FC BARCELONA

Showing posts with label Wenger. Show all posts

The Miracle Worker & the Future of Arsenal

On May 19th Arsenal will be watching the Champions League in both trepidation and envy; worried because their Champions League qualification may rest on Bayern winning and envious because they wonder when the next time Arsenal will be appearing in a Champions League final, or any final at all.

It is quite remarkable that Arsenal are in any position to be challenging for a Champions League position this season. Last summer was one of the most traumatic of Wenger’s time at Arsenal, early results indicated as such and at that point Wenger had a real challenge on his hands; losses to Liverpool, United, Blackburn and Spurs meant Arsenal had 7 points from 7 games. For the first time, the fans were showing their discontent with the board and the manager, Arsenal looked in a perilous condition and hopes of getting near the top four were slim.

The amazing thing about Arsenal, of all the problems they encountered, is that they are lying in third with a game to go. They say judge a side at the end of the season, yet to think Arsenal would be where they are would have been seen as a crazy prediction. They have achieved it by managing to put together winning runs and have been lucky that teams like Liverpool and Chelsea have not been particularly potent in the league.

Since the loss to Milan at San Siro Arsenal have appeared a rejuvenated side, I guess it couldn’t have been any worse, the performance that night was disgraceful, yet their run in has seen them get back into contention for the Champions League. As always with Arsenal though, the past four games have shown Arsenal’s inability to cross the finish line with any belief and strength of will. And it is this lack of mental strength which I hold Wenger accountable.

Wenger - Master of deception?

When people talk of Arsene Wenger he is widely regarded as one of the world's best managers. He has been dubbed a "miracle worker" by former Arsenal vice-chairman David Dein and we are told he has “revolutionised” the Premier League. However in the last six years there has been a shortage of trophies and gradually poorer performances.

One cannot doubt that the absence of David Dein at Arsenal has had a great effect on the fortunes of Arsenal yet excuses are made in regards to the stadium, about how costs have had to be reduced. Yet looking past the excuses, questions must still be asked about the signings being made by Wenger and a change in his philosophy after the invincible season which set in motion where we are now.

It is a fallacy that Arsenal have not spent money, especially in the last five years. Why people think this is because the signings have beenaverage at best. Who has been a success? Sagna, Nasri, Vermalean? Apart from that the signings he has made have been nothing short of average. Granted wages are a stumbling block for many top players, yet to say Arsenal haven’t spent money is a lie. The truth is that since David Dein left the club, citing lack of funding and ability to compete with the top sides around, Arsenal have struggled to bring in players of the quality of Bergkamp, Overmars, Vieria, Petit and Henry.

Arsenal’s business model has been to stay competitive in the league while investing in the infrastructure which will give them a strong future. In the past six years, while the Emirates is being paid off, Arsene Wenger has done something which perhaps no other manager could have. The key to Arsenal’s success has been a strong scouting system bringing in cheap, young foreign talent and having them perform on the pitch, then selling them on for a large profit margin. For those who don’t know of “Moneyball”, Liverpool, who have apparently attempted something of this model, should take note of Arsenal, who have done it effectively.

Yet for a manager who has some of the best scouts around the world and who we are told is very patient to make the right decision to ensure the correct players comes in, the results are clear, the signings made by Wenger are not good enough, or put another way, fail to perform at Arsenal. When you see Newcastle find a defensive mid, creative mid and striker for under £20 million, one has to wonder what Arsenal’s scouts have been doing. For all you hear of the scouting network of Arsenal, there are players who have been missed, and cost was not the issue. Is it Judgement was, and questions must be asked of Wenger’s.

Is there a problem in the way Wenger develops players?

Yet wasn't players like Ramsay, Reyes, Rosicky and Arshavin some of the best talents around? These are players who arrived at Arsenal who came with a great reputation and yet have failed. The key question to ask is, what are Arsenal doing with these players that restricts their performances? I believe it is solely down to Wenger.

The Walcott situation has led me to believe that perhaps Wenger isn't the man we as England fans want to develop our talent either. Walcott was a forward, yet has been playing right wing for six years. How is this helping his development? He is not a winger, through Wenger’s coaching his confidence has been knocked through the insistence of him playing wide. He doesn’t even play him on the left to allow him to naturally drift inside. It is madness. However good his stats have been this year, this is the product of six years under Wenger and Arsenal’s “philosophy”. Is this what we want Chamberlain to become? With Chamberlain showing so much promise am I the only one worried that it is Wenger who is in control of future?

