Football players often talk about fulfilling “dreams”; as if the vocation they are already in isn’t one. But when they speak of fulfilling “dreams”, it often encompasses to some degree, a revision of the ones they had in their childhood: playing for the best team possible, winning your first international cap, or like a New Star Soccer game, progression from anonymity to super-stardom  beginning from the lower echelons of the football league to the team that you support. Of course, it rarely happens that way but for one player in particular, he can realistically say he is “living the dream”.

Two years ago, Carl Jenkinson was playing in the Blue Square Premier League with Eastbourne before he spent another loan spell at non-league side Welling United FC. He had barely played ten games for his parent club, Charlton Athletic, before the unexpected call from Arsenal came. It might have had something to do with former coach, Phil Parkinson, who spent a brief time at Arsenal after he was sacked although Arsène Wenger insists Jenkinson was under the radar for a while, particularly because of his stints with Finland U-19 and U-21. “It was a very steep learning curve for me,” says Jenkinson. “I believed I was capable of playing at the highest level, and sometimes it is about getting seen by the right people at the right time.”

Jenkinson was instantly thrust into the limelight in his début season and endured some difficult periods but this season, at the age of 20, he has matured into a dependable figure for Arsenal. In his latest match against Montpellier at the intimate Stade de la Mosson, and particularly up against the intense pressure the team faced in the second-half, Jenkinson came out with a much-heralded performance. His low cross to assist Gervinho for Arsenal’s winner capped a superb all-round display.

Jenkinson‘s presence in the starting eleven has seemingly been steadier than his counterpart on the other side, Kieran Gibbs, who has caught the eye with marauding runs and his understanding with Lukas Podolski. (Of Arsenal’s ten goals this season, eight featured build up from the left and only two towards the right). In some ways, that’s Jenkinson‘s job; acting as a balancer for Arsenal as they press-on with more fruitful combinations on the other side. Indeed, one of the reasons for Arsenal’s defensive success this season has been the cautiousness of their full-backs.

The team worked on it extensively in pre-season but old habits just as quickly resurfaced when Arsenal entered the field for their first match of the season against Sunderland. As early as the eleventh minute, Steve Bould noticed that twice, Sunderland had opportunities to score from attacks originating from fast breaks down the channels. Therefore, he instructed the full-backs to be more aware whenever they get forward. Thereafter, The Black Cats mounted no serious threat and of the 84 teams that played in the Football League and Premier League in the first weekend, they were the only side not to win a corner. Perhaps the cautiousness has suited Jenkinson because it was the area he was considered weakest – positionally – and in the tour of Asia against Manchester City, that was exposed. Can he show just how far he has progressed in a small space of time in the upcoming game against them? Certainly, the way Arsenal defend now, getting back into a compact 4-4-1-1 shape and the wingers double up have protected him much better.

There is, however, a flip-side to instructing your full-backs not to get forward as frequently. Because, as we know from last season in particular, when Arsenal were stripped of all of their natural full-backs, it has had a big effect on the team’s fluency getting forward. It was one of the reasons why Arsenal failed to get off the mark after their first two games of the season. Full-backs are now one of the most crucial positions on the pitch; they often start as the “free” man and also need to possess the all-round game to make a difference at both ends of the pitch. Arsene Wenger says “having a full-back who creates is an important part of winning.” Indeed, I’d put down Wigan Atheltic’s miraculous turnaround last season to the signing of left wing-back Jean Beausejour. Before he arrived at the club, Roberto Martinez used a central midfielder, David Jones, in that position. Before defeat to Swansea in March, they were hovering in the relegation zone; 11 games later, they had picked up 23 points out of33. In a strange way, Jean Beausejour gave the team balance and in that sense, we are seeing the same thing with Arsenal and their two full-backs this season.

Last season, I talked a lot about the bias Arsenal had towards the right-side and the subtle various it had on Arsenal’s play; the runs of Theo Walcott to break out of the triangles they created while the use of a right-footed winger on the left meant play tended to slant anyway. This season, Arsenal are using both flanks equally as much – indicating how well they are switching the ball from side to side – but it’s interesting to note *how* the build-up differs on each side.

As we can see from the player influence diagram below and the pass graphics, the build up is deeper on the right-hand side than it is on the left. This might be for a number of reasons; (i) Thomas Vermaelen’s tendencies to step out thus allowing Gibbs to advance higher up the pitch; (ii) Per Mertesacker acting as the “stopper” therefore staying deeper while (iii) Mikel Arteta usually starts towards the right of the double-pivot. And (iv) Arsenal’s best combination play, between Santi Cazorla, Lukas Podolski and one of the central midfielders, happens on the left.

That difference between two flanks can be shown by the chalkboards of Carl Jenkinson and Kieran Gibbs in the game against Sunderland. (It’s the mirror image of last season where the build up generally started deeper on the left as opposed to the right. Click here to see example).

