• ! ! ! IMPORTANT MESSAGE ! ! !

    Discussions about police investigations

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

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

Arsenal Tactics Talk

Kobi

I Know Who You Are
I was watching some videos the other day of Barcelona under Guardiola when Messi was a false nine.
They would build up in a 41212 with Messi in the hole and the front two very wide on either touchline, this makes the pitch big and pressing them very difficult.
When the ball has reached the last third (and the build up has done it's job) the front three (specifically the wingers/wide forwards) would have the freedom to go whereever they want, which was generally much more central and into goalscoring positions.
This is why they would play mobile forwards rather than natural wingers, Eto'o, Villa, Henry etc, they didn't actually require any of the attributes you look for in a wide player, they would never take on a fullback or put in a cross.
Aside from making the build up easy the other benefit of this is as a centre back you basically don't have anyone to mark and then suddenly a striker turns up at the last minute, it's much more difficult.
Also one fullback (Alves) would overlap so you would still have width in the attack while the other (Abidal) would stay back making a back three.

So where am I going with this?
Well it occurred to me that Auba and Laca have the perfect profile for the 'wide players' in that system, you could have Özil floating about in Messi's position and Kolasinac overlapping.
It would actually suit the players we have, not the tiki-taka just the shape and the way it develops from transition to attack, it would be a great way of fitting in both our strikers without sacrificing width when building up.

Of course it almost certainly won't happen but it was just a thought.

Henry talks about it a bit here for anyone interested

 

asukru

Established Member

Country: Canada

Player:Martinelli
I was watching some videos the other day of Barcelona under Guardiola when Messi was a false nine.
They would build up in a 41212 with Messi in the hole and the front two very wide on either touchline, this makes the pitch big and pressing them very difficult.
When the ball has reached the last third (and the build up has done it's job) the front three (specifically the wingers/wide forwards) would have the freedom to go whereever they want, which was generally much more central and into goalscoring positions.
This is why they would play mobile forwards rather than natural wingers, Eto'o, Villa, Henry etc, they didn't actually require any of the attributes you look for in a wide player, they would never take on a fullback or put in a cross.
Aside from making the build up easy the other benefit of this is as a centre back you basically don't have anyone to mark and then suddenly a striker turns up at the last minute, it's much more difficult.
Also one fullback (Alves) would overlap so you would still have width in the attack while the other (Abidal) would stay back making a back three.

So where am I going with this?
Well it occurred to me that Auba and Laca have the perfect profile for the 'wide players' in that system, you could have Özil floating about in Messi's position and Kolasinac overlapping.
It would actually suit the players we have, not the tiki-taka just the shape and the way it develops from transition to attack, it would be a great way of fitting in both our strikers without sacrificing width when building up.

Of course it almost certainly won't happen but it was just a thought.

Henry talks about it a bit here for anyone interested


Great video and I agree if we tried this I think we could do great!
 

RacingPhoton

Established Member
A question was bothering me for a long time. I think this is the right time and thread to ask. Hope some experts in this thread can clarify. How exactly does the fact that a game is home/away game affect the players?

I follow both cricket and football. I understand the argument in cricket. Pitches vary so much between one country and another. Hence the home team players have the advantage of having grown up getting used to the pace, swing and spin of home-pitch. Also, the pitch curators normally prepare the pitch for a match in a way that suits the home teams.

But what's up with football? What difference does it make between playing home and away? Is the ground drastically different between one stadium and another? If yes, how are they different(like bounce of the ball or speed)? Or is it the crowd support that pushes the players to play out of their skin at home, while losing their motivation away?

Given our poor away form, what exactly should we do to do better in away games?
 

Toby

No longer a Stuttgart Fan
Moderator
But what's up with football? What difference does it make between playing home and away? Is the ground drastically different between one stadium and another? If yes, how are they different(like bounce of the ball or speed)?

That's definitely a thing in most sports with home/away models. Football pitches vary in size, ground and surface material, etc. Then at home you can mold the pitch how you want it before a game. So if teams like to keep the ball on the ground a lot and prefer a slightly more wet surface you can do just that. You'll have the exact same conditions in the stadium as you always have during training sessions. It's just a bit about habit and being comfortable. Also just look at what Milan did some years ago when facing Arsenal: They knew we'd attack down the flanks a lot, so they turned the sides of their pitch into a ****ing field.

