The myth of Arsene Wenger and his genius. Part 2 - Tactics.

Napoli have brought back a three man defence, Barcelona have brought back total football. The Germans are perfecting counter attack football through the 4-2-3-1 and Mourinho created one of the strongest defensive sides in the past 10 years at Inter. Around the world there is tactical ingenuity taking place weekly. It is the crux of the game.

Tactics are a major part of football; a manager controls how he wants his team to play. Does he want to press high, drop off, delay, counter attack or play a possession based approach. Players are important, yet tactics can change games and wins trophies. What is essential for a team is that they “buy in” to the tactics. Players need to believe in what their manager wants to do.

In this second part blog I am analysing the failures of Wenger in his time at Arsenal. A change of philosophy aimed at attempting to replicate a Barcelona style football using a 4-3-3- with possession based football has been his undoing. What is essential in this formation is having players who understand their roles and responsibilities, playing with speed and creativity in the final 1/3 and being able to press and defend effectively as a team. With poor performances this season, Wenger is not justifying the use of the 4-3-3 at Arsenal yet seems intent on continuing with it.

In the previous article I talked about Wenger’s failings with players, the tactical analysis covers a similar line. When Wenger arrived at Arsenal he didn’t do anything too radical, he inherited a 4-4-2 with a solid defensive unit, which was added to by players in Petit and Vieria. He inherited Bergkamp and Ian Wright and through this team he was very successful in his early years. Although it is termed as a 4-4-2 that formation resembled more of a 4-2-3-1; it was fluid up front, had Bergkamp dropping off into the hole and wingers like Overmars playing high to get in behind. It was a perfect blend of players and style, playing to the strengths of the team which consisted of power, speed, stamina all underpinned with technical quality.

Wenger appeared a genius, appearing a rival to Ferguson . For some time Arsenal were United’s only challenger, however as time went on he began to change his side, the players changed, their size became smaller, they became less imposing. Whether it  because of financial reasons or a change in philosophy the results do not lie, it has not resulted in success.  

In today’s game space and time is reduced, there is a to interchange in order to create and exploit space. If Wenger is trying to emulate a  Barcelona style then he is failing; his tactic is too predictable, a 4-3-3 which offers little variation. The use of inside forwards at Barca and Bayern and at Madrid with Ronaldo enabled full backs to become wingers and allowed more space for creative players like Messi, Robben and Ronaldo to cause damage. How wingers are used at Arsenal is different, they are instructed to stay wide and drive outside more often than inside.

I believe it his tactics which have resulted in players like Rosicky, Arshavin, Hleb, Ramsay, Nasri and Walcott to underperform at Arsenal. Why He has brought in creative players from teams, players with good technical ability, yet very similar in their style and type and played them as wingers? At their previous clubs these players were given a free role, predominately playing centrally as a No 10. At Arsenal they have more often played out wide, not in the sense for them to drive inside as inside forwards but as typical wingers. None of these players are out and out wingers, they are not like Bale or Valencia, they want to play through the middle and impact the game centrally. Wenger has ruined the careers of these players by using differently to what they are.

The reason a three man midfield is used in today’s game is to control possession and overload this area of the pitch. Even United, who play an orthodox 4-4-2  have Rooney drop in to overload the midfield. Teams play with a five man midfield more often in order to dominate the game. Why? Because creating an overload in the centre of pitch enables the team to be solid through the middle, giving more licence to the full backs to push on.

Having full backs overlapping was mark of Arsenal not long ago, however something in Wenger has changed his approach. Is it the players he has bought or his rigid tactics? The team used to have creativity in Fabregas, it now has Arteta who is being played deeper than he was at Everton and is struggling to support Van Perise up front.  The midfield also acks the discipline and leadership of a Vieria type; he was replaced adequately by Gilberto and later Flamini, yet their current player in Alex Song is not good enough in that position. Song is a decent player but lacks the discipline to be a world class defensive midfielder. Against Milan he was caught out of possession to often and he caused problems for his defence by allowing Zlatan to drop in the holes created by him. He does this too often. Like most Arsenal player’s they are good footballers, yet lack the quality to dominate certain positions.

It is only Van Persie who shows the class needed to perform, yet he is burdened with a dual role. Whereas Messi has perfected the false 9 to perfection, he has a supporting cast to support and run off him;  he has a deep lying no 10 in Xavi and players capable of becoming No 9 in Sanchez, Pedro and Fabregas. Arsenal play nothing like this. The only instance seen of this style this season was against Blackburn in the 7-1 home win. It was Chamberlain who came from wide into areas vacated by Van Persie. In the big games Arsenal have been too rigid, too fixed in their positions. They don’t move defences, don’t create space for others. They could not break down a defensive block against Sunderland.  Wenger has complained for years of teams parking the bus yet it is a tactic which a good manager needs to find solutions to, they devise a gameplan to beat a tactic. Wenger has shown his inadequacies by failing to deal with a block and instead makes excuses and blames others.

