Return of the Jack

The moment Jack Wilshere first received the ball against Queens Park Rangers was one many fans had been yearning for an age. The ripple of applause that greeted his first touch conveyed an immense sense of relief. Relief that such a promising youngster, one trained at our very own Hale End Academy, was again dictating play on the carpet-like turf at the Emirates. The sprightly runs were back; hips swaying as he waltzed through the opposition ranks. The characteristic poised tongue was back; moving this way and that, almost transfixing his opponent before the telling blow was delivered. The angelic left foot was back; capable of inflicting a rival’s demise with the most ethereal pass. Jack was back.

After the outpouring of relief came hope. In fact, hope was the foundation, the cornerstone, of the cheers that met his arrival back on the scene. Before the season began in earnest, before a ball was kicked in competitive anger, Wilshere was handed the No. 10 shirt. “So what?” you may ask. “Abou Diaby wears the No. 2. Bacary Sagna, a right back, wears No. 3. Heck, William Gallas used to hold the coveted No. 10 that Jack now proudly sports on his back.” True enough, but this shirt number selection was patently different. Arsène Wenger is clear in his vision that Jack is fundamental to his latest iteration. After the dark days of injury, his seemingly endless time on the sidelines, Wenger’s decision would be a huge boost and sign of the continued faith he the manager, as well as the fans, had in our homegrown maestro:

“I feel Jack will be one of the leaders of this club and by giving him the No 10 shirt I want to show I am confident he will be the one who will lead the team one day.”

That day, at least in terms of style, may come sooner than we all think. Already, a difference can be seen in his presence both on and off the pitch. Most obvious is the extra muscle his long days in the gym have generated. His “core and body-strength have probably improved more than 100 per cent” helping him to cope with the extreme rigours that the Premier League regularly deals out. Mentally, too, there’s a change. Parenthood seems to have had a profound effect on the kid we last saw on the pitch in ’11. In recent interviews there’s a definite calm, a sureness of mind, that wasn’t always the case before his 524 days away from competitive first team action. Archie, his son, has quelled the beast somewhat but importantly his company, removing other distractions, has made Jack even more focused than before.

Renewed focus for the task ahead.

That focus will be needed more than ever as Arsenal strive to swim against the tide and meet targets on all fronts this season. It’s hardly fair to expect so much from a man of only 20 years coming off an extended injury layoff and expectations should be tempered for this very reason. However, it’s hard not to be enticed by previous memories. The mind goes back to the duels with Barcelona; Jack going toe to toe with some of the greatest talents to ever grace the game, and doing so brilliantly. With added maturity it’s only natural for fans to hope (yes, there’s that word again) for a better future with Wilshere at the vanguard.

When fully fit, there’s so much Jack can add to Arsenal’s game. His quick, precise forward passes are vital in his position. He adds an extra link between defence and attack, constantly looking forward for new openings in enemy lines. Wilshere has a special ability to turn, go past a man with ease, and keep the ball circulating at a high tempo. His jinking runs up-field are a fresh break from the mundane ‘pass and not-so-much move’ structure that has contributed to our recent “illusionary domination”. Of course, in the hustle and bustle of centre-field, there’s a time and a place to do so but he generally chooses his moment wisely. In the prolonged and inevitable absence of Diaby and Rosický, two central midfielders fond of a sharp pivot of the feet before embarking on a burst towards the opposition’s goal, Wilshere’s attacking exuberance will be key to adding variety to our game.

Speaking of pivots, Wilshere’s progressive thinking has affected the shape of Arsenal’s midfield. The 2-1 structure we’ve become accustomed to in recent years has been supplanted by a 1-2 to some extent, with Mikel Arteta often providing lone cover in front of the defence. The triangle has been tilted once again.

Diaby (2) and Ramsey (16) both have an average position similar to Arteta (8) in matches away to Liverpool and West Ham respectively. They provide more of a double-pivot in front of the defence which allows Cazorla (19) to take up positions higher up the pitch.

Wilshere (10), however, takes up a noticeably more advanced position when compared to Arteta in matches away to Manchester United and Schalke. In both games he’s closer situated to Cazorla than our deepest lying midfielder. (Images courtesy of WhoScored)

Along with taking a more advanced role in possession, Wilshere’s return also brought about a slight change in Arsenal’s work off-the-ball. Against Q.P.R and Manchester United he would harry his opposite number at every opportunity, forcing errors higher up the pitch than we’d generally managed earlier in the season. Before Jack strode back onto the pitch, Arsenal had been consistent in defending with relatively deep and compact banks of four, especially away from home. His presence altered this approach to a degree and one could argue the change has had both positive and negative effects on the team. The useful aspect has already been mentioned; Wilshere adds another point of attack, one that can add urgency when our play threatens to induce slumber.

The detrimental aspect lies with the knock-on effect on Arteta’s role. The immaculately- coiffured midfield general is vital to initiating Arsenal’s moves. His use of the ball is often swift and accurate, helping to keep play moving at a decent lick to shift the opposition out of position. The change to the midfield shape has slightly hindered play, however, further isolating him in both attacking and defensive phases. Teams are becoming increasingly wise to this with players such as Oscar, Wayne Rooney and Lewis Holtby paying him very close attention in recent meetings. “Shut down Arteta and you shut down Arsenal” is the mantra being recited by rival coaches and it’s certainly one that carries some truth. Passes that once went forward are becoming more lateral; the tempo dropping to soporific levels at times; the joyful spontaneity, once a cardinal feature of our game, being stifled by crises of confidence and opposition plans alike.

Of course, one should not be averse to thinking Arteta could do more to lose his newly-acquired shackles but there’s certainly a school of thought that dictates Wilshere could share the load to a greater degree, dropping deeper to assist those transitions. In the defensive phase, too, work can be done. Jack isn’t the worst in this regard by any means but his occasional impetuous nature, again his downfall at Old Trafford, can land us in trouble. It can be argued that a lack of match practice contributed to his rash tackle on Patrice Evra; his loose touch immediately beforehand was unquestionably uncharacteristic of the man.

It is clear, however, that Wilshere’s left foot has a devilish side, an edge that shouldn’t necessarily be completely eradicated but rather smoothed out as he continues to develop. Whether his advanced positioning, leaving him having to race back, exacerbates these desperate lunges into the tackle is debatable but, on the whole, he’d be better off taking a leaf out of Arteta’s book; jockeying his opponent rather than going to ground and fully committing himself for better or worse, and it’s often the latter.

“You still have much to learn, my young Gunner.”

It must be said that these flaws are to be expected. It’s often forgotten, amongst all the hype, that Wilshere has only played a season and a half of competitive Premier League football. The scope for improvement and the time in which to do so, fitness permitting, is still vast. There are tackles to refine, a knack for goals (plentiful at youth level – 13 in 19 U18 appearances at the age of 15) to rediscover, and the stranger that is his right foot to befriend. The midfield cohesion, or lack thereof up till this point, is also to be expected. Gone are the shirts of Fàbregas, Song and Nasri, no longer hanging in the dressing room waiting to be donned before battle. In their place lie those of Cazorla, Arteta and Podolski; new players with new strengths and weaknesses, new wavelengths to attune.