Can't say more on proper football pitches as I only played at youth level, but from my experience in Volleyball there's also definitely a home/away difference, and often it's little things and they usually aren't significant things but just enough to make you a little uncomfortable. E.g. in our district there's one club that has a gym with a significantly lower ceiling than anyone else - they're themselves used to it but all other teams always need to adjust and of course that's an away disadvantage. One club has a gym in which the floor and lower parts of the wall are painted in one of the most aggressive reds I have ever seen. You come into that gym and it looks like a massive, red bathtub and it's a bit visually overbearing - you look down, left, right, it's all ****ing red and they haven't exactly used the best contrasting colours to mark the lines of the field. Colour and size of the lines is another such thing: Sometimes gyms don't have an outright Volleyball court, so there will be different sporting courts lined on top of each other in different colours - it's basically not a problem cause you now the size of your field, but sometimes the lines will be ridiculously thin squeezed between super thick lines and you'll have to take a few looks to really be sure where it is. Then it's sometimes the size of gym itself, meaning when you serve how much space have you got for the run-up - that varies between barely 1m and 10m.
All this stuff is surely nothing where I'd say it's so influential that it will seriously hamper the team's away performance and decide over win or loss, but it all takes a little adjusting to do. It won't affect if you win or lose, but how quickly you get into a game. Think it's very similar re: football grounds that there's a couple of small things you need adjusting to and that's then a little disadvantage - but just with my examples from Volleyball I wouldn't deem these disadvantages so big that they'll decide on overall away form. Although I've heard/read that some players said they loved/despised playing at certain grounds.
 

Football Manager

Copy & Paste Merchant
A question was bothering me for a long time. I think this is the right time and thread to ask. Hope some experts in this thread can clarify. How exactly does the fact that a game is home/away game affect the players?

I follow both cricket and football. I understand the argument in cricket. Pitches vary so much between one country and another. Hence the home team players have the advantage of having grown up getting used to the pace, swing and spin of home-pitch. Also, the pitch curators normally prepare the pitch for a match in a way that suits the home teams.

But what's up with football? What difference does it make between playing home and away? Is the ground drastically different between one stadium and another? If yes, how are they different(like bounce of the ball or speed)? Or is it the crowd support that pushes the players to play out of their skin at home, while losing their motivation away?

Given our poor away form, what exactly should we do to do better in away games?
Travel Fatigue.
Sitting in a coach for 2-3 hours can be a bit tired.
Knowing that you have to take another 2-3 hours travelling back is not something you would want after the match.

Preparation time.
The other team have more time to warm up and remembering tactical instructions.

Pitch condition.
Mourinho’s Chelsea used to pour water and
make the field as bumpy as possible when playing against us.

Fans.
Having someone shouting “man on” for you in a bird eye view can be helpful.

Dressing room condition.
Some teams have poor dressing room for the away team. For example, no heating in a freezing weather.

Physio staff and equipment.
 
Last edited:

Flying Okapis

Most Well-Known Member
Travel Fatigue.
Sitting in a coach for 2-3 hours can be a bit tired.
Knowing that you have to take another 2-3 hours travelling back is not something you would want after the match.

Preparation time.
The other team have more time to warm up and remembering tactical instructions.

Pitch condition.
Mourinho’s Chelsea used to pour water and
make the field as bumpy as possible when playing against us.

Fans.
Having someone shouting “man on” for you in a bird eye view can be helpful.

Dressing room condition.
Some teams have poor dressing room for the away team. For example, no heating in a freezing weather.

Physio staff and equipment.

Majority of this points to 'mental' parts of the game which has always been a bit of a worry.

I think a lot of the problem is we just can't defend most of the time, when we are playing away the opposition is more likely going to feel the need to attack us in front of their fans and go for it, due to some shocking defending at times goals will eventually leak in, its unavoidable unless you can defend properly.
 

ThlRama

Active Member

Country: Greece

Player:Saka
I was watching some videos the other day of Barcelona under Guardiola when Messi was a false nine.
They would build up in a 41212 with Messi in the hole and the front two very wide on either touchline, this makes the pitch big and pressing them very difficult.
When the ball has reached the last third (and the build up has done it's job) the front three (specifically the wingers/wide forwards) would have the freedom to go whereever they want, which was generally much more central and into goalscoring positions.
This is why they would play mobile forwards rather than natural wingers, Eto'o, Villa, Henry etc, they didn't actually require any of the attributes you look for in a wide player, they would never take on a fullback or put in a cross.
Aside from making the build up easy the other benefit of this is as a centre back you basically don't have anyone to mark and then suddenly a striker turns up at the last minute, it's much more difficult.
Also one fullback (Alves) would overlap so you would still have width in the attack while the other (Abidal) would stay back making a back three.

