It wasn't about Tactics

[thinktank]

It looked like our players believed it, and that they only had to turn up to win.

Has happened before and will happen again until they get it into their heads that you have to earn your points in this division.

It's not like there are no examples of how it's done - man united have shown us all what is required to be at the top of the tree in english football. The model is there and its chief component is MENTALITY!!!

 

[The Apprentice]

I like Sandro but he wasn't following instructions yesterday. he was often the one breaking trying to get closer to Ade. Pretty sure that wasn't the job they asked him to do.

 

[thinktank]

I like Sandro but he wasn't following instructions yesterday. he was often the one breaking trying to get closer to Ade. Pretty sure that wasn't the job they asked him to do.

Certainly wasn't, and Daws barked at him with 'Arry's instructions when he came on but Sandro just continued to headless chicken it.

I gotta stop thinking about this game, it's really disturbed me.

 

[brasil_spur]

For me the team looked tired and lacking fitness, which isn't surprising really.

King - obvious why he would be out of shape
Ekotto - barely recovered from surgery
Parker - seems to be playing through a niggle
Bale - just too many games in succession for him, needs a rest
VDV - nowhere near match fit

 

[DEFchenkOE]

Arsenal seemed to have so much more energy than us, they played with more desire, more spirit and they probably had 7 or 8 players who put in their best performances of the season. I'm certain it was their best team performance of the season. It was like it was a do or die game for them, players, manager, club all were desperate for a win.

Even at 2-0 down they were the better side. We had caused them a few problems when attacking them and probably should have kept up at least a little intensity and tried to stretch them but after taking a 2 goal lead we reverted back to standing off (as we have in other games this season) and we were made to pay for it (which hasn't happened when we've stood off teams). Our negative turn was just the incentive the hungry Arsenal players needed and they didn't need to be invited twice. When they didn't have the ball they usually had 2 or 3 men after it, when they did have it their players were full of running and were finding spaces far too easily. They cut through us at ease and if they had scored 8 it probably wouldn't have been all that surprising.

Whilst Arsenal were flowing and energetic we were unstructured and chasing the game. Rather than forcing our play on them we were reacting all the time and despite knowing all about their defensive frailties we didn't really ask them any questions. I'm not at all convinced that VDV and Sandro were even half fit, both looked miles off the pace of the game. It seemed to be a move of desperation.

It hurts all the more because it's probably the first time that we have had a stronger squad and a better first XI for quite some time. But we've beaten them as underdogs in the past and we should know just how much of a tonic that can be for a side especially at a time when it seems all was lost for them.

Now we have to show real character, we have to bounce back from a thumping against our rivals and try to finish the season strongly. I hope we can get back to doing what we do best and attack our opponents relentlessly. Play with width, play with pace, play with flair and go out and enjoy the rest of the season.

I think scoring 5 away to Chelsea is prob more impressive than 5 at home to us but agree was probably there best home performance. Otherwise agree with everything you say. At times during the game, first and second half it was like we had 10 men. They seemed to be first to everything and had so much space when on the ball, while closing us down and harassing us off the ball.

 

[YiddoJames]

Arsenal seemed to have so much more energy than us, they played with more desire, more spirit and they probably had 7 or 8 players who put in their best performances of the season. I'm certain it was their best team performance of the season. It was like it was a do or die game for them, players, manager, club all were desperate for a win.
.

Agreed with this, they pulled a performance out of nowhere really considering their insipid displays of late

 

[markiespurs]

Arsenal seemed to have so much more energy than us

Agree with this.

I'm not trying to make excuses for yesterdays performance, but considering how off the pace most of our players were yesterday, you have to wonder if the Flu bug that had been going round the lodge had a small part to play.

 

[sasa_moto]

Interesting read from one of "their" blogs:

"Song’s deep starting position, allowed Sagna and Gibbs to play extremely high up the pitch – as out and out Wing Backs. Now, these high starting positions caused the first Tottenham goal with Gibbs caught high up the pitch. Commentators will chastise Gibbs for not being ‘on the cover’ – but against Tottenham he wasn’t playing as a full back. His high starting position was not because he ‘fell asleep’ or was not aware of the impending danger, but because he was required to play 10m or 15m higher up the pitch than usual.

