Rather than a statistical analysis or match by match recounting, I thought I would post impressions of the season in some kind of random way that reflects discussions I've had with other Gooners since the FA Cup final victory over Hull City.
THE GOOD
My player of the season for Arsenal had to be Per Mertesacker. Ramsey burned brighter but you can't miss 14 weeks of the season and be named footballer of the year. BFG's interventions became so routine that they were expected, and I can't count how many times he would do the simplest thing that caused an opposing attack to break down. That's what I loved about Per this season: the simple toe-poke to dispossess someone, the simple pass from the back to the open midfielder, the clearance that snubbed out a threat; it was minimalist, Philip Glass-esque defending and that's what we needed. I don't hate his goals, either, few though they may be, they seem to always be of vital importance.
His partner in the centre of defence would be option 1a in the POS voting. Koscielny, the man with the big pockets, the man who scores the falling-down-iest goals in the squad used his considerable athleticism to chase the ball down when Wenger employed the much-lamented high line and I shudder to think what things may have been without him. Many was the time the opposition would break up the pitch and Kos would be the one at the touchline harassing the ball until reinforcements could arrive.
Aaron Ramsey...what mysterious ailment kept him out so long? We'll never know. But what we do know is that the cheeky look-off that he gave Podolski at the end of the 2012-2013 campaign before he smashed home a goal from a ridiculous angle was just a preview. He had displayed his tireless running and tackling during that season's run-in, but the goal scoring...it leaves one speechless. It didn't even seem as though it took effort, it just seemed to occur and then keep occurring every time it was needed. He was everywhere, he was industrious, he was classy, he was inspirational. Teams that want to win have to plan for injuries, but with only one striker Arsenal couldn't compensate for Ramsey's absence. And of course, he scored THAT goal.
THINGS I LOVED
Rozza's goals versus Spuds, especially picking off the ball from Danny Effing Rose, finally helping put to rest that ghost from season's past.
Wilshere's goal versus Norwich. Everybody likes that one, don't they?
Ozil versus Napoli at Ashburton Grove. More like that, please. The man is so good it's just ridiculous sometimes.
Carl Jenkinson's goal versus Norwich, and the joy he showed following it.
Wilshere giving the middles to the MCFC supporters. Never surrender!
Theo giving the scoreline to the swamp people, then being pelted with missiles which the FA did absolutely nothing to punish, and rather made the story about TW14 "inciting the crowd." Tremendous leadership and showed absolutely NO anti-Arsenal bias there.
Szcz's selfie. Anyone who was churlish over this needs to seriously grow a sense of humour.
Mertesacker and Cazorla's "unclassic" commentary video.
Anything involving Gunnersaurus.
Opponents running away scared from Bacary Sagna on the pitch when he got in their faces.
Flamini doing needed business against those who had it coming to them.
Wilshere doing the "Tottenham-Shit" cheer at the FA Cup celebration. Well done, lad.
Nicky Bendtner's goal versus Cardiff City whilst I was in the process of nearly shitting myself in angst.
All of Podolski's 8 league goals.
And my goal of the season, Aaron Ramsey's blast versus Liverpool. I hate Liverpool. That's why.
(All the fun stuff that happened during the FA Cup final is different unto itself, and since it was finally a trophy you could probably pick every moment in that game that was good as a highlight.)
THINGS I DIDN'T NECESSARILY LOVE ALL THAT MUCH
Losing at home to Villa on opening day following a summer of (to that point) transfer inactivity. It was not a pretty sight anywhere amongst the Gooners of the world.
Losing away to Stoke City and Manchester United without scoring a goal.
Drawing to Swansea, Everton, and Southampton.
"Those heavy defeats." I've said enough about that elsewhere.
The way they played at Napoli.
Arjen Robben, Chelsea Football Club, Stoke City supporters, Yanks pretending to like Liverpool, Juan Kincaid jinxing the Arsenal.
Arsene Wenger shirtless after the FA Cup final. Still better than seeing Steve Bruce shirtless ever, but not something I'd anticipated.
Starting Big Luke in the FA Cup final. What's done is done, but I thought that was not a very good choice by the manager.
People talking about the number of goals Olivier Giroud scored as 22, when he only scored 16 in the league, which is still not good enough.
I HAVE NO CLEVER SUMMATION FOR THIS POST
It was another decent 4th place finish for the Arsenal and it was great to win the FA Cup. Here's to a summer of smashing transfers that will push the club on to winning the Premier League. Heh heh.
Showing posts with label FA Cup. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FA Cup. Show all posts
Thursday, June 05, 2014
Tuesday, June 03, 2014
Why I wish Arsene Wenger were not returning as Arsenal manager
So another Arsenal season has come to a close, and it has been punctuated by a new three-year contract for Arsene Wenger. Wenger is a man who will be given a statue outside Ashburton Grove at some point, hopefully whilst he's still extant. It's not as though he's a transient figure--rather, he is transcendent and transformational.
This season was a brutal journey for Arsenal supporters. I was willing to dream along with many others that Arsenal would or could win the league for the first time in a decade, but that dream collapsed and not through 3 heavy away losses to the clubs who finished above Arsenal in the table. I have said on numerous occasions that for my club, I prize the league above all else. I really couldn't give a toss about Europe, and while I enjoy a good cup run and have wonderful memories of the FA Cup (semifinals and finals included), it's a one-off competition that "even a relegated club such as Wigan" can win.
It's fantastic for the players to share the feeling of winning, of walking up the steps at Wembley to receive a medal and hoist a trophy, and then to celebrate with a parade. It beats all hell out of losing to Blackburn Rovers at home, and that can't be disputed. It beats all hell out of losing to Birmingham City on a schoolboy mistake, as well. So no disrespect to what the Arsenal accomplished by defeating Spuds, Liverpool, and Everton (in more pomp than they managed under David Moyes) en route to a trophy. There is a reason, however, that the FA Cup final is called "a lovely day out;" it's because the 38-game march through a season of league football is the true measure of a club's greatness.
