am all for it. I also still weirdly associate them with the old PL mentality under Mick McCarthy last time they were in the league. Anyone remember Martinez’s Wigan? they were a trailblazer in the ranks of the minnows to this trend.
Lacks of quality english attacking players who are stronng and big a reason for this?
A propos of the last article:
–Why not try playing all 3 of Guen, Xhaka, and Torreira in a 4-3-3 with a flexible front 3 of Ozil, Laca (for now he should start at CF), and one of Auba or Micki?
–Xhaka could sit deepest with the two others pushing forward a bit (I know Torreira always sat deepest at Samp, but strikes me he has enough in his locker to be an excellent b2b player), but also have them do a lot of defensive covering/harrying. As a midfield trio it lacks a bit of flair but would be very secure in possession, and defensively sound.
–It’s not the most skillful midfield, but it’s hardly the most unskillful either, and it would give the talented front three the platform to enjoy themselves, plus the wingbacks the platform to push up the way Emery wants, without exposing the CB’s or dropping a midfielder and reverting to a back three (which I’d only consider as a last resort, since I don’t think any of our other defenders really warrant a place in the starting lineup).
–I’d still prefer to try to shoehorn one more attacking player in the lineup for the time being, but if we keep looking disjointed, it strikes me we could do a lot worse than this lineup.
Intriguing solution. But I dont get why you’d want Xhaka sitting deepest.
–he’s least mobile of the three.
–he’s tall and decent in the air, making him a good option at dropping between CB’s at times.
— good when the game’s ahead of him and he has time to face forward and look up; he’s very vulnerable to pressure when he has to receive ball facing his own goal
–being deepest doesn’t necessarily mean most defensive: Guen and Tor could do a lot of the defensive work ahead of him, especially breaking up counterattack, winning ball back quickly when we lose it in attack, instigating pressing traps, etc.
–his lack of pace and wide/clumsy turning radius mean he’ll always be at best average in the final third, in spite of his good (but low percentage!) long range shooting and creative/varied passing
PS Throughout Euro qualifying, Hodgson and Neville put Wilshere in a deep-lying “quarterback” role for England, as the deepest midfielder tasked with starting attacks, but flanked by two shuttling/workhorse types (e.g. Henderson, Milner, Delph) who covered for his defensive weaknesses. It worked pretty well (then Jack got injured and was not match fit for the tourney itself).
I’m thinking of something roughly similar, except I think Xhaka’s probably better, overall, at defense than Jack, and Tor+Guen are WAY better on the ball than England’s options were.
Then we play a high quality three up top, that can shift fluidly between a 1+2 (Ozil at 10, forming a midfield diamond, with our two strikers ahead of him), or 2+1 (two nominally on flanks with one mobile CF).
I see where youre coming from with Jack and England, but did it work? I dont think so.
Not sure I agree about playing Xhaka deep back midfield. He had one of his best halves of football for us on Saturday, with the FK and the cutback from the left that led to Ozil’s goal… playing upfield.
“–he’s least mobile of the three…”
Which makes him a defensive liability. As we’ve seen (a lot. A. LOT. Too much of, in fact). A lack of mobility is a worse failing in the back of midfield, than it is upfield. To be honest, I find his lack of defensive awareness and inability to read and head off developing danger to be alarming. Im sure he’s trying his hardest, but it can sometimes like he’s strolling when the danger is intensifying. That’s the impression you can convey with tactical confusion. Denilson had the same defensive demeanour.
“–he’s tall and decent in the air, making him a good option at dropping between CB’s at times.”
He’s got a beautiful Adonis physique, but where’s the evidence that he wins or even contests aerial duels? His not even particularly physically imposing. He’s got one of the best shirt tugs in the league, though 🙂
“— good when the game’s ahead of him and he has time to face forward and look up; he’s very vulnerable to pressure when he has to receive ball facing his own goal
–being deepest doesn’t necessarily mean most defensive: Guen and Tor could do a lot of the defensive work ahead of him, especially breaking up counterattack, winning ball back quickly when we lose it in attack, instigating pressing traps, etc.”