Despite this formation being to blame for the first Tottenham goal, it was also the reason for Arsenal’s first. Sagna, playing extremely high on the right flank, found himself in the penalty area and tucked away a bullet header (As an aside, Sagna’s aerial prowess is very underrated – defensively he is probably the best full back in the premiership when it comes to winning headers against oppositions strikers and wingers).

At half time, Arsenal were by far the dominant team, had drawn level, hit the post and had other chances narrowly squandered. Perhaps the thing that made this formation so interesting was how perfectly it was suited to play against Spurs. Since December, Bale has been playing increasingly narrow, most obviously against Norwich at Carrow Road, and against Stevenage last weekend. With Kranjcar playing instead of Lennon, Tottenham were set up without wingers. Wenger knew then that he needed to win the midfield battle and get the ball out quickly to the flanks – where the space had been sacrificed by Tottenham. Recently Arsenal have been slow in possession – the ball played across the midfield and then back again – but with Sagna and Gibbs so high up the pitch, and with no protection to the Tottenham full backs, Arsenal were able to spring attacks extremely quickly, with acres of room in the wider positions.

Worryingly for Tottenham (and potentially for England), at half time Harry’s changes played into the hands of Arsenal. Had Harry brought on Lennon and requested that Bale hug the touchline, the extra width and pace may well have resulted in Sagna and Gibbs being forced back defensively and Tottenham getting a grip on the game in the midfield areas. However, in bringing on two central players in RvdV and Sandro, Arsenal were able to continue to dominate in wide areas. The substitutions basically had no impact and only gave Arsenal’s two centre-backs (Koz and Verm) and one half-centre-back (Song), fewer problems, as Tottenham left only Adebayor up the pitch.

The Tottenham midfield pairing of Parker and Modric have won great acclaim this season. Again this makes me think AW won a masterful tactical battle on Sunday. In playing Arteta, Rosicky, Yossi, and Song (sitting very deep), Parker and Modric were hurried constantly. In fact the only time Modric did have anytime on the ball was when he released Bale to gallop into the penalty area and ‘win’ a penalty. That moment aside, Arteta, Rosicky, and Yossi, used the ball intelligently and really put in a good shift in the middle of the pitch which enabled Song, and Arteta in particular, to release the ball to the wing backs quickly. "

It's always about tactics.

 

[StartingPrice]

Interesting read from one of "their" blogs:

"Song’s deep starting position, allowed Sagna and Gibbs to play extremely high up the pitch – as out and out Wing Backs. Now, these high starting positions caused the first Tottenham goal with Gibbs caught high up the pitch. Commentators will chastise Gibbs for not being ‘on the cover’ – but against Tottenham he wasn’t playing as a full back. His high starting position was not because he ‘fell asleep’ or was not aware of the impending danger, but because he was required to play 10m or 15m higher up the pitch than usual.

Despite this formation being to blame for the first Tottenham goal, it was also the reason for Arsenal’s first. Sagna, playing extremely high on the right flank, found himself in the penalty area and tucked away a bullet header (As an aside, Sagna’s aerial prowess is very underrated – defensively he is probably the best full back in the premiership when it comes to winning headers against oppositions strikers and wingers).

At half time, Arsenal were by far the dominant team, had drawn level, hit the post and had other chances narrowly squandered. Perhaps the thing that made this formation so interesting was how perfectly it was suited to play against Spurs. Since December, Bale has been playing increasingly narrow, most obviously against Norwich at Carrow Road, and against Stevenage last weekend. With Kranjcar playing instead of Lennon, Tottenham were set up without wingers. Wenger knew then that he needed to win the midfield battle and get the ball out quickly to the flanks – where the space had been sacrificed by Tottenham. Recently Arsenal have been slow in possession – the ball played across the midfield and then back again – but with Sagna and Gibbs so high up the pitch, and with no protection to the Tottenham full backs, Arsenal were able to spring attacks extremely quickly, with acres of room in the wider positions.

Worryingly for Tottenham (and potentially for England), at half time Harry’s changes played into the hands of Arsenal. Had Harry brought on Lennon and requested that Bale hug the touchline, the extra width and pace may well have resulted in Sagna and Gibbs being forced back defensively and Tottenham getting a grip on the game in the midfield areas. However, in bringing on two central players in RvdV and Sandro, Arsenal were able to continue to dominate in wide areas. The substitutions basically had no impact and only gave Arsenal’s two centre-backs (Koz and Verm) and one half-centre-back (Song), fewer problems, as Tottenham left only Adebayor up the pitch.