The circumstances which made this league season open to more challengers and challenges came together in a unique confluence of events. Three managers for clubs who were considered to be the usual suspects were all newly hired and inheriting squads not of their own making, whilst the two others perpetually seeking to knock on the door to "big club" certification endured summers of considerable change. The only clubs where consistency ruled were Arsenal and Liverpool.
Arsenal had come back from the proverbial dead in 2013 to once again claim the Fourth Place Champions Trophy, seemingly built upon a foundation of stability, a parsimonious and pragmatic approach to the run in that saw a remarkable set of results that allowed them to pass Spuds and receive an invitation to Europe's big dance. My friends and I taunted Scousers with chants of "Wigan's in Europe and you're not!" which made us all feel a bit better about ourselves. We seemed primed to finally resume what was once an annual challenge for the title, given the relative "instability" in Manchester and west London and the dodgy defence in Liverpool.
What followed, starting with summer transfer doings, was in my mind a serious failure by Arsene Wenger to secure a league championship for Arsenal. There are three areas where, if we are to believe the manager is accountable, that his errors cost the club, and these are why I sincerely wish Wenger weren't returning for another three years.
I. The Transfer Market
It is a simple and painfully obvious fact: Arsene Wenger did not buy the necessary reinforcements during the summer of 2013 to successfully mount a title challenge in either the league or in Europe, and it isn't the first time this has happened. We are not privy to the inner workings of the manager's mind nor the restrictions placed upon him by club management, but it is absolutely unconscionable that Arsenal faced a league and various cup schedules with only one serviceable senior striker in the squad and three senior centre halves. No ambitious club would do that. It's ridiculous.
I can't stress this enough. As much as I sincerely love the talent of Mesut Ozil and enjoy watching him, Arsenal actually needed a proven goal scoring forward and someone to strengthen the back line so that any serious title challenge could be sustained should the inevitable injuries or fatigue set in. There's also a question of quality at the forward position, and again let it be said that while I appreciate the things that Giroud does well, he is not a striker who as a first and only option up front will win an English club a league trophy or any club a European trophy.
Giroud is essentially a "one in three" striker. He scores at a one goal in every three matches pace, more or less. I'm not 7amkickoff and I don't go mental with statistics; I watch matches and follow clubs and use what I see (not what I hear others saying) to form my opinions, and my opinion is that Giroud is simply not good enough, and certainly not good enough to be the ONLY striker at a club with ambitions beyond fourth place.
I fear that Wenger will do this again this summer. No, I don't fear it. I believe it. I believe that Wenger will not buy a very very very expensive goal-scoring forward (a better than one in three) and Arsenal will go into next season with Giroud and Sanogo as the only attacking options, with possibly the one in three Loic Remy to support that pair. If not Remy, then probably some nearly free teenager who is coming off several injuries. Yes, I really believe this. I no longer have faith in Arsene Wenger at all when it comes to the transfer market, especially not in a season when a reserve keeper, a right back, a central defender, a "holding midfielder," and a proven goal-scoring "can win a club the Premier League or Europe" striker are needed.
Surely anyone who has followed Arsenal for any length of time doesn't believe that Wenger will do the necessary business this summer. A new manager who is far less stubborn, myopic, or whatever caused Wenger's inactivity last season, should have been brought in to manage what are supposedly considerably more resources that are now available.
II. Tactical Failure
There is a reason that smaller clubs with smaller budgets and less talented players adopt a defensive posture: it is because they are smaller clubs with smaller budgets and less talented players. When it comes to Europe or challenging far richer domestic clubs, Arsenal are a smaller club with a smaller budget and less talented players. So what did Wenger learn from that life-saving run in of 2013, when a pragmatic and less-adventurous Arsenal minded the gap and won fourth place?
Nothing.
The opening day loss to Villa was a shambolic mess of tactical naivete and that wretched, useless high line. Arsene Wenger was schooled by Paul Lambert. Let that sink in for a moment.
Arsenal lost points from winning positions multiple times last season that eventually cost them the title. This is a fact, not a proposition. When shutting up shop was called for against Swansea, the Arsenal fullbacks were in the opposing penalty area and the centre havles were at the midfield stripe. On away days to "big clubs," Arsenal were so dire that it's not even to be believed. Injuries or no, the stretch where arsenal took just 11 points from an available 33 has to be laid squarely at the feet of the manager.
I don't see any reason to believe that this will change in the next three years. People of Wenger's age don't make radical changes to their approach to work or life, really. Wenger is as Wenger is. The high defensive line is one of the most infuriating things I've ever seen and continue to see it. It exposes a flawed team to simple counter attacks that lead to either goals, penalties, or fouls in dangerous positions that risk a sending off. Yet Wenger persists.
This will not be different next year, and because of that, Arsenal will not win the league.
III. Mental Frailty, Schoolboy Errors
Arsenal's FA Cup win is not supposed to be disparaged and the goals conceded are not supposed to be used as a point of criticism, but in truth it was simply more of the same and a better club would have punished the Gunners much worse. You know, like they did at City, Liverpool, and Chelsea.
There is no reason that a manager who goes on and on about mental strength can keep sending out a squad that is completely unprepared at the start of the match. The third leg of the managerial tripod is instilling confidence and belief that no challenge is too great for the side, and for far too long now Wenger's teams have come out in "big" matches and looked frightened. Timid players don't play instinctively, and they make errors under pressure that they would not otherwise make.
It got to the point where the mental frailty and mistakes became predictable any time pressure was applied in a so-called big match. It's ridiculous that the heavy defeats to the teams who finished above them in the table even happened once, much less three times. It could have happened in the FA Cup final if it weren't Hull City, too. I'm sorry, I'm sure that offends people, but it is obvious to me. The pattern is established and I don't believe it will change.
