Thursday, 16 September 2010

Arsenal 6-0 Braga Analysis

A fantastic display of flowing football from Arsenal, aided by an unusual formation and the deployment of teenager Wilshere in a deep midfield role. The Gunners continued their excellent form in the absence of Robin van Persie - unlike last season - thanks to Marouane Chamakh's typically intelligent play in the centre forward role, which bodes well for the rest of the season.

While Chamakh has been able to fill in for van Persie and perform a similar role as a false 9 within Arsenal's system, Theo Walcott does not have a direct replacement. Against Bolton Rosicky came in, while last night Nasri started in his place. Both are naturally central playmakers, and even though on paper they were playing on the right of Arsenal's 4-3-3, in reality they both drifted infield and acted as extra central midfielders when Arsenal were in possession. See the following average position graph:

The replacement of Walcott (a forward who naturally plays high and wide) with Nasri (a central playmaker) resulted in Arsenal's 4-3-3 morphing into a diamond 4-4-2 that was slanted to the left. Song held the midfield and covered the area in front of Sagna, while Wilshere protected Clichy but had more license to get forward. Fabregas played at the tip of the diamond and wreaked havoc in the final 3rd.

The skewing of the formation towards the left meant that Arsenal were able to focus their attacks down that side, as the following diagrams demonstrate:

Arsenal's attack chart, showing a clear preference for attacks down the left

Arsenal's shots (in yellow), the majority coming from the left

It was therefore no surprise that 5 of the goals (including the penalty) originated down the left side of the pitch, helped by some slack marking from Braga's right back, Miguel Garcia. Andrey Arshavin played a key role, scoring one, setting up two more and playing a part in another. Arshavin is often criticised for being wasteful in possession and in front of goal, but this is exactly what he's in the team for; not to give the ball away, but to be ambitious and expressive without having to feel restrained (within reason of course). His advanced role gives him freedom to try killer passes and shots more often than his teammates, and it's no surprise therefore that he gives the ball away more often than any other Arsenal player - but it also means that he's able to have a direct contribution to quite a lot of Arsenal goals. The same applies to Fabregas' role, to a lesser extent.

While shifting the formation to the left worked wonders for Arsenal, it did of course mean they were slightly vulnerable down the right. It didn't matter in the end though, Braga were guilty of not reacting to Arsenal's unsual formation. Faced with an overload down their right, they continued playing a symmetrical 4-3-3 and didn't look to shift their formation in response. In addition, they focussed their attacks down their right and didn't take advantage of Arsenal's exposed right flank. Braga's left flank was in effect underused, while their right flank was overworked.

Braga focussed the majority of their attacks down Arsenal's left via Alan,
instead of exploiting the Gunners' exposed right flank. In addition, centre
forward Matheus constantly made diagonal runs towards Arsenal's left.

Fabregas and Arshavin did most of the damage in the final 3rd, but they were aided greatly by the quick, accurate and incisive passing of Jack Wilshere. The young Englishman - playing as the link midfielder - was able to keep the ball circulating and to service the more attacking players throughout the game. He got forward often, bagging himself an excellent back-heeled assist for Chamakh's goal and playing an excellent ball over the top in the build-up to Vela's 2nd. He certainly offers something different to Diaby's counter-attacking and Denilson's tidiness, and Wenger often talks about the need for a cultured left footer to provide balance in the centre (think of the Vieira-Petit partnership).

With the intelligent passing of Wilshere from deeper, the probing of Fabregas from further up, and the extra presence of Nasri centrally, Arsenal were able to pass their way through the middle with more ease than they would normally do, and produced some scintillating football in the process. Notice how much Wilshere features in the following video:


This game will live long in the memory of Arsenal fans, and for Wenger, it was further vindication of his stubborn quest to produce a beautiful, yet successful brand of possession football.

Comments (11)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Interesting analysis mate.
stantheman's avatar

stantheman · 758 weeks ago

Wonderful analysis mate! Seeing all the shite on the other blogs and fans deeply divided, this is a great blog that reminds us why we love Arsenal and what's so special about our club that few others can also boast of. Please continue your good work!
For some reason my earlier comment didn't go through so I'll repeat:

In my opinion this was the same formation Arsenal played all year.

Arsenal have been playing a lopsided 4-4-2/4-3-3/4-2-3-1 all season. Typically, Theo Walcott was the winger who pressed the defense and drifted centrally when Chamakh/RVP floated elsewhere while Arshavin dropped deeper and more central, often looking to assist rather than score.

