Back From The Dead On Deadline Day. Arsenal Season Preview.

Blogger: #14

It was a little over a year ago that four idiots, united by their love of football, decided to start a blog. What ensued was a shitstorm that their friends still shudder about. The friends of our four heroes had to face a deluge of spam messages asking them to read, like, share articles that were of a quality not dissimilar to Marouane Chamakh's hair. Yes, that bad. After a bit of a lull, you know, what with the World Cup and college ending and whatnot, the Four Man Wall is back! I can imagine my social media acquaintances squirming in their seats when they read this, but a great man once said, "Haters gonna hate", so we shall plod along, ignoring your catcalls and jeers.

Spikes and male pattern baldness. A match made in Morocco.

Life has a way of uprooting everything around you and yet, give you this feeling that nothing has changed. #7, our silent tech-guy, and #25, our not-so-silent tech-guy, have moved to Canada and the U.S. respectively to study cool tech stuff and whatnot. #18 and myself have shifted cities, new job and all that. So, in short, we've gone international. A lot can happen in a year eh?

But, as it invariably does, a new season has dawned upon us. That glorious constant that changes every single time. We're a couple of weeks into the new season; the transfer deadline day is upon us, so previewing one of the clubs may seem a tad late, but that's what I'm going to do. So, ladies (hehe) and gentlemen, here cometh the pain: The Arsenal 2014-15 Season Preview.

I must admit, I feel a little awkward not having to mention the trophy drought. Now that that monkey is off our backs, hopefully we can kick on and have a real go at major honours (read Premier League and Champions League) this season.

The transfer window started off with us turning down the chance to re-sign one Francesc Fabregas. A decision that rankled with me not because I was still hung up over him (I wasn't), but because I didn't think we'd have a plan in place. Yes, we signed Mesut Ozil last season, but that was a shambles of a transfer window, and turning down one of the best playmakers in the world seemed a little stupid (especially in light of us playing Ozil on the left. What is up with that?!). However, we bought, and how. We started off with signing shorts-hating Alexis Sanchez from our youth feeder club Barcelona, and then bringing in Frenchman Mathieu Debuchy from Premiere Ligue side Newcastle United. This was followed by the signings of Colombian 'keeper David Ospina from Nice and Calum Chambers from the Great Southampton Fire Sale. How about that, Arsenal doing transfer business nice and early, which really does make me not regret passing up Cesc....yet.

As is often the case, the additions meant the departures of some players. Lukasz Fabianski and Bacary Sagna left for free. Vermaelen moved to Barcelona, Jenkinson went on loan to West Ham and Nicklas Bendtner signed for Wolfsburg. But, I think, overall, we've ended up on the positive side of the ledger. The squad is pretty strong, but I think we'll fall short and finish 3rd. Chelsea and Manchester City have outstanding squads, and ours, though not shabby, doesn't quite match up. We've got two really good keepers in Szczesny and Ospina. Last season, I wanted a goalkeeper because I had m reservations about Szczesny, but he had a very good season, and I've no qualms about our number one. At left back, Nacho Monreal and Kieran Gibbs are quality. Debuchy has, surprisingly for me, filled in Sagna's boots quite well early on this season. Calum Chambers has been absolutely fantastic, and the guy is just 19. Makes you feel a little worthless eh? No? Right, just me then.

It's at centre-back where we have a massive shortage. Laurent Koscielny and Per Mertesacker are a great pairing, but Chambers aside, there's nobody else who can play there. We've got one day to get a centre-back in, or else, we're playing with fire. A bloody big fire. Right next to an oil tanker. Our midfield, on the other hand, is chock full. We've got two players for every position and I'm not even counting Diaby. Out wide, we've got the numbers, but Walcott and Oxlade-Chamberlain aside, I don't think we've got real quality. Our striking department doesn't really strike fear into the hearts of opposition defences either (geddit?). With Giroud out for the rest of the year, there will be a clamour for us to buy a new striker, but Wenger has indicated that Alexis was bought to play as a striker, so there's that. A proper beast of a defensive midfielder would do nicely, but that would almost certainly mean curtains for Flamini.

