Chelsea 2 Arsenal 0
Shambles. Gutless. No teamwork. Pathetic. Can’t defend. Worst goalkeeper ever in the history of world football.
I’m sure you’ve heard all these jibes at this Arsenal side following the defeat at Chelsea on Sunday. Some of it, is probably merited; but the vast majority is hyperbole and plain nonsense.
What is true though, is that from the outset, the tactics the team were sent out to play were a tactical nonsense.
Samir Nasri and Andrey Arshavin may have hit a relative glut of goals when they first arrived at the club; Cesc Fabregas does go through some purple patches when he bangs the goals in left, right and centre; Abou Diaby may occasionally smash one home; but as a group of four players, they are more likely to not score in a game than to score.
Yet, they were the forward line. It was they who were expected to score the goals to try and get us a result at Stamford Bridge. Now perhaps I’m wrong, but this was the error with the Arsenal team on Sunday.
To blame the players who were on the pitch is disingenuous: perhaps Bendtner wasn’t fully fit, but by the time he was introduced, the game was realistically lost. If he had played a barn-storming 45 minutes, scored a couple of goals, and then had to be withdrawn because he looked tired that would be one thing. But he played for half an hour and looked fresh as a daisy at the final whistle.
It’s obvious this Arsenal team isn’t the greatest at defending; so to blame Vermaelen and Song for losing their men at the corner which led to the opening goal, whilst fair in one sense, is unfair in another: that, has almost come to be expected.
But what we also expect is to see a bloody good attacking side. They’ve shown throughout the season that this is their strength so they might as well play to it. And yet they didn’t. A side which began the season playing 4-3-3 is now playing 4-6-0.
It’s defending without defenders. And this is where the finger has to be pointed at the manager: because looking at the Arsenal teamsheet before the match it hardly seemed to be bristling with goals.
And the remarkable thing is that Wenger pointed this out: when there were goals spread around the team, whilst acknowledging it was impressive, he also conceded it was not something we could depend upon all season. So the manager himself saw this coming, it wasn’t just the supporters.
Alas. Faced with the chance of improving our team by something called the transfer window, he did nothing. No strikers brought in, because Bendtner was going to be fit. And it was obvious that this run of four games would go a long way to deciding how our League campaign finished.
So the supporters could only believe what the manager said: that the striker would be fit. But he wasn’t: when he was needed in the big games against Man United and Chelsea, he could only give us half an hour each time.
So the team with five creative midfield players in it, has scored two goals in its last four matches, both of which were deflected.
It’s an absolute tragedy: five brilliant – and uniquely different – midfielders’ talents are being wasted because there is nobody to finish the chances. Sure, Bendtner is ostensibly a finisher but he’s not playing so it’s a moot point.
Blaming Almunia for a lack of talent is unfair: its probably true but you cannot blame a player for his own deficiencies. We do have two centre backs with a desire to play centre forward; we do have a left back who cannot really defend; and we do have a goalkeeper who lets in goals he should save. But this is nothing new: we’d counter-acted this by scoring lots of goals.
If we were playing a couple of strikers who just happened not to be scoring that would be one thing. But the manager sent out a team who did not have within it a proven goalscorer. The result of the match tells you exactly what happened. Better, to have a half-fit striker than none at all.
The question is where do we go from here: its possible though unlikely that we will still win the League. But that would merely mask the deficiencies within this Arsenal team: at the moment we probably have eight elevenths of a good side.
That cannot be changed before the summer but the left-back problem may be solved by the return of Kieran Gibbs. It has been said before and it will be said again: Robin Van Persie is not a player who can be depended on to last a season. No other player at the club has the ability to score goals in his numbers so we need another striker who can play next to him: hopefully, Chamakh is the answer. But it is the goalkeeping situation which is the worst because I genuinely pity Manuel Almunia. His fall from grace has been spectacular and its hard to see how he can return to form.
The problem is that there are also clear problems with Fabianski and Mannone and perhaps the hope is that eventually Almunia will get out of this dreadful rut of form.
Realistically, we have one competition left to play for this season: for all our many shortcomings, perennially we seem to at least get to the quarter finals of the Champions League.
Perhaps we’ll get a friendly draw and somebody else will knock United and Chelsea out. What this season has emphatically shown, is that we sure can’t.
It’s not a good time to be a Gooner right now. Let’s stick together and maybe Liverpool will allow us to lift our spirits slightly.
Keep the faith,
Adam
Tuesday, 9 February 2010
Tuesday, 2 February 2010
Pitiful. Arsenal beaten in every department by United
Arsenal 1 Manchester United 3
(And it's worth noting that the '1' was a consolation goal - perhaps we woke up from our lethargy thereafter, but United are far too professional a team to let a three goal lead slip.
If you want to clutch at straws, perhaps you could point out that United were due a win away at us in the League - February 2005, almost five years ago, was when they won away to us last (as long as you discount the Champions League...)