So where am I going with this?
Well it occurred to me that Auba and Laca have the perfect profile for the 'wide players' in that system, you could have Özil floating about in Messi's position and Kolasinac overlapping.
It would actually suit the players we have, not the tiki-taka just the shape and the way it develops from transition to attack, it would be a great way of fitting in both our strikers without sacrificing width when building up.

Of course it almost certainly won't happen but it was just a thought.

Henry talks about it a bit here for anyone interested


I think this has already been used in some games, mostly with a back three (3-4-1-2.) It's not like it's something we haven't seen since anyway, Liverpool under Brendan played some games in that exact manner.
 

Check

Active Member
Was watching the Manchester Derby and Wolves-Arsenal at the same time and the big difference between us and a time like City or Liverpool is the movement off the ball. Whenever our midfielders have the ball, Mkhi Iwobi Laca all stand still. But when for example David Silva has got the ball you see runners everywhere. Sane and Sterling are trying to beat the defensive line, Aguero comes short where he creates a gap for Bernardo Silva, the full backs are coming in to play, and then you also have someone like Fernandinho behind you for the safe option. So they always have so much options on the ball, where we only have like the safe option because there's no movement up front. That's what for example Bellerin brought to us before his injury and that's why whe need proper wingers and a left back.
 

progman07

Established Member
I was watching some videos the other day of Barcelona under Guardiola when Messi was a false nine.
They would build up in a 41212 with Messi in the hole and the front two very wide on either touchline, this makes the pitch big and pressing them very difficult.
When the ball has reached the last third (and the build up has done it's job) the front three (specifically the wingers/wide forwards) would have the freedom to go whereever they want, which was generally much more central and into goalscoring positions.
This is why they would play mobile forwards rather than natural wingers, Eto'o, Villa, Henry etc, they didn't actually require any of the attributes you look for in a wide player, they would never take on a fullback or put in a cross.
Aside from making the build up easy the other benefit of this is as a centre back you basically don't have anyone to mark and then suddenly a striker turns up at the last minute, it's much more difficult.
Also one fullback (Alves) would overlap so you would still have width in the attack while the other (Abidal) would stay back making a back three.

So where am I going with this?
Well it occurred to me that Auba and Laca have the perfect profile for the 'wide players' in that system, you could have Özil floating about in Messi's position and Kolasinac overlapping.
It would actually suit the players we have, not the tiki-taka just the shape and the way it develops from transition to attack, it would be a great way of fitting in both our strikers without sacrificing width when building up.

Of course it almost certainly won't happen but it was just a thought.

Henry talks about it a bit here for anyone interested

Stay in your position and trust your teammates to get the ball to you. Alexis Sanchez would have loved it.
 

Jasard

Forum Issue Troubleshooter
Moderator

Country: England
Our wide play is such a shambles. Liverpool have two full backs that each are equal to the assist record for a defender and two brilliant wide attackers. We are miles behind.
 

Yousif Arsenal

On Vinai's payroll & misses 4th place trophy 🏆
Trusted ⭐
Our wide play is such a shambles. Liverpool have two full backs that each are equal to the assist record for a defender and two brilliant wide attackers. We are miles behind.
Because we don't have :lol: we basically playing 2 attackid mid as wingers and both are average and should be sold its important we buy 2 wingers in summer and keep one of Nelson or smith-rowe
 

DanDare

Emoji Merchant and Believer-In-Chief
Trusted ⭐

Player:Saliba
We seem to have got progressively worse at attacking and defending as the seasons gone on.

Not a great look for Emery
 

Dennis_Bergkamp_10

Established Member
I think we can conclude again that like Wenger, Emery doesn't do tactics ;)

Big overhaul needed. Pep wouldn't do anything with this squad either. Good thing we have that 70m war chest ready.
 

DanDare

Emoji Merchant and Believer-In-Chief
Trusted ⭐

Player:Saliba
We seems to really neglect anything but the wings. We rely on overlaps from fullbacks who can't cross

We allow teams to settle back in to shape and have no ingenuity to break them down

These are our tactics
 

yybecause

Formerly known as ArsenaLover
We seems to really neglect anything but the wings. We rely on overlaps from fullbacks who can't cross

We allow teams to settle back in to shape and have no ingenuity to break them down

These are our tactics

we dont have a single winger or a midfielder who can take the ball and drive forward.
we also don't have anyone to press from the mid bar Lucas, but it would be stupid to tell him to do that knowing it's just him against 2 or 3 opposite players, leaving a huge hole in behind.
 

Yousif Arsenal

On Vinai's payroll & misses 4th place trophy 🏆
Trusted ⭐
It's why very important to get 2 decent wingers and ramsey like replacement to improve the creativity of this team
 
Top Bottom