It is of course no real surprise why the young players at Arsenal don’t fulfil their potential, or require the need to move on to improve. It is a reason why also Arsenal haven’t won anything for seven years. Again, it is down to Wenger and his ridiculous philosophy concerning players over 30 years old. When Arsenal lost players like Keown, Parlour, Kanu, Wiltord and in the summer of 2004 and then to lost Pires and Vieria the following year, followed by Sol Campbell, Ashley Cole and Henry the next, all the experience of winning trophies, all the mental toughness which allowed Arsenal to beat United mentally and physically for a period of years, was effectively taken out of the side.

Everything that was great about this Arsenal team was replaced by technically good players with weak mentalities. The experience and expertise that was key in aiding young stars was removed and replaced by more youth players, they had no-one to learn from and importantly no-one to lead the team during the tough times.

Ever since the team has been completely Wenger’s, without the defence that George Graham developed, the team has been unsuccessful. Is this a surprise? No, and this leads to questions about Wenger’s awful record at recruiting and developing top quality defenders. He was very fortunate to inherit one of the best defences in world football, a defence comparable with the great Italian teams. He built his success on this platform, yet as they started to leave his inadequacies in defensive coaching and management were, and still are evident. Replacing that defence with players like Cygan, Stepanovs, Djourou and and Squillaci was incomprehensible. A back four of Sagna, Koscielny, Vermaelan and Gibbs is not title winning, yet when one of these is out, the team falls apart. Will Steve Bould improve matters defensively, Arsenal fans should hope so.

Wenger’s mental issues

Player’s performances I believe are the result of the manager, those who say that when the player steps out on the pitch that the manager has no influence are wrong. A manager’s role is to have prepared, planned, motivated and inspired their players. You know a team who believes in their manager when you see them working as hard as they can; look at Barca under Pep, United under Ferguson and all of Mourinho’s teams. They inspire their players to perform, to work harder than the opposition, they motivate teams to win. Can this be said of Wenger? The media says he is like a guide to the players, giving them more choices and responsibilities, like an Uncle more than a stern Dad. The result is evident, without discipline and true guidance this Arsenal team looks lost.

The Arsenal team assembled by Wenger has been average, lacking strength in mind and body, lacking leadership on the pitch and in the dressing room. The sides inability to last a whole season, more often than not capitulating at the end of the season shows Wenger’s poor judgement of players, and Wenger’s lack of ability to develop a winning side. Where are the players who have the will to win, an asset that Ferguson rates so highly?

What does the future hold?

The truth is, Arsenal should finish third and should qualify for the Champions League again. The biggest factor to this season has been the ability to keep Robin Van Persie fit, he has now played a whole season for the first time since his arrival, and his 30 league goals have propelled Arsenal up the table and have been vital in keeping the vultures away from Wenger. The question is, can they keep him? Can they convince him to stay, the only way they can do this is if they prove to him that he will be playing with better players and that Arsenal have a genuine chance of challenging for honours. In all honesty this is unlikely, and Van Persie may decide that while his stock is so high, he should look to do what Henry did and head to Spain.

Will the season be seen as successful or another one ending in failure? This answer to this question explains everything about Arsenal and their “situation”. You see, the thing is about Arsenal is that winning trophies seems to matter less than making money.

Arsene Wenger described the new stadium as the "biggest decision in Arsenal's history since the board opted to bring Herbert Chapman to the club in 1925." The stadium cost £400 million to build; amazingly was built on time and is regarded as one of the best stadiums in the world. For those fans who have grown frustrated and tired of Wenger’s management, they need to realise that while the stadium has been built, while the debts have been paid, the side they support have not once failed to qualify for the Champions League.

This is remarkable considering Arsenal have the lowest net spend in the entire league, lower than every side in the league today over the past five years. In that time Arsenal have spent £85 million and received £116 million, a net spend of -£31m. Compare this to the net spends of City (£418m), Chelsea (£155m), Liverpool (£83m), even Sunderland (£69) and Aston Villa (£68m) and it is clear that Arsenal, relative to their spending, should be on for relegation and not qualifying for the Champions League.

Like any fan of any side, they want to win things, they want to compete with the best. They see the money spent by City, the players coming in and envy is a natural reaction. However, Arsenal do not have that money and instead they have decided to go down the route of sustainable growth. A noble and moral path, yet one which seems stubborn and selfish to the fans and to the players.

A Russian future?