Agree with both points.
“–his lack of pace and wide/clumsy turning radius mean he’ll always be at best average in the final third, in spite of his good (but low percentage!) long range shooting and creative/varied passing”
Actually, Im going to stick up for him here (see good combination play and cutback leading to the goal). That was good forward play. I’d rather Granit lose the ball in the opposition third than in ours.
Good point about protecting him in the deep-lying position, but in this day and age, carrying players is risky. His dead ball prowess is clearly worth a lot to the coach, though, and that has value. As argued last thread, he’d be a terrific special teams player, because he’s arguably got the sweetest, truest left-footed strike in the team. The debate about how to play Xhaka reminds me of how we used to talk about how we protect/augment Coquelin’s fabulous tackling skills, given his inability to use the ball.
All that said, he’s done enough to keep his place. His second half performance against Newcastle showed he can be dangerous and effective offensively.
Oh, and Jack (certainly optimum Jack) can ferry/dribble. Xhaka can’t. Guendouzi and Torreira can, to some extent. If you hot-press Granit on the ball in the back midfield, you’re going to get a lot of joy. Would be interesting to see what XI we put out against a side like Liverpool. Xhaka would be on the bench if I was picking it.
1. He wins quite a few headers/clearances. I’m basically positive of this, though I haven’t checked the stats. Feel free to do so on my behalf and prove me wrong, if you so desire.
2. His susceptibility to the press is precisely why you play him deepest (assuming you’re going to play him), so that he can drop into the backline when our keeper has the ball and our CB’s split: it means he’s more likely to get the ball with time to look upfield, as opposed to receiving the ball facing our goal with someone breathing down his neck.
3. Basically, our disagreement comes down to you thinking he’s better in forward positions than I do (one good cutback does not a final third threat make) and me thinking he’s not as huge a liability in deep positions as you do. I agree he can be a liability, but
(a) again, we’re assuming he’s starting somewhere, for the sake of the argument
(b) it matters hugely who he’s starting with. He can’t play as a holding midfielder by himself with someone that pushes up, like Ramsey, at least without the midfield being porous (I think we pretty much established this fact last season). But as we’re seeing this season, he can play in a double pivot alongside someone like Torreira. All I’m suggesting is that we add a third CM in there too–that’s *more* cover, not less. In my suggestion, Guen and especially Torreira would stay pretty close by, not be too gung-ho in their forays forward.
I don’t think what I’m describing is “carrying” Xhaka, because I think he’d contribute a lot. But the point is that IF it’s objectionably carrying him, then it’s no worse in this respect than carrying him as an average B2B player who also can’t defend (you need your B2Ber’s to do a lot of defending too). By playing him deeper, you still have the problem of him occasionally switching off and failing to track a runner in the box, but you no longer have that other big problem of him being stranded upfield as a pacy player easily blows by him on a counterattack.
I wonder if Xhaka is a bit like Rabiot. Big, strong, but a liability, defensively. Able passer, and also able to hit from distance.
Liverpool looked good yesterday, but PSG were definitely hurt by Verratti’s absence. Marquinhos is not a CDM, and Rabiot and Di Maria didn’t do enough to defend or pass/dribble through the lines.
Rabiot could be one of the best midfielders in the world but really looks like he can’t be arsed to do anything. Plus his off field interviews show him to be very immature and possibly even self-destructive. Such a shame.
Where’s Aaron Ramsey in that set-up? Are we at the point where we should be writing him off since he’s not signing a new deal?
I want us to go 4-4-2 whenever possible. It’s absurd to have Aubemayang on the wing, but Lacazette has earned his spot in the middle. Use the Ancellotti era Chelsea diamond midfield. We aren’t pressing all that well anyway. My biggest concern thus far in the season is that Emery seems to be tactically more rigid than expected. The roster doesn’t fit his vision, he needs to be pragmatic and adjust the vision (for now, until recruitment can catch up).
