24 thoughts on “A One Man Team, Arteta-Style”

1. sandra350 on September 8, 2012 at 6:30 PM said:

   This was a hilarious read! The meeting you put together was great–esp Arsene’s part.

   Good points made about the significance of Arteta and our fullback problem last season. I agree entirely that their presence would’ve given us far better results.

   However, that said–I think you underestimate the importance of tactics, defensive coaching & training throughout the squad.

   Every team has injury problems. Yes, we seem to have a lot more than others but that doesn’t change the fact that if you want to be at the top you have to make sure your entire squad is trained & coached in organization & discipline. That way even if a player like Arteta is out, a manager can depend on his replacement to do the job. He may not be as good but he can be relied on to at least do the basics, focus, be disciplined & aware.

   Man Utd can field players like O’Shea, Park, Fletcher — at OT couple yrs ago they had 7 defenders against us as part of a team of fairly avg players and yet not only controlled us easily but scored against us quite easily, and won the game. In fact, a hallmark of Ferguson’s teams is just that–even if they have crucial players out, he can call up his bench & bring on an unremarkable player and that player can be relied upon to do a job.

   We suffered w/o Arteta & fullbacks last season because the midfield could not be trusted to do their jobs, because they were not trained & coached defensively adequately enuf to compensate for the absence of Mikel and all our fullbacks.

   You can’t rely on having your best players all season long. Inevitably we’ll have games without Santi, Arteta, Poldi, Gibbs, etc. What’s important is that the players who step in when they’re out have been adequately coached so that we can rely on them as well.

   That’s where the importance of someone like Bould can come in.

   Also–even when we’ve had our best players available for long stretches, we still have shown defensive frailties. We are not known for being defensively disorganized for nothing. That’s due to training & coaching primarily.

   That was true the season before last, where we had relatively few injury problems (compared to previous seasons). We had our best players available for long periods in crucial games. Yet we still showed the same defensive frailties. It was widely observed by many Arsenal blogs at the end of that season that it did not matter who was playing because the same schoolboy mistakes and lack of focus & communication kept happening–the issues went much deeper than personnel.

   Our problems have always not primarily been about personnel. They’ve always been about training and coaching. Injuries have exacerbated those problems, yes, but they have not been the most important reason. A well-trained squad with defensive organization & discipline & communication plus world class players like Cesc & RVP would’ve won trophies with us already.

   Reply ↓
   • poznaninmypants on September 8, 2012 at 9:12 PM said:

     Great, response. A view that many/most would agree with and support. More importantly though you laid out the case well.
     First let me say that the blog was not supposed to be an endorsement of Arsenal’s defense strategy or tactics over the last 4-5 yrs.
     It is, however, a topic I find fascinating. I would love to have had a beer with Arsene to ask him: “So. Arsene. Defense? What the hell is the plan? Why no drills?”
     Clearly Arsene is a smart cookie, and in his brief playing career, he was a defender. Also, he lives and breathes football tactics and philosophy. So he must have his reasons. But what are/were they?
     Anyway, as I’m not qualified and Arsene isn’t available, the one man who is qualified to debate you and does have the time on his hands is Pep Guardiola, who has kindly offered to “guest respond.”
     Pep: “Sandra, i have been a Twitter admirer of yours for a long time. Your passion and knowledge of world football, is impressive and inspiring. If fans are generally known as being narrow and tribal, well, you, Sandra, would be the response.
     Regarding your defensive philosophy, I would agree that that is the orthodoxy. However, there is another school. I believe that defense is not about drills and the back 4 or 5 or 6. And it is not
     Defense can also be about denying possession. When you have the ball, you are not under threat. Only if you lose the ball are you under threat and so recovering the ball through pressing in packs is essential to my philosophy. With that we play a high line to keep it compact between our midfield and defenders so that there are no gaps for our opponents to exploit. With the high line we must never waste possession, move the ball quickly combined with great movement.
     There is no point in having the back 4 doing drills since we don’t intend to defend that way. I expect my defenders to build an understanding of each other, an awareness, a footballing intelligence. And I expect the whole team to defend. You cannot drill in intelligence but you can drill it out.
     Arsene has called me many times at night when he is in bed in his pyjamas. I know what his pyjamas look like. He texted me a photo of himself last Christmas after he put on his new present. They are light blue with white sheep. Very Arsene.
     Anyway, he calls me at midnight and usually forgets the time difference.
     I say to him: Arsene, yes, you have the right idea but you have never quite had the right players. You are 75-80% there with your players, but it can take a decade to get there, and tremendous depth of resources. Unless you are willing to wrack up huge debts building a La Masia while buying proven players and most importantly, holding on to them, it will take you even longer. Because when you have Xavi, Iniesta and Cesc, everyone on the planet will come to take them from you.
     I said to Arsene, you are safe on either side of the highway, but you are standing in the middle of it.
     When he lost Cesc, he lost his only chance to make it across to our side. But perhaps he couldn’t adjust defensive strategies last season. He went with what he had. Plus, they were so many games and points behind, Arsenal had to gamble with high stakes and throw caution to the wind. So they kept the high line. They won more games that way, but once they lost Arteta and the full backs they also lost more games that way. But to catch Tottenham, a swashbuckling approach to go after 3 points was probably the best, do or die. However, it is no way to win the championship.
     It was probably the best they could do last season. But now they must change. They do not have Xavi, Iniesta and 5-10 other players who never lose the ball under extreme pressure. Our strategy works for us, but probably not for any one else.
     In the end, Arsene’s problem was that his players were neither one thing nor the other. And his philosophy did not match his midfield, but he got close, once or twice.
     Do not judge him harshly. He tried to find an answer to beating United and Chelsea, but on a fraction of the budget. He attempted to innovate because the alternative was to copy with a fraction of the budget, and that would have been to surrender. What he achieved, I have the greatest respect for.

     Love,
     Pep G.

     PS: Arsene is my hero.

     Reply ↓
     • sandra350 on September 8, 2012 at 11:19 PM said:

       I’m afraid I’m going to have a very long answer to you, Pep. It’ll have to be in 2 parts.

       Well, Pep–great answer, but you’re assuming I was unaware of your philosophy of defense and that AW has been trying to adopt at least some of it in the post-Invincibles era. Tho I suppose you could assume I did not grasp that, given my response.

       However, it never quite worked, did it? We’ve seen this year after year. You say Arsene never quite had the right players-that of course it takes yrs to develop players who can do it. I gather you’re saying that it was the players who failed to fully learn the style and are absolving AW of any responsibility.

       I just don’t buy that.

       This is where I disagree with many gooners who make the same argument. I trust AW to choose which players to bring in. I don’t fault AW for choosing which players to sign. I think he was entirely correct to believe that Nasri, Clichy, Song, Ramsey, etc. could learn this Barca-type style.

       I’ll concede these players are not faultless of course. It’s not a one-way street. But it is not the primary reason. Keeping the ball has not been the only consistent defensive failure in this team.

       Basic schoolboy mistakes, lack of communication btwn players, consistent set piece weaknesses that have nothing at all to do with playing like Barca, players failing to track back, standing there as the opposition attacks, failing to support teammates at critical moments, switching off at critical moments, overplaying right in their own box–many of our defensive failings have had nothing at all to do with not having the players to keep the ball a la Barca. Constant failure to build communication with teammates, consistent failure to develop speed of passing and thought – which are absolutely critical components in Barca’s style. Season after season we’ve seen the same mistakes over and over and over—the same failings, the same squad imbalances, the same lack of discipline. Consistent lack of ruthlessness. Consistent inability to have the mental strength to get past the finishing line.