Yet, there is a Russian, Alisher Usmanov, who is by some reckonings Britain's richest man and who owns almost 30% of Arsenal. He has made his intentions to buy Arsenal very clear, yet the board chose the American Stan Kroenke last year. Yet Kroenke has not made the promises of investment that Usmanov has made and it seems that if Arsenal wish to compete then surely allowing Usmanov to take over the club will be a positive decision.

Looking across to Stamford Bridge, the investment from Abramovich has resulted in success, although of course it has also resulted in instability and debt. The thing is, Arsenal have everything in place to welcome a billionaire; a world class stadium and a balanced cheque book. Usmanov has in the past suggested a rights issue to generate cash for Wenger to spend on improving the squad while influential fans group Arsenal Supporters’ Trust recently balloted their members with 70 per cent keen to see him on the board.

The problem is, Usmanov will never have full ownership of the club, not while Peter Hill-Wood is there. Hill-Wood cites Usmanov’s activities, yet the main reason is that Usmanov bought David Dein’s shares when he left Arsenal, for Dein, this was the man to take Arsenal forward. Unfortunately for Arsenal, Dein and Hill-Wood don’t get along and so the investment from the Russian will not be forthcoming. What does this mean for Arsenal? It means that they will still not be able to compete for the best players, they will not be able to pay the best wages and so will still be in a state of competitiveness without silverware.
In terms of infrastructure, Arsenal are ahead of Liverpool, Chelsea and Spurs, while those clubs see the necessity of a new world class stadium, Arsenal already have it. They have done it also while staying competitive and a lot of credit must go to the board and Wenger for such a remarkable job. Yet the question is, when the money becomes available, is Wenger the one to trust to spend it? It is convenient to blame lack of investment on the stadium, yet there is a Russian willing to pump hundreds of millions into the side, to make it competitive for trophies, is there a fear that if they try and don’t achieve anything, would this shown Wenger’s failings?

The main question is, does Wenger’s interest lie with the team or the club, trophies or business? He is very involved in every aspect of how Arsenal are run, which is remarkable in some respects, yet you wonder if he should be focusing on one or the other. If his interest is in the business model, in the sustainability of the club, then he should pass on his coaching responsibilities of the team to a man who can invest all his time and efforts into what happens on the pitch.

All in all, Wenger has done an amazing job at Arsenal in the past six years, considering the lack of investment compared to those around them Arsenal have maintained top four finishes throughout. Perhaps Arsenal have been fortunate that rivals Liverpool and Chelsea have been so poor this year. However the players at Arsenal will not stay around forerver, if Arsenal cannot give these players silverware, then like others before, they will leave. If Arsenal are to push on in the coming seasons, then I do not believe that Wenger is the man to do that. He has created a world class club in terms of business, now it is time he allowed someone else to make a world class team on the pitch.

Follow The Whitehouse Address on Twitter @The_W_Address

0Comments

The Truth About Moneyball

4:04 AM | Labels: Arsenal, Billy Beane, Everton, Liverpool, Moneyball, Newcastle, Wenger

With all this talk of Moneyball, do people realise it has been happening in football for years? And to good effect?

In the aftermath of Damien Comolli’s departure last week, many articles and fans have discussed the failed project this season, which appeared to stem from the book Moneyball by Michael Lewis about the Oakland A’s, an American baseball team, and their visionary general manager Billy Beane.

New Liverpool owner John Henry believed he had a secret, something no-one else knew of, which was thought up by Billy Beane over in Oakland, over a decade ago. To understand what Liverpool have tried to accomplish, you need to understand what Oakland did.

The A’s were playing a different game than everyone else.

The Oakland A’s had been consistently so much more efficient than anyone else that they appeared to be in a different business. They won games by buying in the qualities in a baseball player that the market undervalues, and they sold the oned the market overvalues. Often because of the superficial judgement of how a player looks, his physical appearance for instance, would often mean a player being undervalued by the market.

The Oakland A’s had a strategy centrered around financial control. Most teams were spending too much money. The key for them was being successful on a tight budget. The key to Billy Beane success was that he sought to win games cheaply.

Beane firstly dismissed the views of his scouts. Why? Because Beane believed they were wrong in their judgements. He rendered decades of scouting experience meaningless; they were judging players on their own subjective opinions; Beane viewed this as ridiculous, he felt they were choosing the wrong players, because they weren’t basing their judgements on the players performance, instead it was more about how he looked or how he moved.