But fundamentally we were poor. Really, really poor in fact. This may sound hyperbolic, but I cannot recall a worse performance at home: at least on other occasions when we've been hammered, the opposition have had to be excellent. United were average, they placed some nice counter-attacking football but the three points were gifted to them on a platter.
It's worth looking at why we looked so good at the beginning of the season - the new formation looked like it worked, because we pressed high up the field. Bendtner and Van Persie made sure the opposition could not clear the ball easily. Above all else, it was a formation based on working hard - 4-3-3 became 4-5-1 when we didn't have the ball.
Perhaps our players are tired, but the high work rate has gone out the window. Gael Clichy is clearly not the player he once was, but it's unforgivable that the midfielders and attackers refuse to track back and help the defence. It's very easy to characterise us as flat-track bullies but that's because we can score three our four goals against a mediocre team.
When we play United or Chelsea we can't - I can't recall the last time we scored three against either of them which is telling in of itself. The point is though, that although Gallas and Vermaelen have been excellent, we've looked dodgy defensively all season - there's no hiding from that.
Playing gung ho may work against the smaller teams because out-scoring them work so a lack of clean sheets is not an issue. But against United or Chelsea, it is inexcusable. Look at results like when we last won at Old Trafford (sadly, in 2006). It was a performance underpinned by defensive solidity and we managed to nick a goal. We've played United and Chelsea eight times in the last 12 months. And in that time we've scored five and conceded eighteen, with seven defeats from eight.
There's no way you can spin that: its not a one-off result, there may have been an occasional dodgy refereeing decision but eight games is enough to tell a reasonable story.
Part of me, struggles to get angry. In my lifetime of supporting Arsenal we have always been a top team. But although statistics don't tell the whole story they seem to indicate United and Chelsea are simply better than us. It's hard to write and it's hard to take. But it's probably true.
The saving grace, is that is only on a one-on-one basis. We are still in the title race because we have been rather excellent against the smaller teams this year. Maybe that will continue. Frankly, it has to. United won the League last year while only taking five points from the rest of the Big Four. Arguably, that is our problem - although they haven't been as majestic against the bottom ten teams this season, they're raising their game for big games - something Arsenal are emphatically not managing.
Look at the team from the United game and who can you absolve of blame? Vermaelen, Arshavin and perhaps Rosicky. It's difficult to criticise Nasri because as a team we didn't press and didn't close down - it wasn't only him. But while there were poor performances all round, there were three players who deserve an absolute rollicking.
First and foremost amongst these is Manuel Almunia. It pains me to say that. If any other keeper had scuffed that kick towards the end of the match, it would be fair to conclude they had merely been unlucky. With Almunia, it was the culmination of six months of mediocrity. It would be disingenuous to imply he was responsible for all three goals: the latter two were counter-attacks where he was put in a very difficult position, and even for the first goal Nani should never have been allowed to put his cross-cum-shot into the box.
Indeed, although we conceded three goals, if this was a one-off it would be easy to excuse Almunia. But whereas last year I made him my player of the year, his fall from grace has been spectacular. He adds nothing to this team: no doubt goalkeeping is about confidence but right now he must be at rock bottom. His excellent shot-stopping is nowhere to be seen. To see how his standards have fallen, it is merely necessary to juxtapose two performances: in the Champions League semi-final first leg last year, Almunia kept us in the tie with a series of great saves; on Sunday, he didn't make a single save of note and scored an own goal. Need I say more?
It is even harder to write a piece criticising Gael Clichy: but in a sense Clichy is the embodiment of everything that is wrong with the current Arsenal team. Everything Cashley wrote in his book about nearly crashing his car was ridiculous. But considering the high wages paid to young players, it is unbelievable that for five grand a week, we let the best left-back in world football leave. For a while, it seemed the correct decision: Gallas became an inspirational skipper and Clichy played as an excellent left-back. Then we played a certain match at St Andrews and I'm unconvinced he's been the same player since. Gibbs is an exciting prospect but as long as he is injured, teams will continue to try and attack the left-back area, just as United did. Perhaps this will give Clichy the chance to turn it around and show he really is a top level left-back but it is more likely that we'll continue to ship goals.
Although Denilson was very responsible for all three goals, I think it's fair to say he just had a dreadful game - his performance was shocking but as it was out of character, it is the easiest one to let slide. The problem with Denilson, is that he'll probably play well against Porto in the Champions League. But without any time on the ball - as soon as he faces an aggressive side - he gets shaken up and doesn't play nearly as well.
The question now is whether this team can pick themselves up. Cesc and Sagna have made pronouncements on the official site about how we have to beat Chelsea. It's difficult to disagree with that. But it's also hard to see it happen.
Generally, I disregard everything Myles Palmer says. But his point about Shava repeatedly shooting on Sunday because he had no other choice might be true. This Arsenal side needs to play to its strengths and with RVP out injured, the two world-class attackers in the team are Arshavin and Fabregas. Maybe, as I was saying post-match on Sunday, opposition teams have Arshavin worked out so all he can do is shoot early and hope. But what seems more plausible, is that he wants more support in attack. If we want to play 4-3-3, we have to see far more from our wide men. At the beginning of the year, it was Shava and Bendtner playing out of their skins with RVP up front.
