I get it, but I just wish he'd put more effort into trying to get the best out of our £72m signing, especially since he actually managed it at the back end of last season.

Claudius wrote:

naz wrote:

I still don't get why he plays willian over pepe. I just don't get it

Pepe loses the ball. Arteta likes possession 

Saka loses the ball the most, but he has a far higher positive impact on our play - much like Sanchez previously.

Arteta's decision making during our poor run was questionable and the football an eyesore. Even then we would have had more than 2 points from Leeds, Southampton and Burnley if not for the red cards. I am really happy for him. I hope the theories about his management of Saliba for example aren't true. If he is willing to change, he has shown that he can get results. Very few managers would be able to come from the position he was in. If he can keep the team going in a positive direction, it would be an amazing turnaround.

Gazza M wrote:

naz wrote:

I still don't get why he plays willian over pepe. I just don't get it

willian is probably more useless, but pepe is just so chaotic. he doesn't know what he's going to do next, let alone his team-mates. doesn't combine anywhere near as well as saka or martinelli

Let alone ESR.  

The attack of Tierney, Martinelli, ESR, Laca, Saka looks to have a good understanding - so much so that PEA needs to start scoring as LWF or he becomes the weakest link after Pepe & Willian.

Rohit wrote:

Arteta's decision making during our poor run was questionable and the football an eyesore. Even then we would have had more than 2 points from Leeds, Southampton and Burnley if not for the red cards. I am really happy for him. I hope the theories about his management of Saliba for example aren't true. If he is willing to change, he has shown that he can get results. Very few managers would be able to come from the position he was in. If he can keep the team going in a positive direction, it would be an amazing turnaround.

The MU game becomes significant in this context IMO.

Coombs wrote:

Play Partey and we'll have the recovery pace to field two players like ESR. It'll be awesome.

Or play Tierney on the LW, ESR closer to Partey and Martinelli in front of them behind the striker. At least the football would be good!

Mikel on yesterday’s game

I thought we were really good both defensively and offensively and attacking-wise we had movement that is exactly what I want and exactly what we try and teach the players to do. In other moments we became a little bit sloppy in certain moments when we thought that the game was won. That’s something we have to improve. But overall it’s close to what we want.

If this is how we want to play, what was happening for the first 3 months of the season? Have we been waiting for ESR and Martinelli to be ready to play? Why did we stink up for so long

Claudius wrote:

Mikel on yesterday’s game

I thought we were really good both defensively and offensively and attacking-wise we had movement that is exactly what I want and exactly what we try and teach the players to do. In other moments we became a little bit sloppy in certain moments when we thought that the game was won. That’s something we have to improve. But overall it’s close to what we want.

If this is how we want to play, what was happening for the first 3 months of the season? Have we been waiting for ESR and Martinelli to be ready to play? Why did we stink up for so long

Because auba and Willian were doing the minimal, tracking back but not being protagonists going forwards.

Claudius wrote:

Mikel on yesterday’s game

I thought we were really good both defensively and offensively and attacking-wise we had movement that is exactly what I want and exactly what we try and teach the players to do. In other moments we became a little bit sloppy in certain moments when we thought that the game was won. That’s something we have to improve. But overall it’s close to what we want.

If this is how we want to play, what was happening for the first 3 months of the season? Have we been waiting for ESR and Martinelli to be ready to play? Why did we stink up for so long

ESR more than Martinelli. We basically didn't have a 10. Tried playing Willock and it didn't really work, tried Laca and it didn't really click either.

Aside from that, Arteta doesn't really want to let go of the handbrake himself until he knows for sure the team won't roll down the hill. What he will have hopefully learnt in the last few months is that playing conservatively doesn't get you results either.

speedy wrote:

Claudius wrote:

Mikel on yesterday’s game

If this is how we want to play, what was happening for the first 3 months of the season? Have we been waiting for ESR and Martinelli to be ready to play? Why did we stink up for so long

Because auba and Willian were doing the minimal, tracking back but not being protagonists going forwards.