Gibbs is allowed the freedom to get forward more easily due to more options around him. As a result, his passes are less frequent and involve a lot of “give-and-goes”. One might say the responsibility is considerably less in this regard for Gibbs as opposed to Jenkinson who is asked to be “out-ball” for Arteta or Mertesacker. By the same token, Jenkinson has a tougher task passing the ball out because he often has to go inside or back. As such, opposition might press him higher up the pitch. That was certainly the case against Montpellier Who doubled up on Jenkinson whenever Arsenal moved the ball wide. And because of Gervinho’s propensity to drift inside, he never really was an option for Jenkinson to pass to down the line. (Click here to open .PDF file to see average positions). Nevertheless, Jenkinson handled the pressure superbly and when he did get forward, he whipped the ball a fantastic ball for Gervinho to score. It’s the one part of his game which he hasn’t quite delivered on this season although we know just how well he can cross it – Jenkinson has made 15 tackles so far in the Premier League, joint seventh with four other players – but just like the mantra that has pervaded the collective this season, Jenkinson realises that he has a job, first and foremost, to do for the team. And he’s quietly risen to the responsibility.

This post first appeared on Arsenal Insider

If, as the orange and black banner draped against the North Stand is correct, and Robin van Persie does score “when he wants”, it was evidently his day off as he left it to the others to get the goals. On the face of it, perhaps it was a good thing as it showed Arsenal are not so reliant on Robin van Persie and Arsène Wenger indicated as much, although he would have wanted van Persie to continue his goalscoring form and thus kept him on until the end. But when Kieran Gibbs opened the scoring, the most surprising thing wasn’t the fact that he had scored but that it was Arsenal 17th different goalscorer in the Premier League – more than any other team. What reliance on van Persie?

Of course, that would be missing the point as Arsenal have hugely been dependent on their captain and as Gibbs scored, it merely confirmed what Arsenal had been missing for much of the season – a coherent squad and chiefly the presence of full-backs. Because, not having recognised full-backs on the pitch has affected Arsenal tactically and therefore forced them to play in a different way. (In one sense, perhaps Wenger is culpable as he could have altered his team’s shape). At the beginning of the season, having lost both Samir Nasri and Cesc Fábregas and then Jack Wilshere through injury, Arsenal switched emphasis towards the flanks. When the full-backs quickly succumbed to injury, Arsenal were not able to produce the same combinations that we are regularly seeing now between Bacary Sagna and Theo Walcott and Gibbs and Gervinho as they showed for the first goal, thus they tried to force they through the centre. It’s no coincidence, then, Arsenal’s fluency suffered in that period. Now, as Wenger says, there is “a more variation in our build-up play and therefore we are more dangerous as well.” And when Theo Walcott scored the second to essentially confirm the win when The Gunners completely dominated, each part of Arsenal’s game finally fell into place. Because, that type of goal is how Wenger has always wanted to score and quietly, he will be disappointed that it hasn’t more often. Not the pass from Alex Song, which he has been doing all season, but the penetrative ball behind the full-back, which Arsenal made a trademark of last season, and which seemed a perfect fir for the three-striker system.

Speaking of plans, Wenger also feels the team has come out of their shell in recent weeks and that’s because they are clearer of their game. Indeed, he indicates the early season form and tactics they used may have been dictated by the unfortunate circumstances they were in and thus had to play more cautiously (think about how their pressing had changed and the run of eight games unbeaten from October to mid-December where they almost exclusively dealt in low scores). ”Since then [defeats to Fulham/Swansea],” said Wenger, “we have more options and a bit better plan. That has allowed the team to feel more confident.”

Their new-found exuberance can be typified by the way in which Kieran Gibbs was allowed to get forward against Aston Villa and previously against Everton although when he did, Arsenal also left themselves open. Luckily for Arsenal, Alex Song has been on standby as cover in recent games and has had to drop back into his spaces more frequently. It’s an area Arsenal can still improve on as pushing two full-backs forward can cause undue strain on the back, not to mention when your centre-back also decides to join in the attack, and they looked slightly vulnerable on the break.

Nevertheless, defenders are crucial in developing a fluent attacking game and Arsenal often seek to take advantage, as they look to free them in the build up depending on who they are playing (against a 4-5-1, centre-backs become key while versus a two-man attack, the full-backs are usually the ones who receive it from the back first. Aston Villa made it easy because they dropped deep and allowed Arsenal time to play it out). “When we did not win games [earlier in the season], I did not feel we played as badly as people said. We have gained a lot of confidence in our play out from the back and that makes a massive difference,” said Wenger. “The defenders who play out from the back give us a security now and that allows the team to be much more confident.”

The fate of Arsenal’s season has usually suffered from the absence of quality defenders; this season, their presence has reignited them.

