Hleb-In-The-Hole Discussion Thread

[Zico]

Sammer mentioned Gilberto. It could be that Hleb in the hole is more about Gilberto than our strikers. With the knowledge that we do not have a midfield enforcer/cleaner in place, maybe Wenger views it as paramount that we keep possession, and Hleb in the hole is key to that approach.

Saw today that Sneijder is off to Real. Sometimes I wish we had just him instead of both Hleb and Rosicky. The guy can play left wing or in central midfield, and can smack the ball with either foot. A midfield of Sneijder and Diarra could be a nightmare for opponents. Aaargh, back to reality.

 

[stuart]

ooOOo interesting, the last midfielder to have a bet on his goal tally was Ronaldo

 

[MDGoonah41]

I agree as well. I think at times, Wenger gives too much credit to the opposition. If a team is going to play defensive football, and let's face it, most teams that play us do, I don't see a lot of need for a DM in the squad. Yesterday, for example, we might have benefited from having Denilson in place of Eboue, not worrying about "width" and have another playmaker out there. With Eduardo fit, I'd play a 4-3-2-1, with Cesc, Rosicky and Gilberto in front of the back four, Hleb and Eduardo in front of them, and RVP just in front of them. While Gilberto is out, why not play Diaby there? I love Flamster's energy and passion, but I want to score goals, a lot of them. He's a good player to bring on in the last 20 minutes to clamp down on things when we have a 1 or 2 goal lead.

With the talent we have, playing a defensive mid against a team that will likely be in the bottom 6 is kind of wrongheaded, in my opinion of course. Attack attack attack.

 

[kel varnsen]

If you want more directness and movement up front, you need to field either Eduardo or Ade to partner RVP, in stead of playing a 5 midfielders.

Having 2 strikers doesn't make the play direct. Its the movement and supply of the midfield that dictates whether you're direct or not. Robin and Eduardo up front wont be worth a flying f**k if Cesc, Hleb and Rosicky are all standing 35 yards from goal passing it horizontally until they lose the ball.

Wrong. They have to pass far less horizontally because they have more options to play the ball forward in 442.

no, it's you who are wrong. two forwards are not a requirement for directness in the final third. the difference between two forwards, say one of whom is a 'runner', and having hleb in the hole, is how one achieves directness. in the former case, you pass the ball past the lines. in the latter, hleb carries the ball past the lines himself. making the run on the ball, rather than having a forward making a run off the ball. same result; we have posession in the final third and the team is moving/running in the right direction.

 

[kel varnsen]

We pass the ball back & forth in the final third, because our great passers, lack options to play the final ball to. An additional striker will give more options, reducing the amount of weaving. .

...and here is where you're wrong. well, maybe not wrong, but definately not right. the reason we end up playing back and forth is because, as you say, we lack passing options further up the pitch AND the fact that none of our central midfielders, bar hleb, are capable of carrying the ball themselves up, past the lines(midfield). that iw why 4-5-1, with hleb in the hole, can work. because it gives us that directness we would otherwise miss.

 

[clockwork orange]

If you want more directness and movement up front, you need to field either Eduardo or Ade to partner RVP, in stead of playing a 5 midfielders.

Having 2 strikers doesn't make the play direct. Its the movement and supply of the midfield that dictates whether you're direct or not. Robin and Eduardo up front wont be worth a flying f**k if Cesc, Hleb and Rosicky are all standing 35 yards from goal passing it horizontally until they lose the ball.

Wrong. They have to pass far less horizontally because they have more options to play the ball forward in 442.

no, it's you who are wrong. two forwards are not a requirement for directness in the final third. the difference between two forwards, say one of whom is a 'runner', and having hleb in the hole, is how one achieves directness. in the former case, you pass the ball past the lines. in the latter, hleb carries the ball past the lines himself. making the run on the ball, rather than having a forward making a run off the ball. same result; we have posession in the final third and the team is moving/running in the right direction.

Of course other options also offer some kind of directness, but every manager you ask, will say 2 strikers will provide more directness.

