I breezed over some of the finer aspects of Arsenal's play yesterday, and some of the reasons to be cheerful if you're a Gooner. Now it's time for some doom and gloom. I said from the outset that I don't think Arsenal will win the league, and here are some of the reasons why:
While the state of Almunia's hair might be a bone of contention for some people, I think we can all agree that he is not the most reliable goalkeeper around today (though Cech and van der Saar are certainly doing their best to make him appear otherwise). I said yesterday that he makes very few long passes (which is good), but unfortunately he also makes very few saves (which is bad).
He did well against Bolton last week it must be said, but he's not a goalkeeper I would put much trust in. He just doesn't seem to have full command of his area, and he doesn't have the kind of personality that puts fear into the defenders in front of him, which I think is a really important part of being a good goalkeeper.
For me, I almost get the impression that Almunia is just some bum off the street who wandered into Highbury, started fiddling around with some goalkeeper gloves that were left unattended, and was then thrown into the squad due to some form of mix up, or maybe they needed him for a training exercise because they were a goalie short. Either way, he's been playing there ever since, he now finds himself as Arsenal's no. 1, and is paid in sandwiches and hair dye. A lovely story, but not very confidence-inspiring.
Arsenal other weakness in the back 5 is obvious when you look at the two goals they've conceded this season - both headers, one from a guy being marked by Gallas, the other from a guy being marked by Toure. Granted, the first header was scored by a player who stood at 7ft 9" at last count, and the other was scored by a player who only ever plays the game with his head (and by that I don't mean he plays the game intelligently. I mean he literally plays the game with his physical head and nothing else).
Even so, the Arsenal centre-back pairing are notoriously weak in the air, and this will continue to be a big problem for Arsenal, against good teams and bad teams alike. Arsenal might pass the ball better than you, but if you can get a few free-kicks, a few corner kicks, or in Stoke's case, a few throw-ins, you are in with a chance of getting a good result. Such a weakness is not to be found in the other three central defences that make up the 'big four', and such a weakness will, I think, cost Arsenal dearly once again.
I've mentioned the many positive aspects of Arsenal's midfield previously, but the one overwhelming negative is a lack of forcefulness and grit that's necessary if you're serious about winning things. Somebody in your midfield needs to be prepared to do all the donkey work, and I don't think Arsenal have that guy. Chelsea have Essien and Obi Mikel, United have Hargreaves and Fletcher, Liverpool have Mascherano, but Arsenal have Denilson [?]. They also have Song, whom I rate reasonably highly, but I don't see him being the answer.
The only way Arsenal can get by without a donkey is if they play exceptionally well in every game, and don't even give the other team a sniff. However, since such consistent form is virtually impossible, you can be sure their backs will be to the wall on a number of occasions, and without that midfield general present, they may just crumble.
To be honest, I don't even believe Flamini was the ideal candidate, but he was certainly better equiped than any of the potentials I've listed above. Wenger seems to have rested all his faith on the existing squad however, so Arsenal are going to have to make do with what they've got. And exciting as what they've got in midfield is, I just don't think it's sturdy enough to go the distance.
One final worrying trend on this note is that Fabregas has been forced to be 'the donkey' on a number of occasions this season, and this is clearly not what a player with his talent is there for. This is part of the reason why he hasn't contributed any goals or assists so far, and if it continues then Fabregas will suffer. And when Fabregas suffers, Arsenal suffer.
As an attacking force, the Gunners have very little to be concerned about, although I would still question their clinicalness [?]. Adebayor misses too many chances for my liking, and such profligacy cost Arsenal dearly in the run-in last season. Walcott and Eboue have shown similar tendencies, though both have improved as of late, so there is reason to be hopeful on that front.
Over all though, as much as I do love to watch Arsenal play when they're on song, a lack of steel through the middle will once again scupper their chances in my opinion, but then I'm hardly the first person to say that now, am I?
Many people will tell you that 'strength in depth' is where Arsenal fall down. This is a fallacy in my view, because I actually think Arsenal have a second-string team that could beat most lower half Premier League teams (Man Utd being an exception), and even some in the upper half. However, can their first team beat the likes of Chelsea and United when it matters? I remain sceptical.