So, we're going into the final day of the window desperately needing a centre-back and ideally, also adding a DM. Knowing Wenger, he'll buy a bloke who can play both positions. Or a bloke who can play neither and force him to play both positions. Square pegs and round holes. Or rather, the other way round. Or not, I don't really know. Any buying will mean selling, considering the numbers we've got:
Szczesny (HG)
Ospina
Monreal
Gibbs (HG)
Mertesacker
Koscielny
Debuchy
Arteta
Flamini
Wilshere (HG)
Ramsey (HG)
Diaby
Rosicky
Coquelin
Cazorla
Ozil
Walcott (HG)
Podolski
Campbell
Sanchez
Giroud

That's 16 foreign players, and this is off the top of my head. Sanogo, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Martinez and Chambers are all U21, so I haven't added them. It's a strong squad, and with a couple of good additions, I think we could just go all the way. Just.

That is if this new formation works. I don't know why we're playing Mesut Ozil on the left. The idea that most Gooners, myself included, harboured was that Ozil would be racking up the assists from the middle of the park feeding the speed-demons Sanchez and Walcott. Doesn't look like happening in this formation right now. We've looked unspectacular in our games so far, but that's largely down to a lack of match fitness. So, barring any new additions, I'm predicting a 3rd place finish in the Premier League and a quarterfinal exit in the Champions League.

Right, so, we're back. Not really with a bang, we know. We lack match fitness too. But hey, we were as rubbish as we usually are. Let's hope Arsenal have a nice surprise for us come May.

Don't want us back? Want someone less shitty to write? Drop in a comment.
Thanking You,
Sincerely,
#14

P.S. Manchester United have hired a thumb as their new manager. What in God's name.

Thumbs up if you see the resemblance

P.P.S. Don't take offence United fans, it's all thumbtongue-in-cheek.

9th Time Lucky: Arsenal End Trophy Drought

Blogger: #14

As someone whose first ever Arsenal game was an F.A. Cup Final (2005 vs Manchester United), the 17th of May, 2014 had a sense of occasion to it that earlier trophy challenges didn't have. In short, if one wanted to make a crappy movie about the trophy drought, one would choose the drought to be ended the way it started: with an F.A. Cup. In hindsight, that wasn't in short, was it?

Jokes aside, what a fantastic day it was. Yours truly hasn't ever won a trophy as a fan, and this was every bit as sweet as I had imagined it to be. I'll be honest, the F.A. Cup was never really high on my priority list, but boy, did 'the romance of the cup' sweep me off my feet, buy me a fancy gown and expensive jewellery, and then take me out to that fancy bistro I've been meaning to go. I know, I said jokes aside, I'm sorry. This truly was a liberating moment. It was a victory that brought a sense of completion to the myriad of emotions this wonderful football club evokes in me. I've felt anguish, heartbreak, fleeting moments of joy, disbelief, hope, expectation, excitement, anxiety, exasperation in one combination or the other over the past 9 years. But with this trophy, I can finally experience peace; that warm glow of satisfaction when you see a 'PASS' in your report card.

What was truly remarkable about that victory was that it wasn't an Arsenal that was different from the Arsenal of the previous 9 years that turned up, it was the same old Arsenal. Those 120 minutes encapsulated 9 years of Arsenal: the woeful defending, the indomitable spirit to shoot ourselves in the foot before pulling a rabbit out of the hat when there is no hat to be seen - let alone a rabbit, the atypical scruffy goal, the silky interplay with no end product, the silky interplay with some serious end product, the relief when we finally take control, the almost instantaneous wiping out of said relief by an almighty defensive screw-up. Yet, we pulled through. And somehow, pulling through in this manner makes it seem all the more significant. An assured Arsenal, a calm, surgical one, ending the trophy drought would have felt a little out of place. No Sir, we wanted the Arsenal that we've loved and despaired over to end it. And end it they did.

The implications are immense. We've finally put a full stop to the stadium move chapter and have started a new chapter. A chapter of belief, firepower and ability. Many people attribute City's ascension to the Premier League summit to their F.A. Cup victory the previous season. There's absolutely no reason why the F.A. Cup can't do the same for us. You could see that a weight had been lifted off the players' shoulders. The celebrations were incredible and I shall most certainly tell my grandchildren about how Lukas Podolski poured champagne all over Arsene Wenger. Assuming I have grandchildren.

The parade was a party after the party, an afterpartyparty if you will. I know I'm just rambling on making this a bit of a shit report instead of a shit celebratory post but hey, my team just won the F.A. Cup. The players seem to be a bunch of incredibly nice guys and you can't help but love people like Arteta, Ramsey, Rosicky, Mertesacker, Koscielny, Diaby, Szczesny, Gibbs, Walcott, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Gibbs, Podolski, Sagna,... them. Speaking of Sagna, I sincerely hope his teammates and a bunch of fans asking him to stay is enough to convince him. Because who needs wage demands to be met?

