Whenever the question is asked as to a striker Arsenal should sign, the name Ivan Toney is always mentioned.
The Brentford striker has never overly interested me, even before his gambling ban.
In recent years, Mikel Arteta and Edu have done well to get rid of what they felt were players with problematic characteristics.
These were players that partied too much, players who were a bit to active on social media, and players who felt they were bigger than the club. Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang and Mesut Ozil were not the only two former-Arsenal players to fall into this category.
We now have a group of players who, during the off-season, are not filmed in Ibiza, Marbella or Dubai drinking copious amounts of alcohol and chatting to any pretty girl that is looking to become a WAG.
Just last year during the mid-season break, Toney was videoed launching expletives at his club. It came across as an immature lad trying to impress a girl by showing that he does not care for his club.
I am not sure if Toney, and his obvious ego, would fit in well with the current crop of players.
There is, however, another man at Brentford who might better suit The Arsenal – Toney’s replacement during his ban Bryan Mbeumo.
Still only 24, Mbeumo has been in impressive form this season for the Bees, with 4 goals from his 6 games.
Mbeumo is a different sort of forward to Toney.
Whilst Toney is a bit more of a target man and someone who comes alive in the box, Mbeumo is someone who looks to get on the ball deeper and run at players. The Frenchman is adept at the high press, harrassing defenders on the ball, and drifts horizontally across the front line making him a nightmare to mark.
The way Mbeumo plays upfront reminds me a lot of Gabriel Jesus. The movement, those hip swivels. He could be the perfect understudy for the Brazilian.
Now a lot of fans always talk about us needing a “Plan B” – a big man upfront who we can hit the ball to if Plan A is not working. For me this is always a basic version of having an alternative plan, a tactic of yesteryear of just sticking a big donkey up-top and hitting it long to him.
Considering Jesus’s injury issues in his two seasons at Arsenal, I think we are better off looking for a striker that is similar to him in attributes than someone complete different.
You get in a Olivier Giroud (for example) to be a Plan B to Jesus and as your second choice striker, it means that if your Plan A picks up a long term injury, the entire structure of the team will need to change.
Your second striker almost needs to be a clone of your first choice so that if your starter is injured (or needs a rest), you can make a swap without having to completely change your tactics.
Some might then say “well yes, but you can also still have a Plan B at the club as well as two Plan A’s”. They are wrong.
We live in a world where teams play one up top. Too carry 2 back-up strikers will result in neither getting enough game time to keep them happy. And anyway, I think Kai Havertz with his 6′ 4″ frame and ability in the air is that Plan B.
The other advantage of Mbeumo is that he has also spent much of his time outwide, and is left footed.
That means he could do the duel role of being cover for both Gabriel Jesus and Bukayo Saka. Two players in one.
If we are looking to add another attacker next summer, Bryan Mbeumo will be a better option than Ivan Toney.
Keenos
We continue to grow our Arsenal inspired shin pads collection…
On the store are some fantastic bespoke artwork shin pads, as well as personalisable kit shin pads
“I felt that after 60 minutes and 85 minutes in two games, in this period, to change the keeper in that moment, and I didn’t do it. I didn’t have the courage to do it” Mikel Arteta said in a recent interview.
“Someone is going to do it and maybe it’s, ‘Uh, that’s strange.’ Why? Why not. Tell me why not. You have all the qualities in another goalkeeper to do something; something is happening and we want to change momentum, do it.”
Our boss was ridiculed by many for sharing his views on changing a goalkeeper during the game. But is it as ridiculous as it sounds?
Keepers for different situations
Like outfield players, not all goalkeepers are built the same.
Some are fantastic shot stoppers, others brilliant with the ball at their feet and some are dominant under the high ball. You have the “goal line keepers” like Petr Cech that are at their best when they remain within their 6-yard box, and then you have the sweeper keepers like Manuel Neuer whose starting position is on the edge of the box.
In Robert Enke’s post humorous book A Life Too Short, the German keeper described his struggles at Barcelona.