This is what made think Willian playing had shadier elements to it. He clearly did not follow Arteta's plans yet was played regardless. Constantly negotiating the non-negotiables. Even Xhaka was dropped when he was badly off form (when he was cruddier than his usual middling performances).

Auba I can understand, he'd built up the trust over the years.

Claudius wrote:

Mikel on yesterday’s game

I thought we were really good both defensively and offensively and attacking-wise we had movement that is exactly what I want and exactly what we try and teach the players to do. In other moments we became a little bit sloppy in certain moments when we thought that the game was won. That’s something we have to improve. But overall it’s close to what we want.

If this is how we want to play, what was happening for the first 3 months of the season? Have we been waiting for ESR and Martinelli to be ready to play? Why did we stink up for so long

Several factors, but primarily injuries and a poorly balanced squad means we had restricted options in terms of shape, selections/roles and balance.  
Essentially Arteta has been doing a juggling act to date, which has seen a number of players struggle in less than ideal circumstances/positions/roles.

The availability of Martinelli and ESR has been significant - not just because of their quality and capability, but also their desire to play on the front foot in terms of attacking intent.
That said IMO perhaps the biggest impact has been in terms of the balance we now have in attack.  One of the biggest issues we have had in terms of goals has been trying to improve our right flank once teams looked to close down PEA on the left. We haven't been able to do so effectively until now, and the difference has been both the linking play by ESR AND Martinelli's availability.

Saka can now be moved across to the right flank where he is far better suited to the role than either Willian (who prefers to play wide), or Pepe (who prefers to make inside runs towards the area to get into shooting positions) = Willian is more likely to pass/cross, whilst Pepe is more likey to want to shoot.  By contrast Saka likes to play in the half-space along the vertical edge of the opposition area as seen for his cross that eventually resulted in Laca's 1st goal - something not seen often enough from either Willian or Pepe in that narrower position.  IMO it is his positioning along thee edge that has defenders in 2 minds as to if he will look to shoot or cross from that position.  Similarly being on the edge of the area also means defenders need to be careful about conceding fouls in the area, whereas they need not hesitate when Willian and Pepe are wider.  This then creates extra time in and around the area not only for Saka on the ball, but also for other attackers to make runs into the area to provide options.

The finishing touch to this new balance IMO is since the 2nd half v BHA we also see ESR playing more to the right side in combo with Saka, whilst we still have the Tierney-PEA/Martinelli combo on the left.  Not only do we now have 2 effective creative partnerships on each flank, the added bonus is they also stem from different areas of the pitch to give as asymmetric impact that makes it more difficult for defenders to negate.

I also think we will see more of the attacking play from the right looking for the runs of PEA and Martinelli from the left as much as providing supply to Laca as CF.

Lastly by having an effective #10/CAM who looks to move and link, it also means the CF role not only has close support and passing options making their link play more effective, but they are less required to drop deeper and can remain closer to goal t be better positioned in terms of chances created.

goon wrote:

Claudius wrote:

Mikel on yesterday’s game

If this is how we want to play, what was happening for the first 3 months of the season? Have we been waiting for ESR and Martinelli to be ready to play? Why did we stink up for so long

ESR more than Martinelli. We basically didn't have a 10. Tried playing Willock and it didn't really work, tried Laca and it didn't really click either.

Aside from that, Arteta doesn't really want to let go of the handbrake himself until he knows for sure the team won't roll down the hill. What he will have hopefully learnt in the last few months is that playing conservatively doesn't get you results either.

We did if we reinstated Ozil, but IMO it's not as simple as that option as a solution.
Aside from the lack of defensive cover etc, Ozil IMO is not the sort of #10 playmaker who creates space for others by his movement on and off the ball, but he can exploit space & movement via his passing.  By contrast ESR's game is all about movement (his own) in order to manipulate space on and off the ball for himself and others.  Ozil is all about the final ball or pre-assist, whereas ESR creates the opportunity for others to do so.

I also think the switch from 4231 to 343 during Project Re-start was partly due to the lack of supply of quality ball to the attack, and the lack of movement in the attack - both of which made Ozil less effective in what he was able to do, meaning both the player and position became redundant.

