How effective our attacking players played and the way the manager set the team up to play are totally different things. You have just lauded Chelsea for such amazing tactics for big games, yet slated us, despite us setting up with the same game plan.
They do get the tactics right, that's what I am saying, in the big games, and against us they get the tactics right, and we don't. I didn't say we necessarily had to sit deep VS Chelski and hit them on the counter.
we definitley employed better tactics yesterday, but it was the end product that was missing again. I think were doing a lot of things right, but the difference was that Chelsea attacked with swift and incisive play whereas we laboured around the penalty area. We played some good football and I thought we set up okay, but it counts for nothing if you can't find a way through the defence.
So you slate us for playing an open game usually in big games. Everyone says before the game we should sit deep. We sit deep. But your now claiming that isn't what we should of done?
How effectively our attackers play ALL HAS TO DO WITH THE SET UP, sheesh louise, setting us up with Wilshere in the middle who is lightweight, and putting Ozil out left is already stabbing yourself in the balls.
I didn't say we have to play all gung ho, now did I, . you do know there's a balance right, that you can solid defensively, and solid in attack without it being one or the other? And we lack that balance, if we sit deep, our attack is ****, if we attack, our defence is ****, we lack the balance, and forever have lacked the balance because the manager doesn't know how to properly do it, and doesn't have the players to do it because he doesn't buy them.
And for how long has this been a problem with us? It wasn't just yesterday that our attacking play was laboured, slow, and without purpose.
Please let me know the exact team you would of played yesterday and how you would of set up to get a different result?
One of the reasons we couldn't find a way through was because our passing game was too slow. This has been a problem for a number of years now. We have to be less predictable.
Ok, I wouldn't have started Wilshere, I'd have Diaby in his place, yes DIABY, he's far stronger and gives us much more presence in the midfield, and if not Diaby, then I'd even start Rosicky ahead of Wilshere because he brings all the attacking quality Wilshere does, and is better defensively and stronger than Wilshere, so I wouldn't have started Wilshere. I wouldn't have played Ozil on the wing who was useless again over there. I would have played Ozil in the middle, and started with the OX who has looked very good and sharp recently. We basically had no pace in this game other than Sanchez, and against a Chelsea team you're going to need some pace to hurt them, slow laboured play and passing isn't going to get the job done, you need some pace.
It's something I think Welbeck and Sanchez should help, there movement and trickery should open space and create opportunities for players like ozil, Cazorla wilshere and Ramsey to speed up the passing or run in beyond the defence. I hope so anyway.
Diaby was rested due to a hip problem, so your plan falls apart after 6 words. Rosicky has also been **** when called upon recently. And your only other suggestion is to play oxocube from the start. Hardly ground braking tactical genius from you there. So you would of gone for the same formation and same plan but with a couple of player changes.
I said if not Diaby then Rosicky, how conveniently you ignored that point, ;-). And if Diaby's injured again, it's more of a damning indictment on your god and saviour Wenger, who didn't bring in another midfielder and instead relies on someone who's always injured. But Wenger knows best eh?
In order to make our game work we need space in behind, which Chelsea were unwilling to offer us. In times like these, you need a plan B. We didn't have it.
Maybe it's time to play the OX in Wilshere's midfield place as well, far more stronger and direct than Wilshere, and he's defending is good too, made some good tracking and tackles.
True but there is more than one way to skin a cat. I know the team isn't set up to play route one football, so you need to then force an error from the opposition. We lack players than will take people on, eg. Hazard yesterday. Our team suffers from a lack of player who are willing to run at a man, force the defender to commit and thereby force the error that could lead to a goal. If you can't break them down from open play you must find other ways. Arsenal lack the resourcefulness at times to score against the top sides, not the quality. Football is a thinking game and we were outsmarted yesterday.