He was very much a keeper that liked to stay on his line, whilst a young Victor Valdes preferred to be on the edge of his box.
Whilst Enke out performed Valdes in every training ground metrick (reflexs, shot stopping, jumping, etc), it was the Spanaird who estabalished himself as the Catalan’s number one. And when Enke did deputise for Valdes, he was like a fish out of water being asked to play a goal keeping role that he was not comfortable.
That lead to heavy criticism and his Barcelona dream ended in a nightmare.
So if you understand that goalkeepers are different, then why is it so crazy to be of the view that a different keeper might be more suitable to different situations?
Outfield differences
“I am able to take a winger or a striker and put a central defender back and go to a back five to hold a result” Arteta continued during his interview.
We see managers make substitutions every match to allow them to change their tactics depending on the game situation.
Leading a game, you bring a more defensive midfielder on for an attacking one. You do not expect the attacking midfielder to play deeper. Likewise when trying to win the game, you might sacrifice one of your more defensive midfielders for someone with more attacking intentions.
If you are trying to defend a lead, you might take off your short, rapid striker for someone a bit more robust who can hold the ball up and provide an outlet winning free kicks. Or go the other way and take off your big striker for someone a bit pacier to try and play on the counter attack.
You might take a midfielder off for a central defender and go 5 at the back. What you do not do is say to Martin Odegaard “you are now playing in the defence”.
So if you agree that keepers are built differently, and that substituting players for in-game tactical reasons is correct, then is changing your keeper with 20 minutes to go when leading 1-0 (or losing 1-0) really that insane?
Attacking keeper
These days, most top teams look to dominate posession. As a result they want a goal keeper whose natural starting position is at the edge of the box and who is naturally gifted with their feet and decision making.
Manchester City are happy having someone like Ederson in goal who is not the best in the world at shot stopping and dealing with crosses, but is the best in the world with his ball at his feet.
Having a keeper who is comfortable on the edge of his box allows the defence to have their starting position on the half way line. That in turn pushes the midfield further forward and allows your front 3 to “camp” on the edge of the opponents box. A natural high press.
This allows you to overload the final third and create attacking positions by winning the ball higher up the pitch.
The defence do not need to drop deep as they know every ball played over the top will be cut out by the keeper. If the keeper prefers to stay on his goal line, the tactic is unworkable as it means that there is a huge gap between the defence and the stopper. Too easy for the opposition to put the ball into that space and get an attacker clean through.
A goal keeper who is comfortable with the ball at his feet also always you to have an “extra man” when playing the ball around the defence.
In yesteryear, clubs would play with a back 5, with the middle of them a sweeper.
The sweeper would sit deeper and was always available for a backwards pass if his team were in trouble, allowing sides to recycle possession and being again.
With a keeper doing that role, you can then have an additional attack minded player on the pitch.
Having a more attack minded keeper also means that if you are 1-0 down and pressing in the last 20 minutes to get a goal, you can push higher and overload those attacking positions.
Defensve keeper
Whilst having an attacking keeper is most top clubs preference, many lesser clubs prefer a more defensive keeper.
Teams like Newcastle who have their defences first position at the edge of their own box. They look to pack the defence and midfield, soak up pressure and then hit opponents on the counter attack.
Having a keeper big like Nick Pope, surrounded by giant defenders, makes them very hard to break down.
By the time you are through the back 4, you are close to the goal and have Pope with his giant figure smothering you. And do not thinkg getting it wide and putting crosses it solves the issue, the likes of Pope are also dominant in the air.
If you go 1-0 up and begin to defend deeper, having someone like Pope in goal is a benefit as opponents look to increasingly employ the long ball.
As you sit deeper, you will naturally give away more free kicks, more corners, giving the opposition more opportunity to swing high balls into the box.
A keeper that can come out and catch the ball at this point is a game changer. Holding onto it for 30 seconds releases pressure and slow down the opponents momentum.
Goal keeper substitution
So changing your goalkeeper with 20 minutes to go…
Say you are Manchester City, your first choice keeper is Ederson. you go out and buy Nick Pope as his cover. Leading 1-0 with 20 minutes left on the clock, Manchester City are under pressure to Brentford who are pumping high balls into the box.