The amount of effort expended in order to come back to something close to his former self was huge but our latest No.10 acknowledges that “the hard work is not over yet.” The boss purrs at the prospect of his development but adds a significant caveat: “Jack is a great player but he will only be great if the team is great.” For both the team and Wilshere himself, the arduous journey to greatness now truly begins.

@hazzaboy21

The Future’s Bright, the Future’s English?

February 14^th 2005: The night Arsène Wenger failed to include a single English player in his squad to face Crystal Palace. It had been coming but nevertheless this was a rather unwanted first in the history of English football. It wouldn’t be the last occurrence either as over the following weeks, months and years many a team sheet would be handed to the referee completely composed of the names of footballers from a myriad of different countries overseas. The selections were predictably jumped on by all and sundry and though some reactions certainly had more than just a hint of hyperbole to them, the continued absence of any player with the potential of wearing the famous ‘Three Lions’ crest was a damning indictment of the quality of truly homegrown player coming through the ranks at Arsenal Football Club during that period.

Of course, there is no obligation for any manager to field players simply based on their nationality, even now with rules in place in the Premier League designating spaces for at least 8 homegrown players in a club’s 25 man squad for the season. These ‘homegrown’ players don’t even have to be English; merely training at an English-based club for 3 years before the age of 21 is enough. Simply put, if one wants success then it’s only logical to pick the best players available and often these have been plucked from foreign lands. Selection based on quality and attitude, not an individual’s passport is Wenger’s mantra and it’s an extremely valid one. The bar shouldn’t be lowered just to let English talent in. The aim for these youngsters should be to work hard on improving, reach that bar and then raise it further.

The summer transfer window just past saw the permanent departures of two players some hoped, possibly more than they genuinely thought, may be able to reach that bar: Kyle Bartley and Henri Lansbury. Both were members of the FA Youth Cup winning squad of 08/09 and their talents, especially those of the latter, were frequently showcased in matches for a wide range of England youth teams. After a while, Reserve team football was simply not testing them enough; their development had stalled and they craved the fresh impetus of regular competitive football. This meant embarking on a trip to the vortex that is the English loan system. In the best of cases it can be a brilliant exhibition of one’s ability. If conditions aren’t favourable, however, a youngster can spend what must seem like an eternity bouncing from one club to another, with the ultimate dream, making it back at the parent club, agonisingly slipping through their grasp.

It may well be the case that both did not possess the sufficient talent to break through at Arsenal and you’ll be hard pressed to find a better judge of talent than Arsène Wenger, but as with the careers of many a young footballer circumstance played its part. Being on loan, as well as having the potential to be a great boon to one’s development, can sometimes have unfortunate repercussions. Depending on injuries and suspensions in certain positions chances can arise and be given to those perhaps less talented or at an earlier stage in their development simply because they’re still physically present at the club.

The loan vortex strikes again.

Comparing the ability of players who play in different positions is always liable to some inaccuracy (ability itself can’t be quantified so there’s an immediate difficulty posed) but it can be argued that Lansbury is a more talented player than Craig Eastmond for example. Yet, due to injuries in defensive midfield and a plethora of squad options further forward, the latter acquired 10 appearances in the Premier League, League Cup and Champions League over the 09/10 and 10/11 seasons; a decent number for any young tyro while Lansbury, trying to prove his worth to the club from further afield, received less. After a youngster is given chances obviously they need to impress to make the subsequent permanent step up but being awarded these chances in the first place is a luxury only a select few are granted.

It’s these select few that have seen other English talents leave Arsenal for more regular opportunities. Luke Freeman, a talented left-sided forward, departed for Stevenage last January after he found chances, even to join first team training, hard to come by. His parting words carried more than a hint of frustration: “It is more difficult for English talent to come through at Arsenal at times. They have their favourites and stick with them.”

In a way it’s only natural that this should be the case. If a club spends more money bringing in a foreign import than they do on an individual homegrown talent there’s likely to be an immediate, conscious desire to give the bought-in talent more openings in an attempt to develop the player to the best of their ability and therefore benefit the club either by performance in the first team or by generating further profit. Hopes are especially high for the swashbuckling German Serge Gnabry who manages to combine pace, power and finesse while the elusive movement and delicate touches of Swede Kris Olsson certainly stir excitement in those who are keen followers of the club’s youth. These foreign talents are arguably the most talented in the youth ranks at present but the tide is turning, potentially leading to fewer acquisitions from abroad in the future.

Ultimately, to get the necessary game time to improve, the quality has to be there regardless of nationality and it’s being seen with increased regularity amongst the homegrown talents emerging from Arsenal’s academy at Hale End. Since its official birth in 1998 the academy has been the breeding ground for talents in and around the N5 area to hone their game and it seems that finally the sheer excellence of the facilities available to these youngsters and, most importantly, the standard of coaching they receive is starting to reap rewards. Benik Afobe, Chuks Aneke and Nico Yennaris are the latest gifted English prospects to have made the fabled trip from Hale End to the hallowed turf at London Colney, training and playing with the 1st team on occasion.

As has been the case with many a youngster, though, promise alone is not enough to make a career in the top flight, even more so at Arsenal, so caution is advised and excessive hype to be avoided. One only has to look to the aforementioned FA Youth Cup winning squad of 08/09 to see that talent is far from a guarantee in achieving what most can only imagine. From the 1st leg XI of that final (Shea; Eastmond, Bartley, Ayling, Cruise; Frimpong, Coquelin; Lansbury, Wilshere, Emmanuel-Thomas; Sunu) only Frimpong, Coquelin and Wilshere, the jewel of Hale End, are actually members of the current first team squad.

The David Rocastle Indoor Centre at Hale End: Where the magic happens.

The hope is that the English youngsters previously alluded to heed the warnings of their predecessors and it does seem that the key tools, namely the players’ mentality and technical attributes, are already firmly entrenched within their armoury. Whether they actually become fully embedded in the Gunners’ 1st team structure is up for debate, up to the players themselves and, of course, Arsène Wenger but the signs are promising.

Look further down the ladder and you see the likes of Chuba Akpom, an intelligent striker with an exciting skillset who has made tremendous strides in the last year befitting his rangy frame. His mature performances for Arsenal U21s this season have resulted in a call up for the England u19 squad at the tender age of 16 – certainly no mean feat. There’s Jack Jebb, a robust attacking midfielder with a useful penchant for the perfectly-weighted through-ball, and the versatile Isaac Hayden who you’ll either find at centre back bringing the ball forward with considerable ease or dominating the centre of midfield with an imposing presence and composed touch.

A cursory glance even further down the club’s youth system, at the U18s XI for their latest match, a 2-1 comeback victory at home to Everton, reveals an interesting fact: Of that starting XI (Vickers; Mugabo, Fagan, Hayden, Ormonde-Ottewill; Kamara, Jebb; Dawkins, Iwobi, Jeffrey; Lipman) all are England-eligible - A situation not often associated with Arsenal. Though not every member of that team will make the trip from Hale End to Colney and perform the subsequent 30 yard walk from the U21 team dressing room to that of the first team such numbers can only be seen as a positive when considering the future complexion of Arsenal XIs, from an English point of view at least.