 

[celestis]

Heh , did not know where to post this but it seems that the boys knows that they have to score more goals and are detemined to do it.

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 18,00.html

 

[kel varnsen]

If you want more directness and movement up front, you need to field either Eduardo or Ade to partner RVP, in stead of playing a 5 midfielders.

Having 2 strikers doesn't make the play direct. Its the movement and supply of the midfield that dictates whether you're direct or not. Robin and Eduardo up front wont be worth a flying f**k if Cesc, Hleb and Rosicky are all standing 35 yards from goal passing it horizontally until they lose the ball.

Wrong. They have to pass far less horizontally because they have more options to play the ball forward in 442.

no, it's you who are wrong. two forwards are not a requirement for directness in the final third. the difference between two forwards, say one of whom is a 'runner', and having hleb in the hole, is how one achieves directness. in the former case, you pass the ball past the lines. in the latter, hleb carries the ball past the lines himself. making the run on the ball, rather than having a forward making a run off the ball. same result; we have posession in the final third and the team is moving/running in the right direction.

Of course other options also offer some kind of directness, but every manager you ask, will say 2 strikers will provide more directness.

i wouldn't call it 'more', but rather different. you'll have 'directness' further up the pitch, closer to the goal, as the striker playing farthest up the pitch will play off the shoulder of the defenders, as opposed to the attacking midfielder who'll look to get in behind the opposing midfielders. unless you have a player such as bergkamp, who is able to drop down into this area, receive the ball and then create 'attacking moves' from there.

with the way we play now, lacking a real ball winner in central midfield, not having a proper runner up front and having adopted a slower, more continental playing style, i feel the need and potential for directness is greater in midfield than it is up front.

though, i'm not saying we should play 4-5-1 in every match. with adebayor back, we do get a bit of movement and directness up front. ade is good at angling his runs and finding space in behind the midfielders. once cesc(or hleb or rosick) then pushes up, he can link up with them. for me, this is a good option as well. however, with adebayor out, i don't think we have the players we need to play 4-4-2. bendtner looks a bit too immobile and i don't really know enough about da silva to say anything for certain one way or the other.

 

[kel varnsen]

Heh , did not know where to post this but it seems that the boys knows that they have to score more goals and are detemined to do it.

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 18,00.html

heh, both good and interesting to see. cesc, hleb and rosicky are, imo, arguably the key to success this season. if they can get a good goal talley combined, we might have a decent season...

 

[asajoseph]

Kel,

I think this comes down to the same thing that you and I have been batting around literally for years - I've always felt that you've preferred the 'perfect' formation that, when it works, will destroy teams 3,4,5-0.

I've always felt that your tactical views have been too idealist though, too dependant on the team being perfectly tuned, and often too dependant on just one player to play well, and thus presenting the machine from falling apart.

We batted this around for months and months when it came to Reyes [playing up front], and I feel this debate about Hleb is more or less the same - too dependant on Alex to play well for it really to work consistently enough for us to win anything. I rate Alex, I really do - I've been on his side ever since we were first linked with him in his Stuttgart days. But let's face it, his record at Arsenal has hardly been consistent, and until he shows those signs, it would be wrong to put so much pressure on his shoulders so consistently - just as it was with Reyes.

 

[Feanor]

I think this tactic can work but I think it work better with RVP at the hole and Ade or Bendtner up front. Hleb drops way too deep too often for it to work. I guess at that point it would be the old shadow striker and not a player in the hole. I'm not sure yesterday's formation was about who we had but more about who we didn't have. Despite a lot of people's opinions, Wenger is a pretty astute tactician, it's his stubborness that gets people mad. I would agree with Asajoseph that it's more about a team formation and not a particular's players' needs that should be addressed. We built a team around TH, Manure have build a team around Cronaldo, Barca is build around Ronaldinho, would anyone here but Hleb in that category? I like Hleb and it was good yesterday but I'm not this formation is the best for us going forward. I would prefer another striker up there with RvP.

