It is said that games are won by strikers, by league titles won by defences. And that is often right. The majority of time throughout history, they league is won by the team who concedes the least goals.

Last season, Manchester City scored 10 goals more than Chelsea, yet conceded 6 more. The result? Chelsea won the title by 8 points. We only scored 2 goals less than Chelsea, yet finished 12 points behind. We conceded 6 more goals.

A defence is the foundation to build from. You can not build a palace without first putting in a solid foundation. No matter how extravagant the palace might be, it will simple collapse without the foundations. And a football side is the same.

There is not point being able to score 83 goals like Manchester City did last season, if you are conceding a lot the other end. You can win the league title not scoring bucket loads of goals if you are tight at the back.

And the importance of the defence is continuity. Look at Arsenal in 1998/99 (ok, we came 2^nd, by a point), we conceded just 17 league goals:

David Seaman – 32 League appearances
Lee Dixon – 36
Martin Keown – 34
Tony Adams – 24
Nigel Winterburn – 30

The main back 5, bar Adams, played nearly every game. And when Adams did pick up his injury, he was replaced by Steve Bould (14 starts), a man with 372 Arsenal appearances to his name. The back 5 (plus Bouldy) knew each others games. Individually they were not all the best in the Premier League in their position, but collectively they were.

Last year, when Chelsea ran away with the league, a key aspect was how often they used the same group of players. And this is highlighted in the appearances of their defence:

Thibaut Courtois – 31 league appearances
Branislav Ivanović – 38
Gary Cahill – 31
John Terry – 38
César Azpilicueta – 28

Two key players playing every game of the season. It is an amazing show of continuity. And it also highlights where they are going wrong this season:

Courtois – 3 from 7 games
Ivanović – 7 / 7
Cahill – 5 / 7
Terry – 4 / 7
Azpilicueta – 7 / 7

Mourinho’s chopping and changing at centre back is clearly damaging the side as they have already conceded 45% as many goals as last season, just 7 games in. In fact, only Sunderland have conceded more and if they continue conceding at their current rate (they surely won’t?) they will end up having 76 in the goals against column. That is 3 more than bottom of the league QPR conceded in 2014/15.

This is an Arsenal blog, so that’s enough about Chelsea.

This season, in all competition’s 11 games in total, Arsenal have had 7 different back 5 combinations, and played the same back 5 in just 2 consecutive match’s.

This chopping and changing, is the key reason as to why we have now lost 4 games in all competitions.

It does not allow for continuity, for players to get a run together, to continue learning each others game, to build a solid foundation.

If we continue to change the defence, the simple errors which lost us the game against Olympiacos will continue to rear their ugly head. Against Leicester we also made some horrendous errors. Lukcily we scored 5, but the 2 conceded were not good enough, and not every game will we be able to score 5.

With just 3 clean sheets this season, Arsenal have conceded 2 or more goals 4 times. Stats like these are simply not conducive to becoming a successful team.

For Arsenal to be successful this season, and remember we can go top this weekend, and still have both domestic cups to fight for, Arsene Wenger needs to stop mixing and matching his defence. He needs to pick the best back 5 and stick to it.

Keenos
Follow @KeenosAFC

For many, it is the traditional and best way to set up a football team. To others, it’s too rigid and not adaptable enough for the modern game. However, whilst playing the 4-4-2 system, Arsene Wenger won the Premier League three times. Since changing his philosophy, he hasn’t won it and has only rarely looked like doing so. This article will try to understand the reasoning behind the change from 4-4-2 to the modern 4-3-3.

My background as a community and to a lesser extent academy football coach, has enabled me to come across people at a decent level in the game. When coaching in Boston in the summer of 2014, I got talking to a coach who had recently left the Arsenal academy after 10 years. More than anything else, I’m a fan, so I was desperate to find out what I could from this bloke, who had worked with Wilshere, Akpom, and more interestingly, Cesc Fabgregas. “Why was it mate? Why did he change the whole philosophy of the club, from having a side full of power, speed, physical presence, to these shorter, technically better players and move to a 4-3-3?” I asked, expecting some insight from someone involved in the club. The answer summed up the feeling of most Gooners, he simply sniffed and replied “don’t know mate”.

Its 2004. Arsenal have just gone unbeaten, playing some of the most impressive football ever seen, combining attacking flair with defensive strength. The average height of the team is just over six feet. Vieria and Gilberto made up two in the midfield, and they lined up with two inverted wingers (usually Pires and Freddie but Reyes would begin to play more). They were based behind two strikers, more often than not, Henry Bergkamp. Like anyone, it hurts having to type these names because as good as Sanchez and Ozil are, I struggle to find a place in the team ahead of these players. Interestingly enough, that all conquering side of 2004, like 2002 and the 1998 team before lined up 4-4-2.

In any of those (4-4-2) title winning teams, Wenger had similar players, and if two players were to define the two systems, and even more so define Wenger’s Arsenal career into two parts, I would say it is Patrick Vieria and Cesc Fabregas. More on Cesc later. Patrick Vieria was 6’4 and was the first major signing by Wenger, whose instruction to his backline was simply “when you get the ball, pass is to Patrick”. He didn’t care how many men were around him, he would receive the ball, turn and pass forwards, usually to Dennis Bergkamp (The most completed pass 1997/1998 season). It also helped that he had a partner that was as big and as strong as him next to him, first Petit, then Gilberto Silva, and sometimes Edu. Arsenal could go into games knowing they had the technical quality, but also had the physical power should they need it (something clearly lacking in later years).