I kid, I kid. It'd be brilliant if he signed on. Top quality right back who can double up as a top centre back. The contract's on the table. Fabianski signing on would be great too, but that would be really stretching things. Kallstrom will be leaving, and Vermaelen could too. But there are two men who require special mention.
Arsene Wenger has faced a lot of stick, he's made a few mistakes, and as long as he's around I shall always hate transfer windows, but he absolutely deserves to and should stay on as Arsenal manager. His contribution to this football club is immeasurable and the man truly deserves a fair crack at the job with fewer restrictions. Next season, with a few signings, this team could seriously contend for the league (some might say it already did this season) and maybe even the Champions League.

But wait, what was the 2nd departure I wanted to address, you ask? Well, it is the departure of Emiliano Viviano, who shall go down in history for enjoying the greatest gap year of all time. Seriously, the guy took one year off to sit on his arse and look a little like Almunia and not only was he paid for it, he also got a winner's medal. Legend. Arsenal have been privileged to watch this unfold. Oooh to be a Gooner!

Think you know of a better gap year? Drop in a comment.
Thanking You,
Yours sincerely,
#14

Bus breakdown at The Bridge : A Tactical Review

Blogger #18:

In the face of scathing criticism from various sections of the media, players and fans after a series of performances from Chelsea that has been dubbed ‘ugly football’ (#14 found that quite distasteful), you might have been forgiven for thinking Jose Mourinho might go for a drastic change of approach from the first leg of this tie, which, to be honest, was quite dull. But this isn’t a guy known to give into conformity (or agree with Jamie Redknapp,for that matter) and Jose put out what was probably his most defensive line up of the season, with 6 defenders in the side (Luiz and Azpilicueta in midfield positions).

Atletico Madrid have had the season of their lives and a win at Lisbon this month, forty years since their last final, against Real Madrid coupled with a league title would serve to show the incredible character of this side, moulded in their manager’s image. They aren’t the most attractive side to watch, but they defend with their lives and are clinical at taking their chances. Simeone aptly chose to discuss the character shown by his players when he said "I would like to congratulate the mothers of these players because they have big cojones."

Line Ups and shape:

With Cech still out, Schwarzer played in goal for Chelsea, while Adrian surprisingly replaced Raul Garcia upfront for Atletico. Atletico played in their customary ‘out-dated’ 4-4-2, and Chelsea’s shape seemed to be a 4-3-3, a Jose Mourinho favourite, with Willian dropping very deep to find space and Azpilicueta playing a role akin to that of a defensive winger.

Chelsea Approach:

Chelsea were content to sit deep and stifle space in midfield. This was quite similar to the first leg, where both teams cancelled each other out. Costa once again had little impact on the game. With little space to run into, he was often forced to compete with Terry and Cahill in aerial duels and was often crowded out. Unable to counter attack and run into space behind the defence, this certainly wasn’t a performance that should be used as an example to show why Chelsea are so desperate to buy him in the summer.

Lacking a proper playmaker in the deep center midfield roles, Chelsea were content to concentrate their build up through the wings. Ramires and Luiz were mostly content with simple passes to the wings, although Luiz did indulge in the occasional cross-field ball to switch play.

Atletico seemed content to deal with this method of attack and Chelsea rarely created good openings from the wide areas. Ashley Cole seemed to have been instructed to stay back and hence with no overlaps to worry about, Turan and Juanfran easily dealt with Hazard on the majority of occasions by double-teaming on him. On a few occasions when Chelsea did get in good crosses into the box, Torres’ positioning was poor. A rare good run from him saw him score the opener. Azpilicueta, primarily in that position to track the runs of Filipe Luis, provided the assist.

 

Chelsea also relied on set-pieces to create attacking openings, and had it not been for a couple of very good saves from Courtois, Chelsea could have seen this approach pay off.

Eden Hazard:

In hindsight, Chelsea could have done with a player similar to Azpilicueta on the opposite flank. The first leg of this tie saw Chelsea line up with Ramires, a defensive midfielder, and Willian, a player noted for his hard work off the ball, on the wings. While they rarely created good openings with that approach, they quite easily dealt with Atletico’s wingers and wingbacks. Mourinho could have also played Hazard in a central role and Willian on the left flank. As it turned out, the decision to play Hazard on the left cost Chelsea their place in the competition. Juanfran, left free by Hazard, twice made late runs into the box which led to Atletico’s first and third goals.

