no blogs since friday: busy week for me my friends. it has also been an exceedingly busy week for the hacks of fleet street, who have devoted their spare-time to the castigation of arsene wenger. coverage reached a nadir in the times yesterday, with one shock-value-only headline questioning if it is the end for arsene and gabriele marcotti (who has always struck me as truly awful) suggesting that timmy simons, psv's veteran belgian midfielder, would be a good option for wenger's midfield.
obviously, i haven't exactly been wenger's biggest supporter during the past 3 months; i've been rather banging on about the failings of his squad since starting this blog. but i think this criticism has gone too far, to the point that i have begun to reconsider my own opinions on the matter. and i can definitely see arsenal getting a result today.
it sounds perverse, but arsenal are better against better sides. sides who seek to play football - and not ply the kind of contemptible, mindless mixture of thuggery and brawn stoke roll out every week - are always going to be a more comfortable fit for arsenal, simply because there is no better footballing side than they. certainly, united don't have a midfield presence to make the selection of denilson a complete liability, and they lack the physical centre-forward that gallas, silvestre and toure all struggle with. in fact, the united strike-force - technically outstanding, all deft movement and outrageous skill, with no little pace - fit the wenger central defender - pacy with good anticipation - template quite nicely. and although rooney and ronaldo will drop into the hole, which poses an obvious risk to a side with no legitimate anchorman, the overwhelming negativity of the coverage means that everyone has ignored the possibility that a three man strikeforce containing two reasonably lazy defenders (ronaldo and berbatov) won't necessarily do enough against the ball-playing central midfield pairing of fabregas and denilson when arsenal have possession. so, in a similar way to croatia - england, whilst i am uncertain about the stability of this arsenal side, let us not forget the potential trouble they could cause man united when going forward. if forced to predict, i would suggest a score-draw along the lines of 2-2.
furthermore, on what are we basing these reports of arsenal's demise? we have a loss to fulham, which saw a partnership of eboue and denilson in central midfield fail to compete. a loss to hull, which was, like so many other hull performances, a total fluke, requiring a wonder-goal by geovanni and succession of missed opportunities by the arsenal attack. the draw against spurs, another fluke, involving another wonder-goal by bentley and a strike by jermaine jenas that was merely wonderful. the loss against stoke saw an imbalanced midfield fail to properly keep the ball and succumb to the bullying physicality of a truly lamentable side.
on the back of this many commentators, including myself, have stated that arsenal needed to bulk up: the failing was one of height and aerial ability and muscle. but, on reflection, could this be flawed? the fact is, arsenal probably do need a central midfielder who is capable of tackling and breaking the play up. however, this isn't necessarily the reason they have dropped points this season. at stoke, common wisdom tells you that teams should weather the storm with strength and height and muscle, but is that right? stoke probably possess the biggest, least talented line-up in the premier league, and there are few sides who could reasonably claim to have personnel better at attacking the ball in the air. so why play to their strengths by sacrificing your advantage - skill - to defend their advantage? perhaps the key is to maintain possession and prevent the home-side launching their barrage of crap. instead, alex song came into the centre, abou diaby played left-midfield and denilson played right-midfield. alex song is a player i like the look of, but one currently not seemingly ready for the role i suggested him for, lacking the ability in possession you need to be a success in the arsenal side - certainly, against west ham he was one of the main culprits for their first-half lethargy. and, with denilson and diaby on the wings failing to provide proper width, they weren't ever going to be in a position to effectively maintain possession. this, then, allowed stoke the chance to launch their bombardment and actually meant arsenal were a negligible attacking force in the game.
furthermore, against spurs, the comeback was precipitated by the removal of robin van persie and theo walcott, and the introduction of song, as arsenal ran riot. van persie, in particular, had been outstanding, and arsenal weren't the same after he departed. and against fulham, the problem was not a lack of muscle - the arsenal midfield was overpowered by the pairing of jimmy bullard and danny murphy, an even less defensively talented duo than anything arsenal are capable of putting out. rather, their failing in that match was an inability to retain possession and create chances. with emmanuel eboue, a truly awful footballer, playing that is perhaps no suprise, and what arsenal needed that day was more composure, more talent, more incision.
perhaps, then, the fate of arsenal rests on the faith they have in their attacking game? playing their best offensive players in midfield - fabregas, denilson, nasri, walcott - arsenal present an attacking force that is likely to be irresistable on most match-days. of course, sometimes, that team will lose - as any side will. but the fenerbahce away game perhaps provides the template - by focusing on their strengths rather than the opposition's and fielding a balanced, attacking line-up, arsenal become a difficult proposition. this, and here is where i break with my previous musings, might be the best path for them to follow this season, especially given the progression of walcott and the upgrade samir nasri represents over the flaky alexandr hleb.
defence be damned.
No comments:
Post a Comment