This complexion is something that’s actually being reflected at 1^st team level this season, though understandably to a somewhat lesser extent. Kieran Gibbs, Carl Jenkinson, Theo Walcott and Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain were all on the pitch as the referee blew his whistle to mark the end of Arsenal’s recent match at Stoke. Building an English core is the aim now; or rather it always has been, just that this goal is far more achievable with the increased numbers of technically-proficient talents nationwide and within the club itself at the present time. With the structures now firmly in place there’s certainly optimism that, sooner rather than later, we’ll be able to watch a homegrown nucleus grow together with their love of the club almost as unconditional as that of the very fans that chant their names.

Wenger’s dream was “always to produce 60 per cent English and 40 per cent foreign young players” - a far cry from his team selection at Highbury on that night in 2005. Of course, actions speak louder than words but it’s looking increasingly like that dream may become a reality. Patience is still required and cases like Bartley and Lansbury are bound to arise year-on-year but it will be the upsurge of success stories, the kids that do make the grade, the Jack Wilshere’s of this world that will dictate the future of Arsenal and England. I, for one, hope it’s a bright future for both.

@hazzaboy21

This piece first appeared on England Football Blog

Clipped Wings

To many, symmetry is the blissful ideal in football. Be it two direct wingers or two pacy wing-backs the game is often taken to the opposition on the flanks. In an era where the centre of the park is frequently packed with players on opposing teams competing for superiority the expanses out wide are opportune spaces for the flair and skills of wide men in the game to translate into genuinely decisive, match-winning contributions. With teams across the globe implementing different strategies, however, symmetrical simplicity is not always the optimal route to take.

Quick, wide forwards are all well and good when facing a team holding a rather naïve high line yet when faced with one of many parked buses these forwards, sometimes lacking the speed of mind to go with their fleetness of foot, can come unstuck. This scenario is one that Arsenal fans will no doubt be very familiar with. One only has to look at the start to this season to see where the problems lie. Arsène Wenger, who it must be said selected the team himself, was relatively unimpressed after the opener against Sunderland:

“The formula didn’t work with three strikers up front and we were not well balanced…we needed maybe one more creative player to be a bit more accurate in the final third. There was not a lot of space left to our strikers; everything had to be created from our midfield.”

Now, I should make it clear that the likes of Walcott and Gervinho certainly have a role to play in the squad. Their pace can be instrumental in matches, pinning back opposition fullbacks and creating more space for others in doing so. Provided the supply from midfield is in tune, their movement off the ball, spinning off their markers and making curved runs beyond defences can provide a very effective outlet. Theo’s technical ability and assurance on the ball, though still needing work, is improving apace helping him to retain the ball more frequently in tight situations and Gervinho’s unpredictable dribbling style can aid his beating of a man when one-on-one. Nonetheless, both would admit that their final balls could still do with some improvement which is why the issue of creativity looms large.

Playmakers are finding themselves on the flanks with increasing regularity in football and with this deployment the accuracy of pass in the final third and thus the quality of chances created is invariably enhanced. A higher proportion of quality chances naturally leads to a greater chance of a goal being scored so simple logic dictates that one should aim to maximise this. This precision of passing was certainly a factor Herbert Chapman, an iconic manager in the history of Arsenal Football Club, considered fundamental to his philosophy:

“Inside passing is more deadly, if less spectacular than the senseless policy of running along the lines and centring to just in front of the goalmouth, where the odds are nine to one on the defenders.”

Ever the innovator, Chapman’s views on wide play were in stark contrast to the rest of English football at the time and played a big part in his success during the 1920’s and 30’s. His use of Cliff Baston especially, though it must be noted he was not a playmaking type, was certainly different to that of other wingers of the age. In Chapman’s W-M (3-2-2-3) formation Bastin would stand in from his wing hoping to profit from the abundance of through-balls Alex James, an inside forward and creator-in-chief of the great Arsenal side of the 30’s, served up. His tremendous goalscoring record owed much to these factors and also to his subsequent cutting in from his already narrow position once the ball was received. On the rare occasions that a shot wasn’t on he could simply play a low pass inside, assisting the centre forward or winger cutting in from the opposite flank.

Chapman: One visionary now watches over another.

Football has changed since those days but, in truth, these rather basic aspects remain the same. A precise cutback or cute pass played on the edge of the box inside an opposition fullback is generally a far more successful tactic than an aimless ball played across the penalty area. Accurate inside passing is a key part of most wide playmakers’ repertoire, and is often lacking when direct options are used on both flanks. Completely replacing the hastily crossed balls oft-associated with the wide speed merchants of this world with more cerebral through-balls can make a team too predictable, though, so a variety of styles is a useful characteristic to possess in a team.

It’s certainly a trait Wenger has valued in his time on these shores, noticeably preferring either a more creative talent or tireless runner on one wing to balance a more attacking, direct option on the other. Think back to potent Wenger midfields past and you’ll see Parlour & Overmars, Pires & Ljungberg, Nasri & Walcott to name a few. More often than not, the balance has been there providing guile and pace in equal measure. Execution of pass is, of course, vital but that execution can be so more effective if the opposition have diverse threats to worry about.

Last season, after the early use of direct options on both wings, Wenger changed tact opting for more subtlety on one flank. The timing of the Africa Cup of Nations and squad options certainly played a part in this decision but one imagines Arsène wasn’t completely enamoured with our play at the time. Having dropped points over the busy Christmas and New Year schedule a different spark, an alternative source of ingenuity, was required. The calls for Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain to be given a chance were undoubtedly premature last year but had been deafening ever since his early signs of promise in the Carling Cup. Eventually these calls were met with the desired answer and ‘The Ox’ had finally garnered enough trust from Wenger to gain the opportunity to bring his own youthful exuberance to the party.

In addition to the pace that had already been present out wide before his arrival in the first team, Oxlade-Chamberlain brought vision. When deployed on the left he could cut inside onto his favoured right foot and, possessing the mindset of a midfielder, play slide-rule passes behind the opposition defence. In theory at least, his presence would allow for even more possession yet with the option to take on fullbacks on their outside or inside shoulder. A more varied and unpredictable threat was Wenger’s hope and it certainly did have its moments; Alex’s brace in the 7-1 demolition of Blackburn at the Emirates surely springs to the forefront of most fans’ thoughts. As with any youngster, however, his youth led to inconsistent performances and his naïvety lost possession during a period of the season where mistakes simply could not be afforded. Oxlade-Chamberlain’s time will come and interestingly he’s played more centrally this preseason just past. The added maturity in his game since the Euro’s is noticeable and as a result he’s likely to perform more consistently when he’s next given a chance.

The burden of bringing balance to the flanks was then passed onto Yossi Benayoun. Along with his experience he brought work-rate, ball retention and cunning to the left flank. After several games either on the bench or even out of the whole match day squad altogether Yossi was determined to make an impact. On the face of it, the fact that he provided goals at key times was merely a welcome bonus as he brought much more to the team. Whether it was snapping at the heels of the opposition with remarkable regularity, covering his fullback, holding a narrow position to enable midfield compactness when the flow of the game was not in our favour or dropping deeper to allow Walcott more licence to join the central striker, the balance Benayoun brought was instrumental in the overhaul of our North London rivals and securing a Champions League place for the 15^th consecutive season.