The first and third goals had strikingly similar build-ups

It brings up the debate of the role that such attacking players can have in such a defensive system.  Hazard was burdened with almost all of Chelsea’s attacking responsibilities, a role he wasn’t pleased with. He was often left frustrated due to a lack of support around him and excellent defensive play from Atletico.

Chelsea changes:

To everyone’s surprise (especially Gary Neville), Mourinho made changes as soon as the 54^th minute. Eto’o came on and Chelsea switched to two upfront. While this gave them more men in the box, it allowed Atletico the freedom of the midfield. It was easier for them to keep possession which they did admirably in Chelsea’s own half. This was admirable, as any other team would have been content to sit deep in their own boxes, looking to play on the break. Tiago had a great game, popping up everywhere to receive the ball and keeping it moving. 

Tiago was everywhere

Final Thoughts:

Chelsea weren’t exactly outclassed by Atletico over the two legs. They are two very similar teams, based on counterattacking and cancelled each other for the most part of the two legs. With a bit of luck and some vigilant defensive work from Hazard, Chelsea could’ve been the team facing up against Real Madrid later this month.

Mourinho clearly wasn’t pleased with Hazard and the comments made by the Belgian after the game. While he does go on to criticise Hazard for the first goal, he also showed an understandable reluctance to make Hazard, arguably Chelsea’s best player, change his game. It will be interesting to see if Mourinho goes on to jettison Hazard from the club, as was the case with Mata.

For Atletico, the incredible work done by Simeone has shined through. They have excelled in more than one competition with such a small set of players and without spending big. Should it happen, it will be the greatest European triumph since Mourinho’s Porto won it in 2004.

Winning Ugly.

Blogger: #14

"If you want entertainment, go and watch a bunch of clowns"- Alan Durban, former Stoke City manager.

I can imagine how this must be for you. I do apologize profusely and all that. When one's local football blog, the one run by the bright fellows living down the street, takes an unannounced hiatus, one fidgets. One scours the web, hoping for some signs of life. Much like misplacing that thriller you've been reading, eh? You search, you search, and finally you throw your arms up in the air in resignation and get yourself another whodunit from the library. You struggle to tear yourself away from the old plot and immerse yourself into this new mystery. But by and by, you manage. And just when you forgot all about the discovery of Count Bradley's corpse in the lake and worked yourself up about the missing diamond necklace of Lady Agincourt, you find the old humdinger underneath your pillow. Can't be pleasant that. Our latest resurrection would undoubtedly reignite your interest in the Count's corpse and with a heavy heart you wave Agincourt, in this case, The Guardian, or The Daily Mail, goodbye.

So, what brings us back to life, you ask? Well, like the leopard that stalks its customary morning antelope, we've been waiting for something that would spark us into action, you know? The lowering of the guard, so to speak, enabling the leopard that is this fine football blog to pounce upon the unfortunate antelope. The antelope in this case being the debate that Chelsea's dogged 2-0 victory against Liverpool at Anfield has sparked about the beauty of the game.

Now, long story short, Chelsea came to Liverpool's den, defended for their lives, took their chances when they presented themselves, and then went back to defending for their lives. All very smash and grab stuff. Raiding that would make a certain Attila doff his hat at the Dark Lord of Defense that is Jose Mourinho. However, there's been a general outrage about the manner of victory. The consensus of this outraged section being Chelsea ought to have been more enterprising. That they were "negative" and "boring". Which really is an interesting debate that polarizes most fans. Does style matter? Is merely winning not enough? It's a philosophical debate that nobody can ever really put an end to, so yours truly is here to give you his take on things. Yes, it took me 3 paragraphs to get to this, deal with it.

Now, as an Arsenal fan, I have never really had to complain about entertainment. In fact, I've often wished for dour, comfortable 2-0 victories. If Arsenal were to change to a more pragmatic style, you wouldn't find me complaining. No Sir, whatever works. Winning with style is great, but if I had to choose one of the two, give me winning all day. Keep your style, thank you very much. A season's worth of grinding out 1-0s is fine by me if it fetches us the league.