So that is really the issue: There is an established pattern of post-Invincibles, post-Ashburton Grove move behaviour by Arsene Wenger and his sides. It can be written off to any number of factors but the truth is that during that 11 for 33 stretch, Tony Pulis was putting in better results than Arsene Wenger. I hate saying anything close to that but it's a fact. Pulis got more out of Palace than Wenger did with Arsenal.
Some say "Arsenal improved!" during this last season, using the points total and points gap to the top of the table. However, I think the goals scored and heavy defeats and 4th place finish and the visibly poor efforts in the "big" matches and the inability to take more than one point off the worst Manchester United side in a generation say that improvement is relative to the lack of quality among some other clubs. Improvement is, to me, subjective, and fourth place is not improvement. Cup runs are nice, but we've seen Portsmouth, Birmingham City, and Wigan all win cups and face relegation in recent years.
It won't change next season, and Arsenal won't win the league, and if I'm wrong, I'll eat a big carton of cream cheese.
This season was a brutal journey for Arsenal supporters. I was willing to dream along with many others that Arsenal would or could win the league for the first time in a decade, but that dream collapsed and not through 3 heavy away losses to the clubs who finished above Arsenal in the table. I have said on numerous occasions that for my club, I prize the league above all else. I really couldn't give a toss about Europe, and while I enjoy a good cup run and have wonderful memories of the FA Cup (semifinals and finals included), it's a one-off competition that "even a relegated club such as Wigan" can win.
It's fantastic for the players to share the feeling of winning, of walking up the steps at Wembley to receive a medal and hoist a trophy, and then to celebrate with a parade. It beats all hell out of losing to Blackburn Rovers at home, and that can't be disputed. It beats all hell out of losing to Birmingham City on a schoolboy mistake, as well. So no disrespect to what the Arsenal accomplished by defeating Spuds, Liverpool, and Everton (in more pomp than they managed under David Moyes) en route to a trophy. There is a reason, however, that the FA Cup final is called "a lovely day out;" it's because the 38-game march through a season of league football is the true measure of a club's greatness.
The circumstances which made this league season open to more challengers and challenges came together in a unique confluence of events. Three managers for clubs who were considered to be the usual suspects were all newly hired and inheriting squads not of their own making, whilst the two others perpetually seeking to knock on the door to "big club" certification endured summers of considerable change. The only clubs where consistency ruled were Arsenal and Liverpool.
Arsenal had come back from the proverbial dead in 2013 to once again claim the Fourth Place Champions Trophy, seemingly built upon a foundation of stability, a parsimonious and pragmatic approach to the run in that saw a remarkable set of results that allowed them to pass Spuds and receive an invitation to Europe's big dance. My friends and I taunted Scousers with chants of "Wigan's in Europe and you're not!" which made us all feel a bit better about ourselves. We seemed primed to finally resume what was once an annual challenge for the title, given the relative "instability" in Manchester and west London and the dodgy defence in Liverpool.
What followed, starting with summer transfer doings, was in my mind a serious failure by Arsene Wenger to secure a league championship for Arsenal. There are three areas where, if we are to believe the manager is accountable, that his errors cost the club, and these are why I sincerely wish Wenger weren't returning for another three years.
I. The Transfer Market
It is a simple and painfully obvious fact: Arsene Wenger did not buy the necessary reinforcements during the summer of 2013 to successfully mount a title challenge in either the league or in Europe, and it isn't the first time this has happened. We are not privy to the inner workings of the manager's mind nor the restrictions placed upon him by club management, but it is absolutely unconscionable that Arsenal faced a league and various cup schedules with only one serviceable senior striker in the squad and three senior centre halves. No ambitious club would do that. It's ridiculous.
I can't stress this enough. As much as I sincerely love the talent of Mesut Ozil and enjoy watching him, Arsenal actually needed a proven goal scoring forward and someone to strengthen the back line so that any serious title challenge could be sustained should the inevitable injuries or fatigue set in. There's also a question of quality at the forward position, and again let it be said that while I appreciate the things that Giroud does well, he is not a striker who as a first and only option up front will win an English club a league trophy or any club a European trophy.
Giroud is essentially a "one in three" striker. He scores at a one goal in every three matches pace, more or less. I'm not 7amkickoff and I don't go mental with statistics; I watch matches and follow clubs and use what I see (not what I hear others saying) to form my opinions, and my opinion is that Giroud is simply not good enough, and certainly not good enough to be the ONLY striker at a club with ambitions beyond fourth place.
I fear that Wenger will do this again this summer. No, I don't fear it. I believe it. I believe that Wenger will not buy a very very very expensive goal-scoring forward (a better than one in three) and Arsenal will go into next season with Giroud and Sanogo as the only attacking options, with possibly the one in three Loic Remy to support that pair. If not Remy, then probably some nearly free teenager who is coming off several injuries. Yes, I really believe this. I no longer have faith in Arsene Wenger at all when it comes to the transfer market, especially not in a season when a reserve keeper, a right back, a central defender, a "holding midfielder," and a proven goal-scoring "can win a club the Premier League or Europe" striker are needed.
Surely anyone who has followed Arsenal for any length of time doesn't believe that Wenger will do the necessary business this summer. A new manager who is far less stubborn, myopic, or whatever caused Wenger's inactivity last season, should have been brought in to manage what are supposedly considerably more resources that are now available.
II. Tactical Failure
There is a reason that smaller clubs with smaller budgets and less talented players adopt a defensive posture: it is because they are smaller clubs with smaller budgets and less talented players. When it comes to Europe or challenging far richer domestic clubs, Arsenal are a smaller club with a smaller budget and less talented players. So what did Wenger learn from that life-saving run in of 2013, when a pragmatic and less-adventurous Arsenal minded the gap and won fourth place?
Nothing.
The opening day loss to Villa was a shambolic mess of tactical naivete and that wretched, useless high line. Arsene Wenger was schooled by Paul Lambert. Let that sink in for a moment.
