Arsenal's season ended not so much with a whimper as a demonstration of the team's unpredictability. Like a marching band suddenly losing step and dropping half of its instruments, points were carelessly thrown away against Liverpool, West Ham and Southampton in April before the crunch match at the Etihad Stadium proved that they were definitely second-best to Manchester City. This was followed by title-worthy wins against Chelsea and Newcastle United before the team appeared to give up hope at home to Brighton and away at Nottingham Forest. The closing day's thumping victory over an obliging Wolves side reminded us of the potential, but meant little outside of the positive vibes that had been present all season. However, that "connection", as Mikel Arteta described it, is perhaps the most valuable outcome of the season. Qualification for the Champions League is important in both sporting and financial terms, but ultimately Arteta's project will depend on the fans' patience and so far they have concurred in his belief that the squad is another season or two away from lifting a major trophy.
I said at the two-thirds point of the season that Arsenal could win the league if they finished on 90 points and City dropped a few. In the event, they won the title on 89 points versus the Gunner's 84, and didn't drop any points until after the title was secured. In other words, Arsenal's relative failure was due to those 6 dropped points in April and I can't have been the only fan who thought that the jig was up before we travelled to play City. The popular narrative is that the squad was found wanting when injuries hit, notably when the loss of both William Saliba and Takehiro Tomiyasu left a hole in the defence. There's some truth in that - the squad clearly needs more quality in depth, though it should be noted that adding Jorginho and Leandro Trossard was a clear step to address that deficiency - but it's also true that those 6 dropped points were due to the team losing control of games needlessly, rather than a tired team being battered on the ropes by its opponents.
Divided into thirds, Arsenal gained 31 points over the first 12 games, 29 over the next 13 and 24 over the final 13. That looks like a decline, but that final third saw the highest goals scored - the sequence was 30, 26 and 32 - the problem was that it also saw the most conceded - the sequence being 11, 12 and 20. Of that increase in goals conceded, 7 came in that run of three draws in April. The disruption to the defence clearly played a part in that, but perhaps the bigger issue was the way that the team failed to keep a chokehold on the two away games, at Anfield and the London Stadium, which ultimately was a reflection on the midfield and its recurrent tendency to give the ball away cheaply rather than the defence. With Granit Xhaka almost certain to move on, Thomas Partey looking inconsistent and Oleksandr Zinchenko being injury prone you can understand the targeting of Declan Rice. Personally, I think the squad needs two fresh central midfielders as Jorginho isn't going to play 45+ games.
For all the plaudits earned by Saliba and Gabriel Magalhaes, perhaps the greatest success in defence this season has been Aaron Ramsdale, who not only silenced his critics but has been central to that sense of connection between players and fans. The conundrum in defence is less about how many centre-backs we need to stockpile, though clearly Rob Holding's deficiencies in playing out from the back mean he's no longer the future so another incoming is likely, but what sort of full-backs we need. The inverted role of Zinchenko, which Arteta also tried to emulate using Partey at the tail-end of the season, has provided another dimension to the team, but that in turn has left Kieran Tierney looking out of place. Do we keep him for variety or look for a like-for-like backup to the Ukrainian? Whatever happens, it's doubtful that the agent of chaos known as Nuno Tavares will reappear in Arsenal colours again. Likewise, is the plan to revert to using Ben White as a full-back, in which role he excelled both defensively and offensively, or will Tomiyasu be preferred as a defender happy to move into the middle of the backline when the left-back moves into midfield?