       Every year. We’ve seen no progress on those issues for 6 yrs. It never changes. Players come and go. And it never ever changes. The players change—the same exact failures and weaknesses and mistakes never ever change.

       You don’t accept the notion that AW has failings in his training and coaching, that it implies he’s stupid. I’m not calling him stupid. He’s good enuf to keep us in the top 4 in one of the world’s toughest leagues. That’s not to be laughed at. He’s brilliant enuf to produce players like RVP and Cesc (I detest the notion that only Barca produced Cesc-he spent 8 yrs with AW, 6 yrs at Barca). He’s brilliant enuf to keep us in the CL for 15 consecutive yrs. We are only one of 4 clubs in Europe to do that. .

       But post-Invincibles, facts are facts. I stopped making excuses for his limitations after the 07-08 season. I refuse to ignore them when every year we see the same failings go unaddressed no matter who the players are. And I admit I get irritated when gooners insist on relying on the same excuses every single season no mater how many times they see the same old weaknesses keep us from getting out of this rut.

       The simple basic fact is that AW has not been good enuf to build a squad with the consistent qualities to get past this rut—a good rut, if compared with most other clubs. But nonetheless a rut.

       Over the yrs we’ve had constant & consistent testimony from former players (Adams, Keown, Clichy, Cesc, I know there’ve been others) that he does not spend much time at all on studying the opposition (when he does, it’s been very noticeable & much commented on because it’s so rare). That the intensity of defensive drilling is not high at AFC. That the discipline required of players in their training at AFC is not as high as their new clubs. Gooners ridiculed Cesc for his comments about learning how to be more positionally aware and disciplined as a player at Barca, which he did not learn at AFC. But that’s indicative of AFC’s failure to coach the most critical components of Barca’s style.

       BTW, I thought it interesting in John Cross’ recent piece on the new defensive training with Bould he mentions AW working only with the forward line and Bould with the backline.

       [end part 1]
     • sandra350 on September 8, 2012 at 11:21 PM said:

       PART 2

       I’ve read all of AW’s biographies, comments from former players, all of AW’s interviews since before he came to England (including those in French). An important feature of AW’s philosophy is his belief that players “must learn by themselves” – that has always been his approach. Armand Traore once complained that he was rarely told what he did wrong or right in a game at AFC and he felt it very frustrating. RVP last season described (in a very positive interview about AW) how AW always taught him by asking him questions-that it was a process of a player learning on their own. The reason for this is AW’s emphasis on intelligent players—intelligent players, he reasons, can figure things out for themselves.

       Now of course there are great positives to AW’s approach, his record speaks for itself. But there are limitations. It doesn’t work with every player. Some players need more intense, direct guidance. And I don’t think every intelligent player can benefit from it. And it’s not the approach taken by you, Pep.

       Also, young inexperienced players need to learn alongside older, experienced veterans. That’s what young players like Anelka and others of AW’s early AFC tenure had when he was signed. One of AW’s greatest flaws in the post-Invincibles era, imo, was his belief that he could finally achieve his great dream of building a young team organically developed together all without having any experienced veterans helping to guide them. (It’s a dream he’s had since his days before Monaco). Combine that with his hands-off approach of “players learning by themselves” and the results have been what we’ve had these last 6 yrs.

       And, Pep – that was not your approach either.

       We know from former players that AW is non-confrontational. We know from player testimony that there was complete silence on the way back from Wembley among players, staff and AW on the bus after the CC final loss v. Birmingham. Not that AW never loses his temper (he used to lose his temper quite frequently with his players in France & Japan, he was known for his rages back then) but it’s very very rare.

       My basic point is that it’s all very well to try to adopt the Barca-style philosophy for defensive awareness and cohesion – but you need to adopt the entire package if you’re going to succeed, because it’s an extremely difficult philosophy to imitate. It relies on many many factors working just right.

