1997/98 Arsenal 3–2 Manchester United Manchester United 0–1 Arsenal Champions
2001/02 Arsenal 3–1 Manchester United Manchester United 0–1 Arsenal Champions
2003/04 Arsenal 2–1 Chelsea Chelsea 1–2 Arsenal Champions
The proof is in the pudding. If you want to win the Premier League, you have to beat your nearest rivals.
Last season, we played Manchester City twice, we lost twice. A 12 point swing. We finished 5 points behing City in second.
It was similar in 2002/03 when we failed to beat Manchester United – losing once and drawing at home. We also finished that season 2nd, 5 points behind the champions.
Had we beat Manchester City twice last season, we would have comfortably won the league.
Another 6 points to our tally would have seen us finish on 90. 6 points less for Man City would have seen them get 83 (although they also may well have won their last two instead of got 1 point from 2 games once the title was won).
And it is not just the 3 points, it is also the momentum.
The Manchester City victory against us in in February kicked off a run that would see them gain 37 from 39 points. We did well during this time to keep ourselves a nose ahead.
In April, we would face them again 5 points clear, but with City having 2 games in hand. Victory would have seen us go 8 points clear with 5 to play. Momentum could have swung our way and those defeats to Brighton and Nottingham Forst might never have happened.
Victory over Manchester City today could see Arsenal return back to the top of the league following City’s defeat away to Wolves last weekend.
Considering our perceived slow start, to be in a position to top the table after 8 games shows that last season was not a fluke.
Manchester City go into the game without probably their two best players – Kevin de Bruyne and Rodri. John Stones and Bernardo Silva will also be missing.
This will lead to some saying “Arsenal will never have a better opportunity to beat City” and “if we do not beat City it is a failure”. But this ignores that we have our own injury headaches.
Jurrien Timber is out long term. He was signed for games like today. Gabriel Martinelli and Thomas Partey are also both out.
It perhaps shows our increased strength in depth that despite 3 key players being out, we probably still go into the game as favourites.
Timber is repalced by the ever reliable Ben White, whilst Declan Rice as an upgrade on Partey. Leandro Trossard and Fabio Vieira were both on the bench against Bournemouth last weekend so you would expect both to be fit enough to start.
As for City, Rodri to Matheus Nunes or Kalvin Phillips is a huge drop off. Neither are in the Spanairds class.
Kevin de Bruyne’s natural replacement is Bernardo. Without the pair expect Julian Alvarez to slot into that position behind Erling Haaland. They certainly look less creative with Foden, Alvarez, Jeremy Doku, Jack Grealish and Oscar Bobb.
I would not be surprised if Pep Guardiola sets up to hit Arsenal on the counter. They will leave Doku high and wide and hope that he can exploit the space in behind White.
That will force William Saliba to come across to cover, which could leave Erling Haaland occupying the greater space between Saliba and Gabriel. If Olexsandr Zinchenko then does not keep an eye on Phil Foden, he could be constantly free at the back post.
My feeling is win today and we can talk about a title challenging team. Lose and then we are probably looking at 2nd, depending on the result against Liverpool towards the end of the year.
UTA!
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
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
She Wore A Yellow Ribbon 