The Tottenham midfield pairing of Parker and Modric have won great acclaim this season. Again this makes me think AW won a masterful tactical battle on Sunday. In playing Arteta, Rosicky, Yossi, and Song (sitting very deep), Parker and Modric were hurried constantly. In fact the only time Modric did have anytime on the ball was when he released Bale to gallop into the penalty area and ‘win’ a penalty. That moment aside, Arteta, Rosicky, and Yossi, used the ball intelligently and really put in a good shift in the middle of the pitch which enabled Song, and Arteta in particular, to release the ball to the wing backs quickly. "

It's always about tactics.

But...if we had brought Lennon on and had Bale sticking to the touchline, which would have negated their tactics, then we didn't lose because we played a 4-4-2, which is exactly what those who are saying it was about tactics (4-4-2 being the wrong tactics), kinda cancels your assertion at the bottom that it is always about tactics.

Sagna didn't win his header for their first goal because of their tactics, but belease Bale pathetically waved a leg at the ball, rather than attacking it aggressively with his head.

 

[jonathanhotspur]

I thought Harry's half time changes in personnel were perfect but I thought we would go 4-2-3-1, with VDV in the hole.

I don't see what difference bringing on Aaron Lennon would have made. He played at the Etihad and we continually left our back four exposed in that game, particularly in the first half. When he had the ball, he didn't use it well, and he wouldn't have seen much of it yesterday anyway. It is just too easy to waltz through our second bank of four. In fact, you couldn't even call it a bank of four and that's the problem, isn't it? Parker drops into the space between the lines quite a bit and even ends up standing alongside our back four (happened regularly against Liverpool). And Modric just fannies around a bit. If the opposition find space between our lines, it's not really his headache.

I said elsewhere that I am in awe of Bale but IIRC, he was partly to blame for 3 of their first 4 goals.

 

[sasa_moto]

But...if we had brought Lennon on and had Bale sticking to the touchline, which would have negated their tactics, then we didn't lose because we played a 4-4-2, which is exactly what those who are saying it was about tactics (4-4-2 being the wrong tactics), kinda cancels your assertion at the bottom that it is always about tactics.

Sagna didn't win his header for their first goal because of their tactics, but belease Bale pathetically waved a leg at the ball, rather than attacking it aggressively with his head.

Well, of course it's not only about tactics, it's about quality and attitude of players as well. For example, BAE's, Bale's and Ade's attitude was wrang from the start, they were far too relaxed, with wrong body language. But, it is alwasy about tactics as well, it is not as simple as wether to play 442 or 451 (433) or 4411. In each system, do you play with two out and out wingers or not, or even without, how high is defensive line, what are the roles of CMs, what is the role of 2nd forward if there is one, how and where to press, how do you read moves from oposition manager etc. For me, yesterday was example of both parties, manager and players, being guilty for outcome.

 

[StartingPrice]

I thought Harry's half time changes in personnel were perfect but I thought we would go 4-2-3-1, with VDV in the hole.

I don't see what difference bringing on Aaron Lennon would have made. He played at the Etihad and we continually left our back four exposed in that game, particularly in the first half. When he had the ball, he didn't use it well, and he wouldn't have seen much of it yesterday anyway. It is just too easy to waltz through our second bank of four. In fact, you couldn't even call it a bank of four and that's the problem, isn't it? Parker drops into the space between the lines quite a bit and even ends up standing alongside our back four (happened regularly against Liverpool). And Modric just fannies around a bit. If the opposition find space between our lines, it's not really his headache.

I said elsewhere that I am in awe of Bale but IIRC, he was partly to blame for 3 of their first 4 goals.

Well, Johnny, iirc, we have an extreme variance in our estimation of Lennon - didn't we have a monster monster argument about him when you first joined the site :grin:

What it would have done, together with having Bale actually playing on the elft and stopping farting about anywhere he feels like, would have been to have put pressure on their wing-backs, and stopped them staying up the pitch.

