Who are you?

Ahh, Ligue 1. I wish that I could devote the efforts of my oft-addled mind to you. Would that I could understand the inner workings of your table and the importance of your football clubs. Some of them are called Paris Saint-Germain, Monaco, Marseille, Lyon, and Lille. Those are the ones I know. I don’t really know anything about them, to be honest. Saint-Germain is a decent drink-mixing liqueur, and Monaco has a nice F1 race and some casinos.

So let us be honest-we don’t really understand or know much about Ligue 1. Well, I don’t, and I won’t pretend that I do. I know that the American footballer Charlie Davies went to Sochaux, I believe, and my frog friend Julie said “Sochaux? They’re crap!” She is a Marseille supporter, so I suppose she knows more about that than I could.

Outside of the inevitable youtube clips, what does that mean for Arsenal as regards the man with the massive dome upon his shoulders, Mr. Gervinho? He’s Ivorian! He’s amazing! He’s the greatest secret agent/winger in the world! Danger Gervinho Mouse! Oh rubbish. He’s come in, so who’s going out? Why would you purchase a bloke if you had another identical bloke playing in the same position? Right winger, right? Right winger? Have Arsenal signed Iain Duncan Smith?

Well, this question leads me to the inevitable thing that I have had long discussions with myself about (and yes, living in America, that’s where most of my serious football discussions happen): If it’s a formation you want, which one do you choose for the Arsenal now?

The traditional back 4 among the current squad has tended to look more like:

A back 2 with marauding fullbacks pressing high up the pitch, protected (more or less) by a completely (he ought to be) defending midfielder who in name is a “false sweeper,” a player who, rather sitting behind a back 3, is devoted to cleaning up attacks through central midfield in front of the centre halves. This is, in theory, the job of Alex Song. His duty is to sit deep in what ends up being a back “2-1” with not much offensive contribution. If my memory serves me correctly, Claude Makelele defined this position (not, as it might be offered, Patrick Vieira, who quite often drove the Arsenal attack forward), mostly because he not only was a barricade but because he began so many attacks for his club(s). Now, I know Alex Song, and he’s no Claude Makelele. That’s not to say that his contributions to the attack haven’t mattered, but there was a time last season when it was perceived by the shrieking Arsenal “supporters” that Song’s adventures going forward left the “back 2” horribly exposed, and that’s a criticism I never heard about Makelele.

Let’s just say that means Arsenal have played a “4-1” at the back, which more or less looks like a back 2 with the sweeper playing in front of 2 centre backs while the fullbacks are trying to get forward as much as humanly possible. That doesn’t mean Arsenal were playing some sort of strict “Continental 4-3-3” or “4-5-1.” The problem with that is that it presumes some sort of “holding midfielder” at the base of a midfield 3 or 5, and nobody who watched the Gunners last season would confuse the midfield shape with that. Song was committed to (when he wasn’t being naughty) sitting in front of the centre halves as a de facto 3rd defender. So where did that leave Wilshere and Fabregas? Positionally, and talent-wise, they should have sat one on top of the other because Arsenal didn’t play a real diamond shape where Song was at the base, Wilshere and (insert crap footballer’s name here) were in the middle, and Cesc played in the hole behind the front 2.

Was this, then, a squad which played a 4-1-2-3 in attack, and a 4-1-4-1 in defence? No. Not really, if you think about it, because that would presume that the fullbacks were more defensive and that the two “front wingers” were always willing to track back into midfield or deeper in defence and I can’t recall that ever happening last season, save for the mind-boggling track-backs that Arshavin made just at the moment that everyone was singing “Who ate all the pies?” and booing him with a mighty Eboue-ian gusto.

It’s safe to say that what we do know about Arsenal last season is that Chamakh and van Persie played up front on their lonesomes for the most part and that Theo and whichever bloke was healthy or not crap at the moment seemed to play on the wings and that the fullbacks pressed high up the pitch and Alex mostly played in front of the back and that Jack Wilshere was great in some sort of “I’ll sit back here and take care of everything, lads, in case you all cock it up” role and that Cesc, when he played or wasn’t at the Spanish Grand Prix, sort of sat up top behind the strikers and proved he was irreplaceable.

Now if that’s not a formation, I don’t know what is.

I can’t, based on this hard scientific evidence, make the claim that Gervinho will be the difference maker (an Ivory Antonio Valencia?), or that Aaron Ramsey has rendered Nasri redundant, or that that Meatsack bloke will rock my world, or that Phil Jagielka, Gary Cahill, Leighton Baines, Sylvain Distin, or some other “experienced Premiership defender” will stick a finger in the Arsenal dike and stop the leaking of goals. I think that Samir Nasri is not the irreplaceable man-neither do I think that about Cesc. Of the players currently in the squad, I’m only certain that Jack Wilshere and van Persie are indispensable because grit and goals are always in demand and each is fairly skilled at the game.

Since Gervinho is alleged to play on the right, what does this say for the role that Theo played last season? Is it a demotion? If Wenger persists with the 4-1-2-3 (or whatever thing it morphs into), and if both Nasri and Cesc are part of the plan, then it seems that the first XI would be Szcz, TV, Some other bloke, Sagna, Gibbs (?!), Song, Wilshere, Cesc, Nasri, RvP, and Gervinho. Take a step back, Theo.

If Wenger chose to use a “standard 4-4-2,” the midfield would be a mystery. Wilshere, Fabregas, Nasri, Theo, or Gervinho would mean that Song was odd man out, with either of Theo or Gervinho up top with Robin.

In other words, What are you up to, Arsène? You didn’t purchase the Ivorian to sit him, did you? And you don’t plan to sit Theo, do you? Or Song?

It would seem there’s one too many midfielders in this mix. I know you can “never have too much depth” but there’s also this problem of players thinking they are good and should play in the starting XI and not wanting to sit. If Theo is reduced to “impact sub” only, does that stunt his development? I know many who support the club have their issues with Theo but I do feel he’s improved over the past two seasons, even with his injury problems. His league goals total rose from 3 to 9, his assists from 2 to 7. His total goals for the season jumped from 4 to 13, his highest season tally yet. His pace has the ability to stretch the defence like no other player in the squad.

And as long as Arsenal’s fullbacks are as committed as they have been to the attack, Alex Song is a necessity. I don’t need to elaborate on that. You can’t bench him.

You certainly can’t bench Jack Wilshere. I don’t need to elaborate on that, either.

If Cesc stays, which I’m assuming he will, then you obviously can’t bench him.

It all seems to come down to Samir Nasri, then, doesn’t it? I mean, if Arshavin is now relegated to the substitutes bench and the other options are Diaby and the world’s worst Brazilian footballer ©, then the odd man out would be the odd man who wants out. The man who put in 5 good months and now wants to be Arsenal’s highest wage earner would, in my estimation, be the casualty. Having already established that Arsenal didn’t really play a “formation” to speak of, does it matter as much who puts in the shift on the left front wing? And if bidding “Adieu” to Sammy also brings in £22 million (or some such number) then what exactly is the problem?