We can't bring Van Persie back yet. But what we can do is look at what made us relatively successful and try and re-capture that. Arsene Wenger is paid five million pounds a year: he needs to earn some of that on the training ground this week.
Keep the faith,
Adam
(And it's worth noting that the '1' was a consolation goal - perhaps we woke up from our lethargy thereafter, but United are far too professional a team to let a three goal lead slip.
If you want to clutch at straws, perhaps you could point out that United were due a win away at us in the League - February 2005, almost five years ago, was when they won away to us last (as long as you discount the Champions League...)
But fundamentally we were poor. Really, really poor in fact. This may sound hyperbolic, but I cannot recall a worse performance at home: at least on other occasions when we've been hammered, the opposition have had to be excellent. United were average, they placed some nice counter-attacking football but the three points were gifted to them on a platter.
It's worth looking at why we looked so good at the beginning of the season - the new formation looked like it worked, because we pressed high up the field. Bendtner and Van Persie made sure the opposition could not clear the ball easily. Above all else, it was a formation based on working hard - 4-3-3 became 4-5-1 when we didn't have the ball.
Perhaps our players are tired, but the high work rate has gone out the window. Gael Clichy is clearly not the player he once was, but it's unforgivable that the midfielders and attackers refuse to track back and help the defence. It's very easy to characterise us as flat-track bullies but that's because we can score three our four goals against a mediocre team.
When we play United or Chelsea we can't - I can't recall the last time we scored three against either of them which is telling in of itself. The point is though, that although Gallas and Vermaelen have been excellent, we've looked dodgy defensively all season - there's no hiding from that.
Playing gung ho may work against the smaller teams because out-scoring them work so a lack of clean sheets is not an issue. But against United or Chelsea, it is inexcusable. Look at results like when we last won at Old Trafford (sadly, in 2006). It was a performance underpinned by defensive solidity and we managed to nick a goal. We've played United and Chelsea eight times in the last 12 months. And in that time we've scored five and conceded eighteen, with seven defeats from eight.
There's no way you can spin that: its not a one-off result, there may have been an occasional dodgy refereeing decision but eight games is enough to tell a reasonable story.
Part of me, struggles to get angry. In my lifetime of supporting Arsenal we have always been a top team. But although statistics don't tell the whole story they seem to indicate United and Chelsea are simply better than us. It's hard to write and it's hard to take. But it's probably true.
The saving grace, is that is only on a one-on-one basis. We are still in the title race because we have been rather excellent against the smaller teams this year. Maybe that will continue. Frankly, it has to. United won the League last year while only taking five points from the rest of the Big Four. Arguably, that is our problem - although they haven't been as majestic against the bottom ten teams this season, they're raising their game for big games - something Arsenal are emphatically not managing.
Look at the team from the United game and who can you absolve of blame? Vermaelen, Arshavin and perhaps Rosicky. It's difficult to criticise Nasri because as a team we didn't press and didn't close down - it wasn't only him. But while there were poor performances all round, there were three players who deserve an absolute rollicking.
First and foremost amongst these is Manuel Almunia. It pains me to say that. If any other keeper had scuffed that kick towards the end of the match, it would be fair to conclude they had merely been unlucky. With Almunia, it was the culmination of six months of mediocrity. It would be disingenuous to imply he was responsible for all three goals: the latter two were counter-attacks where he was put in a very difficult position, and even for the first goal Nani should never have been allowed to put his cross-cum-shot into the box.
Indeed, although we conceded three goals, if this was a one-off it would be easy to excuse Almunia. But whereas last year I made him my player of the year, his fall from grace has been spectacular. He adds nothing to this team: no doubt goalkeeping is about confidence but right now he must be at rock bottom. His excellent shot-stopping is nowhere to be seen. To see how his standards have fallen, it is merely necessary to juxtapose two performances: in the Champions League semi-final first leg last year, Almunia kept us in the tie with a series of great saves; on Sunday, he didn't make a single save of note and scored an own goal. Need I say more?
It is even harder to write a piece criticising Gael Clichy: but in a sense Clichy is the embodiment of everything that is wrong with the current Arsenal team. Everything Cashley wrote in his book about nearly crashing his car was ridiculous. But considering the high wages paid to young players, it is unbelievable that for five grand a week, we let the best left-back in world football leave. For a while, it seemed the correct decision: Gallas became an inspirational skipper and Clichy played as an excellent left-back. Then we played a certain match at St Andrews and I'm unconvinced he's been the same player since. Gibbs is an exciting prospect but as long as he is injured, teams will continue to try and attack the left-back area, just as United did. Perhaps this will give Clichy the chance to turn it around and show he really is a top level left-back but it is more likely that we'll continue to ship goals.
Although Denilson was very responsible for all three goals, I think it's fair to say he just had a dreadful game - his performance was shocking but as it was out of character, it is the easiest one to let slide. The problem with Denilson, is that he'll probably play well against Porto in the Champions League. But without any time on the ball - as soon as he faces an aggressive side - he gets shaken up and doesn't play nearly as well.
