Tag Archives: Gabriel Paulista

About this 3-4-3 of ours, is it the Arsènor's New Clothes?

It was a shift borne of desperation. Having conceded 25 goals across nine fixtures, some kind of shake-up was desperately needed, if only for the sake of shaking things up. After all, it’s one thing to conceded five to Bayern. It’s quite another to concede three to West Brom. Or again to Crystal Palace. Whatever the case, the shake-up had to happen. The only real question was whether this would happen in the squad or the front-office. With Arsenal’s fortunes fading fast, we at least got the former. Whether the latter is still necessary is an open question. For now, let’s take a closer look at how well this 3-4-3 worked. After all, we won two in a row for the first time since January. Surely, there’s something in it?

In which Ramsey tried to dribble three defenders.

The play in question came from a corner and the ensuing melee. As you can see in the screenshot above, all three CBs—Holding, Koscielny, and Gabriel—were in the box, presumably for their height (standing 1.89m, 1.86m, and 1.86m, respectively). Monreal, deployed as a wide midfielder and standing a mere 1.79m, had dropped back along with Xhaka. As Ramsey attempted to dribble through a thicket, Touré dispossesed him. In this moment, Holding, Kos, and Gabriel are still inside the 18. As Touré controls the ball, Xhaka steps forward as if he intends to challenge Touré. However, it quickly becomes clear that Touré is going long. As you can see in the image below, Monreal and Agüero have already broken in anticipation of Touré’s pass. There can be no way that Monreal was hoping Agüero would be ruled offside; they’re both well above midfield, and Monreal never once gesticulates for an offside call. Xhaka offers a lack-lustre pursuit.

The ghost of Agüero…
Here’s the question, then: given that our three CBs were in the box for the corner, why was it Monreal—hardly a speed-merchant—left largely alone against Agüero? As a follow-up, why were Monreal and Xhaka both in the no-man’s land halfway between midfield and the 18? These issues beg other, larger ones: should we have played a 3-4-3 for just the second time against this opponent? We were exposed on a similar counter-attack from Boro in which all three CBs had pressed higher up the pitch (and again, it was Monreal who was desperately chasing the man on the ball…). If we are to commit to a 3-4-3, shouldn’t at least one pacier defender be on the pitch? While it’s true that Bellerín and Gibbs are out of form, none of our other defenders has the pace to both get up the pitch to contribute to the attack and recover to stymie a counter.

No less an authority on the issue than Martin Keown has weighed in, saying after the Middlesbrough match that “Ramsey and Xhaka did not offer enough protection to the back three”. He went on to add that “to play with a back three, you have to know the system inside and out. It is not something you can simply adapt to overnight.” That we’ve twice won with the formation is no more revealing that a broken clock that is still right twice a day. It’s hard to say that this formation, though novel and undefeated, is in fact an improvement over the accustomed 4-2-3-1.

The model for the 3-4-3 has of course been Chelsea, who have won 21 of 26 Prem matches since switching to it after losing to us 3-0 in September. Their defensive midfielders, Kante and Matić, focus on protecting that back three. They also have a manager in Conte with a reputation for defensive strategy. At our end, Steve Bould’s in the fold, but does he exert enough influence over Arsène to make this new formation work? Do we have the personnel to implement it? Although the results on the surface seem to say yes, we’ve twice been exposed in two very different ways. Also lurking beneath that shiny surface is the fact that City had a goal wrongly disallowed and struck woodwork twice. It’s therefore hard to draw any deeper conclusions about our nascent resurrection.

Our CBs do look like they can handle the basic elements of the formation. Koscielny is still among the best in the Prem, Gabriel seems to be coming into his own, and Holding is a bit of a prodigy. The real issue, then, may not be with the back three but with the middle four. Can we count on some combination of Xhaka, Ramsey, Elneny, and Coquelin to shield that back three to the same degree that Kante and Matić do? These early returns do put a damper on things; none of the aforementioned four offer the discipline or tenacity of Kante or Matić, and absent Nacho’s exertions, no one else in our midfield seems aware or inclined to defending with any intensity.

In other words, don’t mistake motion for action. We may have moved a few things around, but that doesn’t yet prove that we’ve achieved anything. We have just one more match—home against Leicester—before crucial, campaign-defining matches away against Tottenham and home against Man U. Apostasy-alert: we will not overtake Tottenham. Setting that aside, will the 3-4-3 enable us to overtake Man U and/or Liverpool? If it does, does that settle the Arsène in/out question for another year or two? Can your correspondent shoe-horn any more rhetorical questions?

Arsenal 2-0 Bournemouth: Vote for Player Ratings/MotM!