When hoping to get a glossary commissioned translating Anglo-French football terms, journalist Philippe Auclair realised just how under-developed England’s vocabulary was when it came to the beautiful game. Writing in the biography Cantona: The Rebel Who Would Be King, he says; “The French (and indeed, the Spaniards, the Italians and, believe it or not, the Germans) had at their disposal an arsenal of descriptive words and phrases which my English press-box colleagues had yet to coin.” To highlight his point, he says any piece of skill would generally be referred to as a “flick” whilst “nutmeg” springs to mind as perhaps the only skill to have been baptised.

The English lexicon is similarly unrefined in regards to football positions: a striker is a striker even if in a 4-4-2, one of those strikers drops deep to pick up the ball. Likewise, players are often strictly defined by their roles. For example, the common argument you hear today is that Alex Song cannot get forward because he is a holding midfielder. And indeed, that’s the same argument used against Andre Santos, who has been unfairly criticised for constantly looking to get forward to support the attack.

To be fair to Santos, he had rarely played at full-back for his club side, Fenerbahce, before signing (although he did for Brazil) so his enthusiasm to join the attack may have partly stemmed from that. However, in saying that, his forays forward have been selective and they only have the look of reckless abandon because when he does get forward, he tends to do so with the aim of maximising from the opportunity. Yet, the misgivings about his excursions up the pitch say more about the tactical sophistications of the English game than about Andre Santos’s deficiencies.

In Brazil, the full-back is known as the “lateral” which is perhaps misleading as although it gives the notion of width; it could just as well be misconstrued for the English definition of the full-back whose primary purpose is as a defender who defends across the back-four. However, in Brazil, the full-back is an integral part of attack and the term “lateral” indicates “a wide player, but not necessarily a defensive one,” writes Jonathan Wilson. This idea can be further elaborated by José Thadeu Gonçalves who, writing in the book, Principles of Brazilian Soccer (1998), highlights just how important the full-back is as an attacking capacity.

“One of the most effective ways to penetrate into the offensive zone during the game is utilizing the lateral parts of the field. Because of the excessive development of defensive tactics and the tremendous physical power of many teams, the only way to identify an open space in that zone by moving the attackers and the outside midfielders inside, carrying their marks, and opening space to the full-back moving forward to become the attacker responsible for the crossing.”

The quote has particular resonance to the scenarios Arsenal frequently face and you don’t need to go further than the last fixture against Fulham to see how The Gunners are often faced with deep-lying teams. Thus the attacking thrust of Santos becomes more significant and towards the end of the 1-1 draw with Fulham, he nearly created the winner.

Arsenal failed to get enough from their full-backs last season, particularly on the left. Gael Clichy’s performances, while not the disaster some fans have made out, didn’t really rise above the average. Defensively he was generally solid and particular when Arsenal pressed, he was magnificent but he tended to handle pressure badly and suffered from a lack of concentration which sometimes led to him giving away dangerous opportunities. In attack, though, he was not very effective and as a result, Arsenal suffered when breaking down defensive sides. It proved crucial towards the end of the season as a lack of creativity proved to be the downfall of their title challenge.

In defence, Santos is not the liability he’s made out to be. In seven matches in the league, he averages 4.9 tackles per game – the highest at the club – and makes the most interceptions too at 3.4 per game. The notion that he dives into tackles far too much is fair – as he can commit a lot of fouls – but it’s also a key part of Arsenal’s game. With every ball he wins back quickly, he’s initiating another attack, in a sense, similar to Alex Song who also commits his fair share of fouls but makes even more successful tackles. Risk comes with reward might be the mantra but as intelligent players, they are being selective also. Nevertheless, Santos has shown a composure on one-on-ones that is essential to Arsenal, especially playing on the left side as he does. And that’s because Arsenal have a bias to the right-hand side; 34% of their attacks start on that side as opposed to 31% on the left and that figure increases to 37% at home matches. The reason for the tendency to build up towards that side may be that Alex Song and Aaron Ramsey, two of the three central midfielders, are attracted the to the right whilst Theo Walcott is given a box-to-box role on the flanks. Gervinho, on the other hand – and on the other side – is afforded more freedom and generally stays up the pitch. Bearing that in mind, you might want to forgive Andre Santos if he ever does complain about the lack of protection he gets.

That difference can be shown by their chalkboards in the game against West Bromwich Albion; Santos had more of the ball deeper as generally he was isolated while Carl Jenkinson was allowed to get forward more easily due to more options around him. As a result, his passes are less frequent and involve a lot of “give-and-goes” while Santos often has to go inside for options and use his drive to influence higher up the pitch. Full-backs are generally the only players “free” on the pitch and Santos’ bursts down the left can leave the defence unaware just as when he did scoring against Chelsea and Olympiakos.

In the game against Fulham, however, and that may be the trend in the coming games as Arsenal are to play without a recognised right-back, Santos was expected to provide more of the width. Johan Djourou’s distribution was understandable more simplistic for a player in a make-shift position and as such, most of Arsenal’s play came on the opposite side.