The question now is whether this team can pick themselves up. Cesc and Sagna have made pronouncements on the official site about how we have to beat Chelsea. It's difficult to disagree with that. But it's also hard to see it happen.
Generally, I disregard everything Myles Palmer says. But his point about Shava repeatedly shooting on Sunday because he had no other choice might be true. This Arsenal side needs to play to its strengths and with RVP out injured, the two world-class attackers in the team are Arshavin and Fabregas. Maybe, as I was saying post-match on Sunday, opposition teams have Arshavin worked out so all he can do is shoot early and hope. But what seems more plausible, is that he wants more support in attack. If we want to play 4-3-3, we have to see far more from our wide men. At the beginning of the year, it was Shava and Bendtner playing out of their skins with RVP up front.
We can't bring Van Persie back yet. But what we can do is look at what made us relatively successful and try and re-capture that. Arsene Wenger is paid five million pounds a year: he needs to earn some of that on the training ground this week.
Keep the faith,
Adam
Sunday, 31 January 2010
Audioblog: We'll never win the League playing like that
It must be said we were really poor today. Full blog tomorrow but till then you can have some rambling thoughts:
On a bleak day like this, it is particularly apposite to sign off by telling you to keep the faith. So that's what I'll do...
On a bleak day like this, it is particularly apposite to sign off by telling you to keep the faith. So that's what I'll do...
Saturday, 30 January 2010
A good performance at Villa Park + looking ahead
Here are some stats which may surprise you: Aston Villa have conceded the fewest goals of any team in the Premiership this season. They've scored the same number of goals as West Ham: their League position is based on a very tight defence and the three goals we scored against them on the day after Boxing Day was exceptional.
So Wednesday night's match was always going to be a tight game. And although when we play United tomorrow it will be ten days since we won a League game (hopefully that will be it...) it's unfair to say we have no momentum: it's only one game we've failed to win.
Perhaps more pertinently, if you went through the fixture list pin-pointing places where dropped points should be expected, Villa Park is one of them. The League isn't won by winning away at the top six or eight teams.
Sure, it would have been nice to win. But our aim has to be to win home and away against the bottom half teams and then aim to take four points from six from the other members of the top ten. Do that, and you win the League easily.
Of course, that's difficult. We already know that out of a possible six points, we can take no more than three from our pair of matches against Chelsea, United, or City. But it's something to aspire to. If Arsenal put 96 points on the board and didn't win the League, I for one would be gracious about it - another team would have had to be absolutely brilliant.
This run of four matches of which we've currently played one is difficult. Eight points would be a brilliant return. Frankly, it would be churlish to dismiss the point we won against Villa. They don't play great football, but they've made themselves very difficult to beat. Personally, I feel it is an indictment on the Premier League that a team like Villa can threaten Champions League qualification: it is damning evidence that technique and flair really are relatively unimportant in terms of being successful.
The reality is that we were unlucky: on another day Cesc's shot would have crept inside the post and we would have gone home with an important three points. It was a scrappy game where very little of note happened for at least the first twenty minutes.
But either way, tomorrow's match against United was going to be a massive game. As a fan of Bendtner, I'm happy to forgive him being slightly off the pace on Wednesday after not playing for three months.
The question remains though, will he be fully fit tomorrow? He was excellent as a lone striker last year, and it looks like our best chance of taking three points it to leave him up top to create chances for Fabregas, Arshavin, Nasri et al.
Considering how average we were against Villa, a point was probably a fair result. But we must be better tomorrow. If we can take eight points from twelve, we'll be in a terrific position to win the League.
The paucity of our opposition in our final ten games means we can probably afford to be six points behind after this run of four games. But then we will be dependent on others slipping up - a far from ideal situation.
In league games against United at The Grove we have an excellent record. Let's keep that up.
Keep the faith,
Adam
So Wednesday night's match was always going to be a tight game. And although when we play United tomorrow it will be ten days since we won a League game (hopefully that will be it...) it's unfair to say we have no momentum: it's only one game we've failed to win.
Perhaps more pertinently, if you went through the fixture list pin-pointing places where dropped points should be expected, Villa Park is one of them. The League isn't won by winning away at the top six or eight teams.
Sure, it would have been nice to win. But our aim has to be to win home and away against the bottom half teams and then aim to take four points from six from the other members of the top ten. Do that, and you win the League easily.
Of course, that's difficult. We already know that out of a possible six points, we can take no more than three from our pair of matches against Chelsea, United, or City. But it's something to aspire to. If Arsenal put 96 points on the board and didn't win the League, I for one would be gracious about it - another team would have had to be absolutely brilliant.
This run of four matches of which we've currently played one is difficult. Eight points would be a brilliant return. Frankly, it would be churlish to dismiss the point we won against Villa. They don't play great football, but they've made themselves very difficult to beat. Personally, I feel it is an indictment on the Premier League that a team like Villa can threaten Champions League qualification: it is damning evidence that technique and flair really are relatively unimportant in terms of being successful.
