• ! ! ! IMPORTANT MESSAGE ! ! !

    Discussions about police investigations

    In light of recent developments about a player from Premier League being arrested and until there is an official announcement, ALL users should refrain from discussing or speculating about situations around personal off-pitch matters related to any Arsenal player. This is to protect you and the forum.

    Users who disregard this reminder will be issued warnings and their posts will get deleted from public.

PL Arsenal V Chelsea Sun 26th 16:00

Status
Not open for further replies.

quattro

Well-Known Member
wanted to win the game for obvious reasons, but the performance we showed against them was clearly a step forward. people on here rave on postmortem of our suicidal tendencies in matches against chelski where we get ripped to shreds for dropping the ball once or twice... it didn't happen and didn't look like happening at all yesterday. i think we are still adapting to this kind of style against this kind of opponent, and on evidence of yesterday's match, we are not far off from getting maximum points from games like these, against opponents like that. we matched them for industry, we matched them for grit and we did create chances.

there was none of the naivete in our past defeats to them on show here. sure we could've thrown something to score, and we did but it just didn't work out. the silver lining here is that we CAN still improve on this. looking at chelsea... well that is all that they have. efficient, solid defence, and against bigger teams, the ability to pick them apart for mistakes. we can still improve, while i honestly believe that that is as "good" as chelsea will ever be. that is enough for them to win the league this year, but given how they are set up, i dont know if there is any way for them to actually improve.
 

celestis

Arsenal-Mania Veteran
Moderator

Country: Australia
Annoyed at the result but the team playyed well very happy with our performance.


Just thinking about next season the only team to really beat Mourinho is Barcelona I think we really need to be that good to beat him wenger was right when he said we need another 15 goal season player. The Giroud Sanchez combination caused them trouble we just need that extra runner to get in behind.

Newcastle and the Spuds beat them this year though , convincingly . Mou has never beaten Pardew .
 

SteveEvets

Well-Known Member
As far as Ramsey goes, I think its just Wenger not wanting an imbalance on the right side. Bellerin gets forward a fair bit, and putting on Walcott with him would've perhaps allowed Hazard to get a bit more into the game. The likes of Ox and Ramsey will put their shift in every time. It is still infuriating.

Ox was missed in this game.

Ramsey on the right by definition creates an imbalance on the right side. I don't buy the idea that with Walcott the right flank would have meant a wide open flank for Hazard to exploit all day. It only takes a bit of instruction from the manager to both Walcott and Bellerin.

To Walcott, it's a matter of getting back more than normal, and simply putting his body about to either cut off a pass or slow him down. There's no need to transform into Tony Adams, just basic hustling of the opposition, which Theo is more than capable of doing.

For Bellerin, it's a case of not bombing up and down the wing with impunity, but rather having a 70-80% focus on staying back to neutralise any attempt at them countering through Hazard. There's no need to be bombing forward to provide width anyhow with Theo there in the first place.

On top of that, the presence of Coq should have allowed us to be a bit more adventurous in the team selection. That's the bloody point of him, isn't it? In years past we got torn apart because the midfield was left wide open when we went forward, making the sit back and counter plan Mourinho does so effective. Coq is capable of nullifying, or at worst mitigating the 'counter' part.

In the end Bellerin had little to do, not because of 'Ramsey industry' from right wing, but because Chelsea weren't very intent on attacking at all. In fact, there were many times when Ramsey would take up his 'natural' position in midfield, leaving Bellerin isolated. When we had possession, we'd cycle the ball from left towards the right, and then the player would look up, see nothing but Azpilicueta standing there on his own. Ramsey had vacated the area, and Bellerin was too far back to provide an outlet. So we'd have to turn back inside the other way. Plenty of potential counters were neutered in this way. We really, really missed proper wide play today.

I looked at the Barca 5 - Real Madrid 0 match again, and the goals Barca scored corroborate my thinking.