Arsenal lost points from winning positions multiple times last season that eventually cost them the title. This is a fact, not a proposition. When shutting up shop was called for against Swansea, the Arsenal fullbacks were in the opposing penalty area and the centre havles were at the midfield stripe. On away days to "big clubs," Arsenal were so dire that it's not even to be believed. Injuries or no, the stretch where arsenal took just 11 points from an available 33 has to be laid squarely at the feet of the manager.
I don't see any reason to believe that this will change in the next three years. People of Wenger's age don't make radical changes to their approach to work or life, really. Wenger is as Wenger is. The high defensive line is one of the most infuriating things I've ever seen and continue to see it. It exposes a flawed team to simple counter attacks that lead to either goals, penalties, or fouls in dangerous positions that risk a sending off. Yet Wenger persists.
This will not be different next year, and because of that, Arsenal will not win the league.
III. Mental Frailty, Schoolboy Errors
Arsenal's FA Cup win is not supposed to be disparaged and the goals conceded are not supposed to be used as a point of criticism, but in truth it was simply more of the same and a better club would have punished the Gunners much worse. You know, like they did at City, Liverpool, and Chelsea.
There is no reason that a manager who goes on and on about mental strength can keep sending out a squad that is completely unprepared at the start of the match. The third leg of the managerial tripod is instilling confidence and belief that no challenge is too great for the side, and for far too long now Wenger's teams have come out in "big" matches and looked frightened. Timid players don't play instinctively, and they make errors under pressure that they would not otherwise make.
It got to the point where the mental frailty and mistakes became predictable any time pressure was applied in a so-called big match. It's ridiculous that the heavy defeats to the teams who finished above them in the table even happened once, much less three times. It could have happened in the FA Cup final if it weren't Hull City, too. I'm sorry, I'm sure that offends people, but it is obvious to me. The pattern is established and I don't believe it will change.
So that is really the issue: There is an established pattern of post-Invincibles, post-Ashburton Grove move behaviour by Arsene Wenger and his sides. It can be written off to any number of factors but the truth is that during that 11 for 33 stretch, Tony Pulis was putting in better results than Arsene Wenger. I hate saying anything close to that but it's a fact. Pulis got more out of Palace than Wenger did with Arsenal.
Some say "Arsenal improved!" during this last season, using the points total and points gap to the top of the table. However, I think the goals scored and heavy defeats and 4th place finish and the visibly poor efforts in the "big" matches and the inability to take more than one point off the worst Manchester United side in a generation say that improvement is relative to the lack of quality among some other clubs. Improvement is, to me, subjective, and fourth place is not improvement. Cup runs are nice, but we've seen Portsmouth, Birmingham City, and Wigan all win cups and face relegation in recent years.
It won't change next season, and Arsenal won't win the league, and if I'm wrong, I'll eat a big carton of cream cheese.
Sunday, May 18, 2014
Bad credit? No credit? No problem!
As one contemplates the "modern" history of the Arsenal Football Club, one cannot help but look at the period of 1971-1989 as a sort of wandering in the wilderness, punctuated by the losses to Ipswich Town in 1978 and West Ham United in 1980 in FA Cup finals, the victory in the "Five Minute Final" over Manchester United in 1979, and the supposed boost of the league cup victory in 1987 over Liverpool. That's how I look at it, anyway.
Arsenal were drifting during that 18 year period. The first division became dominated by Liverpool before George Graham arrived at Arsenal. David O'Leary went from a schoolboy to having over 500 appearances for the club. He played with some of the heroes of '71 all the way through to Rocky and Thomas and then Ian Wright. Arsenal apparently couldn't win the league so they became cup specialists of a sort.
I've learned that saying a club are "cup specialists" is about as complimentary as saying someone is a "Sunday player." Arsenal right now don't seem much like they want to expend the resources necessary to win the league, so if you look at their record over the past 9 seasons, they might have become "cup specialists" again. FA Cup winners 2005, Champions League final 2006, League Cup final 2007, League Cup final 2011, FA Cup winners 2014. No real sniff of the league title in that time.
So it's not to say that Arsenal have been dismal during the past 9 seasons. There have been 2 FA Cups in that time, and the chance at 3 more trophies. Maybe it does remind me of that 71-79 period. But if that's the case, does that mean 9 more years (or more) before Arsenal can claim to be the best in the league again? Are we really back to wandering in the wilderness?
I was prompted to write this because of the celebrations of Arsenal supporters after yesterday's FA Cup final victory over Hull City. So many people I know outside of England have only been following or supporting Arsenal for a few years. I asked my Yank friends on Friday, "Have any of you ever seen Arsenal lift a trophy?" Of a group of 20 or so, only 2 besides myself could make that claim, and one of them said it was the 2005 FA Cup. They have come to Arsenal after Wenger's glorious early years when one could take it for granted that being a supporter meant crowns of glory. For them, this trophy means something. They have adopted "she wore a yellow ribbon" and chants about "Wemberley" as though they grew up in Islington. I understand their feelings about yesterday's victory.
But what about those folk I saw on telly back in Blighty who were going mad at the final whistle? The red and white shirted supporters who lined the parade route?
I believe it was a colossal "Eff you!" to everyone who blathered on about "years without a trophy." It wasn't that we think that the FA Cup is a substitute for winning the league or winning Europe, because it isn't. And it wasn't just relief, exhaling, a release of tension. No, I sincerely think it was a giant middle finger to everyone who has felt it necessary to use NOT winning as a cudgel with which to beat Arsenal about the face and skull.
You must write a new narrative, scribes, about the Arsenal Football Club. Perhaps now you can reshape it to say "Arsenal have not won the league in more than a decade" if you like. That would be more damning than "trophyless" because it puts Arsenal in the same company as those people from the other end of Seven Sisters Road and as Jack Wilshere can tell you, there's nothing worse than that.
Arsenal have won the FA Cup 11 times, on par with Manchester United. Wenger sides have won the trophy 5 times, on par with Sir Alex Ferguson. So give him--and the players--credit, please. It wasn't perfect, but it answered so many of Arsenal's and the manager's critics. Arsenal won away from the the Grove on a big occasion. Arsenal overcame a poor start. Arsenal won a trophy. Is this a story worth commemorating with a book, or even a short story? I say no. But for those who have made "not winning anything" a means by which they can flog the manager and the players, surely this is enough?