The reality is that we were unlucky: on another day Cesc's shot would have crept inside the post and we would have gone home with an important three points. It was a scrappy game where very little of note happened for at least the first twenty minutes.
But either way, tomorrow's match against United was going to be a massive game. As a fan of Bendtner, I'm happy to forgive him being slightly off the pace on Wednesday after not playing for three months.
The question remains though, will he be fully fit tomorrow? He was excellent as a lone striker last year, and it looks like our best chance of taking three points it to leave him up top to create chances for Fabregas, Arshavin, Nasri et al.
Considering how average we were against Villa, a point was probably a fair result. But we must be better tomorrow. If we can take eight points from twelve, we'll be in a terrific position to win the League.
The paucity of our opposition in our final ten games means we can probably afford to be six points behind after this run of four games. But then we will be dependent on others slipping up - a far from ideal situation.
In league games against United at The Grove we have an excellent record. Let's keep that up.
Keep the faith,
Adam
Sunday, 24 January 2010
Having watched the TV highlights, three extra conclusions from today
1) Perhaps Wenger was correct: watching on TV, the pitch didn't look great. But having said that, it wasn't unplayable, and two of the three Stoke goals came from successful dribbles up the flanks. Something Walcott didn't manage all day.
Ultimately, the pitch is the same for both teams and if Stoke can dribble on it, than our supposedly infinitely more talented players should also be able to do so.
2) Fabianski isn't much cop. Implicitly earlier, by not criticising him I suggested he should be absolved of blame.
But having watched the highlights, one does have to question his positioning at crosses. Of course he's young and does display some talent (in contrast to our English winger) but nevertheless, he wasn't great.
No great goalkeeper has simply been a shot-stopper. Although of course it is worth pointing out that there is nothing to suggest Almunia would have been any better.
3) Stoke played some nice football. It's all too easy to argue that we were simply out-muscled. Partly, that's true. But Matty Etherington is a relatively small guy. His, was one of the standout performances for Stoke. And it was a performance of dribbling well, tracking back, and putting in good crosses.
Perhaps le boss should get certain team members to watch the video...
Keep the faith,
Adam
Ultimately, the pitch is the same for both teams and if Stoke can dribble on it, than our supposedly infinitely more talented players should also be able to do so.
2) Fabianski isn't much cop. Implicitly earlier, by not criticising him I suggested he should be absolved of blame.
But having watched the highlights, one does have to question his positioning at crosses. Of course he's young and does display some talent (in contrast to our English winger) but nevertheless, he wasn't great.
No great goalkeeper has simply been a shot-stopper. Although of course it is worth pointing out that there is nothing to suggest Almunia would have been any better.
3) Stoke played some nice football. It's all too easy to argue that we were simply out-muscled. Partly, that's true. But Matty Etherington is a relatively small guy. His, was one of the standout performances for Stoke. And it was a performance of dribbling well, tracking back, and putting in good crosses.
Perhaps le boss should get certain team members to watch the video...
Keep the faith,
Adam
Eleven conclusions from Stoke-Arsenal
1) There are no longer any mitigating factors: time and again he has been given chances and time and again he has failed to deliver. Theo Walcott is not an Arsenal quality player.
But today it got worse than that: he was more of a hindrance than a help. He consistently gave the ball away, didn't make a single good cross and generally looked completely anonymous. We would have been better off with ten men.
2) Picking a weakened team in the domestic cup competitions is understandable if annoying. But choosing a nineteen-year-old, debutant to lead the line on their own is a tall order alone. Asking a midfield player to do this is simply unforgivable. Undoubtedly Arsene Wenger knows how to develop young players; but this was asking too much, too soon. JET did okay under the circumstances but that does not negate the fact that others could have played the role and when it is easy to be over-awed by the occasion, having Theo Walcott and Carlos Vela as the other two of an attacking triumvirate is not a recipe for success.
3) Picking Cesc Fabregas was a smokescreen which dissolved spectacularly: but this was no surprise. Sure, he played well but we still didn't create much. The crucial thing about this match was defending well. If Wenger was going to pick senior players then Gallas and Vermaelen should have played.
4) Sol Campbell is both fit - he lasted 90 minutes without looking knackered - and still a good defender. Whether he can marshall the troops a la 2002 is another matter: the first goal was as a result of poor defensive organisation.
5) Speaking of that first goal, it didn't seem possible but it genuinely was funny. 60 seconds in - including thirty for Delap to dry the ball - and we were a goal behind. From a long throw. It was so unbelievable it was funny.
6) If Portsmouth played Armand Traore as a winger then why does Wenger still insist he can play left-back? It is patently obvious to anyone who watches him that the boy cannot defend. If he wasn't allowed to play defence for one of the worst teams in the Premiership, why is he allowed to for a team harbouring hopes of European glory?