1st goal: Iniesta running at the back 4, with an option to the left, a runner in a typical CF channel, and Xavi making a late run from deep (Ramsey anyone?). Iniesta plays Xavi in who scores, albeit with a helpful deflection

2nd goal: Villa takes the ball on the left, drives to the endline, puts the ball across the 6 yd box where Pedro (Walcott anyone?) is running in from the other flank for an easy tap in

3rd and 4th goals: Both were Messi playing in Villa, the third came from a slide rule pass with Villa running in behind the CB. Not sure if we're capable of that with Giroud. The 4th was Villa running in behind from the left flank, which we are capable of doing.

5th goal: The reverse of the second goal, with Bojan going round the outside of hte fullback on the right whipping a ball on the ground across the penalty area with Jefferen cutting in from the left flank to finish it. Before getting to Jefferen, Iniesta, who was making a Ramsey-esque late run from deep, narrowly missed the cross.

Point is, first that Mourinho's parked buses can be beaten, and second it doesn't require world beaters to do it, even though that Barca team were the definition of world beaters. We have the players to do so, if deployed correctly, which is why this result is immensely frustrating. We can bemoan Chelsea's tactics, but they'll keep doing it until it's beaten, in the same way the school bully will keep doing his thing until someone stands up to him. Our version of standing up is to have a proper go in the attacking areas, given we now have the defensive ability to protect against the proverbial sucker punch.
 
its a coward tactics from mourinho. assembled a billion dollar squad, yet doesnt have a pair to play proper football. Hazard was asked to support aspilicueta. tats the worst thing to happen for any creative player. such a one dimensional coach this guy is. suppose a young 17 year old messi like player plays for chelsea, what Jose wud to, sell him to other big clubs and buy obi mikel like replacement. with ppl like him, football will never ever evolve into something spectacle.​
 
Ramsey on the right by definition creates an imbalance on the right side. I don't buy the idea that with Walcott the right flank would have meant a wide open flank for Hazard to exploit all day. It only takes a bit of instruction from the manager to both Walcott and Bellerin.

To Walcott, it's a matter of getting back more than normal, and simply putting his body about to either cut off a pass or slow him down. There's no need to transform into Tony Adams, just basic hustling of the opposition, which Theo is more than capable of doing.

For Bellerin, it's a case of not bombing up and down the wing with impunity, but rather having a 70-80% focus on staying back to neutralise any attempt at them countering through Hazard. There's no need to be bombing forward to provide width anyhow with Theo there in the first place.

On top of that, the presence of Coq should have allowed us to be a bit more adventurous in the team selection. That's the bloody point of him, isn't it? In years past we got torn apart because the midfield was left wide open when we went forward, making the sit back and counter plan Mourinho does so effective. Coq is capable of nullifying, or at worst mitigating the 'counter' part.

In the end Bellerin had little to do, not because of 'Ramsey industry' from right wing, but because Chelsea weren't very intent on attacking at all. In fact, there were many times when Ramsey would take up his 'natural' position in midfield, leaving Bellerin isolated. When we had possession, we'd cycle the ball from left towards the right, and then the player would look up, see nothing but Azpilicueta standing there on his own. Ramsey had vacated the area, and Bellerin was too far back to provide an outlet. So we'd have to turn back inside the other way. Plenty of potential counters were neutered in this way. We really, really missed proper wide play today.

I looked at the Barca 5 - Real Madrid 0 match again, and the goals Barca scored corroborate my thinking.

1st goal: Iniesta running at the back 4, with an option to the left, a runner in a typical CF channel, and Xavi making a late run from deep (Ramsey anyone?). Iniesta plays Xavi in who scores, albeit with a helpful deflection

2nd goal: Villa takes the ball on the left, drives to the endline, puts the ball across the 6 yd box where Pedro (Walcott anyone?) is running in from the other flank for an easy tap in

3rd and 4th goals: Both were Messi playing in Villa, the third came from a slide rule pass with Villa running in behind the CB. Not sure if we're capable of that with Giroud. The 4th was Villa running in behind from the left flank, which we are capable of doing.