Andre Santos, though, realises the differences between the English and Brazilian games and is learning quickly in order to improve the defensive side of his game. Arséne Wenger, however, signed Santos for his attacking capabilities and is not going to let the English game’s restrictive linguistics hold him back: “For me, having a full-back who creates is an important part of winning,” he said. “Take the Brazilian national team, the ones who have won trophies anyway, you will see that there is always two good full-backs. With two average full-backs they would not have won.” Arsenal already have one outstanding attacking full-back and it’s a shame Bacary Sagna can’t join him due to injury.

The argument that Arsenal are reliant on Robin van Persie would prove most conclusive when the Dutchman isn’t scoring goals, as opposed to when he is. So, in the first league match in seven games in which he has failed to score, are Arsenal reliant on Robin van Persie? That answer is probably yes although the overriding reason for Arsenal’s mute performance on Saturday seemed to be down to fatigue as well as Fulham’s obdurate defending.

Arsène Wenger admitted his team lacked accuracy in their passing and that proved crucial given Fulham defended as they did. Essentially though, Arsenal were too functional and the selection was in need of a little invention. Yossi Benayoun’s impressive cameos deserved a bigger stage while Abou Diaby was deemed not match fit to start – both players will surely take their starting births against Manchester City in midweek. As a result, Wenger pushed Aaron Ramsey up the pitch from the outset before the inevitable fatigue factor came into affect and he had a couple of chances himself to give Arsenal the lead. Robin van Persie had a shot cleared off the line but he was forced to take more of a creative role because Arsenal’s passing lacked urgency. The fact that Theo Walcott has laid on so much of his goals highlights just how Arsenal have changed; where it was once about quick passing around the box, they now procrastinate that movement before feeding the ball to the wide men to deliver. Thankfully, Walcott’s movement was good and given the opportunity to test John-Arne Riise, he impressed. The Gunners though failed to break down Fulham’s defence and the 4-4-2 in the second-half suited the urgency of the situation.

Fulham, on the other hand, have carved out a niche in recent years of being organised and tough to break down and despite the flurry at the end, were well worth the point. They would have preferred to play a more functional Arsenal and it showed; in the moments where passed with urgency they looked very good. Unfortunately, Vermaelen’s goal  and the sustained pressure soon after came much too late to force the win although they mustn’t be too unhappy at the result.

1. Aaron Ramsey plays the second-half from the beginning

A key feature of Arsenal’s second-halves – when they are searching for the win – has been to push Aaron Ramsey up the pitch and aiming to profit from his drive. But Wenger initiated that straight away against Fulham, indicating he had always had reservations about Aaron Ramsey’s fitness levels. The Welshman picked the ball higher up the pitch than normal but what was most notable was that he also pressed higher making Arsenal’s formation look more like a slanted 4-4-2 off the ball. But of course, Arsenal do not press intensely therefore the closing down was more about positioning and he did well to help create a barrier to stop the easy pass from midfield. As a result, Fulham had a lot of the ball just inside their half.

Fulham matched Arsenal in possession in the first-half before The Gunners gradually grew more dominant. The relaxed pressing this season meant Fulham could have a lot of the ball in front of the defence with Danny Murphy and Dickson Etuhu happy to oblige.

Ramsey should have probably scored with one of the cut-backs he received but his movement continues to improve and it’s not gone unnoticed. Robin van Persie singles out his intelligent runs against Norwich: “He was a bit unlucky against Norwich as he should probably have been passed to on a couple of occasions when he’d shown great movement to get into good positions,” said van Persie. “I should definitely have given him one ball, looking at it again, and there were other times too. If he keeps going that, though, he’ll score goals.”

Ramsey ensured he got on to the end of moves as well as starting them. His drive set the tone for the early exchange.

2. Arsenal miss Sagna. 3. And Fulham try to target that

The absence of Bacary Sagna hasn’t been made as obvious as it might have from a defensive viewpoint as Laurent Koscielny and on Saturday, Johan Djourou, have filled in with admirably. But it was from an attacking viewpoint as Arsenal hardly passed the ball our from deep on the right side.

Fulham targeted Arsenal's right-hand side particularly in the absence of Sagna. As a result, Djourou was denied possession from deep and Arsenal's play was slanted to the left.

However, that’s not to say Djourou is poor on the ball. Rather, Fulham targeted him in the build up and the movement of Clint Dempsey constantly dragged him in the centre. What Martin Jol did well was to keep Dempsey up the pitch – almost as a left-ish striker thus denying Djourou from getting forward. His deployment was the reverse of a defensive winger; whereas someone like Dirk Kuyt (a defensive winger) would try and stop the attacking full-back influencing by tracking him all the way back, Dempsey stayed up the pitch to give Djourou second doubts about getting forward. Djourou couldn’t and he was under pressure each time he got forward. In the second-half, Fulham dropped back into their own half and the Swiss was more freely able to get forward. However, while his passing was surprisingly safe, he was unable to provide the overlap Sagna so typically provides. (Part of that may go down to the switch to the 4-4-2 thus making Arsenal more direct).