Well, that's my two cents. "But what about delighting the spectators? What about entertaining the fans?", cry out the purists. This is where, my romantic friends, I differ from you. Sport, for me, is not entertainment. Sport is art. When my team grinds out a 1-0, or blows away the opposition 6-0, the base emotion is the same, I am happy. "But art is beautiful!", shouts one purist. Of course it is. But art is also subtle. Pain is art. Struggle is art. Repulsion is art. Entertainment is but a shallow feeling. One that seldom permeates to the heart of a supporter. The fans who watch it for entertainment do lose out on the bigger picture. And losing out on the bigger picture often deprives you of the better story.

I can see a few purists scratch their heads. Allow me to explain using music as an example. What sort of music sells? The Justin Biebers of this world sell. The Rihannas sell. I don't mean to undermine their appeal, but this sort of music is easy to interpret, easy to understand, and thus, easy to listen to. There aren't too many layers to the thing. It's more entertainment than art. But take a truly complex piece of music. An Iron Maiden song, or a Beethoven symphony. It won't get people onto the dance floor, but when you listen, actually listen, it speaks to your soul. It stirs a story within you. A story you never knew you could tell. A story you never suspected of knowing. But it takes effort to appreciate this. It takes time. Because, Beethoven is not entertainment. Beethoven is art.

"So is beautiful football!", cries one purist triumphantly.

So it is. Undoubtedly. And so is dour, defensive football. Don't follow? Let's look at a much maligned genre of music. Death metal, with it's growling and incredibly heavy sound, is often dismissed as trash. But when one actually looks at how much complexity is involved, and takes the effort to actually listen, there is a sense of appreciation, if not enjoyment for the art form. It is art. It has layers, complexity, it evokes a reaction, it demands effort from the listener. It is everything that Beethoven is, and yet, it is everything that it isn't. It isn't about the nobler emotions, it's about the wilder side of things. But yet, it is art, no?

I see a few eyebrows being raised. "What is this idiot saying?", mutters one. "I don't know, but he seems to be quite sure about himself", says another. "Why is he writing about our reactions, when he knows nobody will read this garbage?", asks a third, a most intuitive fellow. True though that undoubtedly is, I shall plod along nevertheless clinging onto slivers of hope that have not yet been crushed. So, what am I saying?

I'm saying that if one can win with a bit of oomph then well done. Fair play to you. But if one wins with a zzzz more than anything else, well done again. As long as the team's playing within the rules, I don't think it ought to be chastised. Take Barcelona for example. All they do is pass, pass, pass, pass, pass and then pass some more. It bores me frankly, but hey, somehow it's hailed as beautiful football. It won them everything, so I'm not arguing against its effectiveness. I just fail to see how defend, defend, defend which, if you notice, has the same monotonous feel to it as Barcelona's tiki-taka is condemned to the gallows.

It is art. "What, it is ART?!", screams yet another purist. I try shushing him, but he does not relent, "Explain, my good sir! Explain!" he says. And so I shall. With support from a very unlikely corner. The purist is uneasy. "Well..?", is all he can muster.
Well, one of the greatest champions of the "Winning with style" school made a statement that I surprisingly find to be in favour of my argument.

“I believe the target of anything in life should be to do it so well that it becomes an art. When you read some books they are fantastic, the writer touches something in you that you know you would not have brought out of yourself. He makes you discover something interesting in your life. If you are living like an animal, what is the point of living? What makes daily life interesting is that we try to transform it to something that is close to art.”- Arsene Wenger

Chelsea defended so well that it became art. They stopped an absolutely rampaging Liverpool attack which was pillaging all comers. It was a nullification, a defanging, a declawing. It worked. Their doggedness was a triumph of substance over style. A triumph of the steady, dependable guy who holds the umbrella for the girl over the swashbuckling charmer who takes her dancing in the rain. A triumph of the kid who slogged all year for the finals over the genius who slacked off all year (not saying Liverpool didn't try, think of the analogy in terms of style and substance, thanks). Struggle is an art. The next time you gasp at a beautiful field of flowers, remember that it all started with the digging of some pretty ugly furrows.

History remembers the victors. Sure, there are notable exceptions. The Dutch team of the 1970s, the Brazil of the 80s come to mind. For good reason too. But to dismiss success because it failed to take one's breath away is a tad ridiculous. Branding it "negative" is something that one fails to understand. If the target is being achieved, one really can't complain can they? Or call it negative.