Yossi’s stay in N5 was only a temporary one, though, so Wenger must now take a different route to provide the creative balance in the final third he values so dearly. The acquisition of Santi Cazorla is a mouth-watering one and given his previous roles for Villarreal and Málaga he’s a tempting wide option, especially in big games where the significance of possession and technical quality is arguably greater than the norm. As has already been mentioned it’s not uncommon to see ‘wide playmakers’ cut in from their designated flank and deliver crucial assists under slightly less attention than they would expect if played in a central role. With the number of alternative, fit central options already present within the squad and the returns of Tomáš Rosický and Jack Wilshere to consider (bringing valuable tenacity in addition to a further point of creativity) the selection of Santi on the wing, even in the ‘lesser games’, may not be so unrealistic.

♫ Santi, Santi Cazorla runs down the wing for me? ♫

Of course, there will be some that won’t want Arsène to remove him from the centre, where he has the whole freedom of the pitch in which to roam, prompting at will. Cazorla’s a player we haven’t really had since Cesc. His appreciation of space is excellent and his delicately-played through-balls will no doubt result in a glut of assists. His success, at least in terms of chances created, in the opening weeks of the season will add further fuel to the thinking that he’s already too crucial to be moved wide. If that is indeed the case then there’s always the possibility Rosický will be moved back to a similar role in which he started his Arsenal career. As previously stated, with his increased maturity, Oxlade-Chamberlain could well make the position his own or Wenger may even repeat last season’s experiment of varying success where he played Ramsey wide. The beauty of these options is that they’re players who are relatively comfortable in either role, wide or central, and would have the potential to interchange freely, disrupting the marking of the opposition as they do so.

In addition to these choices, there’s always the option of using Lukas Podolski wide left as Wenger did at the Britannia. It’s a position he’s very comfortable in having played in that role for the majority of his 101 caps for Germany. The wide left berth may have been Podolski’s starting position but he was far from confined to this location. It was noticeable, in preseason too, how often he drifted centrally, playing one-twos with Cazorla and driving into the box before unleashing a rocket from that cannon of a left foot. This can cause issues with regards to width if the player on the opposite wing is also regularly cutting inside and, again, if that player is a direct type there’s a worry that there will be too big a burden on the central creator. In recent years we have had a tendency to become over-reliant on certain individuals. Regardless of the option Arsène eventually lands on, and there’s still the chance (albeit a very small one) that a last minute move may be made in the transfer window to address this area, it is imperative that doesn’t become the case this season.

Some may prefer the symmetrical, direct twin threat on the flanks but it’s been shown repeatedly in the past, especially at Arsenal, that taking the asymmetrical route can aid one’s search for the perfect balance. The final pass and general creativity in the final third is currently lacking and though the gelling of our new players over time should see an improvement in cohesion going forward, adding an additional creator on one of the wings should enable us to carry a more varied and potent threat. Having similarly direct threats on the flanks is clipping our wings. Hopefully, with an extra dose of artistry, we can find a way to soar again.

@hazzaboy21

The Games of the Golden Spikes

“I had already been into my professional career for six years and had not won an individual gold medal at the Olympics. There was a tremendous amount of pressure going into 1996 to get it done.” ~ Michael Johnson

So there I sat, on the floor of the living room, eyes wide and glued to the box waiting to see if the ‘man with the golden shoes’ could get it done. Athletics was a very innocent sport to the child sitting there, catching up with the events of the previous day in Atlanta on a recorded VHS tape. Little did I know of the ills of doping or the complexities of each event. Getting from A to B in the fastest time possible was all that crossed my naïve, youthful mind. That’s essentially all Michael Johnson had to do in both the 200m and 400m to complete his quest for a historic double but, of course, actions would be far harder to accomplish than words. He had won both a year previous, at the World Championships in Gothenburg, but no man had ever won over both distances at the same Olympic Games. This was unchartered territory; an attempt at Track & Field immortality. Despite the magnitude of the feat, the youngster sitting down on the living room floor, the whole United States of America and the rest of the world all expected…

First up was the 400m. Without this the pursuit of the historic double would come to a shockingly abrupt end. It’s often argued that the 400m is the toughest, most complex event on the track. As Michael himself states “there’s a lot of strategy to it.” Too long to be classed a true sprint, but too short to be grouped under the long distance umbrella. It’s a constant battle between body and mind. The mind focuses on keeping the leg speed and knee lifts high while the legs themselves are screaming for mercy. Go out too hard and it’s only a matter of time before the lactic acid produced by one’s anaerobic metabolism starts to accumulate in the muscles, making every further step an act of sheer anguish. On the other hand, if one takes the first half of the race too easily they’re invariably left with too much to do to catch those at the head of the field. A lingering feeling of what might have been is burdened with the individual. Certainly not a feeling many would like to carry with them for the rest of their lives.

Johnson, however, was the master of balancing these intricacies. He would habitually run similar splits for each half of the race and such was his dominance over the distance a victory was seen as a mere formality. With this expectation came great pressure, however, heaped on further by the Games being held in his home country. This pressure was completely absent from his face as he crouched onto the blocks, though. In its place, an expression of pure focus on the job in hand. He crouched down and settled into the blocks, his bespoke golden spikes* matching the gold chain hanging down from his neck. In the living room I too crouched in expectation of the starter’s gun… “Bang!” Off he went and as he did so did my eyes return to the screen. He quickly assumed his trademark running style, a unique style that many coaches would seek to change if it hadn’t produced such outstanding results. Back bolt upright, he possessed a relatively low knee lift but an incredible leg speed that was simply unmatched across the circuit. His limbs resembled the pistons of a well-oiled machine. After all, that is what he was – a machine.

“Superman”

An Olympic record time of 43.49s and, more importantly, the gold medal were the rewards awaiting Johnson at the finishing line. His winning margin a huge one at such an elite level. Britain’s Roger Black, forever in Michael’s shadow, claimed a laudable silver medal but finished in 44.41s, almost a whole second behind. These were athletes at the very peak of their ability but, quite frankly, they were made to look rather ordinary once they came up against Johnson. I remember jumping up and down for joy and holding my arms aloft to reproduce the scenes that had occurred in Atlanta. The first task had been accomplished emphatically. Focus would now turn to the highly anticipated 2oom.

The 200m would mean stepping out of the safer haven of the quarter mile for Johnson and into the macho zone of the proud 100m sprinters with their oft-used intimidation tactics both in the call room and on the start line. They would be more pumped than ever to halt Johnson’s attempt at history. It’s normal for a 100m runner to step up to the 200m but a 400m athlete stepping down to the distance was far less common. Doing so was almost like challenging the authority of the “pure sprinters” if you like; athletes with less speed endurance than Johnson but who compensated with an incredibly quick cadence. Following Donovan Bailey’s victory and world record in the 100m this would be their final shot at glory.