Johan Djourou's passes in either half.

4. Walcott impresses as a winger

The upshot of Fulham targeting Johan Djourou was that he was unable to support Theo Walcott and get on the overlap. As a result, Walcott was forced to play a more orthodox role and he performed that very dangerously. His cross led to Arsenal’s equaliser and along with the powerful runs of Andre Santos on the other side, he stood as Arsenal’s best chance of creating another goal.

Theo Walcott received most of his passes on the touchline as John-Arne Riise gave him little space behind while the blocking of Djourou overlapping meant a lot of his early passes were backwards.

5. Bobby Zamora didn’t fancy Per Mertesacker

Per Mertesacker’s Arsenal career has been solid if not spectacular and being a novice, he might have expected to be given a more sterner test in Europe’s best league™. But so far, he’s been given an easy ride with Bobby Zamora choosing to play on Thomas Vermalen’s side instead. The battle between the two was intriguing and Zamora looked to have the last laugh when Vermaelen put through his own net. But the Belgian was determined to put that right and he came up with the winner after a run which went unmarked. (Surely, Zamora wasn’t expected to track him, was he?!) Fulham’s play generally slanted down Arsenal’s left, however, so perhaps that’s the reason why Zamora was mostly up against Vermaelen. But Mertesacker should expect busier afternoons than this.

Bobby Zamora picked the ball up mainly on the left.

6. Fulham’s lack of adventure shows in Wojiech Szczesny’s kicking

“Good ball retention starts from the keeper” writes Zonal Marking but job is made easier if the opponent let’s you. Fulham were more than happy to let Szczesny play it short and he did, attempting only one long pass. Which, inevitably, was unsuccessful.

8. Van Persie the creator

When Robin van Persie first assumed the no.9 position, he was thought to be unsuited to the role because he liked to dropped deep to pick up the ball. In the early parts of that tactical reshuffle, Arsenal profited from van Persie getting into space and playing his team-mates in. He did that again against Fulham, particularly in the first-half and he was unlucky his pass to Andrey Arshavin was ruled out for offside. He played a bit deeper, usually looking to give moves some impetus as Arsenal’s passing was, at times, too slow while Fulham defended deep to deny him any room behind. Mentally, Arsenal never looked fully focused in breaking down such a stubborn defence and the switch to 4-4-2 at the end was necessary. He still roamed around the pitch and Arsenal looked more urgent in the final ten minutes, van Persie still reminding everyone that he can perform a creative role if needed.

Van Persie got onto the end of two crosses in his last game against Dortmund and generally ran the channels well. Against Fulham, with Arsenal playing with two players hugging the touchline, he tended to remain central.

Arsenal: Szczesny (6), Djourou (6), Mertesacker (6), Vermaelen (7), Andre Santos (7), Song (6), Ramsey (6), Arteta (6), Walcott (6), van Persie (6), Arshavin (5).
Subs: Fabianski, Diaby (6), Koscielny, Frimpong, Gervinho(4), Chamakh (4), Benayoun.

Fulham: Schwarzer (5), Baird (6), Hangeland (6), Senderos (6), Riise (6), Etuhu (7), Murphy (7), Dempsey (5), Ruiz (6), Dembele (6), Zamora (6).
Subs not used: Etheridge, Johnson (4), Kasami (4), Gecov, Hughes, Frei, Briggs.

Ratings breakdown: 1-3: Absolute stinker, 4: below par; ineffective. 5: par, average. 6: Above average; solid if unspectacular. 7: Impressive; good performance. 8-10: Substantial impact, match winning.

NB: Our thoughts go to Gary Speed and his family. Speed impressed me very much as a player and also a human being. I remember thinking, with a bit of luck, he could have achieved more in the early/mid nineties and not just his superb league title triumph with Leeds United. Ultimately, his versatility was to his detriment. It was a dream for him to become Welsh manager, something you work your whole life for and for some reason – and I think his privacy deserves to respected at this moment – it was gone in an instant. May Gary Speed rest in peace.

Pat Rice cannot wait for the return of Arséne Wenger to the dugouts – the manager still has one game remaining in his touchline ban from UEFA – and it’s easy to see why having put through a stern examination of his coaching credentials that he didn’t want. While against Udinese the comfort of the early goal dictated the encounter, he got no such assistance away to Borussia Dortmund as Jürgen Klopp sought to impose his style as quickly as possible. And they did, creating an overwhelming swirl of yellow and black around Arsenal in possession. It was a strategy that earned them many plaudits last season and while they haven’t made the best of starts this year, they aimed to put that right against Arsenal, the team that in the past, have been the model of the tireless, high-intensity and rapid passing game they displayed on Match Day 1.