In years to come, if there is a team that sweeps all before it while playing an enterprising brand of football that takes the breath away, people will undoubtedly toast it. But, if this all-conquering team wins its battles by digging in, by organizing itself, by being defensive (and not negative), I hope people realize that what they're witnessing is art in itself. Don't bring the pitchforks out, because Durban had a point. Go watch clowns if you want entertainment. Or 'Modern Family', that's a pretty good show. 

Don't agree with me? Agree with me but don't want to agree with me because I'm really annoying? Let us know which side of the fence you're on in this philosophical battle, drop in a comment.

Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

#14

Arsenal. A Rallying Call. Sort Of.

Blogger: #14

At the very core of a football supporter, there is but one emotion: hope. Hope drives the season ticket holder at Coventry to renew for another season. Hope drives the average Indian supporter to stay up till 3 am to watch his team get steamrolled. To a casual observer, the answer is simple. Why not pick the team that's winning? Why not just switch? Toward that casual observer I direct a glare that burns and freezes all at once, and I ask why not disown your father for a richer benefactor? A football club is a place where you feel you belong. Maybe not with your fellow fans. But when your team loses, you lose. When they win, you win. It is one of the finest examples of a human's ability to give without expecting anything in return. For years, Arsenal has been the master of my mood. How well they do, nay, we do, affects my outlook on life. It may seem hard to believe, but I identify myself more as an Arsenal fan than as an Indian, or as a left handed dude who likes death metal, or as a really bad writer.
Season after season, we all come back hoping things will be better. You lose hope, you lose your club.

Of course, logic tempers expectations. Sure, no Saints fan thought they'd win the league or finish in the top 4 when they were on the crest of a wave of fine form early on in the season, but surely, there was just a tiny murmur of what if, wasn't there? When Arsenal got turned over 4-0 by Milan, I stayed up for the second leg. I knew we wouldn't overturn the deficit, I didn't EXPECT to qualify, but I sure did hope so. There's a line, and that line has been giving me the red carpet treatment all season, whispering in a husky, silvery voice to cross it. What line you ask? The line between hope and expectation, what did you think?

This season, for the first time since 2009-10 personally speaking, has Arsenal flirted with that line. I never gave up hope. No, Sir. Even after the 8-2 hiding, I harboured hopes of a stirring comeback to win the title. Did I expect us to? That's where, I'm afraid, I must shake my head. All season long, I have been playing down expectations, wary of the heartbreaks that I've endured. Wary, that there will be heartbreaks to come. But this team is different, you know? They know how to fight. There's steel. There's doggedness. This isn't a silky Arsenal that makes me swoon and sweeps me off my feet only to leave me stranded after a wild night that seems like a distant dream. This is a steady, functional Arsenal that leaves me with a glowing satisfied feeling whose face I know I'll see when I wake up in the morning. Yes, I chose to use that analogy fully knowing what it sounds like, sue me. But I held firm, telling myself it wasn't to last. That we'd crumble, like we always did. I thought so after the Villa game, we went on a ten match winning run. When United beat us, we rose up again. When City huffed and puffed and blew our house down, we responded with 20 points from a possible 24. Despite myself, hope was beginning to crystallize into expectation. I told myself fatigue would set in. That we'd lose our legs. That injuries would take their toll. I didn't want it to, but hey, you can't knock logic.

And then, Liverpool happened. Now, every defeat had some positives up to this point. United was a tight affair, the City game was marred by poor officiating, and I felt we did turn up. But at Anfield, we took the cannon and pointed it footwards. Five times. Those tiny crystals of expectation were killed in the womb, so to speak. Ozil, Giroud, Cazorla, had they not come up with the answers every single time by hook or by crook? Sagna, Mertesacker, Koscielny, hadn't they stymied most attacks that faced them? Had both failed, didn't Szczesny ensure we remained in the hunt? This wasn't the Arsenal I knew. Yet, it was the Arsenal I knew. The old Arsenal, that defended like a bunch of headless chickens. That played into the hands of the opposition. That looked like falling down made it scared of getting up again.