7) Further to this, with the news this week that Kieran Gibbs is out for the season, today's match only re-inforced how fragile our defence has become: Clichy has a dodgy back and both Gallas and Vermaelen are yet to pick up injuries this season; if two out of three of these players pick up long-term injuries, we will win nothing this season.
8) Its easy to criticise the team selection; but bear in mind that the first team lost at the Britannia stadium last year and it was 1-1 when the so-called 'big guns' were sent on. There is more value in criticising the substitutions as a whole: the game was still in the balance when they were made, but rather than making a triple sub then, Theo should have been taken off at half time.
9) 20 fouls and no yellow cards - Stoke today. As a surrogate father-figure (JK) pointed out to me, the new tactic amongst opposition teams seems to be to rotate who does the fouling. Judging by today, it worked.
10) Arsene Wenger really will clutch at any straws imaginable: I was there today, just as I was at the JJB in 2008 when we drew 0-0 with Wigan. Then, it was fair to say that the pitch played a part in the result. Today, we were poor - its that simple; it is particularly disingenuous to argue the pitch played a part when Stoke scored the opening goal from a throw-in - something which has nothing to do with the pitch.
11) Finally, as Kevin Whitcher has pointed out on Twitter, considering that the 5th round takes place between Liverpool (H) and Porto (A), it would have been another weakened team we put out. And we've seen once already this season that doesn't work at Man City.
Two final comments: firstly, kudos to my friend Avi for driving 300 miles today; but more importantly, the importance of today can only be seen a couple of weeks down the line - if we beat Villa on Wednesday and do well in this difficult run of games, then Wenger will have been vindicated.
Keep the faith,
Adam
But today it got worse than that: he was more of a hindrance than a help. He consistently gave the ball away, didn't make a single good cross and generally looked completely anonymous. We would have been better off with ten men.
2) Picking a weakened team in the domestic cup competitions is understandable if annoying. But choosing a nineteen-year-old, debutant to lead the line on their own is a tall order alone. Asking a midfield player to do this is simply unforgivable. Undoubtedly Arsene Wenger knows how to develop young players; but this was asking too much, too soon. JET did okay under the circumstances but that does not negate the fact that others could have played the role and when it is easy to be over-awed by the occasion, having Theo Walcott and Carlos Vela as the other two of an attacking triumvirate is not a recipe for success.
3) Picking Cesc Fabregas was a smokescreen which dissolved spectacularly: but this was no surprise. Sure, he played well but we still didn't create much. The crucial thing about this match was defending well. If Wenger was going to pick senior players then Gallas and Vermaelen should have played.
4) Sol Campbell is both fit - he lasted 90 minutes without looking knackered - and still a good defender. Whether he can marshall the troops a la 2002 is another matter: the first goal was as a result of poor defensive organisation.
5) Speaking of that first goal, it didn't seem possible but it genuinely was funny. 60 seconds in - including thirty for Delap to dry the ball - and we were a goal behind. From a long throw. It was so unbelievable it was funny.
6) If Portsmouth played Armand Traore as a winger then why does Wenger still insist he can play left-back? It is patently obvious to anyone who watches him that the boy cannot defend. If he wasn't allowed to play defence for one of the worst teams in the Premiership, why is he allowed to for a team harbouring hopes of European glory?
7) Further to this, with the news this week that Kieran Gibbs is out for the season, today's match only re-inforced how fragile our defence has become: Clichy has a dodgy back and both Gallas and Vermaelen are yet to pick up injuries this season; if two out of three of these players pick up long-term injuries, we will win nothing this season.
8) Its easy to criticise the team selection; but bear in mind that the first team lost at the Britannia stadium last year and it was 1-1 when the so-called 'big guns' were sent on. There is more value in criticising the substitutions as a whole: the game was still in the balance when they were made, but rather than making a triple sub then, Theo should have been taken off at half time.
9) 20 fouls and no yellow cards - Stoke today. As a surrogate father-figure (JK) pointed out to me, the new tactic amongst opposition teams seems to be to rotate who does the fouling. Judging by today, it worked.
10) Arsene Wenger really will clutch at any straws imaginable: I was there today, just as I was at the JJB in 2008 when we drew 0-0 with Wigan. Then, it was fair to say that the pitch played a part in the result. Today, we were poor - its that simple; it is particularly disingenuous to argue the pitch played a part when Stoke scored the opening goal from a throw-in - something which has nothing to do with the pitch.
11) Finally, as Kevin Whitcher has pointed out on Twitter, considering that the 5th round takes place between Liverpool (H) and Porto (A), it would have been another weakened team we put out. And we've seen once already this season that doesn't work at Man City.
Two final comments: firstly, kudos to my friend Avi for driving 300 miles today; but more importantly, the importance of today can only be seen a couple of weeks down the line - if we beat Villa on Wednesday and do well in this difficult run of games, then Wenger will have been vindicated.
Keep the faith,
Adam
Tuesday, 19 January 2010
Thoughts on Everton, Bolton and Sol.
Perhaps not putting pen to paper - or is that cursor to screen, keyboard to 'new post' - has been useful for me when it comes to looking at the Everton match, which was a staggering ten days ago.