       And one of them is ensuring that your players are rigorously trained/coached in the basics. That they don’t make the same mistakes every single season, show the same failings every season. That those failings are vigorously, comprehensively addressed. And that if certain players refuse to commit to the system, then you have to be ruthless with that player. AW is almost never ruthless with players—and when he it’s been with older veterans. Tho he did show ruthlessness with Song & is showing it with Theo-which I applaud him for.

       I’m hoping that with this new older, less callow, more experienced squad and the Bould effect these persistent failings will finally be addressed.

       Also-I never ever take seriously the common simpleminded argument “well I guess you should be coaching since you know so much better than AW.” It’s an argument that’s so utterly ridiculous and lazy. I dismiss it immediately as valid in any way. I do not respect it.

       By that logic we can’t criticize and find failings in successful businessmen, lawyers, doctors, writers, artists, athletes, musicians, etc. So we’re not supposed to find failings in Mourinho? Ferguson? It’s a nonsense argument and offers a false, strawman choice that is intended to shut everyone up and end debate: “either you believe unquestioningly in AW without fault or you don’t.” Sorry, but AW most certainly has flaws. He’s a great football manager, one of the greatest in the sport – but he has limitations. And they’re there to be discussed if you simply are willing to see consistent patterns and results that we see on the pitch year after year.
     • poznaninmypants on September 9, 2012 at 1:38 AM said:

       Oh yeah? Well you’re wrong. So piss off.
       – Signed, Pep.
     • poznaninmypants on September 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM said:

       Well, that was excellent stuff, Sandra. Still, it’s my own fault for letting that woodener, Guardiola, fight my battles for me.

       However, I would like to say that I think Wenger took a contrarian approach. The proof of its merit is that it very nearly worked.
       07/08, we were nearly there. With that defensive philosophy we were the match of any other team in the Prem until the denouement. Our defense that year was on a par with Mourinho’s Chelsea statistically (even if Avram Grant was seeing out the year) until the last run of games. Our goal difference was superior. Count up the dollar’s spent on Mourinho’s defense and midfield.
       In one or two other seasons we were in the mix but ran out out of steam.
       I also remember last season Arsene quoting on many occasions how we allowed the fewest shots on goal in the Prem. Not that that wins you anything, but it tells us a little as to his measurement system. Sadly, apparently, we let a bunch of those shots on goal in, since the defense was badly exposed by midfield.

       I find it hard to believe that if we had spent equal amounts of money to the other top 2 or 3 clubs over the last 8 years, thereby holding onto Flamini, Hleb, Fabregas and Rosicky, as an example and later Nasri and rvp, as compared to Chelsea or City who pretty much never lost a player that they didn’t wish to lose, we would have won a lot of silverware – certainly our fair share – with Wenger’s contrarian “Defense starts in midfield” and “players should use their collective intelligence/understanding” approach.
       Unfortunately, less resources meant the key players for his strategy, the most intelligent players, kept getting plundered. That is not to say his strategy wouldn’t work.
       When Wenger had the players he sought, the team was a true contender against greater resources – with this defensive philosophy.
       However, the time has come to take a more orthodox approach which will give us an interesting counterpoint.
       Regardless, I greatly enjoyed your exposition on defensive philosophies and the spirit in which it was entered into.
       Please do not reply to this. Leave me with some shred of dignity. Please…
     • Hiroonakamura on September 9, 2012 at 12:15 PM said:

       gotta agree with you sandra.

       Arsenal’s defensive frailties these last few seasons were the same no matter which players were fielded. Individually the players are good defensively, but as a unit they pretty much sucked at it big time!
       There was no cohesion, no good communication, no understanding what people should do when a teammate is out of position or has been made a dummy by the opposition.
       It was like everyone were doing their own thing, no matter what the other teammates were doing.