While the state of Almunia's hair might be a bone of contention for some people, I think we can all agree that he is not the most reliable goalkeeper around today (though Cech and van der Saar are certainly doing their best to make him appear otherwise). I said yesterday that he makes very few long passes (which is good), but unfortunately he also makes very few saves (which is bad).
He did well against Bolton last week it must be said, but he's not a goalkeeper I would put much trust in. He just doesn't seem to have full command of his area, and he doesn't have the kind of personality that puts fear into the defenders in front of him, which I think is a really important part of being a good goalkeeper.
For me, I almost get the impression that Almunia is just some bum off the street who wandered into Highbury, started fiddling around with some goalkeeper gloves that were left unattended, and was then thrown into the squad due to some form of mix up, or maybe they needed him for a training exercise because they were a goalie short. Either way, he's been playing there ever since, he now finds himself as Arsenal's no. 1, and is paid in sandwiches and hair dye. A lovely story, but not very confidence-inspiring.
Arsenal other weakness in the back 5 is obvious when you look at the two goals they've conceded this season - both headers, one from a guy being marked by Gallas, the other from a guy being marked by Toure. Granted, the first header was scored by a player who stood at 7ft 9" at last count, and the other was scored by a player who only ever plays the game with his head (and by that I don't mean he plays the game intelligently. I mean he literally plays the game with his physical head and nothing else).
Even so, the Arsenal centre-back pairing are notoriously weak in the air, and this will continue to be a big problem for Arsenal, against good teams and bad teams alike. Arsenal might pass the ball better than you, but if you can get a few free-kicks, a few corner kicks, or in Stoke's case, a few throw-ins, you are in with a chance of getting a good result. Such a weakness is not to be found in the other three central defences that make up the 'big four', and such a weakness will, I think, cost Arsenal dearly once again.
I've mentioned the many positive aspects of Arsenal's midfield previously, but the one overwhelming negative is a lack of forcefulness and grit that's necessary if you're serious about winning things. Somebody in your midfield needs to be prepared to do all the donkey work, and I don't think Arsenal have that guy. Chelsea have Essien and Obi Mikel, United have Hargreaves and Fletcher, Liverpool have Mascherano, but Arsenal have Denilson [?]. They also have Song, whom I rate reasonably highly, but I don't see him being the answer.
The only way Arsenal can get by without a donkey is if they play exceptionally well in every game, and don't even give the other team a sniff. However, since such consistent form is virtually impossible, you can be sure their backs will be to the wall on a number of occasions, and without that midfield general present, they may just crumble.
To be honest, I don't even believe Flamini was the ideal candidate, but he was certainly better equiped than any of the potentials I've listed above. Wenger seems to have rested all his faith on the existing squad however, so Arsenal are going to have to make do with what they've got. And exciting as what they've got in midfield is, I just don't think it's sturdy enough to go the distance.
One final worrying trend on this note is that Fabregas has been forced to be 'the donkey' on a number of occasions this season, and this is clearly not what a player with his talent is there for. This is part of the reason why he hasn't contributed any goals or assists so far, and if it continues then Fabregas will suffer. And when Fabregas suffers, Arsenal suffer.
As an attacking force, the Gunners have very little to be concerned about, although I would still question their clinicalness [?]. Adebayor misses too many chances for my liking, and such profligacy cost Arsenal dearly in the run-in last season. Walcott and Eboue have shown similar tendencies, though both have improved as of late, so there is reason to be hopeful on that front.
Over all though, as much as I do love to watch Arsenal play when they're on song, a lack of steel through the middle will once again scupper their chances in my opinion, but then I'm hardly the first person to say that now, am I?
Many people will tell you that 'strength in depth' is where Arsenal fall down. This is a fallacy in my view, because I actually think Arsenal have a second-string team that could beat most lower half Premier League teams (Man Utd being an exception), and even some in the upper half. However, can their first team beat the likes of Chelsea and United when it matters? I remain sceptical.
No comments:
Post a Comment