Beane’s vision entailed the use of performance scouting, which directly contradicted the baseball man’s view that a young player is what you can see him doing in your mind’s eye. It argues that most of what’s important about a baseball player, maybe even his personality can be found in his statistics. Billy Beane intended to rip away from the scouts the power to decide who would be a pro baseball player and who would not. A new insight into statistics would be his weapon for doing it. He believed that by analysing baseball statistics you could see through a lot of baseball nonsense. This was revolutionary. And it worked.

John Henry, the new owner of the Boston Red Sox and now owner of Liverpool had a great understanding of markets and their inefficiencies and he believed that Beane’s methods were the way forward, efficiency without spending a lot, a sustainable model of success. He wanted to overhaul his new franchises in the image of the Oakland A’s.

John Henry’s new Anfield model

Many people have used the phrase “moneyball” to explain the transfer policy at Anfield since the Fenway Sports Group came in to the club.

By looking at their signings it would show that did try to attempt Oakland's "Performance scouting", to scout players objectively, through their statistics.The signings made by Liverpool last season indicated that statistical analysis was the key for the purchases of Suarez, Enrique, Carroll, Henderson, Downing and Adam.

In an interview with France Football last year Comolli said of Luis Suárez: "We turn enormously toward players who don't get injured. We also took into account the number of assists, his performances against the big teams, against the smaller clubs, in the European Cup and the difference between goals scored at home and away." José Enrique was signed aftrer his statistical figures were far more impressive than Liverpool's scouting report suggested.

Henderson and Downing created the most chances for their respective clubs the year before, and this would have been a major factor in their acquisitions. Charlie Adam’s set pieces were considered to be worth “£10 million on their own” according to Alex Ferguson after United played Blackpool. And so what Liverpool had done was bring together a group of players who had created a lot of chances from different positions on the pitch, who had a high percentage of entries into the final third, a perfect mix for strikers like Carroll and Suarez.

And yet, Liverpool failed in their approach, because they didn't get the value in the market with which Beane was so famous for. The extreme money spent on players at Anfield in the past 18 months has been staggering, and this is why Comolli has left. He took a concept and misunderstood it, he looked at the stats, sure, yet the point is to see worth in a player whose value doesn't indicate it. £20 million each for Downing and Henderson and £35 million for Carroll is not really "value for money". Regardless of their statistics.

The French version of Billy Beane

And yet, have there been other sides in football who have used the the "Moneyball" system to good effect. Indeed there has. And it these sides which deserve a closer look.

Since 2006 the side who has the lowest net spend in the Premier League may shock you, or perhaps not. It has been Arsenal. They have spent £85 million and recouped £116 million, with a net of minus £31million. This is remarkable considering their league position has never had them finish below fourth.

Damien Comolli worked with Wenger from 1996 and found a number of talents for Wenger. Wenger gave Comolli a lesson in scouting, in performance analysis. Wenger was doing what Billy Beane was doing it over in Oakland. He was brining in players for cheap and with little market value and finding they had talents. Wenger’s impressive scouting network unearthed some real talent, which contributed to performances on the pitch and more importantly for a side wishing to achieve sustainable growth, has improved the finances of the club, especially when a new £500 million stadium has restricted the growth of the squad in the short term, yet allowed it be stronger and sustainable in the longer term.

The profit margin on some of their players is remarkable. Arsenal realised they couldn’t spend on both the team and the stadium and so had to be very astute with their signings and importantly with their ability to sell big to other teams. Kolo Toure, Adebayor, Nasri and Clichy, players who cost Arsenal £150k, £7m, £10m and 250k have recopued Arsenal over £80 million.

Add to this Cesc who cost nothing and was sold to Barcelona for £24 million, then the model that Arsenal has produced is the most impressive in the league. The top scorer in the league this season cost Arsenal £2.75 million. He has scored 93 goals for Arsenal in 189 games, what a return for the money spent.

Arsenal realise they cannot compete with the money spent by City and Chelsea (£500 and £250m in the past six years), what they needed to do was find a solution to this in order to keep being competitive . Arsenal's scouting network is so good because it has to be, they need to keep finding talents who will cost little, who will improve the side and who can be sold on for more. This is sustainable growth. Wenger has done such a remarkable job producing a competitive Arsenal with spending literally no money. Oakland were the same, they could not compete with sides like the Yankees, and so the players who cost the big money were not feasible. This is why they began looking to players who were not valued by the big sides.