 

[phenn]

A team could certainly be built around Hleb, just not a Championship winning team. Much like Riquelme in that sense.

There's got to be some way we can harness Hleb's creativity better than sticking him to the right touchline when he can't really cross. The man can legitimately beat people better than any of our other midfielders, save maybe Diaby.

Perhaps admitting that the only width we have is from full backs and letting him drift in central sometimes to carry the ball between midfield and the opposition defense would be ideal.

I still say I'd like to see him on the left with Rosicky either on the right or benched but I doubt Wenger will do that.

 

[banduan]

A team could certainly be built around Hleb, just not a Championship winning team. Much like Riquelme in that sense.

Actually I think such a team could win the championship. But why bother building your team around a player when you don't need to? The current Arsenal team is not over-reliant on anyone except to make sure our wide players are consistently fit as we lack depth there.

 

[ThaSaltCracka]

Perhaps admitting that the only width we have is from full backs and letting him drift in central sometimes to carry the ball between midfield and the opposition defense would be ideal.

This may be a dumb question, but why not do this with Rosicky, Hleb, and Cesc. Basically have all three move fluidly throughout from left to right, using our full backs overlapping for width? All three of these guys can play in the middle, all three can be ok on the wings. So why force 2 of them to play ok for a game if the possibility is there for all three of them to play.

I actually think for this to work we need a stout DM. Maybe we can do this when Gilberto gets back.

 

[Biggus]

Maybe we can do this when Gilberto gets back.

If Gilberto comes back.

 

[Big_Cake]

I agree as well. I think at times, Wenger gives too much credit to the opposition. If a team is going to play defensive football, and let's face it, most teams that play us do, I don't see a lot of need for a DM in the squad. Yesterday, for example, we might have benefited from having Denilson in place of Eboue, not worrying about "width" and have another playmaker out there. With Eduardo fit, I'd play a 4-3-2-1, with Cesc, Rosicky and Gilberto in front of the back four, Hleb and Eduardo in front of them, and RVP just in front of them. While Gilberto is out, why not play Diaby there? I love Flamster's energy and passion, but I want to score goals, a lot of them. He's a good player to bring on in the last 20 minutes to clamp down on things when we have a 1 or 2 goal lead.

With the talent we have, playing a defensive mid against a team that will likely be in the bottom 6 is kind of wrongheaded, in my opinion of course. Attack attack attack.

I agree I think Hleb would function a lot better with two strikers ahead of him - same role, less responsibility but with more scope.

 

[Clrnc]

nice idea, but that would mean sacrificing either our width, or gilberto/cesc.

it would be like a diamond formation with hleb at the peak of the diamond. his through passes and eye for players would make the 2 strikers ahead of him have alot of chances

 

[Feanor]

Maybe we can do this when Gilberto gets back.

If Gilberto comes back.

Stop it! I don't want to hear that kind of talk, I can only take some many departures in one summer!

 

[Feanor]

nice idea, but that would mean sacrificing either our width, or gilberto/cesc.

it would be like a diamond formation with hleb at the peak of the diamond. his through passes and eye for players would make the 2 strikers ahead of him have alot of chances

As I said earlier, I'm not sure Sunday's formation was our new formation for they year but what AW thought would work best with the players we had. I wish some of the journalists would actually understand football enough to ask these type of questions instead banging on about Jens' blunder.

 

[tactica442]

I still can't see why the fuss about the 451 with Helb played behind the lone striker.
Indeed Robin was sometimes isolated and Hleb took one touch too many before shooting. But the players are improving in these aspects. Even when the team played 442 last season, they still couldn't break the defense or be more clinical when the oppositions sitting back in their own half like Blackburn and Newcastle.

One thing I found to be desired in the Fulham game is the players' control on the ball when through balls were coming. In some occasions, Robin were one step too far and the keeper Warner was brave in coming out in full speed. Rosicky and Hleb's finishing inside the box needed to improve as well. They could've actually tried to chip the ball over Waner's lunging body.