It is not just the attacking aspects that are poor, defensively the wide players don’t work hard enough to restrict teams passing through and getting out of the attacking third. Mouirnho’s Chelsea and Inter played a 4-3-3 in possession and a 4-5-1 out of possession. He understood the need to overload midfield and to create a block to prevent teams counter attacking or playing through. At Arsenal the front players don’t press as a unit, don’t track full backs effectively and rarely contribute defensively. This is counterproductive for the team to perform.

Pressure in midfield has been poor also, there have been too many instances this season where Arsenal have not pressed well enough and have allowed the opposition to find their forwards and play balls easily behind or to feet. Against Milan they showed their lack of attacking skills by  not looking to get in wide to positions and create 1v1’s yet they also showed their lack of unity and work rate in midfield when defending. Against Chelsea in the 5-3 win both teams showed they did not want to press and work hard in midfield. Too many chances were given up. Against United 8 goals were conceded; this is not a side capable to challenging for anything when the midfield unit is not willing to work off the ball. Any team, United, Milan, Barca or any Mourinho team defend successfully, it is fundamental.

A well organised, motivated side will work hard to prevent counter attacks, to press the opposition. Watch Barcelona press the ball when they lose it, they hunt together as units and close space and time for the opposition. It is this which has been the key to their success. Wenger clearly is not getting the message to his players because the causal defending of the attacking units is not conducive for winning football. Is this Wenger flaw, that he fails to motivate his players to put the work in off the ball? It would appear he does not inspire enough in his players, this is a key asset in management and another thing which seems lacking.

Finally, Wenger is poorest during games. He rarely changes anything whether formation or substitutions (when he does it tends to be like for like). This is odd as there times when players and formations are needed to change in order to adapt to the game. Is it no surprise that Wenger has not opted to go to Italy or Spain where tactical manoeuvres are a big part of the game continually throughout the game. Listen to Mourinho talk of tactics in Italy and he says it was like a constant battle of chess with the other manager. Is Wenger capable of this thinking and adaptation?

If Wenger is stubborn and refuses to change his ways and tactics then he is doing a disservice to the fans and players. If however he just does not know what to do, hoping that his players will figure it out then he should not be a Pro manager. A youth team coach may use this method, allowing his players to learn the game and solve their own problems. Yet this is not youth football, this is top level football which requires changes and an understanding of tactics.

Does he change anything to suit the teams he faces? The United 8-2 contained no tactic or instruction, they should have sat deep and looked to counter, yet they were shockingly open, the defence like against  Milan appeared lost and confused as to whether to push up or sit back. His mentality appears to be “go out there and play”. This is not top level football. A manager showing more understanding of the game this year is Paul Lambert at Norwich, a man who adapts and changes tactics and formations to suit the game, perhaps his education in Germany gave him more understanding in this respect. Lambert has the credentials to be a world class manager more so than Wenger.

Do you think that Guardiola doesn’t alter his tactics? He is always moving players and adapting in the game, always configuring gameplans and styles to suit the opposition in order to win. Mourinho as we know is a master of it, Unai Emery at Valencia and Bielsa at Bilbao are tacticians who evaluate and make changes during games. These are masters of the game, you simply cannot put Wenger in this bracket, he simply lacks the talent and tactical knowledge to compete with these men. 

 In this analysis of Arsenal I have attempted to be objective and analysed what I see as faults in the philosophy of Wenger. His signings have been questioned yet perhaps it is the way he handles these players more than the players theirselves; does he play them in the right places? Is he bringing in players who improve the team, recruiting players needed to fill positions or just buying prototype players that he likes and putting them in positions which don’t suit them?

 Tactical he has shown he relies on his players to make decisions instead of him. He lacks the ability to change style and formations when required. His 4-3-3 is too rigid, predictable and slow, lacking all the necessities for a successful 4-3-3- to work, yet he stays with it when he can’t break down a team. Why does not try to play over the top, turn a team and get his players behind the lines. What once was a strong and fast counter attacking 4-4-2 philosophy has now become a predictable possession based formation lacking the guile, craft and speed to break through defences.

Wenger can be accused of not having the right personnel for the style he wishes to play. He is to blame, it is his players, his tactics, his motivating skills which have resulted in a poor team with no guidance, lost as individuals and disjointed as a team. Wenger is not great, he has never been. It is myth that he is one of the best, he is now being found out and questions are finally being asked. He must accept he has failed as manager and must move upstairs and oversee the club. He should leave Arsenal at the end of the season if Arsenal is to challenge for anything in the future.

The Whitehouse Address is on Twitter @The_W_Address