When you talk about Moneyball, when you consider what Billy Beane did to baseball, Wenger has done the same thing for the English Premier League. He has brought in players for little money, achieved relative success on the pitch, and more often than not, got a lot of money by selling them on for more. When John Henry considers a side who he wishes to resemble, Arsenal may just be that side.

The Toffees, continually exceeding expectations

In fact, there are other sides around England and Europe who deserve a closer look to see how they resemble Billy Beane’s Oakland A’s.

When you talk about Moneyball the key is buying players who other teams don’t consider good enough or worth the risk to play in the top levels. It is about buying cheap players who can offer more than their value shows. Everton are an excellent example of this.

David Moyes has been at Everton since 2002 and in his time he was built a stable Premier League side with almost no money. Remarkably Everton in the past five years have not finished below 8^th, many will not be surprised as many consider Everton to be a top half side. Yet, they have only spent £111 million on players since 2004. And in that time they have recouped £100 million. This means that they have a net spend of only £10 million in eight seasons.

This is impressive considering Liverpool rank 3^rd with £83 net spend, Tottenham 4^th with £73m net spent and of sides considered equal with Everton; Aston Villa, £68m net and Sunderland, £62m net. Even Bolton, Fulham, Stoke, Wolves, QPR and West Brom have all had a higher net spend than Everton since 2006. And yet, Everton have finished most of these sides for the past several years.

What has been their secret? Everton have scouted players from the lower leagues such as Cahill, Lescott and Jagielka and have found players capable of performing in the Premier League. These were players that many clubs were believed to be interested in, yet the belief that they “couldn't do it in the top flight” was a reason for their reluctance to purchase them.

Since 2004 these are some players who have been bought in to Goodison; Tim Cahill (£1.5m), Joleon Lescott (£5m), Phil Neville (£3.5m), Mikel Arteta (£2m, Tim Howard (£3m), Phil Jagielka (£4m), Leighton Baines (£6m), Steven Pienaar (£2m), Louis Saha (Free), Sylvain Distin (£4m), Jermaine Beckford (Free), Magaye Guaye (£1m), Apostolos Vellios (£250k), Seamus Coleman (£150k), Darren Gibson (£2m), Nikica Jelavic (£6m).

This is an impressive array of talent considering the money spent and shows how a Premier League side can be competitive with a tight budget. Their academy also has brought through players like Rooney, Hibbert, Osman and Barkley.

They have sought to tap into a market which was not been utilised by teams around them, they spent less and earned more from those players, on the pitch and off it too. Everton should be proud of their accomplishments and those calls for Moyes to be manager of the year each season are correct in what they say. He has done a remarkable job.

Moneyball aims to bring in players with talent who other sides don’t know about or perhaps don’t want to take a risk on. Everton have shown that taking the risks works, especially with the right manager and environment. And Billy Beane was also keen to stress that players bought cheap can benefit the finances too, Everton have shown this in their sales of Rooney (£27m), Lescott (£22m), Arteta (£10m) and Beckford (£4m).

A new change in team's approach?

Looking at some other sides, it would appear that this Moneyball mentality is spreading and bearing fruit. Newcastle have been a great example in the past two years of buying players for cheap value and achieving great results. Their new transfer policy has acquired players from around Europe who can offer more than their value represents. Cabaye (£3.5m), Tiote (£4.5m), Ben Arfa (£2.5m), Ba £0) and new signing Papiss Cisse (£10m) have all been remarkable signings for Newcastle. And I am sure that they will make a hefty profit on these players when the decide to sell them on.

These aren’t unknown players who are hidden, but those who certain teams don’t want to risk buying. Newcastle are proving that good scouting can produce good results for less money. With the right manager at the helm they have exceeded expectations and have a realisitic chance of achieving Champions League football this season.

Newly promoted Norwich are an excellent example of sustainability and great management too. Two seasons ago they were in League 1, now they sit tenth in the Premier League. What has been their formula for success? The key has been their manager; his drive, determination and ability to get the most from players. And also his ability to buy cheap players who exceed their value. Anthony Pilkington, Steve Morrison, Bradley Johnson, Jonathon Howson and Wesley Hoolahan are players who had no previous Premier League experience. Their total value is around £10 million. And yet performances would show that they can handle the speed and pressures of the top flight.

It shows that there is talent out there, it resides in the lower leagues and abroad and sometimes it may take a manager with a restricted budget or with a little nous to take a risk on some players there. Take Grant Holt, he has been a revelation since signing from Shrewsbury Town. He was signed for only £400k in 2009 and in his Norwich career he has played 113 games and scored 58 goals.