Unbeknownst to me at the time, the efforts of Frankie Fredericks that season had added another exciting element to the event. The affable Namibian certainly didn’t match the stereotypical demeanour of the 100m runner. A smile seemingly forever graced his face and by all accounts he remains one of the nicest guys to have ever participated in Track & Field. After silver in Barcelona ’92 in both the 100m and 200m he was determined to prove that nice guys can win as well. Johnson, a friend since they had competed against each other on the college circuit, was very much the dominant rival on the track but Fredericks had been able to finally reverse the trend on a July evening in Lausanne.

Fredericks ran 19.82s that night, beating Johnson by 3 hundredths and in doing so bringing Michael’s 21-race unbeaten streak spanning 2 years to an end. ‘Superman’ had broken the world record earlier that season in the American trials, sealing his place in the US team for the event in the process, but there was now a chink in his previously impregnable armour. The times in Lausanne, into a headwind of 1.1m/s, meant Atlanta with its fast track would be a mouth-watering prospect. Could the world record be eclipsed again? More pertinently, though, could Fredericks prove to be Johnson’s kryptonite when it mattered most?

The rounds were easily negotiated by both men, with the exuberant Trinidadian bronze medallist in the 100m, Ato Boldon, also exhibiting good form. The scene was set for a cracker of a final. Once again, I set up my imaginary blocks and crouched down waiting for the starter and his pistol. “Set… BANG!” Johnson had stumbled slightly out of the blocks or what he calls “more of a misstep, a flinch” but thankfully it would not derail his race; quite the opposite in fact. His drive phase was electric, seemingly every sinew engaged as he strived to make his dream a reality. As he neared the end of the curve he had reached Fredericks.

He passed him as he transitioned into the straight and then simply kept on going, building a gap over the field that became greater at every stride. His golden spikes were no longer pounding the ground, but floating above it. He was completely dialled in, reaching heights (figuratively speaking) that no other individual had ever reached before. As he crossed the line he turned to the infield clock. 19.32s: a new world record and an astonishing chunk taken off the previous one (19.66s). Johnson’s jaw dropped in disbelief as the crowd roared and thousands of cameras flashed as they attempted to capture this historic moment. After the shock came the euphoria. He bounded across the track in jubilation just like the little boy back in the living room. Then, on the podium, came the realisation of what he had achieved. Tears of joy proving that this astonishing athlete was human after all. The magnificent double was complete.

“I am rarely shocked by my own performance. And I’m shocked.”

Fredericks in 19.68s and Boldon in 19.80s had finished 2^nd and 3^rd respectively but their positions and times were merely an afterthought amidst such athletic brilliance. Boldon summed up the victor’s run perfectly: “Nineteen-thirty two? That’s not a time. It sounds like my dad’s birth date.” It would be a time that would stay untouched until a certain Jamaican named Usain Bolt arrived on the scene. Johnson’s 400m world record, however, still remains. It’s a time that no-one has really come close to since and one suspects it will remain that way for a number of years.

At Atlanta, Michael Johnson proved himself to be an all-time great. A legend worthy of being mentioned in the same breath as Jesse Owens and Carl Lewis. He was an athlete with a unique style achieving a unique feat; one that will be incredibly difficult to match. Atlanta ’96 truly was the Games of the golden spikes.

~

* The spikes, tested extensively in the Nike Sports Research Lab, were made of Zytel, a material, in short, composed of nylon and varying amounts of fibreglass depending on the use. The aim was simple: make Johnson feel like he wasn’t wearing any spikes at all. They weighed approximately 90g. The left shoe was half a size smaller than the right so to fit Johnson’s feet characteristics and, according to Nike, they gave medial and lateral support respectively so to ease progress around the bends of the track. The initial prototype was silver in colour to give a mirror effect as he ran but there was only one thing on Johnson’s mind – the gold. So they were changed to meet his requests and 8 pairs (one for each round of both events) were made for his assault on the history books. Afterwards, his coach Clyde Hart would keep the right shoe of the final pair while Johnson kept the left. The rest were sold at auction with the proceeds going to charity.

N.B. Unfortunately the order in which the finals took place are reversed in this video but its quality is one of the best around so sit back and enjoy these moments of sporting excellence.

@hazzaboy21

Tilting the Triangle

The centre of the park is a fiercely-contested battlefield in any football match. Rival midfielders fight tooth and nail to achieve supremacy in the central third with the victor of this battle, more often than not, going on to claim the overall spoils. The midfield is a vital cog in any team and remains so for Arsenal despite moving towards a more wing-based strategy last term. The ideal midfield should provide a robust stability when out of possession, a wall ready and waiting to shield the defence from the advances of the enemy. When in possession it holds the key to unlocking opposition defences, circulating the ball with unerring precision, and waiting for the exact moment to inflict the killer blow.

Despite Arsenal’s altered tactic last season, the midfield wasn’t suddenly absolved from duty, far from it. When quick, vertical transitions weren’t possible, for whatever reason, central craft was required to provide the breakthrough. Currently talk is rife of how Arsène Wenger may replace Robin van Persie’s impact within the team, should he depart, and of course that will go some way to deciding how competitive Arsenal are this coming season. Arguably, however, he has an even greater task still to perform: filling the giant hole that Cesc Fàbregas used to fit so snugly into. Understandably, given Cesc’s quality and the apparent funds available, this is easier said than done.

Without wishing to go over too much old ground and bring up a plethora of forcibly-erased memories of the majority it can’t be disputed that Cesc was our go-to man on so many occasions. If we needed a goal, simply put, we’d pass to him and hope he’d conjure up either yet another magical assist or net-bulging shot. Wenger’s decision to thrust Fàbregas forward behind the main striker was a defining one; one that was questioned at first by some but a decision that, after a brief adaptation period, simply couldn’t be argued. His burgeoning goals and assists columns the perfect response to the naysayers. He was our talisman, our creator-in-chief now at his devastating best on the fringes of the opposition box. His ability to provide the key pass in the final third of the pitch was unmatched in our squad and even if one were to look worldwide he’s in a select group of very few in this regard.

However, with his quality came a curse of sorts. A pass to Cesc became the easy pass, almost the only pass at times. His presence, through no fault of his own, seemed to inhibit the creative instincts of those around him. Tactically, though, subtle changes were made to the overall shape of the midfield partly perhaps to diminish this phenomenon while still keeping Cesc at the centre, quite literally, of our game plan. Having moved from a 1-2 structure (with a deep-lying holding player behind two more attacking midfielders) to a 2-1 shape with Fàbregas moved into a more advanced role, Wenger has since further tinkered with that shape.

