FA Community Shield: Arsenal vs Chelsea, Sun. 2nd August, 3pm BT Sports 1

[redanddread]

lmao they are convinced Jose was pure class after the match.

As Wenger once said, give success to a stupid person & it can make them more stupid. Success has turned them into an arrogant, despicable bunch of ****s.

 

[Carlo Marx]

Really digging your discussion, @nasri_8 and @redanddread I can see where you're coming from.

We should remember not to take the Chelsea game too seriously as an indicator of Wenger's tactics. His comments after the game suggest that he was as frustrated as anyone by our caution going forward, perhaps also with our inefficiency on the counter. He seems to attribute these to our being tentative against Chelsea in particular.

In other words, psychology in this game had a lot to do with our inefficiency. Maybe we shouldn't get too hung up on personnel, form, tactics etc. until we settle into our league games. I have a feeling that our counter attack will look a lot better when we don't have "little bit handbrake on".

 

[redanddread]

Really digging your discussion, @nasri_8 and @redanddread I can see where you're coming from.

We should remember not to take the Chelsea game too seriously as an indicator of Wenger's tactics. His comments after the game suggest that he was as frustrated as anyone by our caution going forward, perhaps also with our inefficiency on the counter. He seems to attribute these to our being tentative against Chelsea in particular.

In other words, psychology in this game had a lot to do with our inefficiency. Maybe we shouldn't get too hung up on personnel, form, tactics etc. until we settle into our league games. I have a feeling that our counter attack will look a lot better when we don't have "little bit handbrake on".

There was an enormous psychological hurdle to get over in regards to Chelsea. In the last 8 months we've beaten City, UTD., Liverpool & now Chelsea & only lost to the Sp*ds (out of the tradtionanl "big" teams). This win is more significant for whom we beat rather than what we won. The next hurdle is to beat Chelsea in the league and either draw or beat them at the Bridge. No matter how confident the manager may be it's the players that have to execute on the pitch-they're starting to do that in big games and that will give them the necessary confidence.

It's been a long, arduous, frustrating, painful road back to the top but at long last we're looking like we can legitimately challenge UTD., Chelsea & City for the title. The most important thing is the players now have the experience of actually beating these top teams and that's the best confidence builder that a team can have.

Regarding tactics, it's impressive that the team shows the necessary nous to adapt & adopt different tactics in fulfilling their ultimate ambition, which is to win the game. It certainly seemed that, up to very recently, the team didn't know how to do this and execute a winning gameplan concurrently.

 

[Carlo Marx]

Regarding tactics, it's impressive that the team shows the necessary nous to adapt & adopt different tactics in fulfilling their ultimate ambition, which is to win the game. It certainly seemed that, up to very recently, the team didn't know how to do this and execute a winning gameplan concurrently.

Yes. I've been so impressed with the off-the-ball shape of our team this pre-season. It just doesn't look like we're going to panic and lose our discipline the way we sometimes did two or three years ago.

 

[Gooner Zig]

First goal is pretty much everything in big matches IMO.

That's the difference.

 

[Gooner n Proud]

Yes. I've been so impressed with the off-the-ball shape of our team this pre-season. It just doesn't look like we're going to panic and lose our discipline the way we sometimes did two or three years ago.

That was against inferior midtable sides mostly and against Chelsea we allowed them to create too many chances due to lapses of concentration and unnecessary panicking. If it was the other way round ,like it usually is, us obtaining the lion share of possession and Chelsea defending do you think we would get clear cut chances like they did for Ramires ? Or Fabregas through ball into Hazard?

I don't have a full issue with us deploying this stratergy but when that's the case the players executing should be different, both Cazorla and Özil shouldn't start or both should be on the bench in such games, I love both players but their defensive effort and effectiveness combined is inadequate and it was these weaknesses that resulted in Chelsea gaining space in the final third to create chances or winning dangerous freekicks, the midfield should be Arteta-Coquelin-Ramsey with pace up front to lead strong counter attacks. Arteta starts because first and foremost he is our leader who possesses an abundance of footballing wisdom, he knows how to put in a defensive shift and retains possession well without panicking or doing careless dribbles like Cazorla does at times. Ramsey and Coquelin in front of Mikel to establish a triangular 433 because of their defensive abilities and engines to compensate for Artetas athletic weaknesses.

You mention that we no longer lose our discipline and do not panic like 2 seasons ago but last season against the bigger teams there were quite a few away games when we opted for this defensive approach the players panicked for large portions of the match; Tottenham away, Liverpool away, Man united away even against Crystal Palace we were never at any point in all these 4 fixtures in control like a team of our ambitions and aspirations should be. Why? Because of the players being selected to execute this tactic simply aren't suitable for it coincided with too much panic which points to us having a deficient number of leaders in the team when Arteta is out because if we did these situations when employing this style would be controlled with more composure.

 

[Gooner n Proud]

First goal is pretty much everything in big matches IMO.

That's the difference.

Yer that's good point too.

 

[Gooner Zig]

@nasri_8

I think you're being too generous to Chelsea by saying "we allowed them to create too many chances" - they didn't have a shot on target until the 65th minute or something like that.

Had we played the way Chelsea did, we would have slaughtered the team on here.

 

[This_is_The_Year]

@nasri_8

Had we played the way Chelsea did, we would have slaughtered the team on here.

no we wouldnt

 

[Gooner Zig]

no we wouldnt

I've seen our team slaughtered on here many a time for a lot less.

 

[This_is_The_Year]

I've seen our team slaughtered on here many a time for a lot less.