I don’t have much against Gazidis except that he made me want to throw up with that choreographed video where he introduces Emery to the Emirates. Artful as a marionette.
Oh, but I liked listening to him talk, because I like words, and he’s clearly a smart, eloquent man. On the other hand, I also like substance, and at the end of the day, I’m not sure he did enough to make Arsenal competitive, financially or otherwise. So his departure is met by a resounding “meh” from this guy.
I’ve been thinking about how this may or may not destabilize Emery, but it was the worst kept secret of all time that Gazidis’ first choice was Arteta (or so the rumors say), so Gazidis’ departure might actually lift Emery’s sense of the club’s faith in him.
Anyway, onwards and (hopefully) upwards.
“…but it was the worst kept secret of all time that Gazidis’ first choice was Arteta (or so the rumors say)…”
The Ornacle spoke. It was to be Arteta. Embarrassing , that missive.
Having removed the emperor; his vision down-voted.
Pulls up the stakes and moves on.
Not an implausible version.
jw1
Seeing no one has nipped on the ‘Arteta bait’?
I’ve had this somewhat cutthroat perspective on ‘why we should have’. Aside from the view that he is (was) the right man/right time, given time? We might also have gained by subtraction had he come back to the club. Mikel Arteta will succeed when he plies his skills as a manager. Pep is absolutely grooming him as his protege. Arsenal might well have kept him from taking the reins from Pep in 2021; continuing the skein that is presently in downhill-runaway-mode.
Arsenal seemingly the one job Arteta might have stepped away from City to take. Had Arteta come to Arsenal– implementing the structure of Guardiola’s methods– and succeeding in boosting us back into relevance quickly– hoorah! (Ivan was a genius!) Had the opposite occurred here– perhaps Arteta then isn’t in position to step in at City — not yet proven he’s up to that job.
Either an uplifting win-win– or slightly tawdry lose-win IMHO.
jw1
“The League Championship used to be the “blood and guts” tournament in England, and teams would get promoted playing smashmouth football. But Wolves won it by playing football the Arsenal way. ”
There’s more quality in the Championship nowadays. A quick look at the Championship teams, and you’ll see many internationals and former players from the Premier League or top European leagues.
Exactly.
Not only that, some of our fans sometimes act as if playing it out from the back is some newfangled concept. I see teams like Leeds and Derby doing that with great composure.
Nottingham Forest beat us in the cup last year, and they outplayed us
Interesting. I did say “used to be.”
great post Tim. Best part the dig at Chelsea. Bravo.
I would love it if the Birmingham, Stoke, et Al style of play from the mid-00s was never again a thing in the Premier League. It would be a final victory for Wengerball.
We are well into the season now, 5 games and however unconvincing we may seem on the pitch at times, the progress is there.
We have won more games than we have lost, we two consecutive away wins already, something we didn’t manage in Wenger’s last season and changes in the front office continue. I’m not a fan but I think Gazidis did the right thing: shepparded the exit of a Great Man whose time was done and then got out of Dodge. Good riddance.
Now we need to build our future and hone this thing into a well oiled machine. Ok, never mind. Let’s at least keep the winning run going while we slowly sort ourselves out.
The stats say Guendouzi was better than Torreira. The performance says that we were much better when Torreira was on in his stead.
Is that only because of Torreira? Probably not. Maybe so. All I’m saying is that this is one of those situations where we might need to look beyond the numbers. I know that might be uncomfortable in our lust for the quantifiable.