       It seems to me that with Bould at the helm, this has changed somewhat. The team defends more like a TEAM now and the defensive players seem to know better how to react to “weird” situations, eg when one player is out of position or when he has suddenly slipped or been made.
     • poznaninmypants on September 9, 2012 at 5:06 PM said:

       Not true. Check out our results any time we had arteta with experienced FBs and CBs.
       Then the yr b4 we had Verm out, Koz was new to EPL. Very often we played with JD and/or Squillaci.
       We need to look at the details, and the personnel missing in defense and midfield. When AW had the right personnel, it worked.
2. @AFC_Invincibles on September 9, 2012 at 5:12 AM said:

   yeah, hi Sanrda and qPip. It’s ‘Arry Redknapp wot’s writing this commqent. (whooqps – sorry ’bout them ranqdom q’s wot pop up every q now’n’ven: ive got this twiqtch, innit?) anyways. i’m not sureq what the point of q all vis discussioning about defence is… q

   only good defence q worf discussin’ is a lawqer wot can get you off in court when youse got a forren qbank account in yer dogs name.

   just q my two cents… YOuse c’n ‘ave it for a quid.

   Reply ↓
3. Hiroonakamura on September 9, 2012 at 12:08 PM said:

   Arsenal will not stop playing with a high line. Would mean the midfielders have to drop much more deep to start play and thus the linkup play with the attacking trio would not be as quick and good.

   It would of course help the defensive aspect of things, but Wenger won’t do it.

   Reply ↓
   • poznaninmypants on September 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM said:

     Our line is nowhere near as high as last year so far, imo. Im sure Bould has put his foot down on that.

     Reply ↓
4. FunGunner on September 9, 2012 at 3:57 PM said:

   Excellent – and hilarious. I agree with the basic points.

   What do you think of this idea – is there anything in the fact that that the average age of our first 11 has gone up signficantly? I was very struck by something AW said a few seasons ago after the CL qf v Liverpool – Theo gave that fantastic assist and AW said he couldn’t celebrate because he knew we were going to concede on the right hand side – that Theo was so excited he wouldn’t be concentrating on tracking back. And that was exactly what happened for their next goal. I also remember Theo himself talking about the work they were doing on defending set pieces, esp the Stoke throwins, but the results of the practice and drills were not seen on the pitch.
   Kids – they get over-excited, they don’t really take defending seriously because it’s a bit boring. etc etc. Experienced players understand that they have to do the boring stuff consistently to secure wins.

   Reply ↓
   • poznaninmypants on September 10, 2012 at 12:04 AM said:

     So, I checked it out and our avg age has gone down since the end of last yr. (Thx Yossi and Robin) But in generally versus other years i think experience has to be a big factor. Plus our defenders actually know each others’ names. It’s the attack that needs to be introduced to each other.
     But overall, yes, I think there is a lot to do with that.

     Reply ↓
     • FunGunner on September 10, 2012 at 4:01 PM said:

       The squad age has gone down but I thoought the age of the first 11 had gone up? Anyway, perhaps it’s more experienced players in crucial positions. Attempting to salvage what’s left of my point!
     • poznaninmypants on September 10, 2012 at 6:02 PM said:

       It seems a more mature team, with better balance, and lots of options esp in midfield and attack.
5. Sav from Australia on September 9, 2012 at 6:15 PM said:

   Good article and very funny as usual lol.

   I would like to wade in on the discussion about Arsene Wenger not winning trophies in the last few seasons. Tactics and players and injuries and everything else aside, I really think it was the referees that made the real difference. I thought I was mad and paranoid for years, until I came across the referee reviews on Untold Arsenal. There was the evidence for what I had seen and whilst nothing in life is certain, the fact that a pathetically ordinary Man United team does so well smells a bit funny. For Arsenal (and most clubs actually), you have to fight the other teams and referees to win the league and I think it is that referee manipulation that alters title challenges into failures.

   Arsene is a genius, and whilst no one is perfect, who can doubt that he would have had at least another two league titles in the last few years, if the playing fields were remotely even.