Credit where it's due--to Santi Cazorla's brilliant strike, to the ever-ready Laurent Koscielny for his typically grubby falling-down goal, to Kieran Gibbs' heart-stopping intervention, and to the combination of the always frustrating Olivier Giroud and the sent-from-heaven Aaron Ramsey for that priceless winner. Credit to Yaya Sanogo for what is becoming a habit of running on and opening up the game like a proper striker.
And credit most of all to Arsene Wenger, who did in fact lead Arsenal to a winning performance at Wembley in a cup final. You forget that he did manage it in 1998, and in Cardiff on 3 other occasions. Or perhaps you didn't forget it because you'd never seen him win anything in your time as an Arsenal supporter. I don't care how churlish I feel on the inside, I was overjoyed to see the man hoist a trophy again, to smile, to be tossed in the air and doused with champagne. He has been a frustrating, at times infuriating figure at the club but only the hardest of hearts would begrudge him yesterday.
I will be back to perform a proper autopsy on the season and this cup final, but for now, let us just give credit where it is due. Arsenal told all the critics in the world to get stuffed, and I couldn't ask for anything more.
Arsenal were drifting during that 18 year period. The first division became dominated by Liverpool before George Graham arrived at Arsenal. David O'Leary went from a schoolboy to having over 500 appearances for the club. He played with some of the heroes of '71 all the way through to Rocky and Thomas and then Ian Wright. Arsenal apparently couldn't win the league so they became cup specialists of a sort.
I've learned that saying a club are "cup specialists" is about as complimentary as saying someone is a "Sunday player." Arsenal right now don't seem much like they want to expend the resources necessary to win the league, so if you look at their record over the past 9 seasons, they might have become "cup specialists" again. FA Cup winners 2005, Champions League final 2006, League Cup final 2007, League Cup final 2011, FA Cup winners 2014. No real sniff of the league title in that time.
So it's not to say that Arsenal have been dismal during the past 9 seasons. There have been 2 FA Cups in that time, and the chance at 3 more trophies. Maybe it does remind me of that 71-79 period. But if that's the case, does that mean 9 more years (or more) before Arsenal can claim to be the best in the league again? Are we really back to wandering in the wilderness?
I was prompted to write this because of the celebrations of Arsenal supporters after yesterday's FA Cup final victory over Hull City. So many people I know outside of England have only been following or supporting Arsenal for a few years. I asked my Yank friends on Friday, "Have any of you ever seen Arsenal lift a trophy?" Of a group of 20 or so, only 2 besides myself could make that claim, and one of them said it was the 2005 FA Cup. They have come to Arsenal after Wenger's glorious early years when one could take it for granted that being a supporter meant crowns of glory. For them, this trophy means something. They have adopted "she wore a yellow ribbon" and chants about "Wemberley" as though they grew up in Islington. I understand their feelings about yesterday's victory.
But what about those folk I saw on telly back in Blighty who were going mad at the final whistle? The red and white shirted supporters who lined the parade route?
I believe it was a colossal "Eff you!" to everyone who blathered on about "years without a trophy." It wasn't that we think that the FA Cup is a substitute for winning the league or winning Europe, because it isn't. And it wasn't just relief, exhaling, a release of tension. No, I sincerely think it was a giant middle finger to everyone who has felt it necessary to use NOT winning as a cudgel with which to beat Arsenal about the face and skull.
You must write a new narrative, scribes, about the Arsenal Football Club. Perhaps now you can reshape it to say "Arsenal have not won the league in more than a decade" if you like. That would be more damning than "trophyless" because it puts Arsenal in the same company as those people from the other end of Seven Sisters Road and as Jack Wilshere can tell you, there's nothing worse than that.
Arsenal have won the FA Cup 11 times, on par with Manchester United. Wenger sides have won the trophy 5 times, on par with Sir Alex Ferguson. So give him--and the players--credit, please. It wasn't perfect, but it answered so many of Arsenal's and the manager's critics. Arsenal won away from the the Grove on a big occasion. Arsenal overcame a poor start. Arsenal won a trophy. Is this a story worth commemorating with a book, or even a short story? I say no. But for those who have made "not winning anything" a means by which they can flog the manager and the players, surely this is enough?
Credit where it's due--to Santi Cazorla's brilliant strike, to the ever-ready Laurent Koscielny for his typically grubby falling-down goal, to Kieran Gibbs' heart-stopping intervention, and to the combination of the always frustrating Olivier Giroud and the sent-from-heaven Aaron Ramsey for that priceless winner. Credit to Yaya Sanogo for what is becoming a habit of running on and opening up the game like a proper striker.
And credit most of all to Arsene Wenger, who did in fact lead Arsenal to a winning performance at Wembley in a cup final. You forget that he did manage it in 1998, and in Cardiff on 3 other occasions. Or perhaps you didn't forget it because you'd never seen him win anything in your time as an Arsenal supporter. I don't care how churlish I feel on the inside, I was overjoyed to see the man hoist a trophy again, to smile, to be tossed in the air and doused with champagne. He has been a frustrating, at times infuriating figure at the club but only the hardest of hearts would begrudge him yesterday.
I will be back to perform a proper autopsy on the season and this cup final, but for now, let us just give credit where it is due. Arsenal told all the critics in the world to get stuffed, and I couldn't ask for anything more.
Thursday, May 15, 2014
By My Troth!
When I first decided to follow the Arsenal Football Club, it was September 1996 and they were 8th in the table. A friend of mine from Atlanta, upon breaking up with his long-time girlfriend and being a member of the leisure class, had spent the spring in London shagging a Pakistani girl and going to West Ham matches whilst eating some delicious curry and listening to dub and reggae. I envied him most for the West Ham matches.