If I recall, Coquelin had very good stats for interceptions, tackles, duels etc. but his passing stats were never stellar. If you watch Torreira he is Coquelin with a bit more footballing skills; he holds the middle, doesn’t venture around too much, just maintains a presence in the middle that deters a lot of opposition movement. That’s my theory on why when he comes on we look better. We were a strangely more solid team when we had Coquelin in the line-up too, only Wenger didn’t rate him as an overall footballer. Torreira is Coquelin+, a defensive midfielder who will make the adventurous pass, take a crack from distance, but more or less is there to plug up holes in the midfield.
Coquelin is an interesting case study. He had all the tools in the world, and could’ve been the type of top drawer player that we envisioned when snagging him from Levante at age 14, but he never developed a top drawer mental game to go with his elite physical tools. Sure, he could run fast, jump high, clatter people and even dribble a little. He was a passionate player as well who loved Arsenal, and briefly with Santi Cazorla he looked like he could mesh into a high level midfield. After we lost Cazorla though, it became apparent that shorn of a midfield partner with such prolific playmaking abilities, he didn’t have the chops to participate in building play from the back, he looked painfully averse to a forward pass, and even the passes he had the ability to make he often didn’t see. Similarly from a defensive organization point of view, he could win duels, and that helped the team, but his positioning and aptitude for consistently working back were lacking. So he slowed or even stymied Arsenal as an attacking force, and didn’t exactly shut up shop at the back either (weaker alternatives notwithstanding). So what exactly was he good for? The rise of AMN sealed his fate.
Torreira is like an inverse Coquelin. He doesn’t have that imposing physique or raw power, but he is so good at seeing the play on both ends of the pitch that it doesn’t seem to matter. He always seems to be in the right place at the right time, and has such lovely balance and core strength that he can take the ball without fouling or be able to take 2, 3 or 4 nibbles at it when other players might only get one, so he doesn’t need to overpower you to dispossess you. Coquelin never had such skill or subtlety. When it comes to attacking areas, there is no comparison in terms of either technique or vision. Can you imagine Coquelin taking set pieces for Arsenal? So, we have a defensive maven with a cultured touch and vision to progress play?! Torreira looks like the best midfielder Arsenal have had since, well, Santi Cazorla and probably our best signing since Alexis Sanchez. The elegant beast has arrived at last, he just doesn’t look as beastly as we perhaps imagined.
I did look well beyond the numbers in my post on The Arsenal Review.
We scored from a dead ball, that changed the game, not Torreira.
Let’s also not forget that we conceded a goal from a man that ran right in front of Torreira. I think the data is dead right: he didn’t improve us on either end of the pitch.
The winning goal came from a Xhaka cross, right? Would he have been pushed up that far if he didn’t have Torreira behind him? I doubt it.
It’s about the money I think. More money tends to bring better players and managers. Good football generally comes from that. When I first started becoming aware of football in the 90s Serie A was THE place for football. Not that we got to watch it much here in India, but it was still touted as the best league. The fact that there was a whole new market beyond Europe seemed to escape them, and with the inherent advantage of English, the PL took over gradually via the big boys of Spain promoting a lopsided La Liga.
The league has definitely moved on to a large extent. The sort of challenges that broke Diaby, Eduardo and Ramsey’s ankles are less common and less defended as part of the game. Even though Zaha shows it continues.
But is the money good for the game? I suppose it doesn’t matter because it’s here to stay and as long as we get better football from it, we’ll be happy.
Where money isn’t good for the game? Is when it’s so obscene (sliding scale I suppose) that it changes the dynamic of a given club. Example? PSG. Becoming ‘Neymar Boys Club’. With a revolving-door of managers who will likely never win-over, much less tame the Brazilian core there. One clue, having read where the players determined ‘when’ they would be returning from the WC in preseason. That had to be a shock to a control-freak like Tuchel. We should start a pool. Winner guesses closest to his departure date. Side-bet on who makes the decision.
Here in the states, it’s joked about similarly with LeBron James as the ‘new GM of the LA Lakers’. Except? That is one hellbent-driven-to-win individual. Not that the Lakers will come close to winning this year. But that group will have a quality instilled in each of them, to understand what it will take.