Ederson is struggling with the physically of Ivan Toney jumping against him. Every free kick, every corner, is a heart in mouth moment for City fans.
Spo Pep takes Ederson off for Nick Pope. The Englishman, being a more dominant presence in the box, will not be as bullied as the man he replaced.
He comes out and claims everything. Every cross, every corner, every free kick is caught by him. Brentford lose the momentum they have built and become despondent. Their heads go down and Man City hold on for a 1-0 win.
“Genius move by Pep” would be the headline as his mid-game goalkeeper changed the momentum and helped his side secure the 3 points.
Why does it not happen?
When a manager makes defensive substitutions to see out a game, fans are used to it. It is a tried and test method so if it does not work supporters and the media do not say the manager made a tactical error.
On many occassion, Arteta bought on Rob Holding and went to a back 5 to see out a game. It worked on almost every occassion.
That meant that on the odd occassion it did not work and the opponent equalised (think Liverpool away last year), Arteta was was not condemned for his change.
But changing the keeper would be a new thing. Groundbreaking. Never been done before. And like Arteta says, the first manager to do it will have to be very brave.
If it does not work first time and you concede, you will have hours of punditry dedicated to criticising your decision. So managers stay in their comfort zone and stick with what they know.
But to go 1-1 bringing on a defender for a midfeilder than go to 1-1 swapping your goal keeper.
There is also the argument that keepers need to grow into a game. That it can take them a while to get fully up to speed and the adrenaline pumping. That sitting on the bench for 70 minutes could affect their alterness and supplety.
Final thoughts
Was this just Arteta theorising?
You can certainly picture the likes of Arteta, Guardiola, Arsene Wenger, Carlo Ancelotti and other great thinkers of our game sitting around with a whiskey and discussing it in depth.
I think the consensus would be that it makes a lot of sense, but the fall-out if it does not work is just too much
There is a lotof logic in changing your keeper depending on the match situation. But as Arteta said, it will take a manager with a lot of courage to do it…
Keenos
We continue to grow our Arsenal inspired shin pads collection…
On the store are some fantastic bespoke artwork shin pads, as well as personalisable kit shin pads
At the time of writing, the fear is that Bukayo Saka’s hamstring injury could be a serious one.
Tuesday night was the 3rd time in 3 games that Saka had hobbled off injured. However this was the first time he went off due to a muscle injury rather than a knock.
The negative amongst you will blame Mikel Arteta for overplaying Saka, and say that he should be rested more often. But as Arteta has said previously, world class players play 50 games a season.
Medical advances mean that clubs now have more data than ever one players fitness and could almost predict when muscle fatigue is close to cause a strain. When fatigue has set in, Arsene Wenger used to say they were entering the ‘Red Zone‘.
Every players red zone is different. If Saka was entering his, he would not have played on Tuesday. It was just one of those things.
So assuming that Saka is out this Sunday, who can replace him?
Fabio Vieira
When Saka hobbled off in France, Fabio Vieira came on.
The Portuguese midfield has looked good in his cameos this season, but his best performances have come on the left wing or more central.
Whilst he is a “like for like” replacement for Saka in terms of being left footed, he is not a natural winger.
He does not have the pace to ping back a full back and never looks to go on the outside.
Playing on the right he becomes predictable, looking to cut inside as soon as he receives the ball. This narrows the pitch and eats into Martin Odegaard’s space. It also slows down our progression up the pitch.
Lovely player, but I do not think the right wing suits him.
Kai Havertz
When we signed Kai Havertz, I spoke about how he gave Arteta 6 tactical options. One of these was as cover for Saka on the right wing.
Rumours are Thomas Partey could be fit to start on Sunday. Or at least play an hour. This could see Arteta push Declan Rice into a more attacking role and allow Havertz to be utilised out wide.
Havertz has played over 50 times on the right hand side, scoring 18 and assisting 11 as a right winger.
