This isn’t a post nearly related to our 3-1 loss to Barcelona yesterday. The takeaways from there are obvious – we put in a spirited second leg when there was absolutely no pressure on our backs, and wild cards like Alex Iwobi and Mohammed Elneny impressed because – quite simply, they were wild cards. If there’s one regret, it’s that we weren’t clinical enough in front of goal and Barcelona took full advantage of their chances when they could.
No, this isn’t a report on what happened yesterday. Instead it’s an article I had written some weeks ago on Arsene Wenger’s style of football, and how it’s another factor in our insipid performances this season. Needless to say, such a tactically backward approach is on of many reasons why we haven’t made the most of an easy Premier League and FA Cup run.
Without further ado, here it is.
—
Watching Arsenal fall prey to the pressures of expectation against Manchester United, Swansea City Watford was painfully unsurprising. However, along with it came another all-too familiar frustration in the defeat – the manner of it.
Despite owning 61% of the ball, Arsenal were quite unable to infiltrate the mishmashed backline of the Red Devils. Indeed, aside from the Nacho Monreal chance and the two goals, we didn’t seem penetrative and purposeful in any fashion.
This isn’t an isolated incident. This season, a disappointing Arsenal result is nearly always complemented by the failure to craft reasonable chances; forget taking them. It’s always a solid backline or an unreal goalkeeping show restricting us from putting the ball in the net.
And while you can attribute all credit to the Fraser Forsters and the Eldin Jakupovics for their hand in our failure, it would be superstitiously ridiculous to not apportion ourselves the bulk of the blame. Isn’t it too much of a suspicious coincidence that defenders play like Italians against us?
Look at how Arsenal played against United. They took their time building from the back, giving their opposition plenty of time to maintain their shape. Theo Walcott and Alexis Sanchez stood on their flanks instead of running the channels. Mesut Ozil and Aaron Ramsey are players with exemplary vision, but they didn’t have anything to see. And when Arsenal did reach the box, the ball went sideways, sideways and ultimately backwards.
Mohammed Elneny’s violent surges in and around the box grabbed the eye because, frankly, he was the only one bothered enough to run. Sanchez used to be the same, but became more and more static as his Arsenal career progressed. Arsene Wenger’s attacking philosophy focuses on careful (and ultimately safe) passing, which kills spirit and movement over time.
Arsenal have been easy to negate. Put ten men behind the ball and even Alexis becomes toothless. The day Dinamo Zagreb beat Arsenal 2-1, their manager had a startlingly simple comment to make.
“We have already seen other teams who beat Arsenal use the same tactics. That’s what we did and it’s nothing new.”
Wengerball isn’t even helpful to Arsenal’s defenders. With midfielders and wingers idly passing the ball on the fence of the box, our centre backs tend to push higher up the pitch to offer support. Needless to say, such a subconscious high-line makes us increasingly vulnerable on the break, upping the burden on the back four and Francis Coquelin to stem it.
Why else has Per Mertesacker been so unreliable over the past couple of years? Wengerball is simply not conducive to slow, 31-year-old centre backs. He’ll get exposed every time he’s in a high-line. Jamie Vardy exploited him, Diego Costa exploited him and Barcelona (for the first goal in the first leg) did the same.
If you’re a silky creative midfielder, Wengerball is ideal for you. Arsene Wenger’s Arsenal have been the promised land for many technicians looking to exhibit their passing prowess. It’s why Mesut Ozil has the most assists in the continent and Santi Cazorla is Arsenal’s lynchpin. Crucially, it’s also why players like Jack Wilshere, Tomas Rosicky and Aaron Ramsey are too similar to establish themselves as a property in this team.
Technically exemplary players, however, tend to be physically weak ones. Apart from rare gems like Paul Pogba, one would be hard-pressed to find midfielders possessing unreal skill and strength. Most of Arsenal’s midfield – as a consequence of adhering to Wenger’s ideology – are a weedy bunch. Needless to say, that simply cannot flourish in a league as physical as England’s.
Factoring in the psychology of tactics weakens Wenger’s philosophy further. Our possession play is confidence-based. If the psychology of the team is healthy enough, games are a breeze, for that is where Wengerball is in its element.
But when players are not ‘in the mood’ – for lack of a better term – Wengerball stagnates. Passes are square, not incisive enough and our approach therefore becomes repetitive and predictable. Wenger’s footballing philosophy is based on “finding the inner talent”, something players cannot do when they’re doubting their own confidence. Instead, they get lost in themselves and fall into ruts.
Jose Mourinho is a man I have a million reasons to loathe, but in-game management is not one of them. More often than not, he has a detailed plan for each individual of his starting XI, which he imposes to his liking. In some ways it greatly curtails the players’ potency, but sometimes that’s what the player needs. A managing style of “Don’t worry lads, you’re losing 2-1 but just believe in yourself and it’ll be fine” simply isn’t viable anymore. It reeks of laziness and makes Wenger look like a man who doesn’t know what to say, and thereby ‘delegates’ the instructions to his players. In some ways, it’s the opposite of leadership.
Counter that to Jose Mourinho – when John Terry spoke about him on Chelsea’s 2-0 win over PSG in 2014:
“We worked a lot all week on scenarios – 1-0, 2-0, 3-1, what would we do if Demba [Ba] came on. We planned to hit the big man and he has scored a great goal. For every scenario, we had a gameplan and once again we got it right.”
Wenger has gotten a lot of praise from a lot of people and justifiably so, but has any Arsenal player spoke about him in such specific terms? Has anyone?
Wengerball is limited. It cannot be guaranteed to work unless the pitch is slinky enough and the players are confident enough. Conversely, it also needs the opposition to be relatively lax, physically mediocre, tactically inflexible and have strikers who don’t take advantage of Arsenal’s high line. It’s obvious there’s a lot of ceteris paribus in there which compartmentalizes Wenger’s ideology to something Utopian that can never be achieved.
Conclusively, it adds another dimension to the argument that Arsene Wenger is no longer good enough for Arsenal. The man can adopt to a more compact, counter-attacking approach infrequently, but reverts to his dated approach when he thinks he can pull it off. The result? Two trophies won out of a possible 37.
At 66, it seems unlikely that Wenger will abandon the pet philosophy he’s adhered to for a long time. Meanwhile, we’ve missed out on managers like Jurgen Klopp and Pep Guardiola, who offer more progressive and revolutionary philosophies than the same old pass-and-move. However, it’s not too late. If the club is proactive enough, we can quickly begin the tumultuous rebuilding phase for a new manager and a new style.
Better late than never, right?
-Santi [Follow me on Twitter @ArsenalBlogz ]
Comentarios