At this point, I must apologize for what seems like a pointless ramble. It was my intention to evaluate our chances post the Liverpool and United games. I intended it to be an objective analysis, however, I feel it would be better to do my feelings justice. After all, it is through this game, that most people like me experience emotions nobler than hunger or thirst or the relief one gets after, well, relieving oneself. The United game is one I always watch in a haze. An almost obsessive desire to defeat Robin van Persie clouds any rational thought that comes my way. Yet, this time, I wasn't expecting or hoping for a win. A point would be good, I felt, though I knew we could beat this United side. There was rebuilding to be done. The battle had to be compromised to salvage the war. And compromise we did. Never being too adventurous, never leaving ourselves too open. Sure, that can be looked upon as negativity, but that feeling was something else wasn't it? The feeling that bigger things needed to be looked after than a solitary game. That's something I haven't felt in a while. The question now is, have we done enough to salvage the war? We are, after all, only a point behind the leaders. But I look back, and I see Liverpool a mere 3 points off us, and with a heavy heart I must admit, I think it is more likely we'll be lugged into a top 4 dogfight. The squad is thin, we haven't strengthened when we could, and I fear this is as far as our title challenge goes. Yet, that feeling remains from the United game, like the aftertaste in your mouth when you use too much toothpaste. That the United game was a necessity. That beating them at their weakest wasn't quite as important as the task at hand. Logic dismisses my feeling though. Logic tells me to see us slip into a top 4 struggle. Logic tells me to look to next season.

But, it is a wondrous ability of humans to abandon logic as and when they choose. There comes a point, when as a fan, you just throw statistics out of the window, along with rationale and whatnot, and just back your team to the hilt. The United game turned out to be that point for me. They've been proving me wrong all season, they can prove me wrong again, right? Right?

It is an uphill task. It is unlikely, to the point of being fanciful. In all likelihood, come May, I will be reading about our ninth successive season without a trophy. But, hey, what can you do, eh? After all, if I don't back us, who will?

Arsenal haven't convinced a lot of people quite yet. But what I've not realized up to this point is that they don't need to. We've played up to this point without crystallizing hope into expectation. The odds are stacked against us and hope isn't going to be enough. But tell you what, when transformed, it gives you a fighting chance. Transformed into what, you ask? Belief. This team, and its fans need to believe. We've hit a blip, we've got to respond. And we're not going to be doing that without believing we can.

Cynical about it? Well, a wise man once said, "If you do not believe you can do it, you have no chance at all."

Arsenal fans would do well to remember who that wise man is.

Think you know who it is? Why don't you tell us in a comment? No negative points for guesses either. It's free guys, give it a shot.
Thanking you,
Yours sincerely,
#14

Man City v. Chelsea - The Review

Blogger #18

11 straight home wins, a 20 match unbeaten run, and a scoring at home run of 61 games. Chelsea’s win at the Etihad on Monday night brought an end to a number of City’s streaks. But despite thrashing teams week after week at the Etihad, the two times they’ve lost there this season (against Bayern and Chelsea), they have looked shorn of creativity as both teams exploited the flaws of City’s 4-4-2 system.

Mourinho seems to have adopted a ‘don’t lose’ policy against the big teams away from home. Games at both Old Trafford and The Emirates finished 0-0 and all signs seemed to point to a similar approach. Perhaps that was his greatest trick, convincing the media, fans and maybe even the managers that he had just the one game plan. All the talk before the game was about parking the bus. When questioned about it before the match, he responded by saying “Parking the bus [in front ofgoal] has no relation with the players the manager chooses, but how the team plays. You can play with six, seven, eight defensive players and be an attacking team."

How true it turned out to be.

Line Ups and Shape:

The Line-Ups

City lined up in their customary 4-4-2 (or 4-2-2-2). Fernandinho and Aguero’s absence meant that Pellegrini went with Demichelis in midfield, with Dzeko and Negredo upfront. In the return leg this season, Pellegrini went for three in the middle with the midfield battle in mind, and was unlucky to lose that game. It made sense to go for a similar approach here, but City’s brilliant run at home (over 4 goals a game) seems to have convinced him to leave their shape untouched. But Aguero’s absence lead to the side having a predictable feel, with Dzeko and Negredo quite similar in their approach to donning the center forward role.

Initial impressions of Chelsea’s starting line-up seemed to suggest a 4-3-3 with a midfield trio of Matic, Luiz, and Ramires. But as the match played out, Chelsea looked more like a 4-2-3-1, a formation Mourinho has come to favour and love since his initial departure from the Premier League. Willian played behind Eto’o as Ramires played a central midfielder/winger role on the right, with Matic and Luiz patrolling midfield. It is also entirely possible that Mourinho changed his plans at the last minute after seeing Demichelis in the City line up, wanting to make the most out of a player in an uncomfortable position.  

