Arsenal's Rambo-esque start of the season analysed

Fulham v Arsenal

On to the Fulham game now. Rosicky replaced Wilshere in the double pivot alongside Ramsey. I was worried before the game, you can’t change a player’s role at that point as easily and as quickly. Rosicky is a playmaker, he was going to be asked to defend a lot more and play deeper.

On this image Cazorla replaced Rosicky as the latter is higher on the pitch. Hence the team was disorganized quite rapidly. It wasn’t very obvious at first because Fulham weren’t efficient but the more the game went on, the more we were able to see the cracks in our midfield. It forced Wenger to react and he did, using the only first team substitute available: Jack Wilshere.

Overall Rosicky dealt with his new tasks at first. I reckon he managed the first thirty minutes. Afterwards he looked tired and didn’t always respect what he was asked to do. Although, it was a very interesting combination of players: it might happen again, for example if Arsenal purchase a proper defensive midfielder. Both players had a couple of quick phases of which layoffs were predominant.

Rosicky looked very tired and unsure tactically, forcing Wenger to react. He decided to bring Jack Wilshere on, despite the tough challenges from Martin Jol’s players and the slippery pitch which could’ve been harmful for Jack’s recovery. The double-pivot reformed itself. Ramsey and Wilshere were alongside and Cazorla was clearly the playmaker. You can’t blame Rosicky, it isn’t his position and he did what he could. Considering it was [I hope!] only temporary there’s no reason to worry. The Czech won’t play there much more but… that means Cazorla’s role will change too.

Cazorla was outstanding against Fulham. He was set in a central position, the position he prefers. It guarantees him much more freedom than on the left flank. Besides, he is the only Arsenal player who can consistently cut defences apart. When he plays on the left he tends to drift center and like with Walcott and Sagna, Arsenal’s left flank is only filled by Gibbs who can’t do everything on his own. Defensively the Spaniard is not efficient and forgets his duties at times.

Cazorla’s figures were impressive: 63 passes, 94% passing accuracy and 6 key passes. He looked immensely lively and was involved everywhere. He also shot three times, especially in the first half when it was pouring. Santi is an intelligent player and Arsenal make the best of him in this present role, behind Giroud (or another striker).

Three of his six key-passes came from the edge of the box and are in Walcott’s direction. Theo is efficient in his ball-calls whenever he triggers them between the left back and the center back, especially behind the left back.

On counter attacks he is deadly. Thanks to Giroud’s moves, one of the center backs is dragged with Frenchman. The Spaniard can either shoot, fake a shot or pass it on the overlap for Podolski or Walcott. And that happened quite often against Fulham.

My last point concerns our crosses. Although I feel our wing-backs have improved their crossing quality another problem occurs (actually, it was an issue last year already): we lack presence in the box.

The team would be so much more deadly if we only had one or two late runners (midfielders, obviously) who’d cut the cross in the back of the net. You need to get the best out of your team and Arsenal’s style of play is based on attacking football and therefore, goal scoring. On this situation only Giroud is running towards the center of the box, Cazorla and Podolski are staying on the edge of it. Imagine if – sometimes, it doesn’t have to be all the time as you need some cover afterwards – a player would get in the area where the ball is the most likely to fall and just bang it ruthlessly in the nets.