A critical thinking error that all humans make is that once we become convinced of a criticism or a weakness in a person, leader, government or sports team, we start to see it everywhere. Once the critique is formed, even if it does indeed has a sound basis, we see the criticism first and retrofit events to it afterwards. We lose perspective easily.
And to repeat, we all do this, it is a natural part of human psychology. We take in more information in an average day than our brains could ever possibly absorb, so we have to have a filing system. It’s why mythology and storytelling were so important prior to the Enlightenment. The myth of Persephone, for example, was a neat shorthand way of explaining the complex phenomenon of seasons and the transition between them.
Detectives and investigators are taught to keep an open mind when working on cases and let the facts lead them rather than allowing their theories to lead them to evidence. I both think it is true that Arsenal might have some regrets about not ‘taking the handbrake off’ at points this season but also think there are a lot of circumstances where that criticism can be met with context.
I really enjoy the Libero podcast and think they have had several interesting, nuanced discussions about Arsenal this season. They recorded an episode on the Manchester City v Arsenal game earlier this week which was of a really high standard again. In the episode, they discuss whether Manchester City have that key creative edge over Arsenal by buying a player like Rayan Cherki and tolerating some of his structural profligacy in exchange for his ability to score the goal that he scored on Sunday.
I think that is a totally fair question. At the same time, I think there are circumstances that should not be brushed aside. I would argue, perhaps with some sense of extrapolation, that Eberechi Eze has been on a similar arc to Cherki this season, in that it has taken some time for the player and the team to work one another out.
The frustration, for me, is that at the absolute peak of this trajectory, just after Eze has smashed a delicious volley into the top corner against Bayer Leverkusen, he pulls his calf around half an hour later and misses a crucial part of the season. Together with the injury situations of Havertz, Odegaard, Merino and Saka, I think this was a significant blow.
I think Arteta’s selection against Manchester City was instructive. He wanted Odegaard, Eze and Havertz on the pitch together. It was the first time that Eze had played on the left wing since December at Villa Park. It was also the first time Eze and Odegaard had simultaneously been available for months.
When asked before the match why Arteta had relented and selected Eze on the left in a game of this importance, the manager answered, ‘Because he has proved he is a player for big moments.’ In short, this was going to be a game of inches and Eze was seen as a player capable of making those inches work in the team’s favour.
In the Libero podcast I linked, the panellists discuss Cherki’s brilliant individual goal and suggest it shows a relaxation in Pep and a deference to creativity that Arteta lacks. I think that ignores that Eze was selected for this game and was a quarter of an inch away from scoring a goal of equal beauty and creativity.
Ultimately, City and Arsenal both bought ‘maverick’ number 10s this summer, who both took a while to acclimatise, both were selected for the biggest game of the season and both took a couple of excellent touches before sending the ball towards the bottom corner. The outcome differed by a matter of millimetres.
I certainly don’t dismiss the criticism that Arteta and Arsenal could and should have fiddled a little with the risk and reward dial over the last few months. At Brighton, Arsenal opted to grind out a 1-0 win when they might have been more expressive and able to multiply the advantage. At Brighton the outcome went the right way, at Wolves and Brentford, for example, it did not.
I think the aforementioned injuries to some of Arsenal’s better technical players explains a lot (not all) of that. I also don’t dismiss that if Arsenal don’t win the league this season that psychology will be a huge part of that failure. All failures and successes have multiple authors and multiple factors. Injuries would be part of the story, so too would a psychological brittleness in some of the crunch moments.
But I am still to be convinced that Arteta genuinely over values control and caution. I think a team’s approach is defined by its talent and most of Arsenal’s genuine elite level talent is behind the ball. I think if Arteta were obsessed with control and caution above all else, Madueke, Eze and Gyokeres would be a very strange summer shopping list and Riccardo Calafiori would be a very awkward fit as a defender.
If anything, you could attribute the defeat to City to a lack of caution, really. Eze, selected for his match winning abilities, is caught on the Cherki goal because he is not a natural defender and his instincts on the edge of his own area showed that. Arsenal concede the second goal largely because they (well, Martinelli) overcommit to the high press.
But I understand why ‘Arsenal lost the game because they lacked off-ball caution’ is not an attractive framing for this game given the criticisms of Arsenal we have become accustomed to this season (which, again, are not without foundation at all). What is clear now is that we have clarity.
Arsenal probably have to win their last five games to win the title. They are playing at least three opponents who are mired in midtable with little to play for and by the time Burnley come to the Emirates in May, they will likely already be relegated. Arsenal have to release the handbrake.
My personal opinion is that, if they do this successfully, it is less likely to represent a tactical or psychological shift and it will more likely be down to the players available. I think if Eze, Odegaard, Havertz and (hopefully) Saka can play a significant role in these last five games, we will see Arsenal become more expansive due largely to the talent available and less because of a situational reckoning.