The players were turbo-charged from the off; indeed the popular image of Borussia Dortmund today is that of the “Duracell Bunny”, the wind-up rabbits that front the promotion of the battery manufacturer’s products and Dortmund certainly lived up to their metaphor. They hounded Arsenal on the ball at the back so much so you could see the gears in The Gunners mechanics clicking and stuttering into place, trying to find a solution. Should the midfielders drop back or push forward to counter/negate the press? Or should the centre-backs risk Arsenal’s philosophical game and pass the ball long? Because, as magnificently as Dortmund did press, it’s been a ongoing problem that Arsenal have had to contend with.

Tuesday night’s troubles were indicated in pre-season when SL Benfica did well to stop Arsenal playing in part although The Gunners reacted well when Alex Song tried to evade the attentions of his marker by moving left and right, allowing his partners to pick the ball from deep instead. Unfortunately Arsenal didn’t do that enough at Signal Iduna Park, with Mikel Arteta only receiving 23 passes. Contrast that to Song, Arsenal’s main outlet from deep, who received 33 passes. Arséne Wenger’s answer usually is to push his midfielders up the pitch when opponents close down but that was similarly problematic as all it did was lessen the options the defenders can pass to so they were forced to pass it amongst each.

“The teams close us down so much high up because they know we play through the middle,” said the manager. “I push my midfielders a bit up at the start to give us more room to build up the game. When you come to the ball we are always under pressure, so Song is a bit naturally high up because I want him high up. I am comfortable with that sometimes it leaves us open in the middle of the park. We want to play in the other half of the pitch and, therefore, we have to push our opponents back. But my philosophy is not to be in trouble, but to fool the opponent into trouble.”

Dortmund know Arsenal won’t play very long; indeed, perhaps therein lied another issue. The Gunners stretch the play length-wise, up the pitch but don’t laterally. We know how Barcelona stretch their two centre-backs across the pitch at the start of attacks so that it increases the distance that the opponents can get compact. As a result, a midfielder can then drop in as they’ll have more space now. Manchester United did that well against Benfica last night and the fact that their play is naturally wide made it difficult for the Portuguese side to squeeze the play.

Pressing of full-backs

With all the talk about how well Dortmund played, Arsenal actually had more possession in the first-half. The selection, Benayoun ahead of Frimpong suggested Wenger would try and dominate through possession. Klopp realised this too so he set up his side to work very hard off the ball and when they got it, work the channels to try and get in behind. In fact, Dortmund were content with letting Arsenal’s centre-backs pass the ball, especially Per Mertasacker, who they thought may have more chance fumbling with time on his hands while the more competent passer, Laurent Koscielny was afforded less due to Mario Götze’s tendencies to drift in. As a result, there was a slant towards the left-hand side and Bakary Sagna, the right back, found it was him who was put under the most pressure.

Dortmund’s pressing usually starts when the ball moves towards midfield or out-wide to the full-backs although the two forwards created an initial barrier that stops the easy pass going through. BVB did this very well, creating a line and getting tight when the centre-backs had the ball but when the ball reached the full-backs, ramped up their efforts to close down thus making it hard to start moves off. And certainly, with the success that they had, you wonder why more teams don’t do the same particularly because of the way the game has developed, the full-back has most time on the ball and often start moves off. At the end of the game, both Sagna and Kieran Gibbs made the most passes for Arsenal but by denying them time on the ball, they were unable to influence and spread play wide effectively – their main avenue of attack this season. (Alan McInally, co-commentating for Sky, observed how often Arsenal were forced to play the ball back to their defenders).

<Figure 1> Bakary Sagna was targeted by Dortmud’s pressing, particlarly early on. Whenever the ball reached the wide areas, he was instantly surrounded and making it difficult to find a pass through. The tactic was very effective in the first-half when Arsenal tried to get on the offensive so much so, it’s a wonderment more teams don’t do it more often. Full-backs have such a prominent role in a building attacks and the fact that they stopped him getting forward, affected Arsenal’s game. The knock on feature in pressing a full-back is that it then limits the angles he can pass the ball. Here, Sagna is not offered a 360 degree vision as the side to his stronger foot is closed off due to the touchline. He is thus compelled to pass it back or to the congested centre or else, to try and find a way past Grosskreutz who gets tight.

Arsenal’s (lack of) pressing invites Dortmund forward

It’d be unfair not to praise the way Arsenal defended (not to mention seriously questioning the partisanship of this blog!) because it was an atypically resilient performance with their backs-to-the-wall. Alex Song, in particular, was magnificent in front of the defence although it was he who also had the feel the full brunt of Dortmund’s high-tempo strategy. However, Arsenal’s problems were as much self-inflicted as they were thrust upon them because they simply invited the opposition at them. BVB had three good chances to score in the opening twenty minutes, exposing the kinds of weaknesses that were displayed in the 8-2 defeat to Manchester United. That it nearly happened again shows that there is a serious flaw in Wenger’s defensive strategy and cannot all be excused by unfamiliarity between the players.