The beauty of the double-pivot is it allows for rotation in the middle third, a blurring of roles that can pose the opposition multiple questions. Depending on circumstance any member of the midfield trio can feature at the point, allowing for untracked runs and more havoc in enemy ranks. Sure, Cesc was still very much the fulcrum of the team, but with that came increased attention, so if space was at a premium further up the pitch the structure gave him the option to drop deeper, dictating with enhanced freedom while allowing a teammate to take up his original position. The midfield triangle can be tilted at will with the opposition being pulled this way and that. At its best it can be extremely effective as illustrated in @BackwardsGooner’s masterfully crafted video detailing Arsenal’s midfield shape throughout a match at home to West Ham United in October of 2010:

In addition to the fluid element the double-pivot brings it can allow for creativity from other sources, depending on the personnel within said pivot of course. One player who has benefitted from this freedom is Alex Song. As the video above shows, when the triangle tilts Song can often become the most advanced midfielder allowing him to prompt with increased regularity. Arsène himself alluded to this growing attacking influence after Song’s goal in that game with a classic ‘Wengerism’: “He has got the taste to go forward, even if I think [it’s] a little too much sometimes for a holding midfielder! But that is part of our game as well.”

This “taste” of the attacking side of the game has resulted in greater assists for Song, especially last season. There’s certainly an argument for stating that he’s venturing forward more due to the inadequate creativity levels of others further forward but what is surely indisputable is that of our current midfielders he has relished the shared creative burden the most since Cesc’s return to Cataluña. His delicately weighted passes and somewhat surprisingly proficient dribbling ability (see a fan’s excellent capture of Robin van Persie’s 1^st goal at home to Dortmund) are arguably becoming too predictable at times but they were undoubtedly welcome contributions during key periods of last year’s campaign.

As Wenger mentioned, this attacking instinct is part of our game and is no doubt encouraged throughout the squad. He wants his midfield to be the complete midfield: Capable going forward and going the other way; possessing ability on the ball and intelligence off it. It’s a desirable quality he has described on many occasions including last season where he lauded Arteta’s goal and controlling performance at the heart of midfield against Manchester City:

“He first won the ball back through complete focus on what the opponent will do and where he could lose the ball. He then finished the action and scored the goal. That is what I call a real midfielder, a guy who is always in the game.”

The goal typified Wenger’s definition of a complete midfielder; “that means he can defend, give the final ball and score”. This often results in him either playing midfielders out of position in the first team on occasion or suggesting that should be the case for those in the Reserves. There’s a constant desire to improve the defective aspects of their game. Even regarding the early development of the aforementioned Fàbregas there was an ongoing aspiration to create an all-round midfield maestro. He demanded that Cesc should “improve on his defensive side because he is naturally an offensive player.” Playing on the right in his nascent career in the red and white, moving to a central role as Vieira departed, and then being thrust forward to take further control of our attacking potency all helped in creating the versatile, well-rounded talent he is today. Sadly, for Gooners, Barcelona are now the club profiting from such versatility and quality.

Anyway, I digress slightly. As with any system, there are drawbacks if the cogs aren’t completely aligned. As Wenger hinted at in his earlier quote of Song he perhaps ventures forward more frequently than is ideal, leaving the defence exposed as a result. Of course, he’s not the only member of the team that is at fault for the record-high tally of goals conceded under Arsène Wenger in the Premier League last season but, as part of the double-pivot, he must share some of that responsibility. Perhaps the system is partly to blame, though, allowing too much freedom so that specialization of roles is almost thrown out of the window at times. The ‘tilting triangle’ requires more intelligence and awareness of both the positions of your own teammates and the opposition than most midfield shapes.

André Villas-Boas, for one, believes such rotational freedom isn’t possible within the familiar high-octane tempo we enjoy so much on these shores leading to these words earlier this summer:

“We decided [rotational freedom] doesn’t work here, so that’s one of the things I have adapted. You lose a little bit of balance in the Premier League if you play that way. Transitions here are much more direct, making the importance of the number six [the holder] to stay in position more decisive.”

With that in mind, is it an option worth considering for Arsenal as well? Of course, Wenger has used a 1-2 shape in midfield before and it certainly has its merits. The most obvious aspect to note, as Villas-Boas mentions, is the presence of an outright defensive midfielder. Immediately, in theory at least, this gives more protection to the defence; previously unclear distinctions between roles instantly given clarity. More important, though, is the effect this has on the overall team shape and strategy.

A 2-1 midfield naturally leads to a 4-4-1-1 formation without the ball, with the no.10 assisting in the first wave of pressing. The midfield will subsequently follow and to remain compact, therefore neutralising space between stratas, the defence should also follow suit. This can result in a relatively high line which naturally leaves gaps in behind but the fact that the team is applying pressure on the ball should negate the ability of the opposition to exploit that space somewhat. Of course, teams can also practice a more reactive strategy with the defence and midfield dropping deeper without the ball, forming two banks of four. This is an attempt to reduce the space the trequartistas of this world thrive in but the best can still find room to operate effectively in this system.

A 4-2-3-1 with its double-pivot moving to more of a 4-4-1-1 shape without the ball.

Arguably, this isn’t so much the case with a 1-2 midfield. The no.6, operating deeper, can block some of the holes that emerge between the lines and keep a closer eye on wandering opposition 10′s. Furthermore, his presence can allow for further pressing higher up the pitch with greater numbers while still providing security on the counter. In extreme cases a 3-4-3 shape can be formed, with the holding midfielder dropping into defence, allowing the full backs to press on as the wide men have done ahead of them.

The altered positioning of the full backs within the 4-3-3/4-1-2-3 can take some time to adjust to, as Gael Clichy especially noted while we implemented that system, but in the long run it’s a shape that can pay off with the right personnel. It has its advantages when in possession as well as off-the-ball. Again depending on personnel, creative responsibility can be apportioned with the 2 more attacking midfielders sharing the load of a traditional no.10. Admittedly, that’s one less individual than in our current interpretation of the midfield shape (as at times all seem to wander forward!) but it still allows for a degree of freedom while keeping a firm eye on the defensive aspect of the game. Balance, as ever, is key to our fortunes.

A 4-1-2-3 with its designated holding player forming a 3-4-3.

We saw a brief look into the possible future of the Arsenal midfield at the back-end of the 10/11 season with Manchester United’s visit to the Emirates. Ramsey, Wilshere and Song formed the central trio that day and the presence of the former meant a change in our usual midfield shape. Whereas Fàbregas played as the clear no.10, Ramsey played a deeper role, taking it in turns with Wilshere to support the central striker, Robin van Persie. Alex Song’s role was more defined, and as our no.17 performed the role of a traditional no.6 in the system, he gave the stability and balance that Jack and Aaron required to exert their own creative influence on the game. It was fitting that Ramsey should score the winner; a triumph not only for his attacking thrusts but for the midfield shape.

Ramsey (red dot) and Wilshere (blue dot) have both ventured forward into the box with the former applying the killer touch to a flowing move which he started himself. His deployment deeper than a traditional no.10 allowed patient possession to develop, subsequently offering himself and Wilshere more time to advance into dangerous positions such as these.

The view from behind the goal shows Song (yellow dot) in the holding role just in front of the central defenders. His positioning gives Ramsey and Wilshere the confidence to advance in the same move while offering an additional body to ward off any potential counter-attacks.