As per my last post I don't think Arteta was intending to play conservatively - I think Partey's injury has had a significant impact on our lack of dynamic play as we have not had the type of players available until now with ESR and Martinelli.  Partey's return will add impetus to our transition as well as an additional option in the final 3rd that neither Xhaka or Ceballos can.

I think it's worth remembering that tactical changes are also psychological, almost like re-arranging the furniture. It's not just that it's different, it also feels different, and sometimes that can mean a lot.

It was funny how people were saying we were awful at defending set pieces after conceding our first and second of the season.

It’s impressive, Goon.
As we said before, the defense has been great. We might even find that the inability to get the offense firing has put additional pressure on the defense. So finally getting Saka/ESR and co. firing might help us consolidate this great defensive condition.

IIRC there was another article recently that said we have the lowest numbers for losses of possession in the PL for this season thus far?
I presume this is in relation to the opposition pressing us in possession.

Anzac wrote:

IIRC there was another article recently that said we have the lowest numbers for losses of possession in the PL for this season thus far?
I presume this is in relation to the opposition pressing us in possession.

Wouldn't be surprising if it was for overall.

Honestly there's a lot of positives about Arty. Makes it all the more maddening why he undermines himself by playing those who aren't fighting for him.

When has he had 11 players who are "fighting for him" available?

Willian sure as shit wasn't fighting for anyone, but Arteta still insisted on playing him. He could have perhaps got more fight by dropping Willian for some youngster.

That you've only been able to identify "some youngster" is part of the problem. That'll go away with time.

Good read.

The question is why are super clubs putting their fates in the hands of inexperienced managers? Is it FOMO?

It's High Fashun.

I don’t think the the large majority of experienced managers offer anything more.

It's a good way to break the lithification of the game and to avoid being held hostage to the old guard and their cronies. Reward doesn't come without risk and all that.

TIL lithification.

Coombs wrote:

It's a good way to break the lithification of the game and to avoid being held hostage to the old guard and their cronies. Reward doesn't come without risk and all that.

yes. Especially since the guy who set us on our way down was also our best ever manager and most experienced.

Bring Back Kerrea Gilbert wrote:

It's High Fashun.

I think this is close, but there is some logic to the decisions beyond just being trendy and/or FOMO.

IMO Guardiola was the benchmark in terms of both being inexperienced when taking over at top level.
The other such appointment that solidified the decision as a genuine option was that of Zidane at RM.

The other key factor IMO is 'having club DNA' = Guardiola, Zidane, Arteta, Pirlo.
OGS & Lampard did have previous limited experience before their current appointments so they were not entirely new to the role, but they do meet the second factor.
Neither of these are actually anything new to club management & promotion from within used to be the norm with the LFC Boot Room Era being the best example, however it has become less likely in the modern era of mega revenues.

IMO it also possibly reflects the lack of options regarding both available top established managers, and bright new managers at lower level clubs.
Lastly it is also some recognition by the clubs that club legends are probably more likely to be given time to learn, than some bright young managerial hopeful from elsewhere who is more likely to be expected to hit the ground running.

banduan wrote:

Coombs wrote:

It's a good way to break the lithification of the game and to avoid being held hostage to the old guard and their cronies. Reward doesn't come without risk and all that.

yes. Especially since the guy who set us on our way down was also our best ever manager and most experienced.

IMO the management structure and playing style are massive factors in this.

Firstly how much of the decision making is centralised with the manager and how much is retained by the club.
Similarly how much of the playing style can be replicated if the manager is removed from the equation for whatever reason.

AW is the ultimate example of the former whereby he retained 'total control' of the football operations on and off the pitch, and his playing style based upon 'player intuition' was unique in top flight.  In both sides of the equation the club was more likely to 'fail' following the departure of AW as not, because he was the focus.