Arsenal’s defensive line was all over the place but the real trouble stemmed from the non-existence of a pressing game high up the pitch. If the back four want to push up then the midfield must do so in accordance. However, Arsenal tend to sit off in their own half and that just invites the opponents at them and more crucially, the chance to spring the offside trap. As the game wore on, the midfield dropped even deeper so the chance to get behind was limited but the lack of pressing was still shown by the level of last ditch defending they did; Dortmund had 22 shots in all, 16 in the second-half and half of those were blocked efforts.

Arsenal, with the best defence in open play last season, were not in need of such a drastic overhaul to their pressing and ironically, it was when they did press up the pitch that they created the goal. They say from up the stands you can analyse the action better and you’d hope Wenger, watching from the perfect vantage point, can learn from the side he says pressed the best he’s seen this week and make the changes the side desperately needs.

<Figure 2> The lack of synchronicity between the instructions of the defenders and the midfielders is shown. While the back-four push up to play a high line, the midfield doesn’t follow suit. In fact, they are more concerned with shape – which is all well and good – but by not getting tight, they are essentially allowing the opposition at them. This makes it ripe for Dortmund to attempt the ball over because they are not under pressure to make the pass. At times on Tuesday night, the two conflicting strategies meant the positions collapsing on each other as the midfield dropped deep in their own half, pressing too late and the back-four pushing up. In the second-half, particularly that was the case as Arsenal were unable to get out of their own half.

Midfield rotation

With all the talk of Arsenal’s pre-season performances centring around defensive meltdown, it’s arguable (and we will argue that in our next article this week) that replacing Cesc Fábregas – or at least replicating his creativity – will be Arsenal’s main concern this impending season. Frustratingly for us tactical anoraks and dissectors, he hasn’t played a single minute in pre-season which means any tactical conclusions that are to made — if Cesc Fábregas stays of course — will be treading on the hypothetical.

In the friendlies this summer, Samir Nasri and Aaron Ramsey have exclusively played in the playmaker role but to mixed success. While Ramsey has shown the positives and freshness he can bring to the team, Samir Nasri has frankly been disappointing. He is supposedly the heir apparent to the more commonly known “Fábregas-role” but he has shown a underwhelming lack of football application recently, which his national team coach, Laurent Blanc, alluded to: “I hope that Samir, whether he stays with Arsenal or not, will play well for France, which was not the case in the last three matches.”

It seems to be that Nasri has resorted back to the same mannerisms that made him a fledgling talent instead of the match winner he was becoming halfway through last season. Arséne Wenger once said Nasri “was a bit too much attracted to the ball” and his displays in pre-season seem to have gone down that route against. Against Hangzhou Greentown in particularly, he tended to drift and follow the ball when he would be more useful looking to get into space. His other weakness is that his passing is not as penetrative as Fábregas’ but in pre-season, he either attempted too many or was not assertive enough. It’s a far cry from the start 2010/11 where he looked like the obvious successor to Fábregas —  there is, of course, time riddle out these inaccuracies because there is too much talent in Nasri – but he has since been usurped by Aaron Ramsey.

Ramsey is not a typical No.10; he prefers to pick up possession from deep rather than operate in the gap between midfield and attack but thus far, he has created a good chemistry with his two central midfield partners. If he drops back to pick up possession, it opens up space for one of his midfield partners to stride further forward. In the Emirates Cup it was mainly Tomas Rosicky although Jack Wilshere has looked threatening when using his drive further up field. What this tends to mean is the formation, rather than the 4-2-3-1 it is when Fábregas plays, looks more like a 4-1-4-1 with two midfielders either side of Alex Song. Indeed, some of Arsenal’s most cohesive performances last season came when Cesc Fábregas attempted to make a midfield three thus allowing one of his partners to push forward. It was frustrating not to see the Arsenal captain take part against Benfica because it would have then helped to see if this was a purposeful ploy from Wenger to encourage greater rotation between the midfield. As it is, we can perhaps pass it off as part of Ramsey’s natrualistic tendencies to want to play with the game in front of him although Neil Banfield, Arsenal’s reserve coach, gives the greatest insight into the Gunners’ tactics for this season after Arsenal XI’s 3-0 win over Woking. “[Tactically] we are working a lot on winning the ball back fairly quickly,” he said. “Getting our shape and quick rotation from midfield so there is quite a lot we’re looking for this season.”

Of course, the other advantage to Ramsey dropping back to pick up position is that it creates a natural vantage point to spray passes to the wide forwards of which is to become a key feature of Arsenal’s play in 2011/12.

<Figure 1> As happened against Benfica, the opposition when facing Arsenal, tend to press down the middle and get tight, stopping Arsenal from passing the ball out from the back. In the defeat, Alex Song tried to evade the attentions of his marker by moving left and right, opening up space for Aaron Ramsey to pick up the ball. This in turn allows Jack Wilshere to push forward into the No.10 role Ramsey may have started in and gives Arsenal an ambiguity which is harder to defend.