Because whenever you score late, in the aftermath of the match, the result secured takes on a special glow which casts its light far and wide. Like the sun even. But not as far and wide. (I do mean the hot thing in the sky, not the tabloid newspaper, although that does also seem to cast its influence far and wide; its not the best analogy ever).
But while Everton are clearly playing much better of late - they are one of the division's form teams - that does not take away from a very salient point: since August, because of the Champions League qualifying round we played, all the teams around us had played an extra game - we had a perennial game in hand. Anyway, we always counted the difference from Chelsea as being three points less because Bolton at home is a banker.
However, the 'adverse weather conditions' meant that as so many matches got snowed off, the home game against Everton became the perennial game in hand. Herein, lies the issue with the point we gained against Everton last Saturday: suddenly, our game in hand was not easy and having essentially played it, it only gave us an extra point. So when we play Bolton this Wednesday night, even if we win and go top, Chelsea will have a game in hand on us. So not only was it a poor result, it has weakened us psychologically as we are no longer de facto top of the League, to borrow a particularly ugly expression from my brother.
If I were a truly objectionable fellow, I would point out that I predicted we would not beat Everton; but since my ensuing correctness gave me no joy, and I never wrote it on this blog, it would be wrong and disingenuous to use that as proof that I really am Mystic Meg.
Nevertheless, Everton always looked like it would be a difficult game: the poor weather and Everton's return to reform conspired to make it so. In the end, although there are clearly many negatives to that draw, considering the circumstances, as an isolated result it could have been much worse: at risk of stating the obvious, we came within a minute of losing the game and needed Rosicky's deflected shot to keep the momentum up - at the final whistle it felt like a win. Missing both Fabregas and Song - and with Shava strangely anonymous - to get a point from the team which genuinely is the most complete non Big Four side was no terrible thing.
Its often highlighted that we lost the League in 07/08 through a series of draws in February. And strictly speaking this is correct. But it was not each individual result that was bad. Considering the circumstances, the draws at St Andrews and the JJB that season were understandable results. The issue, is draws clustering together and that is what we must try to avoid. We've only drawn three League games this season and that low number is keeping us in the title race - a draw is two thirds of a defeat so it really is crucial to keep on winning.
That's exactly what we did on Sunday when Cesc showed his value to the team. Time and again this season, the captain has driven us forward to picking up important results. His presence is immense and currently it is almost impossible to picture Arsenal without him. He looks a shoo-in for Player of the Year and on current form he is the best player in the world. His scoring record is the envy of many a striker (eat your heart out Emile Heskey) and his passing is still top-draw. As well as working a goal on Sunday when the game threatened to go scrappy, he passed the ball beautifully and is doing his bit to make this team believe they are winners.
If we win nothing this season, Cesc could be on his way. It would be one of the great travesties of justice if Cesc's time at Arsenal was remembered by just one solitary FA Cup. Against Everton, without him, let us pick no bones: we struggled going forward and got some of the luck we have earnt with two own goals. It was no coincidence that with Rosicky and Cesc back in the team was much better going forward.
It shouldn't be overlooked that Bolton had many chances and while the return of Gael Clichy should strengthen us, we still look dodgy defensively - Sunday was a rare clean sheet. Nevertheless, beat Bolton convincingly on Wednesday and we go top for the first time since August. Lets stay there.
In November I wrote in The Gooner that it would be the greatest achievement in the history of modern football if Wenger won the League with a team bought for nothing. With the financial difficulties at Liverpool and United, it would be no surprise to see other teams try and take the Wenger approach.
But what has held us back thus far is the constant injury crisis at the club, with some remarking on Twitter that we have a 'new one-out, one-in policy in the Physio's room. Just out - Fabregas, Clichy. Back in - Nasri, Ramsey'.
Its tempting to suggest this means Wenger should rest players for the Bolton and Stoke games since they are easier matches and the FA Cup is not our priority. But two wins, before the quartet of matches that will define our League campaign begins next Wednesday would be brilliant for momentum.
Also, if we stay in the FA Cup, the manager will be more likely to buy. The acquisition of Sol looks like a good piece of business which we cannot really lose from. All Gooners were worried we would be up sh*t creek if one of our centre backs got injured and this is less of an issue now.
His return also means one of my favourite football-related jokes can return: on North London Derby day walk into any pub in Tottenham and say 'Hi, can I get a Sol.....[extended pause]...or do you give them away for free?
It is very easy to say the manager should buy a world-class centre back as cover. But firstly where do you find another Vermaelen on the cheap? And perhaps more pertinently, why would a player of the calibre of Vermaelen want to bench-warm unless someone gets injured. It makes no sense for the player.
Ultimately, it would be nice to see the manager buy a striker, but the team is a quality one and although I have my doubts, maybe Wenger really will be smiling come May.
Two weeks ago, it seemed that without signings we didn't have a cat in hell's chance. The memory of Spring 2008 is still a fresh wound. But maybe the the manager knows what he is doing?