Chelsea dominated in the midfield while missing their star striker - also their defense was solid as always and their passing was better than ours. (please dont show a youtube clip of cesc being made dizzy: O )

for a pre-season game both teams did very well imo

 

[Gooner Zig]

Chelsea dominated in the midfield while missing their star striker - also their defense was solid as always and their passing was better than ours. (please dont show a youtube clip of cesc being made dizzy: O )

for a pre-season game both teams did very well imo

And for all that they create next to nothing. We could have played another 90 and they still wouldn't have scored IMO.

We should have scored at least another goal with the counter attack opportunities we had.

 

[Carlo Marx]

That was against inferior midtable sides mostly and against Chelsea we allowed them to create too many chances due to lapses of concentration and unnecessary panicking. If it was the other way round ,like it usually is, us obtaining the lion share of possession and Chelsea defending do you think we would get clear cut chances like they did for Ramires ? Or Fabregas through ball into Hazard?

I don't have a full issue with us deploying this stratergy but when that's the case the players executing should be different, both Cazorla and Özil shouldn't start or both should be on the bench in such games, I love both players but their defensive effort and effectiveness combined is inadequate and it was these weaknesses that resulted in Chelsea gaining space in the final third to create chances or winning dangerous freekicks, the midfield should be Arteta-Coquelin-Ramsey with pace up front to lead strong counter attacks. Arteta starts because first and foremost he is our leader who possesses an abundance of footballing wisdom, he knows how to put in a defensive shift and retains possession well without panicking or doing careless dribbles like Cazorla does at times. Ramsey and Coquelin in front of Mikel to establish a triangular 433 because of their defensive abilities and engines to compensate for Artetas athletic weaknesses.

You mention that we no longer lose our discipline and do not panic like 2 seasons ago but last season against the bigger teams there were quite a few away games when we opted for this defensive approach the players panicked for large portions of the match; Tottenham away, Liverpool away, Man united away even against Crystal Palace we were never at any point in all these 4 fixtures in control like a team of our ambitions and aspirations should be. Why? Because of the players being selected to execute this tactic simply aren't suitable for it coincided with too much panic which points to us having a deficient number of leaders in the team when Arteta is out because if we did these situations when employing this style would be controlled with more composure.

Well, I have to be honest, I didn't see the full match, so I can't say too much about the Chelsea game. From motd highlights, it didn't look like we did too badly! I only remember two clear-cut Chelsea chances. But, as I say, I can't argue.

We disagree over Cazorla's worth in midfield. I'm sure there have been games where he has lost possession in midfield, but I think he's a very, very good player at retaining possession considering the positivity of his play. He needs a strong partner (Coq) for sure, but I rate him highly as a CM. In fact, there aren't any retentive players in the Prem I'd prefer in his position, and certainly not a permanently injured Arteta.

Arteta, I'm afraid, is finished. Love him, but I can't see him coming back to anywhere near his best. Were it not for his leadership qualities, he would be gone.

I agreed more with your earlier post re. transition from defence to attack in a counter-attacking setup. But I think that's exactly why we need to have Ramsey or Santi alongside Coquelin. The best way to improve would be to buy a Busquets (if only) to compete with Coquelin imo.

 

[arsenalhumor]

...UTD., Liverpool & now Chelsea & only lost to the Sp*ds (out of the tradtionanl "big" teams).

Ok I understand this a code you have been kidnapped somewhere north of Islington but we will not pay the ransom. Now If you could turn on your the gps so we can rescue you.

 

[Gooner n Proud]

@nasri_8

I think you're being too generous to Chelsea by saying "we allowed them to create too many chances" - they didn't have a shot on target until the 65th minute or something like that.

Had we played the way Chelsea did, we would have slaughtered the team on here.

Absolute tosh mate honestly just because chelseaconly had one shot on target doesn't mean they had no dangerous attacks and created zero opportunities throughout the game, Arsenal overall were just about the better team but that doesn't take away from the fact we were under unnecessary pressure for large portions of the 90 minutes especially in the second half.

 

[Gooner Zig]

Absolute tosh mate honestly just because chelseaconly had one shot on target doesn't mean they had no dangerous attacks and created zero opportunities throughout the game, Arsenal overall were just about the better team but that doesn't take away from the fact we were under unnecessary pressure for large portions of the 90 minutes especially in the second half.

Did I say that? So what if Chelsea had dangerous attacks - every team has them in every game - how many times did you come away from the game thinking "oooh **** Chelsea should've scored there" - there wasn't many. Our defence was totally on top of their attack.

Chelsea played the type of game our team regularly gets slaughtered for in the press and on here - lots of huff and puff but zero end product.

Yes it was annoying our midfield lost posession too easily at times and put our defence under uneccesary pressure yet still Chelsea didn't create much at all from their control of the game and it was us who really should have put them to the sword.

 

[redanddread]

Did I say that? So what if Chelsea had dangerous attacks - every team has them in every game - how many times did you come away from the game thinking "oooh **** Chelsea should've scored there" - there wasn't many. Our defence was totally on top of their attack.

Chelsea played the type of game our team regularly gets slaughtered for in the press and on here - lots of huff and puff but zero end product.

Yes it was annoying our midfield lost posession too easily at times and put our defence under uneccesary pressure yet still Chelsea didn't create much at all from their control of the game and it was us who really should have put them to the sword.

Think UTD. at home last season!

 

[RandyMarsh]

haha

https://twitter.com/FootyHumour/status/628593077561786368

 

[US_Gooner]

Hahaha
Suspect defending, my a**. Eden Hazard still missing.

 

[redanddread]

Don't these guys get Mourinho & his (not so) sly mind games?

Arsenal boss Arsène Wenger was mean-spirited after victory over Chelsea at Wembley, says Lord Coe

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/foo...helsea-at-wembley-says-lord-coe-10440420.html