It's very difficult to recall what the planet was like in 1996. The interwebs had barely become a place where people sought information at that time, and really that's a demarcation line for me. I was a research associate for a consulting firm and was tasked with figuring out just what this thing was where you could fire up a computer and read things from other parts of the world.
Atlanta and the Olympics--my friend and I had gone to Orlando (his home town) to watch 2 matches from the Olympic football tournament. France vs. Spain and Japan vs. Nigeria. Crikey, I saw some great players. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_at_the_1996_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_team_squads if you want to see who was there. Raul, of course, and a few players from France you might have heard of who in two years time would go on to win the World Cup, plus Nakata from Japan and a bloke named Kanu from Nigeria. The official record says that Kanu was 19--"You're having a larf!"
I told my friend as he regaled me with stories of his time going to matches in London that I needed to find a club to support. The Atlanta newspaper published the Premier League table once per week and it was from there that I "chose" the Arsenal. I said "That's a cool name," found out they were in London, and that, as they say, was that.
This was so far in the past that phrases such as "trophy drought," "war chest," "dry powder," or even "Le Professeur" had yet to be associated with the Arsenal. I really liked Dutch football at the time and the eventual combination of Dennis Bergkamp and (my favourite player at the time) Marc Overmars made me love the team (love, as opposed to like). I followed the the French national side intensely at the 1998 World Cup finals and when they returned as World Champions, I was sure that Arsenal would follow on with more greatness, only to see United win the treble (well, I didn't actually see it as televising club football hadn't made inroads into the USA yet).
I've said many times that the first live Arsenal match I ever saw on television was the 2000 Uefa Cup final versus Galatasaray--failure! Yes, that conditioned me to be an Arsenal supporter. "Tough break for your boys," my West Ham-loving friend remarked. He didn't mean it, but that's enough of that.
The next season matches began to be broadcast live on Fox Soccer Channel. The FA Cup semifinal vs. Spuds is burned into my memory. David Rocastle had just passed on, Hod the Sod was in charge of that lot, Graham had just been sacked--that match had subplots on top of subplots and included a come-from-behind victory fueled by goals from PV4 and Dreamy Bob. That's my first FA Cup memory. It's not very old for a man of my advanced years, but for a Yank with no access to the coverage that's available today, I think it makes me auncient.
Of course Arsenal would go on to lose to the McPoyles (trust me, it's an obscure yet appropriate reference) in a stolen final in Cardiff, where I christened one of their players "Stephanie Handjob." More heartbreak. Finishing second to United in the league again was nothing compared to the pain of that final, a referee who couldn't see things that appeared so obvious. It was that day that I started hating Liverpool. Most of my Yank friends who follow the Arsenal didn't understand why Liverpool are the club I despise above all others. Well, it started that day in 2001. It only becomes more intense after every conversation I have with Scousers who feel the need to remind me that their club invented the game. I'll leave discussions of Herbert Chapman for another time.
In the early 2000s, it seemed that playing in the FA Cup final was an Arsenal birthright. In 2002 I was back in Blighty for the "It's only Ray Parlour" final (but Freddie's goal in that match is also one of my favourite Arsenal goals of all time). I watched the agonising victory over Southampton and the penalty shootout victory over MUFC in seasons where Arsenal didn't win the league and lifting the grand old trophy meant the season wasn't a total loss.
But much like everything else regarding Arsenal in the last 10 years, winning the FA Cup seemed to stop mattering to the manager and the club. The League Cup loss to Birmingham City hurt but I've never cared much for the Milk Cup and was able to take that in stride. I'm one of those romantic old fools that still feels that winning the FA Cup means something, because winning it is tied so deeply to my first Arsenal memories. It stands for vanquishing old foes, allowing your players to march up the steps and your captain to lift a trophy, singing songs about Wemberly (as opposed to Cardiff, which was never very romantic at all) and yellow ribbons--for me, recalling goals by Overmars and Anelka that are adopted memories but I've seen them so often that it feels as though I was there. Remembering Tony Adams demanding that Vieira help lift the Cup in 2002. Remembering Vieira's last kick of the ball for the Arsenal. Tell us, Freddie, what's it like to win the FA Cup?
I'm charmed to see my Yank friends "up for the Cup." It's a reminder of another era, a bit less cynical, a bit old fashioned, really. So let's have a lovely day out at Wembley. COME ON YOU GUNNERS!
For your viewing pleasure:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnPaOi6F4wc A bit of "Hot Stuff" 1998
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP_8O05dSgc A Day in the Sun 2002
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTI8E-tBNu0 A Penalty Shootout 2005
Monday, April 21, 2014
On Width and Yanks Loving Liverpool
I don't have a florid beginning to this entry, no historical lead in or seemingly unrelated topic that is brought back at the very end to give an extra bit of meaning to the whole thing. Let's just get right to it.
Since the FA Cup Semi-final I've engaged in a series of discussions and one round of nearly handbags on twitter about Arsenal's continued use of the 4-3-3 or nominal 4-5-1 when defending and how that formation has its problems. The reason I've been pondering it is that it seemed that opposing sides had sussed how to deal with the formation and how its lack of width save from the fullbacks had left Arsenal open to counter attacks, especially when Arsenal play that ridiculous high defensive line that sees the centre backs across midfield and the fullbacks in the opposing penalty area.
Much was made post-Wigan about how less-turgid Arsenal looked when both Giroud and Sanogo (I can't type his name without thinking of De La Soul) were deployed up top of the formation. I think it could be called a 4-1-2-1-2? It wasn't a 4-4-2, not in the Tim (Gooner) Sherwood or Roy Hodgson sense, but it was something a bit different.
Much has since been made about Lukas Podolski's role or lack thereof at Arsenal after back-to-back braces against West Ham and Hull City AFC. After he was substituted against Wigan, he was in a bit of a strop, and every ITK Arsenal blogger said something similar to this: "We can't play him, he doesn't defend! We LITERALLY cannot play him! He makes it too difficult for the fullbacks!"