Keep the faith,
Adam
Because whenever you score late, in the aftermath of the match, the result secured takes on a special glow which casts its light far and wide. Like the sun even. But not as far and wide. (I do mean the hot thing in the sky, not the tabloid newspaper, although that does also seem to cast its influence far and wide; its not the best analogy ever).
But while Everton are clearly playing much better of late - they are one of the division's form teams - that does not take away from a very salient point: since August, because of the Champions League qualifying round we played, all the teams around us had played an extra game - we had a perennial game in hand. Anyway, we always counted the difference from Chelsea as being three points less because Bolton at home is a banker.
However, the 'adverse weather conditions' meant that as so many matches got snowed off, the home game against Everton became the perennial game in hand. Herein, lies the issue with the point we gained against Everton last Saturday: suddenly, our game in hand was not easy and having essentially played it, it only gave us an extra point. So when we play Bolton this Wednesday night, even if we win and go top, Chelsea will have a game in hand on us. So not only was it a poor result, it has weakened us psychologically as we are no longer de facto top of the League, to borrow a particularly ugly expression from my brother.
If I were a truly objectionable fellow, I would point out that I predicted we would not beat Everton; but since my ensuing correctness gave me no joy, and I never wrote it on this blog, it would be wrong and disingenuous to use that as proof that I really am Mystic Meg.
Nevertheless, Everton always looked like it would be a difficult game: the poor weather and Everton's return to reform conspired to make it so. In the end, although there are clearly many negatives to that draw, considering the circumstances, as an isolated result it could have been much worse: at risk of stating the obvious, we came within a minute of losing the game and needed Rosicky's deflected shot to keep the momentum up - at the final whistle it felt like a win. Missing both Fabregas and Song - and with Shava strangely anonymous - to get a point from the team which genuinely is the most complete non Big Four side was no terrible thing.
Its often highlighted that we lost the League in 07/08 through a series of draws in February. And strictly speaking this is correct. But it was not each individual result that was bad. Considering the circumstances, the draws at St Andrews and the JJB that season were understandable results. The issue, is draws clustering together and that is what we must try to avoid. We've only drawn three League games this season and that low number is keeping us in the title race - a draw is two thirds of a defeat so it really is crucial to keep on winning.
That's exactly what we did on Sunday when Cesc showed his value to the team. Time and again this season, the captain has driven us forward to picking up important results. His presence is immense and currently it is almost impossible to picture Arsenal without him. He looks a shoo-in for Player of the Year and on current form he is the best player in the world. His scoring record is the envy of many a striker (eat your heart out Emile Heskey) and his passing is still top-draw. As well as working a goal on Sunday when the game threatened to go scrappy, he passed the ball beautifully and is doing his bit to make this team believe they are winners.
If we win nothing this season, Cesc could be on his way. It would be one of the great travesties of justice if Cesc's time at Arsenal was remembered by just one solitary FA Cup. Against Everton, without him, let us pick no bones: we struggled going forward and got some of the luck we have earnt with two own goals. It was no coincidence that with Rosicky and Cesc back in the team was much better going forward.
It shouldn't be overlooked that Bolton had many chances and while the return of Gael Clichy should strengthen us, we still look dodgy defensively - Sunday was a rare clean sheet. Nevertheless, beat Bolton convincingly on Wednesday and we go top for the first time since August. Lets stay there.
In November I wrote in The Gooner that it would be the greatest achievement in the history of modern football if Wenger won the League with a team bought for nothing. With the financial difficulties at Liverpool and United, it would be no surprise to see other teams try and take the Wenger approach.
But what has held us back thus far is the constant injury crisis at the club, with some remarking on Twitter that we have a 'new one-out, one-in policy in the Physio's room. Just out - Fabregas, Clichy. Back in - Nasri, Ramsey'.
Its tempting to suggest this means Wenger should rest players for the Bolton and Stoke games since they are easier matches and the FA Cup is not our priority. But two wins, before the quartet of matches that will define our League campaign begins next Wednesday would be brilliant for momentum.
Also, if we stay in the FA Cup, the manager will be more likely to buy. The acquisition of Sol looks like a good piece of business which we cannot really lose from. All Gooners were worried we would be up sh*t creek if one of our centre backs got injured and this is less of an issue now.
His return also means one of my favourite football-related jokes can return: on North London Derby day walk into any pub in Tottenham and say 'Hi, can I get a Sol.....[extended pause]...or do you give them away for free?
It is very easy to say the manager should buy a world-class centre back as cover. But firstly where do you find another Vermaelen on the cheap? And perhaps more pertinently, why would a player of the calibre of Vermaelen want to bench-warm unless someone gets injured. It makes no sense for the player.
Ultimately, it would be nice to see the manager buy a striker, but the team is a quality one and although I have my doubts, maybe Wenger really will be smiling come May.
Two weeks ago, it seemed that without signings we didn't have a cat in hell's chance. The memory of Spring 2008 is still a fresh wound. But maybe the the manager knows what he is doing?
Keep the faith,
Adam
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