Anyway, I'm not saying we shouldn't have played a 4-5-1, if possible, just that there were far bigger problems, IMHO, yesterday - not least of which was that our 4-4-2 was hardly even that, we just had a loose collective sybdicate of communally associated players milling around the centre circle, presumably on some kinda of psycho-babble astro-physics mystical thang...like waiting to seeif the Grays would win, or if Moudly Was gonna bosch Sculler :-|

And Bale has never pissed me orf as much as when he limply waved his boot at the ball for Sagna's header - feck the barnet, man, attack it aggressively with yer heed - and that would never have been a goal :bang:

Well, of course it's not only about tactics, it's about quality and attitude of players as well. For example, BAE's, Bale's and Ade's attitude was wrang from the start, they were far too relaxed, with wrong body language. But, it is alwasy about tactics as well, it is not as simple as wether to play 442 or 451 (433) or 4411. In each system, do you play with two out and out wingers or not, or even without, how high is defensive line, what are the roles of CMs, what is the role of 2nd forward if there is one, how and where to press, how do you read moves from oposition manager etc. For me, yesterday was example of both parties, manager and players, being guilty for outcome.

I agree

 

[DEFchenkOE]

Tbh I think what the guy from the arsenal blog wrote was spot on and just how I saw the game, they were killing us down the wings and there was no surprise that 2 of their first 3 goals came from crosses and the other 2 came from their right wing.

I know that he gets slated but when you play Arsenal and they have Walcott you kind of need to make a plan to stop him having space to run into or having a one on one, as much as he's likely to cock it up like he did first half when he should have punished us there's always a chance he'll get it right at some point. Having Bale roaming about just played into Sagna/Walcott's hands as they had little defending to do.

And sasa_moto I think that what you point out has been a problem we've had for a while, and I mean going back to Ramos/Jol days when at times it seemed like players roles were not defined.

In our current midfield 2 of Modric - Parker it's often not clear who is supposed to be the more attacking of the 2. You would think it would always be Modric but I often see Parker in the box more than him. If you look at our average positions yesterday Krancjar was even deeper than those 2 while still being in the centre, Bale was more or less as a centre forward. Whereas if you look at Arsenals you can see Sagna/Walcott high and wide on their right flank.

 

[jonathanhotspur]

Well, Johnny, iirc, we have an extreme variance in our estimation of Lennon - didn't we have a monster monster argument about him when you first joined the site :grin:

What it would have done, together with having Bale actually playing on the elft and stopping farting about anywhere he feels like, would have been to have put pressure on their wing-backs, and stopped them staying up the pitch.

Anyway, I'm not saying we shouldn't have played a 4-5-1, if possible, just that there were far bigger problems, IMHO, yesterday - not least of which was that our 4-4-2 was hardly even that, we just had a loose collective sybdicate of communally associated players milling around the centre circle, presumably on some kinda of psycho-babble astro-physics mystical thang...like waiting to seeif the Grays would win, or if Moudly Was gonna bosch Sculler :-|

And Bale has never pissed me orf as much as when he limply waved his boot at the ball for Sagna's header - feck the barnet, man, attack it aggressively with yer heed - and that would never have been a goal :bang:

We had a barney over BAE, SP. I know I tore into Lennon as well but I don't remember having a tiff with you over him.

Lennon and Bale on the wings would have perhaps made their fullbacks play a bit more conservatively but I still think they'd have had no issues exploiting the space in front of our back four. I'm not going to sit here and say Wenger's some kind of tactical mastermind-because he isn't. They usually maul us with their possession game anyway-difference being that yesterday they took their chances.

 

[StartingPrice]

We had a barney over BAE, SP. I know I tore into Lennon as well but I don't remember having a tiff with you over him.

Lennon and Bale on the wings would have perhaps made their fullbacks play a bit more conservatively but I still think they'd have had no issues exploiting the space in front of our back four. I'm not going to sit here and say Wenger's some kind of tactical mastermind-because he isn't. They usually maul us with their possession game anyway-difference being that yesterday they took their chances.

Oh...the Lennon-Barney musta been sum1 else...I'm losing track of all these barneys

Essentially, John, I think there were several factors contibuting to yesterday's debacle, and tactics was just one of them.

And I think the Goons are still a decent team who will still create chances, and we need to lose this fantasy that if they even get one chance it is because we have made an error.

 

[bubble07]

IMO Lennon should have come on for Kranjcar to go 4-1-4-1. The one being Sandro. If we did that I dont think we would have lost

 

[NEVILLEB]

The players simply weren't up for it.

They thought they had won it before kick off.

 

[minimike]

We were clearly over-confident and our mentality was shite, if we played our best football i.e. the football which has kept us 3rd throughout the season (bar Stevenage and Watford), we would have won.