That's tremendous, isn't it? You have a player who, unlike all other available Arsenal forwards, actually SCORES GOALS but he CAN'T play because he doesn't DEFEND. I guess a similar argument should be made for Sagna. He defends but he doesn't score! He puts too much pressure on the forwards by not scoring! Yes, we know he's a defender, but here at the Arsenal we expect goal scorers to play like Jaap Stam and our defenders to score like Gerd Muller! TOTAL FOOTBALL!
Conventional wisdom has forced tremendous backtracking from Arsenal supporters over the years. The most recent example would be "Aaron Ramsey is shit; oops, I mean he's Welsh Jesus." After the Wigan match, conventional wisdom was all about Poldi's defending. Then four goals in two games and everyone's saying "Hmm, can a team starved for goals from the forward position afford NOT to play him?"
I have a question: Why are the fullbacks Arsenal's only option for providing wide attacking play? It's not a rule. It's not in the Bible or the Koran or the Torah or even the Talmud, to the best of my knowledge. My near spat on twitter (with one of my favourite Arsenal bloggers, no less) seemed to suggest that playing Podolski automatically means that whoever is at left back will run himself to death with no cover and will decide to leave the club and Arsenal will have to re-sign Traore because nobody will want to play for Arsenal under those conditions, or something to that effect.
This question ties into what appeared to be a two striker formation in the Wigan match. I heard no comments that suddenly Arsenal were horribly exposed down the left even though it was not put upon either of the forwards to cover the opponent's right wing.
The lovely fellows at Tuesday Club made a very clear and rational argument for more flexibility in the formation choice in their most recent podcast. You can listen to it if you like, it's quite entertaining. My biggest issue with the 4-5-1 or 4-3-3 is that the way Arsene deploys it, the 3 midfielders are all centrally deployed playmakers or pivot players or destroyers and the other two are dying to be central strikers unless Rozza starts at the top of the second 3. The Ox can offer some width but again he likes to attack from the inside.
Nobody anywhere has ever said that only the top 2 wide players should defend the flanks in this formation, but I think that it's clear that the personnel that make up Arsenal's midfield don't have the capacity nor the inclination to play wide in a 4-4-2 or 4-1-2-1-2. Arsenal are built to be narrow and attack through the middle right now, and the only attacking width comes from pushing the fullbacks so high up the pitch that a misplaced cross or loss of possession against a good team will mean punishment at the other end.
Yet there is Poldi, "all he does is score goals." I've never seen people chastise Dzeko for not being a conscientious defender, but this received wisdom that Podolski has no value because he doesn't defend has become an unshakeable truth among Arsenal supporters. I'm tired of seeing Giroud miss chance after chance (yes I know he does other things, yes I know he scored a great goal against WHU) and wail in Gallic frustration. Poor Sanogo isn't yet ready to lead the line and score much or at all. And yes, I know that Ramsey is now back and scored against Hull and he plays perfectly off of Giroud but again, there is a question of width when facing teams that pack the box and play tightly and try to hit Arsenal on the counter.
Even if Wenger did want to "experiment" with a two-striker formation (experiment? How many titles did the man win playing two?!!), he hasn't bought the players to make such a shift. There's no flexibility in the squad sheet so there really can be no flexibility in the tactics. The away loss to Stoke comes to mind when I think of a match where some tactical freshening could've helped.
The oddest thing about all this is that Wenger played midfielders who really did attack down the flanks on the tiny pitch at Highbury, and has eschewed this option at the Grove. There's a logic in there somewhere, I'm sure I'll find it.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In light of Liverpool's early coronation as champions, many Yanks are donning red shirts and professing love for all things Scouse, Stevie G, the tactical genius of Brendan Rodgers, the tragedy of Hillsborough, the Beatles, and a lot of shit about which they really know nothing. With this being NBC's first season broadcasting or streaming every match, this is for many of us an introduction to English football and there seems to be some bizarre romanticisation of Liverpool by the novice.
Yanks don't understand the loud-mouthed, know-it-all, "we invented the game, Shankley, Paisley, Alan Hansen was the fastest player in the history of football, what do you know about football you idiot Yank?, John Barnes was the greatest player ever, Ian Rush was the greatest player ever, King Kenny, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah" Liverpool fans. Christ they never fucking shut up. I'd rather listen to Teddy Sheringham read Glenn Hoddle's autobiography than have a discussion--or rather ATTEMPT to have a discussion--about football with a goddamned Scouser. Yanks have no idea, this was the most hated club in English football long before United started running the rule over the top flight.
The worst thing about it is the horrible pro-Liverpool bias among the English press and media. These people have this romantic memory of the greatness of Liverpool and how it will never be that good again and they spend column after column verbally wanking over a team led by a bitey racist and a serial diver. (No, they're not one and the same.)
You don't understand it, Yanks. They don't want your support. They don't like you. They think you're stupid. They think you don't know anything about the game. And on that point, they may be right.
Liverpool winning the league is bad for football. Arsenal haven't won the league in over a decade (and haven't played in the States in 25 years) and yet the number of Arsenal supporters routinely outnumbers all other clubs. This says that nobody becomes an Arsenal supporter because they're glory-hunting day-trippers. The number of Liverpool supporters in the USA will swell like rats from an abandoned house and will be just as annoying and vile and obnoxious.
You don't know what you're doing, Yanks. You simply don't know what you're doing.
Since the FA Cup Semi-final I've engaged in a series of discussions and one round of nearly handbags on twitter about Arsenal's continued use of the 4-3-3 or nominal 4-5-1 when defending and how that formation has its problems. The reason I've been pondering it is that it seemed that opposing sides had sussed how to deal with the formation and how its lack of width save from the fullbacks had left Arsenal open to counter attacks, especially when Arsenal play that ridiculous high defensive line that sees the centre backs across midfield and the fullbacks in the opposing penalty area.