The Chapman Era offers a similar example of the first part, with Chapman being the first 'manager as god' and having total control as later became the norm.  However his playing style was able to be replicated by the club, following an internal promotion for successive managers to maintain both the style and success that dominated for a decade and was only broken by the intervention of WW2.  The success and longevity of the model was only later bettered by the LFC Boot Room Era from Shankly to Roy Evans/GH.

Barca have tried to replicate the Internal DNA model with Cruyff as the template in terms of establishing the club DNA, and with managerial appointments familiar with this from time at the club as former players. As such Arteta is a potential future managerial candidate, and more so if his preferred playing formation and style meets those expectations.

I actually think it is fucking crazy by all these clubs. In all your areas of discipline, more often than not some experience leads to better outcomes. There is a leveling off when the level of experience impacts outcomes, but it makes sense. A manager who has been on the job for some time will have had a chance to manage through multiple tactical challenges, has to deal with ebbs and flows of seasons, and has to manage multiple personnel matters both individual and team-wide. The experience will help him see patterns faster and react with much more subject matter authority.

So the smarter thing for these clubs to be doing is to do what Dein did when he hired Wenger. Go out and find an established manager who has already done it and has successfully deployed his ideas. Guardiola is not a great example: he had a risk free sandbox in which to test out his ideas with Barca B. What Arsenal did appointing Arteta was an act of mismanagement. Just as we did when we appointed Raul Director of Football when he had particular skills around player relationship management and not end-to-end management of football operations. We need to start using the language of governance around football because a lot of the things we see are an abdication of duty by club custodians.

Claudius wrote:

I actually think it is fucking crazy by all these clubs. In all your areas of discipline, more often than not some experience leads to better outcomes. There is a leveling off when the level of experience impacts outcomes, but it makes sense. A manager who has been on the job for some time will have had a chance to manage through multiple tactical challenges, has to deal with ebbs and flows of seasons, and has to manage multiple personnel matters both individual and team-wide. The experience will help him see patterns faster and react with much more subject matter authority.

So the smarter thing for these clubs to be doing is to do what Dein did when he hired Wenger. Go out and find an established manager who has already done it and has successfully deployed his ideas. Guardiola is not a great example: he had a risk free sandbox in which to test out his ideas with Barca B. What Arsenal did appointing Arteta was an act of mismanagement. Just as we did when we appointed Raul Director of Football when he had particular skills around player relationship management and not end-to-end management of football operations. We need to start using the language of governance around football because a lot of the things we see are an abdication of duty by club custodians.

Agreed and been saying this for some time.

Claudius wrote:

I actually think it is fucking crazy by all these clubs. In all your areas of discipline, more often than not some experience leads to better outcomes. There is a leveling off when the level of experience impacts outcomes, but it makes sense. A manager who has been on the job for some time will have had a chance to manage through multiple tactical challenges, has to deal with ebbs and flows of seasons, and has to manage multiple personnel matters both individual and team-wide. The experience will help him see patterns faster and react with much more subject matter authority.

So the smarter thing for these clubs to be doing is to do what Dein did when he hired Wenger. Go out and find an established manager who has already done it and has successfully deployed his ideas. Guardiola is not a great example: he had a risk free sandbox in which to test out his ideas with Barca B. What Arsenal did appointing Arteta was an act of mismanagement. Just as we did when we appointed Raul Director of Football when he had particular skills around player relationship management and not end-to-end management of football operations. We need to start using the language of governance around football because a lot of the things we see are an abdication of duty by club custodians.

I disagree. Obviously if you have two identical candidates, but one has experience as management level and one doesn't, then you go for the one that does. But if you talk to four people and the one without experience stands out the most, surely you go with him? Most experience counts for nothing, every club and every job is different. Experienced managers fail more often than they succeed.

I actually think one of the biggest things clubs get wrong is hiring managers based on their CV rather than one that's a good fit, and I'm glad we don't have guys at executive level who'll go for 'safe' appointments like Mourinho, Ancelotti or even Poch.

goon wrote:

I actually think one of the biggest things clubs get wrong is hiring managers based on their CV rather than one that's a good fit, and I'm glad we don't have guys at executive level who'll go for 'safe' appointments like Mourinho, Ancelotti or even Poch

Pochs CV is garbage. Got fired from two out of three clubs he's managed and won zero trophies, less than Arteta Laudrup Di Matteo or McLeish.