It is certainly a position he has played, but you do have to go back to 2019 for the last time he started on the right consistently. Considering the pressure he is under and his underwhelming performances in an Arsenal shirt thus far, a positional change might not be a good idea.
Gabriel Jesus
Jesus returned to the Arsenal squad with Gabriel Martinelli and Leandro Trossard out injured. He slotted in on the left wing as Eddie Nketiah started down the middle.
The versatile attack has spent time on both wings, but not as much as you would think – 23 games as a right winger with 8 goals and 10 assists.
If Saka is out, and with Martinelli’s injury, it would not make sense to then move the remaining of our first choice attacking trio away from his most natural position.
Jesus has to start up-front.
Reiss Nelson
Probably the most natural right winger in the squad, he played on that flank throughout most of his youth career. It is also where he has played the majority of his senior games for Arsenal, Feyenoord and Hoffenheim.
Arteta would have looked at the problems Pedro Neto gave Nathan Ake last weekend and be thinking that Nelson could replicate that.
Neto is quick and direct and gave Ake all sorts of problems as Wolves beat Man City. The only difference is Neto is left footed and Ake’s problems mainly came when the Portuguese winger got inside of him.
In the modern game, with “inverted wingers” Nelson is a bit of a throwback to when a right winger was right footed and would just look to beat their man and put a cross in.
More recently, Nelson’s best performances for us have come when he has played on the left. Picking up the ball and driving more centrally with pace. I feel he is better on this flank and a more natural replacement for Martinelli than Sake.
Emile Smith Rowe
There have been calls for a while for Smith Rowe to return to the starting XI.
He spent much of last season injured, and in that time Martinelli pulled away from him as a left wing option. We have also since recruited Trossard.
It is easy to call for a player to start, but not so easy to say who he should replace – some will say he should replace Havertz, but his performances in a number 8 role have been poor thus far.
Smith Rowe’s best performances for Arsenal came either as a left sided midfielder, or as a sole attacking midfielder with 2 more defensive minded players (Partey and Xhaka) in behind him.
He has rarely played right wing in senior football. Right now in his career, he is more of an option on the left wing.
Leandro Trossard
Mikel Arteta and his team took the risk this summer by not buying a top class right winger to cover Saka (although recruiting a player to play 2nd fiddle to a world class 21-year-old would not have been easy).
The management team would have looked at Trossard and thought “Leandro will be first choice cover on both wings”.
Saka and Martinelli have never really spent time on the sidelines simultaneously, so I get the risk, but it has potentially come back to bite the team in the arse.
You would have expected Trossard to start on the left wing against Manchester City this weekend, but with Saka’s injury, we might be best moving him to the right.
Trossard is two footed and can do everything that Vieira can not in terms of running at a full back and pinging them back. He is solid cover for Saka.
That then leaves the left hand side open.
As above, Nelson, Smith Rowe and Vieira are all better suited to the left wing.
You shift Trossard to the right and play one of Nelson, Smith Rowe or Vieira on the left. Considering Kyle Walker’s pace, I would probably go with Emile Smith Rowe.
I think Smith Rowe’s movement inside will make Walker less comfortable than having to go stride to stride with Nelson. The English full back will also be able to easily cover off Vieira trying to go round the outside and wipe balls in.
So I have probably left the best till last.
Against City I would play a front 3 of: ESR Jesus Trossard.
In behind them I would go Rice, Odegaard and Partey. Rice will be key covering that left hand side c.
Final thoughts: I actually think Arteta taking Saka off in the last 3 games was him protecting him.
In another game, another time, I think Saka could have shaken off those injuries and played on. But this might have led to longer term issues.
We still do not know the full extent of Tuesday (I am writing this Wednesday morning ahead of flying to Athens). Maybe he was just taken off as a precaution.
People would not tell a brain surgeon how to do their work, or a heart surgeon. Why do they think they are qualified to tell sporing doctors how to do their work?
Keenos
Our latest set of Arsenal inspired shin pads is now available on the store!
She Wore A Yellow Ribbon 