Much was made post-Wigan about how less-turgid Arsenal looked when both Giroud and Sanogo (I can't type his name without thinking of De La Soul) were deployed up top of the formation. I think it could be called a 4-1-2-1-2? It wasn't a 4-4-2, not in the Tim (Gooner) Sherwood or Roy Hodgson sense, but it was something a bit different.
Much has since been made about Lukas Podolski's role or lack thereof at Arsenal after back-to-back braces against West Ham and Hull City AFC. After he was substituted against Wigan, he was in a bit of a strop, and every ITK Arsenal blogger said something similar to this: "We can't play him, he doesn't defend! We LITERALLY cannot play him! He makes it too difficult for the fullbacks!"
That's tremendous, isn't it? You have a player who, unlike all other available Arsenal forwards, actually SCORES GOALS but he CAN'T play because he doesn't DEFEND. I guess a similar argument should be made for Sagna. He defends but he doesn't score! He puts too much pressure on the forwards by not scoring! Yes, we know he's a defender, but here at the Arsenal we expect goal scorers to play like Jaap Stam and our defenders to score like Gerd Muller! TOTAL FOOTBALL!
Conventional wisdom has forced tremendous backtracking from Arsenal supporters over the years. The most recent example would be "Aaron Ramsey is shit; oops, I mean he's Welsh Jesus." After the Wigan match, conventional wisdom was all about Poldi's defending. Then four goals in two games and everyone's saying "Hmm, can a team starved for goals from the forward position afford NOT to play him?"
I have a question: Why are the fullbacks Arsenal's only option for providing wide attacking play? It's not a rule. It's not in the Bible or the Koran or the Torah or even the Talmud, to the best of my knowledge. My near spat on twitter (with one of my favourite Arsenal bloggers, no less) seemed to suggest that playing Podolski automatically means that whoever is at left back will run himself to death with no cover and will decide to leave the club and Arsenal will have to re-sign Traore because nobody will want to play for Arsenal under those conditions, or something to that effect.
This question ties into what appeared to be a two striker formation in the Wigan match. I heard no comments that suddenly Arsenal were horribly exposed down the left even though it was not put upon either of the forwards to cover the opponent's right wing.
The lovely fellows at Tuesday Club made a very clear and rational argument for more flexibility in the formation choice in their most recent podcast. You can listen to it if you like, it's quite entertaining. My biggest issue with the 4-5-1 or 4-3-3 is that the way Arsene deploys it, the 3 midfielders are all centrally deployed playmakers or pivot players or destroyers and the other two are dying to be central strikers unless Rozza starts at the top of the second 3. The Ox can offer some width but again he likes to attack from the inside.
Nobody anywhere has ever said that only the top 2 wide players should defend the flanks in this formation, but I think that it's clear that the personnel that make up Arsenal's midfield don't have the capacity nor the inclination to play wide in a 4-4-2 or 4-1-2-1-2. Arsenal are built to be narrow and attack through the middle right now, and the only attacking width comes from pushing the fullbacks so high up the pitch that a misplaced cross or loss of possession against a good team will mean punishment at the other end.
Yet there is Poldi, "all he does is score goals." I've never seen people chastise Dzeko for not being a conscientious defender, but this received wisdom that Podolski has no value because he doesn't defend has become an unshakeable truth among Arsenal supporters. I'm tired of seeing Giroud miss chance after chance (yes I know he does other things, yes I know he scored a great goal against WHU) and wail in Gallic frustration. Poor Sanogo isn't yet ready to lead the line and score much or at all. And yes, I know that Ramsey is now back and scored against Hull and he plays perfectly off of Giroud but again, there is a question of width when facing teams that pack the box and play tightly and try to hit Arsenal on the counter.
Even if Wenger did want to "experiment" with a two-striker formation (experiment? How many titles did the man win playing two?!!), he hasn't bought the players to make such a shift. There's no flexibility in the squad sheet so there really can be no flexibility in the tactics. The away loss to Stoke comes to mind when I think of a match where some tactical freshening could've helped.
The oddest thing about all this is that Wenger played midfielders who really did attack down the flanks on the tiny pitch at Highbury, and has eschewed this option at the Grove. There's a logic in there somewhere, I'm sure I'll find it.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In light of Liverpool's early coronation as champions, many Yanks are donning red shirts and professing love for all things Scouse, Stevie G, the tactical genius of Brendan Rodgers, the tragedy of Hillsborough, the Beatles, and a lot of shit about which they really know nothing. With this being NBC's first season broadcasting or streaming every match, this is for many of us an introduction to English football and there seems to be some bizarre romanticisation of Liverpool by the novice.
Yanks don't understand the loud-mouthed, know-it-all, "we invented the game, Shankley, Paisley, Alan Hansen was the fastest player in the history of football, what do you know about football you idiot Yank?, John Barnes was the greatest player ever, Ian Rush was the greatest player ever, King Kenny, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah" Liverpool fans. Christ they never fucking shut up. I'd rather listen to Teddy Sheringham read Glenn Hoddle's autobiography than have a discussion--or rather ATTEMPT to have a discussion--about football with a goddamned Scouser. Yanks have no idea, this was the most hated club in English football long before United started running the rule over the top flight.
The worst thing about it is the horrible pro-Liverpool bias among the English press and media. These people have this romantic memory of the greatness of Liverpool and how it will never be that good again and they spend column after column verbally wanking over a team led by a bitey racist and a serial diver. (No, they're not one and the same.)
You don't understand it, Yanks. They don't want your support. They don't like you. They think you're stupid. They think you don't know anything about the game. And on that point, they may be right.
Liverpool winning the league is bad for football. Arsenal haven't won the league in over a decade (and haven't played in the States in 25 years) and yet the number of Arsenal supporters routinely outnumbers all other clubs. This says that nobody becomes an Arsenal supporter because they're glory-hunting day-trippers. The number of Liverpool supporters in the USA will swell like rats from an abandoned house and will be just as annoying and vile and obnoxious.
You don't know what you're doing, Yanks. You simply don't know what you're doing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)