 

[jonathanhotspur]

Oh...the Lennon-Barney musta been sum1 else...I'm losing track of all these barneys

Essentially, John, I think there were several factors contibuting to yesterday's debacle, and tactics was just one of them.

And I think the Goons are still a decent team who will still create chances, and we need to lose this fantasy that if they even get one chance it is because we have made an error.

As you say, SP, it wasn't all about tactics. However, I believe that every goal/chance conceded involves mistakes, regardless of who's doing the scoring.

 

[Spursh]

Interesting read from one of "their" blogs:

"Song’s deep starting position, allowed Sagna and Gibbs to play extremely high up the pitch – as out and out Wing Backs. Now, these high starting positions caused the first Tottenham goal with Gibbs caught high up the pitch. Commentators will chastise Gibbs for not being ‘on the cover’ – but against Tottenham he wasn’t playing as a full back. His high starting position was not because he ‘fell asleep’ or was not aware of the impending danger, but because he was required to play 10m or 15m higher up the pitch than usual.

Despite this formation being to blame for the first Tottenham goal, it was also the reason for Arsenal’s first. Sagna, playing extremely high on the right flank, found himself in the penalty area and tucked away a bullet header (As an aside, Sagna’s aerial prowess is very underrated – defensively he is probably the best full back in the premiership when it comes to winning headers against oppositions strikers and wingers).

At half time, Arsenal were by far the dominant team, had drawn level, hit the post and had other chances narrowly squandered. Perhaps the thing that made this formation so interesting was how perfectly it was suited to play against Spurs. Since December, Bale has been playing increasingly narrow, most obviously against Norwich at Carrow Road, and against Stevenage last weekend. With Kranjcar playing instead of Lennon, Tottenham were set up without wingers. Wenger knew then that he needed to win the midfield battle and get the ball out quickly to the flanks – where the space had been sacrificed by Tottenham. Recently Arsenal have been slow in possession – the ball played across the midfield and then back again – but with Sagna and Gibbs so high up the pitch, and with no protection to the Tottenham full backs, Arsenal were able to spring attacks extremely quickly, with acres of room in the wider positions.

Worryingly for Tottenham (and potentially for England), at half time Harry’s changes played into the hands of Arsenal. Had Harry brought on Lennon and requested that Bale hug the touchline, the extra width and pace may well have resulted in Sagna and Gibbs being forced back defensively and Tottenham getting a grip on the game in the midfield areas. However, in bringing on two central players in RvdV and Sandro, Arsenal were able to continue to dominate in wide areas. The substitutions basically had no impact and only gave Arsenal’s two centre-backs (Koz and Verm) and one half-centre-back (Song), fewer problems, as Tottenham left only Adebayor up the pitch.

The Tottenham midfield pairing of Parker and Modric have won great acclaim this season. Again this makes me think AW won a masterful tactical battle on Sunday. In playing Arteta, Rosicky, Yossi, and Song (sitting very deep), Parker and Modric were hurried constantly. In fact the only time Modric did have anytime on the ball was when he released Bale to gallop into the penalty area and ‘win’ a penalty. That moment aside, Arteta, Rosicky, and Yossi, used the ball intelligently and really put in a good shift in the middle of the pitch which enabled Song, and Arteta in particular, to release the ball to the wing backs quickly. "

It's always about tactics.

Top post that.

As some of you know, I have been banging on about some of our poor tactics this year, and especially our lack of balance in midfield.

Yes we are 3rd in the League, but yesterday's result highlighted some of Harry's tactical deficiencies.

I love Harry, he's a fantastic man-manager, but his biggest flaw is his lack of tactical nous. I still want him to stay on as Manager come the Summer (unless Mourinho becomes available), but I know this probably won't happen because the England job is too tempting for him at his age.

The post above explains the sequence of horrible events that led to our embarrasing downfall, and he describes them to a tee. I was shouting at the telly for the majority of the match, and could see that an Arsenal goal would come even when we went 0-2 up.

Our biggest problem was that Harry is giving our midfielders, and even our strikers, too much freedom. Yes it works against smaller teams, as they can't cope with our movement and power. But against the likes of Arsenal, Utd, City etc, especially away from home, you simply can't allow that much space across the middle.

We are at our best when there is discipline in our shape, and structure to our build up play. So, keeping Modric that bit deeper to keep the game ticking along and to dictate the tempo. Parker/Sandro alongside him to screen the back 4, keep the passing simple, and plug any holes. But yesterday, and against City away before we brought Livermore on, that protection in front of the defence hasn't been there.