Strikers on the wings

In the matches Arsenal played at the Emirates Cup, they have tended to play with at least one striker on the flanks. That, at least, may have been forced upon Wenger as in the early games in the summer, he had Ryo Miyaichi and Theo Walcott to call upon — at the Emirates both were injured — while Arsenal’s forward players tend to be versatile anyway. What this resulted in, in the two matches against Boca Juniors and then New York Red Bulls, was a narrower attack but more men in the box as essentially Arsenal used three strikers. Against New York Red Bulls, the trio were Benik Afobe, Robin van Persie and Gervinho. And certainly, with van Persie tending to drop deep to pick up the ball, it opens up space for one of those strikers to occupy his position.

It maintains to be seen how this tactic will develop if Nasri goes back to the right or when Walcott and Andrey Arshavin come in. Wenger has tended to balance out the wings with one creative player –sometimes referred to as a “half-winger” — and a more dynamic winger the other side. His options next season seem less varied; if Nasri departs it only leaves Arshavin as a player vaguely described a creative winger while Tomas Rosicky will probably more time in the centre. There was plenty of interchange in pre-season, Gervinho particularly impressing and making sure he was always available. He’s the type of player, like van Persie, Song or Fábregas, that make the system who, when missing are evidently missed. Utilising the space behind the opposition through diagonals will be key, especially as space is already a premium whoever Arsenal are up against and Gervinho does that particularly well. His drive tended to lift the pessimistic atmosphere at the Emirates and is always deadly on the counter-attack.

<Figure 2> Arsenal faced a packed defence against New York Red Bulls with space at a premium. Arsenal struggled as the game wore on as their opponent camped more and more deeper but they still had good chances in the first-half to score. Aaron Ramsey getting behind was a key feature but as much was the wide men who constantly looked to profit in the spaces that Robin van Persie left behind when he dropped short. As a consequence the attack narrowed but Arsenal had more men to target in the box. Maybe Wenger got some of his inspiration from Barcelona who tend to flit in and out of a narrow and stretched front line and the wide forwards looking to get beyond Messi is a key feature.

Set-piece configurations

Arsenal’s woes from set-plays have been well documented. The most widely agreed solution is that Arsenal need a more dominant defender to slot in alongside Thomas Vermaelen and while that may be the case, Wenger is of the solution there is a more deep rooted problem than that. Of the 42 goals The Gunners conceded last season, 22 came from set-pieces but further delving into that statistic reveals only six came from corner kicks; the rest from free-kicks. That seems to suggest Wenger’s assertion that it is as much, a concentration and anticipation issue, as free-kicks whipped tend to be more varied and can cause confuse the defence as they are often back-tracking. Picking up your man in a man-marking system then becomes a bit of a muddle so it may be better to do away with the needless jostling for space and concentrate on what matters most: winning the ball. A zonal-marking system has now been deployed although we haven’t been able to fully examine it beyond corner kicks (although the goal conceded against Greentwon Hangzhou suggests a mixture, predominantly man-marking is used at free-kicks).

<Figure 3> The zonal-marking system displayed is a change from last season whereby Arsenal used a mixture of both although it was pre-dominantly man-marking. There is a curved line of six defenders at the edge of the six yard box, containing Arsenal’s best headers of the ball with the striker at the near post. Time will tell how the new layout will work as Premier League teams generally put pressure on the goalkeeper. (In this picture, the New York attacker is doing the same). It’s the same structure many teams who play a zonal-marking system use and it might be notable to say that the “Famous Four” under Geroge Graham also used zonal-marking.

Relaxed pressing

Arsenal’s pressing was also more relaxed. In this picture below, you can see Arsenal are more cautious, generally pressing more intensely if the ball gets into their own half or when they trap a defender. Last pre-season, Arsenal were practising an aggressive but structured pressing system but seem to have abandoned that. The structure is still there using the principles of through-marking but the intensity has been reigned in.

Kieran Gibbs adds a new dimension

Gael Clichy’s performances last season, while not the disaster some fans have made out, didn’t really rise above the average. Defensively he was generally solid and particular when Arsenal pressed, he was magnificent but he tended to handle pressure badly and suffered from a lack of concentration which sometimes led to him giving away dangerous opportunities. In attack he was not very effective – which was understandable given that he was forced to play cautiously as he wasn’t afforded the same protection as Bakary Sagna on the other side. (Sagna had the added bonus of having Alex Song in front of him in the double pivot as opposed to Clichy with Jack Wilshere).

It maintains to be seen just what Kieran Gibbs will bring defensively although he does look very comfortable if a bit carefree but he should make a huge difference to the attack. Already in the warm-up games he was very influential, getting into the box frequently and making dangerous runs and importantly, he crossed in for Robin van Persie in the 2-1 defeat to Benfica. A less talked about contribution he may bring is his ability to break down deep-lying defences as is often the case for Arsenal. Full-backs are generally the only players “free” on the pitch although against Arsenal that’s not always the case. Nevertheless, his bursts down the left can leave the defence unaware and he does have a dynamism about him which is hard to counter-act.