Holt is the perfect example of the Moneyball philosophy. He is regarded in the media as being overweight, a drinker and someone who doesn't fit in the Premier League. It is as if people haven’t watched him play. He has scored 13 goals in the Premier League this season, after Rooney he is the top English marksman.

Holt’s biggest problem is his age. At 31 he has little upside left in his career, perhaps his arrival in the Premier League has come several years too late, it is a shame, because he really does look suited to this league and imagine if someone had taken a chance on him years ago, perhaps he could have been an England regular. The lesson from Holt is for sides to not make judgements on players, how many other Holt type forwards are in the lower leagues, is Rickie Lambert, Jordan Rhodes or Ged Evans, players capable of making the step up, I would say definitely.

A German model of Moneyball

In Europe there has been no team better at creating success with little money than Borussia Dortmund. This is a side who ten years were close to bankruptcy due to over spending, they had gone beyond their means and looked a shadow of their side they were in the late 90’s. Dortmund have become sustainable and they have been successful. What have they done to accomplish this?

Firstly, they decided that the key was to bring the right man to lead the side, they decided Jurgen Klopp was the right choice. And right they were. Klopp decided that if he had no money to spend then he had to use what he had. The key was youth. Klopp believed in developing youth players and saw the value in bringing through academy players and buying cheap players who perhaps were not valued as much as they should. Sound familiar?

On top of youth development the key for Dortmund has been their impressive use of scouting. The Dortmund scouting team work very closely with the management, they use a scouting system called Scout7 which gives information on players from all over the world. Dortmund have specific attributes for each position of which they look for, which they then search for a match on Scout7.

Effectively, they are looking for a player who fits their criteria who perhaps hasn’t been found on other top teams radar. Players like Kevin Großkreutz, Neven Subotic and Mats Hummels have all been picked up for small amounts yet have made massive contributions to the revivial of Dortmund and their success in the past couple of seasons. One of their most impressive “finds” has been Shinji Kagawa, he was found in the J-league 2nd division, and was bought for just £300,000.

Dortmund, Arsenal, Everton and Norwich have shown the merits of the football version of Moneyball, specific scouting using players statistics and attributes in order to find a player whose ability does not match his value. These sides have taught other sides how to use the market effectively, that spending millions is not always the answer, they have proven that success can had through sustainability.

A new future of sustainability

Billy Beane changed the lives of ballplayers whose hidden virtues otherwise might never have been seen. The money splashed around by teams like Man City, Chelsea, PSG and Real Madrid the game looks unsustainable and unbalanced. What the game needs is more Wenger’s, Moyes’, Klopp’s and Lambert’s, men with the willingness to take a risk, to believe in a player who others don’t and to prove those others wrong.

Why did Damien Commoli fail? Because he didn’t do what Oakland did. Instead he brought in players for obscene amounts, this was not the model John Henry wanted implemented. If those players were too expensive, then Liverpool should have sought to find players who had similar stats and attributes yet who could did not have the same value as those they bought. Perhaps it would have given Liverpool the same results, or even better. It would have definitely being more cost effective. The problem with buying English players from the Premier League is that their value is too high compared to their actual worth. It has been a harsh lesson learnt by Liverpool’s owners.

What can Moneyball teach us? It is no surprise to me that the reluctance to open up to new ideas has held back the English game. The majority of coaches and scouts in the pro game posess an “old school thinking” philosophy which doesn’t consider how the modern game is and what is required. They holds onto an ideal of the past. The truth is, the game changes, styles change and ideas evolve and in order to achieve success ideas need to be ahead of the game.

Billy Beane gave a new approach to baseball and revolutionised the sport. It gave the seemingly accepted idea something new to think about. Are football coaches and teams willing to try new approaches to improve standards? Barcelona’s approach is revolutionary, Guardiola has been called a visionary for the work he has done; he obsesses over tactics and statistics and has put emphasis on possession and movement more than any team in last two decades at least. The game can be changed, what it needs is someone with vision, a will to convince and the ability to implement.

I appreciate any feedback you have and you can get me on Twitter at @The_W_Address

0Comments

Arsenal need to do everything to keep their MVP

4:17 PM | Labels: Arsenal, Van Persie, Wenger

This season the shortlist for the player of the season will have names like Aguero, Silva, Rooney and Bale on. However there has been no one more important, more valuable and more impressive than Arsenal's Robin Van Persie.