I noticed yesterday that Parker was pushing up far too much at times, and he simply doesn't have the recovery pace to stop a counter attack. This would often leave Modric by himself, or even worse, no one in front of the CBs. The reverse happened too, when Modric was advancing up the pitch, to make up for the lack of control in the middle, and that left Parker by himself. For us to be at our defensive best, we need both sitting in front of the defence, occupying space, getting the ball, and launching counter attacks.

When Sandro and VDV came on, it got worse. VDV hardly occupied his fullback, and Sandro tried to attack more than he defended.

My biggest worry at the moment is Bale. It seems as if he is starting to believe his own massive hype. His comments about his agent advising him to play more centrally were worrying in themselves, and unfortunately it seems he has followed his advice to the letter. I initially thought that he started to drift in because we lacked a striker presence when Ade was up top on his own, but it does look like he is willing to come off the wing no matter who we've go upfront. This is causing our midfield balance so many problems its untrue, as Modric is having to make up for his lack of work rate on the left, which is in turn making us more vulnerably through the centre.

Bale seems to have foregone his defensive duties too, and constantly leaves BAE exposed. I've also noticed that BAE has taken it upon himself to be an attacking threat down the left, as it's an area now vacated by Bale. Fair play to Lennon, who isn't half the talent Bale is, but at least he puts a bloody shift in, always helping out Walker defensively, and keeping wide to occupy his opposing fullback.

Bale is simply at his best when he hugs the line, combines with BAE, and attacks his fullback. If he is doubled up on, so be it, as it leaves another player like VDV or Modric more space to influence the game, and in turn, get Bale back in the match. It gives us so much more counter attacking threat, as well as defensively solidity as he is occupying his fullback, who has to completely focus on him, instead of pushing up the pitch and helping the his midfield against us.

My final point on an area I believe Harry is still getting it wrong, is up top. I truly believe Adebayor and VDV cannot work together. As we saw against Newcastle, Adebayor thrives when he drops off and gets involved in play in that deeper role behind the more advanced striker. In that way his game is far more similar to VDV's, than that of Saha and Defoe for example. So when they both play together, we often have no one in the box to attack crosses or get on the end of moves. So for me its either Ade or VDV, with Saha/Defoe up top.

I'd personally go for VDV as I think he can offer more in that position than Ade. It would be fantastic if both could work together, but I just can't see it ever happening, unless Ade is told categorically that he has to stay in and around the box, instead of drifting. But even their games have been effected by Bale's personal crusade through the middle of the pitch, as the Welshman attracts too many players centrally, leaving no space for the likes of VDV to do what he does best. This often means VDV drops even deeper where he is no where near as effective, almost alongside Modric, couple this with no left wing threat, congestion in the middle of the park, poor defensive balance in front of our back 4, and no one in the box, you can see where some of our problems lie.

It is all about Balance and Shape, otherwise your team starts to collapse, one domino at a time....

-Bale drifting centrally >
-BAE exposed and is forced to push up to vacate left wing area >
-King has to come across to cover which stretches our defence >
-Modric also has to push up to gain control in an over-loaded midfield now supported by the opposing RB >
-Parker left by himself to screen the back 4 >
-VDV drops deeper to support the midfield >
-Adebayor in turn drops deeper or drifts towards the left to get involved in play >
-No one is in the box, so their defence pushes higher up >
-Midfield now over-loaded, we lose control of game >
-Players who should be deeper now start to push up to gain control again (we lose our shape), but this means we are now exposed at the back, and can't win it back to start a counter attack, as our quick players aren't in positions to spring into action >
-We're all over the place across the park, huge spaces for the opposition now to attack >
-They score >
-We now become even more desperate, and push even higher up, committing more men to the attack >
-They score again, on the counter >
-We lose.

And on top of all that, Bale plays poorly because when he is central in a congested midfield, he can't pick up speed (when he is so dangerous), can't stretch play, and often tries to go past 3 or 4 players by himself as there is no other option.

I do genuinely believe we had the better side player for player (apart from RVP), but tactically we played into their hands. They had conceded 6 in their last two games and had scored none, because they came up against two very disciplined sides in Milan and Sunderland, and they were soundly beaten by both. Yes it was a NLD so they would have played with extra vigor, but to beat us the way they did was not solely down to that extra passion, it was tactically a perfect storm for Arsenal.