This game was more of the same except the Russian assumed Walcott's roll and Nasri played the roll of dropping winger. The result was indeed a little different- Arshavin still dropped deep a little more often than Walcott, and Nasri played deeper and more centrally than Arshavin typically does, but only slightly.

As an aside, I think Vela can come close to replicating walcott's production while he's out. Vela doesn't have the pace, but his touch is deadly and he's good at pushing the off-side trap and pressuring the defense. I really hope he gets more time to prove himself.

I think you've put your finger on Wenger's new strategy (that he's been refining since last season). In some ways it is a lopsided 4-4-2 with one winger playing as a wide striker who drifts to the middle while the other winger plays deeper. in other ways its a 4-3-3 in that Cesc does drop deep and defend more often than the wingers do. With a false 9 dropping deep and wide, 2 holding midfielders, and another winger pushing the defense back, Cesc is given lots of room and freedom in the middle.

This team is truly built around Cesc.
1 reply · active 758 weeks ago
Thanks for your comment. For some reason it got caught in the spam folder, I have no idea why. I was wondering why your other comment below didn't make any sense!

I think the role Nasri played against Braga was quite different to that of Arshavin against Blackpool and Blackburn (when Walcott was assuming the role of goalscoring wide player). On both occasions, Arshavin played ahead of the attacking midfielder (Rosicky/Fabregas respectively), whereas Nasri played behind Fabregas against Braga. In addition, Arshavin maintained his position on the left while Nasri came all the way into the centre. And not only was the positioning different, but the focus too. Arshavin managed 3 shots in each of those games while Nasri only managed 1 on Wednesday night. Of course it's a smal sample to choose from but it does illustrate Arshavin's goalscoring focus even when playing as the creative/deeper of the 2 wide forwards.

See the difference between this: http://mr-renoog-videos.blogspot.com/2010/09/arse...

and these http://mr-renoog-videos.blogspot.com/2010/08/arse... http://mr-renoog-videos.blogspot.com/2010/08/blac...

To sum up, the main difference for me is that in the creative wide forward role, Nasri congests the centre and doesn't trouble the fullback at all, Arshavin on the other hand maintains width and runs at the fullback, looking to shoot or play the killer pass. Nasri was a success on Wednesday, but only because of Braga's naivety.

In my opinion, Vela is much more comfortable with the ball at his feet than making diagonal runs in behind. The last 2 games he's come on as a sub and linked play with the midfield quite well. He can certainly run in behind the defence, but usually it's done from a central area as opposed to Walcott's running in from wide. I think Vela's future lies as a false 9 much like Chamakh and van Persie.

I do agree that the system gives Cesc a lot of freedom. I've had doubts as to the benefit of playing Cesc so high up, I thought it deprived us of his creativity from deep and made it difficult for us to advance the ball up the pitch. But the emergence of Wilshere means that we now have a player who can work the ball quickly and accurately into the front 4, leaving Cesc to push up and focus on goals/killer passes. That's if Wilshere plays of course.
Anyhow, great analysis as always, thought you could use some friendly debate :)
Oh wow unbelievable, your analysis deserves a TV show or something, so incredible, so fluid, so magical. Its fantastic.
The first move in this video is amazing, the movement and touches are mesmerising. This really was Arsenal at their best, Wilshere and Fabregas at the centre of midfield make a huge difference to the way the team plays.
2 replies · active 758 weeks ago
Yes, Wilshere takes a lot of creative burden off Fabregas and makes his job easier by feeding the ball into feet in space. Makes a lot of difference compared to Denilson/Diaby in the 2nd midfielder role.
Huge difference, you're right. His passing is just that much better than the others. Having him and Ramsey (if he recovers) makes me feel a lot better about the possibility than Fabregas will eventually leave Arsenal.
Great analysis, I'm really enjoying this blog. As well as Arsenal looked, it seems like you think a stronger team may have exploited us more harshly. It seems like Eboue might be a better solution at right forward when Walcott is out.
1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago
Not necessarily a stronger team, just a more responsive manager. Braga basically had spare men on their left who could have (a) shifted over to help out their right flank and (b) provided an attacking outlet, but did neither.

I'm not particularly a big fan of Eboue at right forward, he tends to dribble infield and congest the middle. When Nasri and Rosicky come infield they can contribute to the possession game but Eboue's passing isn't quite on their level. He does at least provide good defensive cover for Sagna (see my post on the Liverpool game).

Post a new comment

Comments by