David Silva and the free flank:

City get away with playing a 4-4-2 largely due to the way Silva (or Nasri) drift in field to dictate play, essentially becoming the third man in midfield. A winger drifting in played a major part when they thrashed Manchester United. This also allows Kolarov (or Clichy) acres of space to run into on the overlap.

Having recognized this, Mourinho seemed to have instructed Luiz to sit on Silva. Luiz was quite good in his role, and Silva failed to dictate play to the extent he usually does. While Kolarov did have a chance or two to put in dangerous crosses, the opportunities were few and far between. Looking to escape from Luiz’s shadowing, Silva seemed to consciously drift towards the right flank towards the end of the first half and for the entirety of the second. Being City’s playmaker, this also reduced City’s threat down the left and much of their build up in the second half was through their right flank. It was an interesting shift in shape that seemed to slightly unsettle Chelsea. With Hazard stationed high up for the counter attack, it was Matic who often helped out Azpilicueta with the defensive duties on that flank. With Silva drifting, and Zabeleta overlapping Navas, City easily created numerous 3v2 situations, which they failed to make the most of. Azpilicueta had a good game, matching Navas for pace, and Matic showed that not everyone requires time to ‘get accustomed to the Premier League’. He was splendid in his reading of the game and was comfortable on the ball, passing it around sensibly.

Silva's zones - 1st half v. 2nd half

City's passing in 2nd half concentrated down the right.

With Silva drifting in, and Ramires slightly tucked in, that entire flank was left to the two wing-backs, Kolarov and Ivanovic. Ivanovic was very brave with his positioning, and was often found challenging for Chelsea goal kicks against Kolarov way beyond the half line. Exploiting this situation was clearly instructed into Ramires as he often advanced into the vacant space behind Kolarov pulling Nastastic wide. Chelsea made the most of Silva’s free role and while it might have not been in their plans to score the way they did, it was an indicator of Chelsea’s plans.

Chelsea’s individuals and City’s midfield:

Despite their free scoring run, City’s soft center has been exposed on occasions. Liverpool were unlucky to lose against them, and Bayern by and large thrashed them. Demichelis in midfield compounded City’s problems. Despite staying back for most of the game, he lacked the positional sense of a proper DM and often rushed into tackles when staying on his feet and covering space would’ve been a better option. He was also a liability on the ball, often slowing down play and losing possession at times in crucial zones. A more solid and dependable DM would’ve helped City’s cause (even if Les Ferdinand doesn’t agree).

Much has been made of Mourinho’s tactical master class in this win, but so much of it depended on the individual brilliance of Hazard and Willian. Hazard was in a class of his own, skipping past tackles with ease, and dragging the City defence out of shape. Hazard and Willian’s movements were co-related as each exploited the space created by the other. The City back four often had to deal with Chelsea’s front four on their own, and were exposed numerous times. While he does make a huge difference in the attacking third, you have to question Yaya Toure’s defensive awareness (Probably why Hamann called him a liability).

Hazard attempting more take-ons than the entire City side (Chelsea attempted 37)

Eto’o worked hard to keep the City center backs occupied and while he certainly wasn’t their best player, it was a hardworking performance, much similar to what he did under Mourinho at Inter. The City defenders also showed a surprising inability to defend high up the pitch against Chelsea’s fast transitions from defence to attack.

Pellegrini made just the one change, Jovetic on for Negredo, and it was a generally good move. Jovetic positioned himself behind Dzeko, drifting into pockets of space. His lack of fitness led to a poor touch or two, but his presence caused some disturbance in the Chelsea midfielders. With two nimble footed players, Silva and Jovetic, trying to find space between the lines, it brought some unpredictability to the City attack.  

Final Thoughts:

City’s midfield weakness was exploited very well by Chelsea, who were comfortable to sit in numbers behind the ball. The Chelsea defenders rarely had to face a City attacker 1v1. Both Terry and Cahill were splendid, mainly because they were never dragged out of their comfort zones.

High pressing, pro-active possession football has often been declared the way to play in recent times, but this Chelsea performance (and Bayern against Barcelona) shows us that there’s nothing wrong in playing defensive, counter-attacking football, despite what Mourinho said about the same last week.

Pellegrini will learn from this, and it’s tough to see him play with a 2 man midfield against Barcelona. As for the rest of the season, City can afford to drop points against the likes of Chelsea, as long as they continue to blow away the smaller teams. Chelsea have now faced both Manchester clubs home and away and come away with 10 points from 12. It’s a remarkable record, and shows Mourinho’s capability to get results from the big games.