We saw the Ramsey-Wilshere axis grow as a unit in the preseason of 11/12 but, unfortunately, that partnership would then be broken once again due to Wilshere’s injury, the ongoing nature of which is certainly a worry. Nevertheless, all being well, it’s clearly an option that Arsène sees prospering in the future. Of course, circumstances can change; the call of fans for signings to add that extra creative guile in the heart of midfield will seemingly never abate. One could certainly provide a strong case for such an investment but that argument will be left for another day, as will suggesting specific members of the current squad for certain roles any further than has been done already. The crux of this piece is shape and any alteration, albeit even a small one, could change things for the better.

Whether change is actually enacted is another matter. Realistically, the likelihood is that Arsène will stick with the rotational freedom that the double-pivot provides. That’s perfectly understandable and arguably the best option moving forward given its fundamental flexibility allowing for both defensive and offensive pivots. The question shouldn’t necessarily be “1-2 or 2-1?” but how best to marry the two. The missing ingredient at the moment is a complete understanding between teammates of their individual responsibilities as the shape continually shifts.  If such understanding can be found it’ll be a joy to watch the triangle tilt in seasons to come.

@hazzaboy21

Success, Loyalty and the Inherent Bias of Fandom

Robin van Persie’s statement last week conveying his decision to not extend his current deal created waves of discontent in the Arsenal community.  Naturally, the subject of loyalty and the direction of football were raised in the aftermath. Player-power has seemingly never held such a prominent role in the game as it does now.  These issues have weighed on my mind for some time and regardless of the eventual outcome of yet another summer transfer window saga in N5 I feel it’s time I met them head-on, so to speak. The cyclical nature of stars leaving for pastures new and the subsequent heartache endured by fans is hardly a novel occurrence but in this torrent of emotion the objective view is often discarded. The aim of this piece is to address that somewhat in rather general terms.

Strip down the beloved colours of whatever team it may be that you support and what is left? One man and his job. Footballers are human beings like you and I. They may enjoy a considerably more lavish lifestyle than us “norms” but they are still humans all the same. As the financial aspect of the game continues to reach frankly ridiculous levels, the perspective of both fans and players alike are stretched to the maximum. Whereas in the past there seemed to be a close bond between both groups, a real sense that obstacles were met as one, the continuing disparity in values has diminished that feeling. The overwhelming mood is one that football is losing, if it hasn’t already lost, its somewhat magical allure. Hopes and dreams that are slow cooked in life’s oven are burnt in an instant; Loyalty a value tossed by the wayside.

Football has changed, there’s no doubting that. What was once primarily a hobby, admittedly back in days of yore, is now a commercial cash cow with the sole aim of squeezing every last penny out of the very people who are the reason the game has such a standing in the first place. Football clubs have become businesses first and foremost with footballers their employees. Like in any profession it is natural, if one has an ambitious streak, to aim for the top. There are few feelings for a determined soul better than that of success. So, from a purely objective standpoint it makes perfect sense that an individual, especially a world class one in their field, should want to join an organization at the very top of their particular sector.

The money argument is an oft-used one and of course there have been numerous players in the past who have moved clubs simply to improve their wealth. I feel it’s important to stress, however, that these broad strokes shouldn’t be attributed to all players. Take Robin van Persie’s present situation. If indeed he does end up at Manchester City, yes, he will be increasing his wage by a hefty amount. Sure, the Sheikhs in Middle Eastlands have distorted the financial landscape of the game more than I imagined was possible only a few years ago but now, having benefitted from that injected wealth, City possess the “success” card too. It’s convenient that both monetary gain and success can be achieved at the Etihad now but it shows that these aspects don’t have to be mutually exclusive, contrary to the way they are often referred to in the modern day press. Bringing the situation back to the real world, one may love working in their present company but if a more successful company comes along offering you a better wage and a similar level of enjoyment I wouldn’t begrudge anyone from taking that option.

Of course, when emotions are involved it’s not always that simple. Our fandom brings with it an inherent bias; one that makes objectivity a difficult feat. We constantly demand that players show the same loyalty to the club we hold dear as we do ourselves, calling any player that doesn’t selfish. However, aren’t our own demands selfish in themselves?  The majority of fans are tied to the club of their choice for life. It’s a bond that is near impossible to break.  By default we bask in the glory days and wallow in the mire of failure. In contrast, a player’s sporting life near the top of their game lasts ten years maximum and that’s for the exceedingly fortunate. Yet we demand that they play out those years in our familiar dwelling rather than in the stadia of our rivals. We hold this desire regardless of the ability of our club to challenge for the silverware that many in the game crave. Again, this is merely natural human sentiment, but our own fanatical support can sometimes cloud the wider picture.

Contract duration: Life

“What of their contracts?” you may ask. “If they’ve agreed to stay for a certain time period shouldn’t they adhere to that?” A very valid question but an issue that is liable, once more, to bias. The fact is there are many occasions where the club can benefit from a contract just as much as the player. “Selling contracts” where a player signs for an extra year simply to give the club more leverage when entering transfer negotiations are rife and a clear example of this. A player signing a long contract may give them stability but it also gives the club a relative position of strength when facing bids from elsewhere.

Depending on a fan’s subjective opinion of a specific player they may or may not agree with the principles of their contract. Go back to the example of Robin van Persie for instance. A player whose standing in this present Arsenal team was immense before his statement. We, the fans, wanted nothing more than for him to prolong his stay in Arsenal colours, subsequently disagreeing when his own free will as a human being resulted in him coming to the opposite decision.

Take a player such as Sébastien Squillaci, however, and the call of the majority is to cut our ties as soon as possible. Fans who furiously demand loyalty of their favourites can be incredibly hypocritical when a player doesn’t take their fancy. On occasion, I’ve echoed similar sentiments so I’m certainly not in a position to condemn such behaviour. Unsurprisingly as fans, given the links to our club first and foremost, individuals of lesser quality are seen as surplus to requirements. In fact, that same stance is invariably shared by the club itself even though there are several occasions where the player in question may still have years left to run on their contract. The business-like nature of football makes this acceptable for most but again it highlights the two-faced nature of loyalty in the game.

Maldini, Giggs and Scholes: 3 names that are commonplace in any argument touching on loyalty in football and rightly so given their respective years of service to their clubs. These one-club men will go down in history and their performances on the pitch have been a credit to their profession. Despite this, it remains a fact that their careers either took place, or are still taking place in the case of the latter two, in a successful environment. The trophy cabinets at their clubs have been filled on a regular basis throughout their careers and for that very reason it’s difficult to attain a grasp of exactly how loyal they are. Would they have left for more successful clubs had silverware been more of a rarity? Any purist would like to think not but the hypothetical nature of the question leaves a lingering sense of doubt.

Loyalty isn’t simply black and white, though, it’s a spectrum. A sea of grey in which fans and players alike tread water. Every fan wishes they had a squad full of Matt Le Tissier’s; players with their club truly at heart, willing to stay throughout the lows and spurning opportunities of potentially greater things elsewhere. The reality is that such loyalty is scarce but it’s a depressing reality that most should expect nowadays. After all, footballers are only human.

@hazzaboy21

Attack, Defence and the Quest for Balance

The 2011/12 Premier League season:  A season voted the best ever in the league’s 20 year history (in its current guise). While one may argue that the outright level of quality wasn’t at its highest this season, no-one can deny the sheer amount of excitement generated throughout culminating in an exhilarating end at the Etihad stadium. The moment the ball left Kun Agüero’s right foot and hit the back of the net encapsulated this in an instant. Mass euphoria for the blue half of Manchester. Heart-wrenching despair for the red half. Football at its dramatic best.