In attack, Arsenal managed to score 88 goals, which was only 6 fewer than Manchester City. This was done by spreading the load, rather than relying on a machine in the mould of Erling Haaland, who got 36 in 35 games, with Gabriel Martinelli, Bukayo Saka and Martin Ødegaard each scoring 14 or 15. Jesus managed 11 in a curtailed campaign and Trossard looks like he can get into double figures too. Perhaps the biggest surprise was Granit Xhaka, who got 7 in the league and 9 in all competitions. As the obvious deputy for Jesus, Eddie Nketiah scored 4 in the league and 9 overall, despite severely limited playing time. The problem is that while title-winning teams usually have strong goal contributions from midfielders and wide players, they also tend to have a standout goal scorer. When Arsenal last won the league in 2004, Thierry Henry banged in 30 and Robert Pires, the next highest scorer in the team, got 14. With Haaland going nowhere and Harry Kane probably going somewhere, the day of the goal-a-game player is clearly not over.
The club has more pressing matters on the transfer front, but I can't help suspecting that a top-drawer striker will become the priority in a year or two. Nketiah isn't quite at that level, though he's been a profilific scorer in his career to date, and nor is Folarin Balogun, despite his impressive numbers on loan at Reims. Bear in mind that Alexandre Lacazette just scored 27 over the Ligue 1 season, compared to Balogun's 20, and he never scored more than 14 in the Premier League and in his last season at Arsenal managed only 4. I'd love to be proved wrong, but I suspect Nketiah will find his level as a striker for a mid-table team. I actually really like him as a player, in terms of his style and opportunism - he reminds me of Emilio Butragueño (who incidentally never scored more than 19 in a La Liga season and usually got half that) - I just don't think he's going to be a 30 goals a season striker. Of course, Arteta may (and not for the first time) prove me wrong. If we can get 4 players scoring 15 goals in the league a season then the title would look more likely than not.
In terms of highlights, the fightback against Bournemouth is obviously up there, though the actual significance was the evidence of sloppy concessions creeping into our game rather than the emergence of Reiss Nelson from his chrysalis. Bukayo Saka's reliability was never in doubt, but the maturity of the 21 year-old remains startling. If I were a betting man I'd have a crafty fiver on him being the first black manager of England. It was also pleasing to see the way that Martin Ødegaard embraced the captaincy without it negatively affecting his game. Indeed, his determination to play outrageous balls on the pitch while presenting as a level-headed, emotionally-literate adult beyond his years off it was exemplary (compare and contrast with Granit Xhaka's short-lived tenure). But perhaps this misses the point. To return to the opening of this post, what will probably last longest in the memory is the sense of connection between the players and the fans.
After what felt like a decade of growing alienation during Wenger's later years, and even at points early in Arteta's reign, there was clearly a collective decision for fans to get behind the team during the 2021-22 season, particularly once young talent like Saka and Emile Smith Rowe was pushed to the fore, and the success (relative) of the season just gone can, I think, be put down to that as much as the tactical tweaks of the manager and the transfer nous of Edu, the sporting director. It has also been noticeable how Josh Kroenke taking a more public role, and his father Stan wisely staying in the background, has improved relations all round. From the promotion of the women's team through the return of Jack Wilshere to the redecoration of the outside of the Emirates Stadium, there has been a real sense of Arsenal rediscovering itself as a club, rather than a marketing opportunity.
I was at the London Stadium, supporting the home team. I wouldn't say Arsenal were careless, but it was curious the way the game switched: Arsenal dominant and impressive for the first 30 minutes or so, with West Ham timorously reluctant to try to play through midfield and the home crowd audibly unhappy at the sheer negativity of the tactics. My reading was that the West Ham players collectively decided to ignore instructions and just start taking players on. It seemed like Arsenal were so surprised at this volte-face that they lost their poise for the time it took for West Ham to get two back. After that it could have gone either way. But I thought that if West Ham had started equally positively then Arsenal, a better team and in better form, would have got the measure of the opposition and won. I'd be interested to know your perspective on what changed in the middle of that match.
ReplyDeleteWell, the two penalties obviously changed the game and we'd surely have won if we'd converted ours, making it 3-1. Bowen's equaliser had a bit of good fortune to it, but it also looked like Arsenal's concentration dipped for a few, crucial minutes.
Delete