Gabriel headed home his first Arsenal goal in the first half from Özil’s corner-kick, to which Özil coolly delivered a goal of his own in the second (assisted by Giroud), and Arsenal eased past AFC Bournemouth and to the top of the table, at least for a few days pending the result of Mancester City’s visit to King Power Stadium to visit Leicester. That one could be a barn-burner—I’m still of a mind to hope Leicester win there—but we can only take care of the squad in front of us. Thankfully, we’re back to winning ways. Petr Čech gets his record-setting 170th clean sheet in the Prem, Özil has his 16th Prem assist, and Gabriel opens his account. Good times were had by all. Get down to the poll to rate the lads’ efforts!

Avenging Angel Gabriel's ban rescinded by FA

To the satisfaction of Gooners, Gabriel’s three-match suspension for violent conduct has been withdrawn in the FA’s own words “with immediate effect.” He is still “subject to a separate FA charge of improper conduct in relation to Saturday’s game and has until 6pm on Thursday [24 September 2015] to reply.

Amazingly, this confirms what many of us suspected knew, namely, that Mike Dean doesn’t know his head from his arse (although the latter may be more require a bit more waxing, sugaring, or plucking).  What a week. Arsène gets away with criticising a referee, calling Mike Dean “weak”, the FA overrules a ref while simultaneously getting something right, and we get a red-card rescinded. About the only element missing here is retrospective action on Diego Costa’s thuggery and Mike Dean’s imcompetenc-cum-bias.

The FA has charged Costa with “an alleged act of violent conduct,” and he has until 6pm Tuesday (today) to reply. A panel of three former elite referees ould then decide whether to book Costa, which would lead to a retroactive three-match ban. While none of this would change the outcome of Saturday’s match, we at Arsenal can at least start to feel like there’s some degree of justice, however delayed, in these proceedings.

Plucky 12-man Chelsea squeeze past nine-man Arsenal

STAMFORD BRIDGE—In a stirring display of tenacity, grit, and acumen, an undermatched and historically underfunded rag-tag collective of misfits bravely overcame all odds, drawing on every single ounce of moxie at its disposal in order to narrowly eke out a win that will be talked of through the ages. Despite never catching a single break in this match or in any other prior, and despite having to watch each and every halfpenny for decades. Chelsea’s dozen screwed their courage to the sticking spot and road Lady Luck’s coat-tails to victory over Arsenal’s nine. Never before and perhaps never again will we see one side overcome such short odds to achieve victory.

Alright, enough of that. Clearly, quite a few things went Pete Tong on Saturday. It was Gabriel, not Costa, who got sent off just before halftime despite Costa clawing, elbowing and chesting Koscielny to the floor. Yes, Gabriel was stupid in issuing an innocuous and flimsy kick to Costa after each man was booked; he should know Costa’s wind-up tactics and rise above them, even if Costa did say something unforgivable in Portugeuse.  That Costa was still on the pitch was Dean’s worst failure. The Spaniard should have been sent off for barging Kos to the ground moments before. Zouma should have been booked at a minimum for throttling Gabriel during the melee. Instead, Costa managed to convince Dean that Gabriel’s response to that string of provocations deserved a red card. Madness. Moving on, Ramsey committed some kind of ghost-foul to set up the free-kick that gave Chelsea its first goal. To be honest, Cazorla probably earned his red card even if Fàbregas did make a meal of the moment by writhing around as if his leg had been broken—an injury that, if memory serves, he’s seen a teammate or two suffer in the past. Those were the days.

Still, I come away from this one feeling pretty damned good. Chelsea needed every last advantage Dean could offer them and still barely came away with the victory. Don’t let the scoreline fool you, for it flatters Chelsea: the second goal came in the waning seconds on a fluky deflection. Hazard, for once managing to keep his feet despite being in the penalty area, struck hard only to see it deflect off of Ramsey and in. That’s not entirely undeserved, but when you spend 45 minutes with a man-advantage, and fifteen minutes with a two-man advantage, you deliver more than this. Hell, Chelsea were lucky that Alexis didn’t equalise moments after Zouma’s goal (might have had something to do with the horse-collar Zouma offered…).

We know what to expect when we combine Mike Dean, Diego Costa, José Mourinho, and Stamford Bridge. Anyone who did more than hope or believe that we would win is probably a bit deluded. This is not three points dropped. Losing at home to West Ham? That’s three points dropped (thanks, Hammers, for winning at the Etihad). Losing at home to Crystal Palace is three points dropped. For as wonderful as it would have been to win, we had to know that the dice were loaded. Costa did what he does. Dean did what he does. Even if we’d come in on a run of form, which we didn’t, there’s little chance that we could have found a win. As it stands, we’re still lacklustre at best, struggling to find form, and so I don’t mind this result at all. I mind the method.

I’d imagine that most Chelsea fans are quite content with winning by any means necessary and will mock Gooners for moaning about the result (ignoring how loudly and persistently Mourinho moans after his squad loses). No matter how they gloat and try to lord it over us and others, they know that there’s an emptiness there too vast to fill, no matter how many players are rented or how much silverware is bought. If you don’t fight for something, it’s hard to feel like you’ve earned it.