OTOH. Neymar looks quite comfortable at PSG for the long-term. Another Caipirinha? Why, certainly!
jw1
Cleveland got to what is it, 4 straight finals, and won a championship, so it worked out for them. But the LeBron return really did lead to a lot of overhaul, and potentially, future issues. Hence the jokes about him being the GM. But he won, so all is forgiven. Neymar needs to win. Not Ligue 1. But the CL. That’s what he’s there for, that’s what PSG want. Without it, he’s not going to be seen as the player he believes he is. And until he sorts out that attitude and becomes a leader through more than his ability, I don’t think that will happen. He’s too disruptive, and he’s not Messi. I wonder if Mbappe will outshine him and that will lead to Neymar’s departure.
Maitland-Niles received a broken bone injury first game of the season from a very unnecessary challenge from Walker. No card, no foul, no coverage.
Nothing has changed regarding hurting Arsenal players except the violence used against us may be applied by smarter more subtle ‘pro’s’
Tim, from the previous post. I love the idea of an Arsenal world. Your arguments about individual ties is different to those of social and political cohesion.People may identify with various things, but historically, that cohesion has been achieved only through empire of conquest or through religion (or both) and achieved limited success. Even the political theory of communism failed to overcome national barriers/psyche. So what idea would serve as a viable tool to promote global governance, seeing as historical cultural and religious ties (usually represented in nations) seem stronger binding forces than economic or political ideas.
Why do I have to have that answer? I’m just a guy who loves his daughter, loves Arsenal, and hates nationalism.
The Wolves have been playing very attractive brand of football and it’s kinda funny you should compare them to peak Wenger’s Arsenal because their manager did something similar to what Wenger did when he first arrived in London.
Wenber took advantage of his inside knowledge of the French market which gave him the leg up on the competition and Nuno Santo did likewise with respect to the Spanish and Portuguese markets.
I watched them play three times this season and the game against Burnley wasn’t a one off. But I had to look up their roster and transfer history because outside of Joao Moutinho and Rui Patricio, none of their players I was familiar with.
Remember Wenger saying introducing more than two new players into the squad is difficult and can ruin the balance and chemistry of the starting 11?
Well, Nuno Santo started 5 new players against Burnley and introduced two more as subs and they looked very much on the same page other than for some poor finishing.
I’ve been most impressed with their CB, Willy Boly who played at left back against Burnley. He looked very composed on the ball under pressure and very athletic in the challenge.
He looked better than any defender we have and he only cost them €12m.
Nuno’s supposed “knowledge of the [Iberian] market” is more to do with superagent Jorge Mendes having official ties with Wolves. Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised to discover that’s how Nuno himself got installed in the position to begin with.
Fair point, unless you’ll tell me next that Mendes deserves the credit for coaching his clients to play the way they have thus far.
Maybe Arsenal should fire their scouts and just get in bed with Mendes since the market value of players we bought for €79m is €105m, while the market value of players Wolves brought in for €73m is €128m 🙂
Nope, I won’t tell you that. He’s qualified and all. Just saying that sometimes, your qualifications alone aren’t what get you into a job – they help, of course. But Mendes also represents managers, so…
I am not sad or even disappointed to see Gazidis go. For years he hid behind Arsene when things got rough and failed to back up his smooth talking with real action. My biggest problem with him is that we were not able to keep up with our rivals in the top 6 when it came to our commercial revenue. Liverpool, who for years lagged behind us in the league, did much better there. He should also shoulder a majority of the responsibility for our gross mismanagement of so many player contracts. He probably deserves some credit for bringing Sanllehi and Mislintat into the club at a time when we badly needed some people with footballing knowledge to ease Wenger’s departure but on the commercial side, any executive worth his salt should be able to do what he did.