Exactly. Spurs' trash should not become our dinner.

I definitely haven't believed Arteta is our main problem, but it's pretty noticeable how much calls for his head have receded based on a series of decent results against modest opposition.

This improvement will have to be sustained for ages for me to think replacing him would be an issue, at the moment it feels like a neither here nor there thing, or a decision that is mainly about the stability and character we lack in other areas.

Anyone who thinks that installing Pochettino would harm our fortunes is kidding themselves. The question isn't whether other managers can do what Arteta has done, it's whether any manager could make us competitive despite our many other deficiencies.

Burnwinter wrote:

I definitely haven't believed Arteta is our main problem, but it's pretty noticeable how much calls for his head have receded based on a series of decent results against modest opposition.

This improvement will have to be sustained for ages for me to think replacing him would be an issue, at the moment it feels like a neither here nor there thing, or a decision that is mainly about the stability and character we lack in other areas.

Anyone who thinks that installing Pochettino would harm our fortunes is kidding themselves. The question isn't whether other managers can do what Arteta has done, it's whether any manager could make us competitive despite our many other deficiencies.

IMO the answer is NO, simply based upon our squad and lack of ambition in terms of the required rebuild, whereby our priority decisions are based upon finances and not football.

As such I do not believe Arteta will achieve the objective without additional investment beyond our 'normal' revenues.
At best I hope he may be supported in the market in the summer, but even so it may come too late for several key members to the squad if we fail to retain UEFA football.

Haven't played much attractive football this season but stylistically by stats we are getting there it seems behind those 3 clubs. You can also see what Potter is doing with BHA although having no results. 

Moyes team the long ball specialists as expected, WBA will probably go up there now that Big Sam is in charge. Below is a comparison of Arsene's time here.

Bascially we were slightly faster and more direct under Wenger while also having more passes. 

Perhaps the mitigating factor in each example can be explained in terms of players.

Currently we have the likes of Xhaka, Luiz, Elneny etc who like to recycle to retain possession = slower and more passes, whereas under AW we had more technical players AND we were more direct getting the ball forward to Giroud as the linking target man type at CF for our technical players to play off.

Lastly I'd say our play before and after the Boxing Day game v CFC has been chalk and cheese. We've scored almost as many goals in the games starting with CFC as we did up to then in about 1/3 the time. We've also upped our tempo and seeing more use of pace, movement and space on and off the ball. Defensively we have only conceded 1 goal and whilst Leno has made a number of saves they are of lower quality chances being conceded within the area.

As such if we continue in this manner I'd expect to see our direct speed to get closer to that seen with the likes of LFC & Co.

On a side note it is interesting to see the differences in terms of both the number of teams who take more passes per sequence now compared to earlier, and also the changes in style being more pronounced for the likes of MU & TH in particular following their changes in manager.

Anzac wrote:

Perhaps the mitigating factor in each example can be explained in terms of players.

Currently we have the likes of Xhaka, Luiz, Elneny etc who like to recycle to retain possession = slower and more passes, whereas under AW we had more technical players AND we were more direct getting the ball forward to Giroud as the linking target man type at CF for our technical players to play off.

Lastly I'd say our play before and after the Boxing Day game v CFC has been chalk and cheese.  We've scored almost as many goals in the games starting with CFC as we did up to then in about 1/3 the time.  We've also upped our tempo and seeing more use of pace, movement and space on and off the ball.  Defensively we have only conceded 1 goal and whilst Leno has made a number of saves they are of lower quality chances being conceded within the area.

As such if we continue in this manner I'd expect to see our direct speed to get closer to that seen with the likes of LFC & Co.

On a side note it is interesting to see the differences in terms of both the number of teams who take more passes per sequence now compared to earlier, and also the changes in style being more pronounced for the likes of MU & TH in particular following their changes in manager.

except for luiz all those players were here under AW for the season he's comparing.