Some are fascinated by the minutiae of tactical changes over the course of a game while the heartbeats of others are raised by a good, old-fashioned crunching tackle. The staple diet of the majority, however, is goals and there were plenty this season. In fact, Agüero’s late effort was the 1065^th goal of this remarkable campaign, a record for a 20-team Premier League season. As you’d expect on the back of that an exceptionally high 2.81 goals per game were scored, the highest ratio in the English top-flight since magic picture boxes were still showing black and white images (3.03 in 1967/68). Which begs the question, what were the defenders doing?

There’s no doubt, in my mind at least, that there are still players highly skilled in the art of defending playing in the Premier League. Vincent Kompany and Joleon Lescott formed an impressive pairing at the back for Manchester City and along with Joe Hart were a key reason for their title success this season. Other players once derided even by portions of their own fans, Jonny Evans and Laurent Koscielny, have shown fantastic improvement this season and become vital components in their respective teams’ defensive phase. In contrast to Liverpool’s woes in front of goal, Martin Skrtel has proved to be a rock in a defence that allowed the opposition the fewest shots on target of any Premier League club this season (132).

Fabricio Coloccini’s fine season was acknowledged with a place on the PFA Players’ Player Team of the Year, Pablo Zabaleta was his usual reliable self whenever called upon by Roberto Mancini while Younes Kaboul’s performances have resulted in him being Harry Redknapp’s first choice pick at the heart of his defence and being awarded a provisional place in the France squad for Euro 2012. I could go on listing skilled Premier League defenders as there are many more but, in short, my point is that the individual quality is certainly there.

What isn’t there, at least on a regular basis, is efficient collective organisation. Consider the following results: Manchester City (final position 1^st) 6 Manchester United (2^nd) 1, Manchester United 8 Arsenal (3^rd) 2, Arsenal 5 Tottenham Hotspur (4^th) 2, Tottenham Hotspur 5 Newcastle United (5^th) 0. These are remarkable results between teams who weren’t separated by that much in the final reckoning (gap between 2^nd and 3^rd apart). Granted, there were mitigating circumstances for some of these scorelines but on the whole they show a rather naïve tactical approach either in the initial setup of the respective losing teams or during the carnage.

These examples don’t even include Chelsea who themselves have been on different ends of cricket scores (albeit very low ones) in some of the ‘big’ games. Their 3-5 loss to Arsenal at Stamford Bridge earlier in the season was a prime example of excitement induced by kamikaze defending. Both sides gave master classes in how not to play a high defensive line. A lack of pressure higher up the field meant both defences were extremely vulnerable to even the most rudimentary long ball. The difference between the sides on that day, and where Arsenal won the match, was seeing this and making a change to rectify the initial error. The team in red dropped slightly deeper in the second half and weren’t as immediately susceptible to the long ball unlike their London rivals who were steadfast in their approach. André Villas-Boas was subjected to a lot of flak that day but his philosophy wasn’t the issue, it was more its implementation. Gradually, as he saw his squad weren’t willing to accept his methods, he adopted a more conservative approach but sadly for him the die had already been cast.

That away victory was one of many in the Premier League this season. 30.5% of games have ended in this fashion, higher than in any other Premier League season. It’s clear that managers have had a more offensive mindset when setting their team up which is another reason for the glut of goals this campaign. The rationale for this change in mentality is somewhat less clear-cut. It could be that the top teams seem, and in fact are, more vulnerable than they once were resulting in the ‘smaller’ clubs taking the handbrake off rather than travelling to the big grounds, parking the bus and waiting for the inevitable breakthrough.

Courtesy of The Independent

Premier League managers are also currently more progressive in their philosophy. The ambition of the ‘lesser’ clubs has meant an increase in attacking play throughout the league. There seems to be a greater number of teams adopting a certain ethos of playing, namely with the ball on the deck, and not altering that approach when they come up against sides they might traditionally expect to be battered by. Roberto Martinez’s Wigan, with their 3-4-3 and Brendan Rodgers’ Swansea with their 4-3-3 have both surprised opposition at times with their attacking transitions and technical quality on the ball. We’ve also seen this with other promoted teams in recent years.

Ian Holloway’s Blackpool devoted almost no time in their game to defending and though they paid for it in the end their attacking play brought them many plaudits and large scalps along the way. Paul Lambert’s Norwich are possibly an exception to this rule of sticking to one particular style. He’s a manager that often changes the shape of his team dependent on the opposition but the attacking intent generally remains. Despite only keeping 3 clean sheets all season, goals from all over the team helped them to reach the safe haven that is mid-table. The more success these types of teams have with this approach the more expansive styles will be integrated into the English game.

So, is Premier League defending dead? All the signs certainly point to it being in a lull at the moment. Gone are ‘the Mourinho years’ in which Chelsea’s defence was at its resolute best. Looking back it’s quite remarkable they only conceded 15 goals in the 2004/05 season. Mourinho’s success at Chelsea brought in a wave of cautious tactics across the league and a drop in the number of goals as a result. Managers adopted the thinking that it’s easier to destroy a masterpiece than create one and with José showing results could be gained with a controlled style why should they bother implementing a more open system? Of course, this generalises a bit. Mourinho’s Chelsea was hardly lacklustre. They were a well-drilled machine well capable of exploiting weaknesses in the opposition but what can’t be disputed is the fact that defence always came first.

This was something that Roberto Di Matteo grasped immediately when taking over the reins from Villas-Boas. Given the personnel at his disposal he decided the most logical approach, especially in high-profile games, was to instruct his team to sit deep and compact before springing to life on the counter-attack. Though this tactic didn’t help Chelsea climb the table in the league it did aid them in knockout competition where purity, and to some extents naivety, is often trumped by pragmatism. Of course, Bayern still had ample opportunities to triumph in Munich but Chelsea’s defensive display in the Camp Nou especially (where similarities with Mourinho’s Inter success were very apparent) was in stark contrast to those of most English teams throughout the season both in European competition and on their own shores.

Manchester City have this year won the league conceding 29 goals, almost double Chelsea’s record, and a tally higher than the average over the last 10 years (25.7) . Perhaps fittingly the newly-crowned Champions also scored the most goals yet the word ‘United’ rather than ‘City’ could well have been inscribed on the Premier League trophy had the red half of Manchester defended with a collective cohesion in the dying minutes at home to Everton. Nevertheless, in the end the trophy was won (or lost) on goal difference and for this reason it’s impossible to forget the 6-1 between the two sides earlier in the season. Had Manchester United not been so cavalier against City that day perhaps the ending of this tumultuous season might have been different.

Open, expansive football may conjure excitement but it doesn’t necessarily get results. As ever, a balance is needed. An ability to attack and defend as one. For most teams the elusive search for balance continues.

Many thanks to Opta (@OptaJoe) for their continued provision of stats galore.

If you enjoyed this piece you can follow me on twitter ~> @hazzaboy21