The larger concern for us is coping with Gabriel’s absence over three matches. Mertesacker didn’t make the bench for this match (still ill or recovering from the car crash), so it might come down to Chambers. Worse, Coquelin could be out for a few weeks with a knee injury, exposing a gaping hole in our defense. We three away-matches in the next have ten days, a midweek League Cup clash at White Hart Lane, then a visit to King Power Stadium to face Leicester, and a Champions League group-stage trip to face Olympiacos. Too bad Arsène couldn’t quite find that other DM we now need a bit more than we did 24 hours ago. However, this is the squad we have, and there’s little to gain about whingeing about that now. We’ll have to dig a little deeper (for courage, not for transfer-fees) for now, and make the most of what we have.

At the end of the day, Chelsea are still looking up at us on the table. Long may it stay that way…

There's no way Arsenal can lose. Period.

This one is for all the marbles. Okay, no. Not really. Chelsea seem to have the Prem all sewn up. Even if we do win, it would still take an epic collapse from Chelsea to open up any opportunity for us to win the Prem. However, the match is like a microcosm for each club’s very different approaches and aspirations. For all of the hatred and vitriol spewed back and forth, Arsenal can’t lose—even if we do.

Yes, Chelsea look to have the Prem in a death-grip, and no one can prise it from their hands. With that in mind, we might view the match as more of a symbol than anything else. Winning would then only serve only a few purposes, none of which has anything to with the 2014-15 campaign. As we all well-know, Arsène has never beaten Mourinho, losing seven and drawing five. In his absence, we did a bit better, but we’re not here to parse results or stats. I’m here to take a larger view of things. Perhaps no club and no manager stands in starker contrast to Arsenal and Arsène than does Chelsea and Mourinho. Financing. Transfers. Style of play. Personality. They’re all polar opposites. Arsène is the idealistic penny-pincher; Mourinho, the Machiavellian cynic. For better or for worse, Arsène has always been courteous and deferential, with one eye on the future of the club. By contrast, Mourinho has always been self-aggrandizing and smug, leaving each club as his grating personality grinds down the squad. Each match becomes more a morality play, a proxy-war between the values each club ostensibly represents.

Back to the match itself, it’s hard to imagine anything dramatically different from Chelsea’s performance of a week ago. However, don’t miss the forest for the trees. Yes, Chelsea won 1-0 and conceded possession to Man U to the tune of 70%. While we might mock that, there was a method to that madness as Mourinho’s minions shacked Fellaini, Falcao, and Rooney while daring anyone else to step up. No one did, and Van Gaal never adjusted his tactics in any meaningful way.  The Prem is not quite yet Chelsea’s, and so I’d imagine that Mourinho will set up in much the same way—sitting back, of course, but doing everything possible to deny Alexis and Özil while daring us to find a way through a dense thicket of defenders. I hope we’ll see some high-energy pressing in the first twenty minutes to see if we can find an early goal; if we can disrupt their defense enough to earn a set-piece or two, anything’s possible. The flip-side, of course, is to defend against counters. With Mertesacker ruled out, Gabriel will likely be pressed in, but his pace and energy might give us a bit more flexibility.

Speaking of Gabriel, I wonder how much extra motivation he’ll draw from facing off against his former countryman—surely, Diego Costa’s switch from Brazil to Spain won’t go unnoticed. Even if Mertesacker is available, in fact, I’d fancy Gabriel to not only help us shackle the turncoat; he might even deliver that first Arsenal goal that he’s flirted with in recent weeks.

More than likely, though, we’re going to see something very similar to Chelsea’s “performance” against Man U, so prepare for a lot of frustration punctuated by some bum-tightening moments on those occasions that Chelsea do get forward. For as much as we might crave the win—even if only to end the hoodoo that Mou seems to hold over us—the most likely result looks to be a draw.

LAST 3:
Chelsea 2-0 Arsenal (05.10.2014)
Chelsea 6-0 Arsenal (22.03.2014)
Arsenal 0-0 Chelsea (23.12.2013)

FACTFILE
The two clubs first met on 9 November 1907, a 2-1 win to Chelsea.
Arsène has failed to defeat Mourinho in 12 matches (0-7-5).
There have been more than 2.5 goals scored in Arsenal’s last eight home games.

INJURIES
Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain has been ruled out; Per Mertesacker is doubtful.

POSSIBLE STARTING XI
Ospina; Monreal, Gabriel, Koscielny, Debuchy; Cazorla, Coquelin; Alexis, Özil, Ramsey; Giroud.

If we can start with a high-energy press, we might be able to carve out a chance or two, maybe from a set-piece, to get a goal before Chelsea settle in.

PREDICTION Arsenal 1-1 Chelsea.

This post originally appeared at Goonersphere.