5th goal: The reverse of the second goal, with Bojan going round the outside of hte fullback on the right whipping a ball on the ground across the penalty area with Jefferen cutting in from the left flank to finish it. Before getting to Jefferen, Iniesta, who was making a Ramsey-esque late run from deep, narrowly missed the cross.

Point is, first that Mourinho's parked buses can be beaten, and second it doesn't require world beaters to do it, even though that Barca team were the definition of world beaters. We have the players to do so, if deployed correctly, which is why this result is immensely frustrating. We can bemoan Chelsea's tactics, but they'll keep doing it until it's beaten, in the same way the school bully will keep doing his thing until someone stands up to him. Our version of standing up is to have a proper go in the attacking areas, given we now have the defensive ability to protect against the proverbial sucker punch.

this is the game Guardiola outtacticed Jose. Jose tried to man mark Messi with Pepe and played two defensive midfielders to counter Xavi and Iniesta. But Guardiola moved Busquets forward to make it 4 vs 3. How these four players were playing that one touch two touch was mesmerizing to watch. its a classic case of "man for man", for every defender, one attacking player pushed forward. result? 5-0 embarassment.
 

Anzac

Established Member
Thought we were disappointing and 1 dimensional in our attack with many the same issues as previous seasons.
 

Penn_

Established Member
Trusted ⭐
Walcott looked very uninterested when he came on, pulling out of challenges, turning his back. Definitely think he'll be off this summer.
 

say yes

forum master baiter
Depressing game tbh. The worst match between the two best teams in the league I can remember. The quality in this league has dropped so much.

Chelsea are average. We had our best XI on the pitch and created **** all. Contrast that to what a 10 man PSG managed to do at Stamford Bridge.

We're the second best team in England but we (and Chelsea) have a long, long way to go before we can compete with Europe's best.
 

BobP

Memri Fan
If we're going to have any chance of winning the title in proceeding years we must avoid defeat to Chelsea at all costs.
 

Yousif Arsenal

On Vinai's payroll & misses 4th place trophy 🏆
Trusted ⭐
The media need to stop reminding us about Wenger poor record against the special c**t. Well the special c**t never beaten Padrew why they not show that
 

The_Playmaker

Established Member
Trusted ⭐
Ramsey on the wing was a good tactical alteration against Liverpool, but Wenger has stuck with it for too long now. Move him back in the middle and drop Santi or Özil. It's square pegs in round holes all over again.

I thought Ramsey played really well, some of his touches were outrageous, not to mention his ball retention. As soon as he went int o the middle there was a difference.

Cazorla seemed very reluctant to play forward and he has no confidence in his shooting. A Ramsey, Coquelin axis has more balance for definite, but as long as Cazorla remains at the club he will be shoe horned in simply on his technical ability, but he had a really poor game yesterday.

Maybe a Spanish calling will be a blessing in disguise.
 

celestis

Arsenal-Mania Veteran
Moderator

Country: Australia
Depressing game tbh. The worst match between the two best teams in the league I can remember. The quality in this league has dropped so much.

Chelsea are average. We had our best XI on the pitch and created **** all. Contrast that to what a 10 man PSG managed to do at Stamford Bridge.

We're the second best team in England but we (and Chelsea) have a long, long way to go before we can compete with Europe's best.

We were just awful with the final ball and that included when we had no pressure inexplicable . I just think they just wanted it too much . So much talk about doing it for the boss and put pressure on themselves . They'll beat Chelsea by the end of next season .
 

a_fourteen

Established Member
They had no interest in gaining three points yesterday. They played for a draw. No big deal the league is over anyway.
 

Penn_

Established Member
Trusted ⭐
Games like this either need a powerful midfielder of one of Ramsey/Wilshere in their golden seasons.

I love Cazorla but his simply not a CM/WF, I don't see a space for him in the 11 personally; unless of course you drop Özil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts+

Top Bottom