(Posted this elsewhere earlier today, with regard to Gazidis’ departure and attendant pearl-clutching/garment-rending.)
My glaring fault? Is eternal optimism (dammit).
I see this as opportunity– if Josh K ‘goes big’.
And I’m not kidding about Jeff Luhnow.
The regulars (t)here have endured my meanderings off-topic with regard to our baseball team (Houston Astros) for the better part of 2 years. (General Manager) Jeff Luhnow is the literal genius behind the club’s video-driven/data analytics/application that have propelled the entire organization to champion status. Houston is/were very Arsenal-like. A mid-market team revenue-wise that have bounded in front of the big-spending major-TV market teams like New York, LA, and Chicago. From worst (in 2012) to best — World Series Champs in 5 years. This is what was being said about the Astros plan when they were a very poor team rebuilding in 2013:
https://www.apqc.org/blog/houston-astros-and-predictive-analytics-what-team-profitability-can-tell-us-about-its-future
Prior to being hired into the St Louis Cardinal organization in the mid-00s, Luhnow had had no exposure to baseball since playing in youth leagues at age 12. He took the statistical system of the day (early-00s)– and has revolutionized the depth of analytics as a means of succeeding in Major League Baseball. Probably in ways that could be compared– and IMHO well-exceeds what AW did for football in the late-90s.
The Kroenkes have admitted they are (baseball economics/analytics) Moneyball admirers. If they have aspirations of being great? This would be the a jumping-off point. The ROI would be forthcoming– to give Luhnow major incentives to make such a move.
jw1
We disagree on this obviously, but let me say that Xhaka winning headers and being good in the air seems completely made up, and comes out of nowhere. “I seem to recall” and “I said it first” are not arguments, my bro.
Hector is good going forward. Ramsey makes good runs into the box. Mustafi regularly makes serious misjudgments. Giroud is good in the air. All things we can see clearly. Xhaka is good in the air? Hmmm. I cant think of a less physically imposing player in the Arsenal lineup, except perhaps for Mesut. Even tiny Torreira brings more physicality. Xkaka would kill it in an underwear catalogue, though.
In football in 2018, no coach wants to hide one-dimensional players, as we tried to do with Coquelin. You’re suggesting we play TWO players to augment Xhaka’s deficiencies? And put him where his mistakes can hurt us the most? How about we not play him!
Granit has consistently been found wanting defensively (no matter how much we try to put Mabelline on the pig), nor is he especially productive offensively (Ramsey has his critics, but 21 goal involvements in 36 games last season — 12 + 9 — shows the impact that he is capable of providing).
But I can see Xhaka’s value to Emery, and why he played him advanced in the second half. If the coach can unlock Xkaha’s dead-ball productivity, great. But his brainfarts in THEIR third rather than ours is preferable, thanks.
(Reply to Pfo, upthread 👆🏽The posting gremlin got me)
“Granit has consistently been found wanting defensively …..”
Are you saying that Granit is no rock when it comes to defending, Claude? 🙂
I get where you’re coming from re xhaka aerials, but the numbers show that he wins the 3rd most on the team at 2 per 90, just behind Nacho and ahead of Sokratis. You may not see it but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
Signed up as guitar tech on a very long tour. We’re taking requests on the road. Hint: big 80’s hair band, not really my thing but hey, the pay is good. I’ll see you all down the down the road. Please keep your instruments tuned and may you be in heaven a half an hour before the devil knows your dead (yeah this band is Irish). Cheers, y’all and CYOG.
Not really an eighties bans, my bad. But I think one of them is Gooner.
Ok, so not really an 80’s band then…does that mean they were formed earlier? Later? And does “hair band” to you mean something like Poison? I can’t think of an Irish equivalent. The Irish mostly did punk, alternative rock, rock (U2, but I know you can’t mean them) and new wave rock (Boomtown Rats) in the 80’s. Is Thin Lizzy a “hair band”?
More hints!