   Reply ↓
   • poznaninmypants on September 9, 2012 at 6:48 PM said:

     Interesting take. Alas, I think we will continue to have that problem going forward. I certainly believe there is a separate rule book for United playing at OT.
     Fergie is on record through his players as instructing them to take a dive if they get any kind of touch. And we know that’s a very slippery slope. We have seen the results of that over the years.

     Reply ↓
6. Sandra350 on September 11, 2012 at 9:07 AM said:

   I hope you won’t be too upset that I’m replying to your final reply to me here–but having just read your last word, I just had to post this: the 07-08 team was the absolute proof that AW’s project did indeed have merit-we had the best midfield in Europe, we were better than the eventual league winners, Man Utd–no question. But the very fact that brilliant team won nothing proved my overall points and our subsequent results have merely reinforced them. AW can put together an excellent first XI – but the rest of the squad is not good enuf to carry the project thru when we need them due to inevitable injuries/exhaustion. More importantly, even the first XI are not imbued with the mental strength, character, reliability to win trophies. The training/coaching/back-up signings simply have not offered the reliability that trophy winning teams have on their bench. Our best first XI when they’ve been on offer have not been able to win anything–not even against Birmingham in a cup final. You use the same argument I hear all the time: we’ve been close, we should’ve won the league in 08, etc., etc. Yes, exactly. That’s the entire point. AW did enuf to get us close-in 2 seasons in the last 5. We were not close in the other seasons. And that’s all he was able to do. *Consistently.* He consistently has been unable to do more other than “get close.” You don’t seem to grasp AW’s own persistent use of word “consistency” as the most important feature of the basic nature of a team. Consistency reveals a pattern. And when the same consistent results appear every season regardless of personnel, then any empirical scientist will tell you the reasons go much deeper than just playing staff. Any empirical scientist will tell you not to focus on superficial matters to explain something that goes much deeper. To get us a trophy he had to do more, which he’s consistently been unable or unwilling to do.

   Reply ↓
7. poznaninmypants on September 11, 2012 at 9:26 AM said:

   Funny how the same facts prove 2 different “truths “to 2 different viewpoints
   Well, we agree on 1 thing. The first XI of the 07-08 team were better than the eventual winners. That team used the same defensive philosophy we are debating. QED. It can work.
   Where the team failed was not its defense. you say mental toughness and squad strength.
   Now, we could have a long argument on mental toughness or squad strength beyond the first XI, but that will be another blog as I want to stay on topic.

   Reply ↓
8. FunGunner on September 12, 2012 at 6:19 AM said:

   @ Sandra350
   You are ignoring other variables – the influence of the officials, but most importantly finances. If you can put together a quality first 11, logically, why wouldn’t you be able to put together a quality squad? The only thing stopping you putting together a quality squad is money. As playing staff get exponentially more expensive, and our budget reduces in relation to that of the mega-rich clubs, it has seemed to me that such funds as have been available have been concentrated on the first XI.

   We have never been beaten to the league title by a club with a worse squad or which has not outspent us massively. It may be that they lacked the experience or mental toughness to dig in and finish the job, but AW’s squads have consistently finished in the top four. If the manager plus two sets of players win titles and finish in the top three or four and subsequently, the manager plus another 1.5-2 different squads finish in the top three or four but fail to win titles, I think any empirical scientist would think the relative failure could be due to the different set of players.

   Reply ↓
9. FunGunner on September 12, 2012 at 6:22 AM said:

   Please keep the posts coming, by the way.

   Reply ↓
   • poznaninmypants on September 14, 2012 at 11:59 AM said:

     Will do. There’s a couple on the way.

     Reply ↓
10. Anonymous on September 26, 2012 at 1:42 PM said:

    You are just a legendary blogger !! Keep going 🙂 Enjoying every bit of your every post 😀

    Reply ↓
11. Jalene on November 26, 2012 at 5:08 PM said:

    Your posting is asbolutely on the point!

    Reply ↓