Arsenal have struggled at times throughout the season, although they are currently on a great run of form and have overtaken Spurs to lie in third place there has been serious questions asked of the team and the manager. Many, including myself did not expect this kind of resurgence, however defensively they have finally got their first team players back and their solidity at the back has been a massive reason for their improved performance. Yet, throughout the season, it is Van Persie who has almost single handedly put Arsenal in the position they are in.

No injury = world class

This season Robin van Persie has a total of 34 goals & assists in the Premier League this season, no other player has more than 22! His record while staying injury free has been only bettered by Messi and Ronaldo. He is arguably up there as the best striker in world football today. Especially considering the talent he has around him.

It is amazing that he has been at Arsenal since 2004, and before 18 months ago he was forever plagued by injury. It seemed that the new Bergkamp was never going to live up to the hype, it seemed he was always going to be a player with the potential yet never reaching it with due to injury. Now, after remaining free of injury for over 12 months, Arsenal are reaping the rewards.

A matured man

This blog has accused Wenger of many failings, however his work with Van Persie has been more than impressive. Wenger has morphed this volatile young promise into a well rounded person and footballer. His work with Van Persie has been steady, yet from it has come a man who when fit appears able to rival the best in world football.

From an early age Van Persie's parents encouraged him to think for himself from an early age. His mother was a painter and his father a sculptor, both who hoped Robin would follow in their creative footsteps.

This free thinking, creative player would be regarded of being arrogant and rebellious in his career, a reason why Feyenoord were more than happy to let go a player who offered so much potential, yet also so much turmoil. This meant Arsenal would get Van Persie for just £2.75 million.

Wenger took a gamble on a player that many believed did not have the mental strength and discipline to make it in top level football.

Wenger's development plan

The teacher and his pupil

Wenger believes that to coach a player is to ensure he completely expresses his talent in full, rather than make him obey strict tactical instructions. Through these methods Van Persie has certainly matured, he is now a leader where once he was a maverick. Wenger’s ability and desire to teach and not tell has it’s critics, and it is these attributes which make Wenger appear more suited to development than success driven senior football, yet one cannot fault his work with a number of players who he takes under his wing.

It is a remarkable test of Wenger’s belief and perseverance that a player deemed too selfish and too indisciplined at Feyernood could become captain of Arsenal. It is important to realise that with the right guidance and teaching that these players at 18-21 are still young boys, who have been thrown into a world of riches, pressure and expectations which far exceeds their young shoulders. It is imperative that they receive the correct guidance in order for them to come out of these years with maturity and discipline. Van Persie is the perfect example and Wenger’s decision is being vindicated by a run of performances stretching over 12 months.

A matured man

Wenger believes that Van Persie’s biggest accomplishment has been his maturity, “Robin always had the vision and the talent, what really stands out is how he’s developed as a team player.”

A tactical change

Van Persie was always a shadow striker, a Dutch No 10, yet today he has been converted in to a modern no 9. Or even a 9.5 if you will, a player who drifts between a 10 and 9 with seamless fashion and allows himself to find space and time to create and score.

The modern game requires the use of a striker less formation, where a static player number 9 has become redundant for an ever faster game, one in which space and time were restricted more. Van Persie now players as a 9.5, filtering between the lines. Guardiola has made Messi into this type of forward and Wenger clearly admires the style that Barca have.

With Adebayor's departure Wenger opted to go for the 4-3-3 in order to suit the Dutchman’s talent, although there are flaws with the system and certainly there is too much over-reliance on Van Persie, it has clearly aided his game and development.

It is testament to Van Persie’s work ethic and desire to improve that he has improved his “weaker” foot and has scored more goals in 2011 with his right than he had done in all his previous Arsenal seasons combined. With a consistent run without injury Van Persie has been able to play at a higher level for longer, enabling him to show the world that his talent would not be wasted.

He has certainly improved his strength, being able to play as a lone forward, holding the ball up and feeding others. His ability to retain the ball and improved heading ability has improved his overall game and has enabled Arsenal to alter their style to be more direct when needed, having a player who possesses the necessary skills of a target man.

A mix of British and Dutch

Has the British game improved him? I would say so. The Dutch style seeks to develop creative, expressive players, those searching for the perfect goal, the perfect game. Van Persie’s path has taken him from seeking this perfection to understanding that first and foremost the game is there to be won. It is through this change in belief that Van Persie has taken his goal tally to remarkable levels.