In 2004 though, something else happened. Jose Mourinho moved to West London and brought his “park the bus” style with him, and with the help of around £150 million from the Russian, transformed Chelsea into winners. He used a 4-3-3 system that was relatively unknown in England, the main advantage being when you are defending, 4-3-3 becomes 4-5-1. Teams began to use this style, particularly lower down the Premier League, while Arsene persisted with his tested 4-4-2. However, the emergence of Cesc Fabregas would have negative affect on the team in certain away games of the 04/05 season, I seem to remember Palace away, and the all too common physical batterings in the North West as teams began to pack the midfield and physically over run Arsenal, who continued to play with 2 in the middle. An FA cup win over Man United in 2005 marked the end of the Vieria era, the start of the Fabregas era and the start of a 9 year trophy drought.

In the following years, Wenger continued with 4-4-2 with the same stubbornness he is accused of today, partnering a two of Fabregas with first Gilberto, before the likeable Brazilian was shipped out, and this was followed by Flamini (In 08, where had it not been for awful luck, they would’ve won the title), Diarra (remember him?) and then Denilson. It was only in 2009/2010 the idea changed and we would play 4-3-3, with Fabregas quite rightly the focal point of a brilliant footballing team. Another reason Wenger may’ve been influenced was that this is around the same time Spain were winning everything and Pep’s Barca were recreating the right way to play football.

Of course, you can’t blame a trophy drought on tactics alone, and perhaps if signings had been different, or Gallas hadn’t been appointed captain etc, we may be talking differently now. But it remained obvious that in big games, against big teams (both figuratively and literally), Arsenal struggled. The average height had dropped significantly, we no longer had that midfielder that would shove 3 players off the ball and take on another 3.

As great a footballer as he was for us, Cesc was never able to do this (this is demonstrated now at Chelsea, where you see him line up, often protected throughout by Matic and Ramires). My argument with Wenger is that he was so convinced that he had found this new way of playing, he’d persist with it. When Cesc left in 2011, I wonder what would’ve happened if he’d gone out and bought two brick walls to play central midfield. Possibly would’ve slowed down Jack and Aaron’s development (although I personally feel both can play in a midfield two, just not together), but we may have a league title to be parading round the Emirates. Another crazy though, imagine having these technically gifted players being allowed to do their thing, knowing that a Matic type is behind them,

Four years on from Cesc’s departure from Arsenal, and it’s fair to say we’re in better shape than when he left. Consecutive cups and shields have lifted mood somewhat, but we as fans are crying out for a league title. Under Wenger, Arsenal will always score goals, whoever is up top, but what really disappointed me in the last window was the lack of a holding midfielder. I like Coquelin a lot, but the best way I can describe him is he is a number 16, not a number 4 (basically, we need someone bigger and stronger to play that role, or for the tough away games, play two). Arteta and Flamini I dont like criticising, because they clearly care about Arsenal and put in a shift, despite being not good enough. But why, with £100 million in the bank, has Wenger decided against Kondogbia, Krychowiak, or even Scheneiderlin?

I said earlier that you could almost split Wenger’s time at Arsenal into two. Many would call it Highbury and Emirates. I would call it Vieira and Cesc. And speaking as a football coach, but more so a fan, I think it’s time Wenger returned to the Vieira ideology, to help, if not completely change, his philosophy on how a title should be won.

Up the Arsenal.

Joe

Are you “Wenger In” or “Wenger Out”?

Do you think “Wenger Knows Best” or “Wenger’s Lost It”

Should we have “Spent some F’ing money” or was it a case of “The squads good enough”

Our fans are split. But one thing is for sure, if we fail to compete this season, Wenger must take the blame. And both the WOBs and AKBs will agree to that.

Don’t think you agree? Let me go through it.

If you are a WOB (I hate the terms btw), you want Wenger out no matter what. A failure to compete this season will be due to Wenger’s transfer policy. Not signing the players we needed to compete. It will not take too much convincing to say Wenger should go. So I will not dwell on it anymore.

As for the AKB’s. They will take a bit more convincing, but ultimately, they will agree – even if they do not admit it, that it will be Wenger’s fault if we fail.

People claim that they are happy with squad, that there is not much else out there to improve the side. That Giroud and Coquelin are more than sufficient. If this is true, we should win the league, or at least compete. We should win the Champions League, or at least get past Monaco (or whoever we are drawn against) in the second knock out stage.

It is you, remember, saying the players we have are good enough. Supporting Wenger’s decision not to spend in the window.

So what happens if we fail again? If we finish double figures behind the Champions? Fail to beat those around us? Get knocked out of the Champions League early? Who’s fault is that? Because remember, it is you who said the players were good enough.

If the player’s are good enough, and we fail, where does the blame lie? You could blame the fitness. But who hired the fitness team? Who signed or kept faith with injury prone players? The answer is Arsene Wenger. So blame fitness and injuries for our failure to compete, then be brave, blame Wenger.

If fitness is not the issue, surely it comes down to tactics and preparation. Yes, you laugh when people say “Wenger doesn’t tactic” but if we fail, and you are saying that the players are good enough, then surely it comes down to tactics? Down to formation? Down to team set up and preparation? Again, will you be brave enough to criticise Wenger?

If the players in the squad are good enough, and the team fails, it is Wenger who should be blamed.

If the players in the squad are not good enough, and the team fails, it is Wenger who should be blamed.

So at the end of the season, if we fail to compete, not matter if you are a WOB or an AKB, you should be blaming Wenger. Calling for him to go.

It’s going to be a rocky season.

Keenos