This search for perfection is shown in his demeanour, his fashion and his football style. He eptiomises the culture of being Dutch, yet now he has aspects of the British game in his style, which have added more determination, strength and directness to his game, “I used to weigh up the options, think whether there was a chip or a backheel for beautiful finish. Now the ball has to go in. I don’t give a damn how.”

Most Valuable Player

In the US, they call their player of the season their Most Valuable Player. This is what Van Persie is, he is the MVP of the Premier League, because in my opinion, there is no other player who has done so much for his team this year.

Man City have a supporting cast which makes most sides in the world envious, in the past two years perhaps Tevez has been their MVP yet this season they have shown that they have many players who cans step up and be relied on. United have more than just Rooney to get the goals and however good he is, he is not carrying the side. Obviously this is the hallmark of a winning side, being a team, having players around the top players who can provide and help out.

Arsenal simply have to keep Van Persie at the Emirates, without him they could be a mid table side, his goals have been invaluable, his contribution is not matched by any other in any other team. Nearly everything goes through him and when he performs then Arsenal are more likely to win. Yet, one man cannot do it all, Messi doesn't do it all, neither does Ronaldo, Rooney or Aguero. A successful side requires a multitude of quality.

Fans complain that Arsenal lack the ambition to challenge for the title and their reluctance to spend big is a major part of that, what is also important, maybe more so, is the wages offered. The wage structure at Arsenal, however admirable it may be, gives too much to those who don’t deserve it and not enough to those who do. If the issue is the wage then Arsenal need to alter their wage structure for this player. Chelsea, United and more so City have raised the ceiling in terms of wages, is this unsustainable?

Please don't go. I need you!

For a league to be competitive yes, yet for these sides they want the best players and require to pay the best wages to do that. If Arsenal wish to compete then they need to retain their best players, right now Van Persie is their only world class player, and they need to pay him world class wages. Right now Arsenal need Van Persie more than he needs them, what they need to do is convince him that his future lies at the Emirates.

Does he owe Arsenal the rest of his career? I believe that he owes loyalty to a club which supported him through his injuries and educated him in being a footballer and importantly a mature man. What he wants, like any ambitious player is to be a winner, to look back at his career and feel he achieved something. What Arsenal need to do is prove that they match his ambitions. They need to go out and purchase three or four world class talents to surround Van Persie and show him and the fans that they mean serious business.

Van Persie could probably have his pick of any top side in Europe at this time; City and United would be great locations for him and I am sure Bayern and the top Italian sides would be interested; Milan would be a good fit and Inter need rebuilding, although without Champions League would he be interested? PSG may also be able to offer him riches and success though I do not believe he is required at Madrid or Barca, their squads are too strong in that position to need a player like Van Persie.

What if an offer of £25 million came in for him? Would Arsenal find it too hard to refuse; they have allowed a lot of good talent to leave before and it appears that if the price is right then they are happy to do business. On this occasion, they must refuse, the message it would send out would be toxic to the Arsenal brand and to their fans. Another world class talent lostindicates only a slippery slope down.

I believe he will stay, he appears very well settled at the club, he talks of his family being happy in London and stresses this is important to him. What Arsenal need to do is prove to him that they want him, and they are willing to give him the wages he has warranted this past year, and to show him that they will bring in the players around him in order to improve the side, to make them more competitive and give Van Persie a chance to win silverware as captain of Arsenal.

I have complained about Wenger and his methods, about the issues that have plagued Arsenal since their move to the Emirates and how they now need to show their intent, to their players, fans and opposition. If this summer will be a turning point for Arsenal then their first show of intent must be to tie up Van Persie, to prove that Arsenal are not a selling club but a team building for the future, and that the man who will lead the side and the new generation at Arsenal will be the leagues MVP, Robin Van Persie.

The Whitehouse Address is on Twitter @The_W_Address

0Comments

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

10:45 PM | Labels: 4-3-3, Arsenal, Inter, Jose Mourinho, Napoli, pressing, Tactics, Wenger

Wenger is tactical inept for top level football

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.

Tactical? Motivating?

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 three man midfield

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.

Defence wins championships

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.

Changes during games

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.

Genuine Tacticians = Success

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

0Comments

FC BARCELONA

Popular Posts

Archives

Followers

The Miracle Worker & the Future of Arsenal

The Truth About Moneyball

Arsenal need to do everything to keep their MVP

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