Arteta’s Arsenal are TOP — here’s how

Welcome back to the Different Knock. I've recently noticed a trend regarding Arsenal content online, and I wonder if you have too. Last season, though I think there's a whole other video on how I think we're slightly over-indexing it, Arsenal had a flying start. So, creators, myself included, responded, video after video, article after article, asking the question, how are they doing it? Tactical breakdowns came thick and fast, owing to the renewed interest in Arsenal from that angle, and also because they had, relatively speaking, a pretty steady game model. The same, pretty settled XI, consistently picking up points with, once you saw it, a pretty clear idea. A man-for-man press, 3-2 build-up, force teams long, win it back, play through the thirds, wide triangles, sack of sticks in the top corner, down to the pub. And that consistency made for very understandable football, and therefore understandable analysis, that could be done by outsiders, as well as Arsenal fans, pundits, analysts and creators, hence, there was a lot of it. But this season, I don't see the same level of coverage. Partly because maybe Arsenal's scene is more boring, partly the newness of Arsenal's title charge has worn off, but also, I think, partly because the changes aren't as obvious now, as an inverted full-back, white going to right-back or Xhaka's role changing, but there have been a lot of changes. I think, right now, Arsenal have their most interesting, intricate and, crucially, most adaptable game model we've ever had under Mikel Arteta. But that makes it very hard to pin down. However, I'm gonna try. I'm gonna try and explain Arsenal's game model for 23-24, as I've seen it so far. There will be a lot of subjectivity to this, and it's obviously my perspective of how we play, which isn't right or wrong, it's just what I see, and I'm sure I'm gonna make some errors, which I'm happy to be corrected about down below. Ultimately, a lot of football is subjective about what you see, but I'll try and be clear and give as many examples as I can. It will also, inevitably, be out of date within two weeks. I never claim to be an expert, I'm only a fan, but I've not missed an Arsenal game, either live or on a rewatch since 2019, and certainly have watched every single 90 under Arteta. There will also be levels to this that I don't know about and probably couldn't even comprehend if I did. Arteta hasn't exactly sat me down and explained this to me, so forgive me if I get something wrong. I'm gonna divide it into three categories, with a maximum of three points per category. From game to game, there are things that almost never change, things that sometimes change, things that usually change. I'm only gonna be dealing with in-possession in this video. Out-of-possession will be in another video, because otherwise this will be two hours long, my editor will kill me. There's other game states, of course, like set-pieces, transitions, and so on, but I think in-and-out-of-possession are the most pertinent ones. Okay, here we go. Things that almost never change in possession. Just so I've covered all bases, Arteta plays with, broadly, two wingers, two eights, one nine, two centre-backs, a DM, and two full-backs. And a goalkeeper, obviously. All of whom have different roles and responsibilities in the first, middle, and final third, dependent on game states. Then, he has, number one, touchline players in the final third, usually the wingers. I'm sure someone's going to find the three minutes in a pre-season friendly when we didn't do this, but I would say something that almost never changes is Arteta's desire to play with two opposite wide players in the final third. I say wide players, because although these are usually the wingers, for example, the other night against PSV, Cedric was asked to remain wide as the fifth attacker, which we'll come to as well. The principle behind this is pretty simple. Keep two players on either touchline while you're in possession, looking to break teams down in the final third, in order to stretch teams. Without natural width, you collapse teams in and it's harder to find space inside, so you need to stretch them horizontally as well as vertically. There's moments, of course, in a game where we don't have width, but this is a pretty standard principle in possession that the majority, though not all, modern managers use. For example, you could use a striker pairing and then pull your full-back up, depending on the style of play. Number two, the full-back coming in and out of midfield in build-up. This, however, is something not a lot of managers can do, especially not at the top level, because it requires someone who can be a full-back out of possession, but is also comfortable receiving centrally, and also requires terrific centre-backs who can cover for the man disadvantaged at the back. Hence, we didn't see it until we had Zinchenko, Saliba and Gabriel. Generally, the principle is to create a dilemma for the opposition winger. Do I go inside to cover the man, then creating space for the centre-back to carry and the left winger to drop and create an overload on my full-back, or do I stay out wide and allow them to connect centrally and create overloads in there? However, as we discussed in this video, teams can counteract it by changing their structure. I want to stress again, this is something that happens on and off over the course of a game. It isn't a permanent fixture. The point is the option remains the same game to game, assuming Zinchenko's fit, and even sometimes when he's not. My sense is it's largely up to Zinchenko's game IQ, whether he drops inside or pulls out wide. I think this would remain the same without Zinchenko if we had Yuri Intimba. Number three, desire to dominate the game. This is more about the attitude towards the game, but I do think it's important to stress. I think Arteta wants to have the ball more than the opponent, as, simply put, it's the best way of stopping them having chances and creating more yourself. However, I don't think it's quite as simple as that. I thought this quote the other day was fascinating. Arteta said, More than control, I want dominance. Dominance in the right area and not allowing the opponent to breathe. This is what we do. Control in certain areas of the pitch, I'm not interested at all in that, because we can get in trouble by trying to do that. We want to dominate, we want to be a threat, and we want the opponent to feel under pressure at all times. It made me think about the difference between control and domination. Domination might not look like controlling possession, which feels counterintuitive. For example, against Manchester United, Arsenal sat off with a low PPDA and let United play long ball to try and get it back off them, probably to stop them doing their best work, which is on the transition. It's about deciding what zones you want to dominate and where you want to have control of the football, not necessarily just the desire to do that overall and having 100 touches in your own half. Next, things that sometimes change in possession. Number one, five lanes of attack. Generally, Arsenal play with five lanes of attack. Those five are the winger, the eight, the striker, the other eight, and the winger. However, there are times when that does change. Dependent on game state, dependent on opposition, we have seen six lanes of attack. For example, against Bournemouth last season. It's a pretty gung-ho approach, but it can and does change at times. We crush the box in a slightly different way at that point, but usually one of the full backs is the one who goes on the overlap to create the sixth line. I'm not suggesting they all stand there in a line as a six and wait for the ball, but sometimes to create that extra threat out or inside, there's another player added to the five when appropriate. I can't say I love it personally. It feels a bit heavy duty, but it's there when you need it. Number two, build up shape. Normally, Arsenal build in a three-two in possession, which I like and offers many, many benefits, but this season there's been a lot of variation. Sometimes we see almost a four-two with Zinchenko and White wide. Sometimes we've seen Raya come in as a sort of auxiliary centre back when we're building a bit deeper. Sometimes Erdgaard is dropping in as a single pivot. Against Wolves, we saw us building a much more of a two-three, which I believe was with the desire to pull Wolves wide in the midfield as they didn't have their best midfielders available. It changes around quite a bit, but the reason I didn't put this in the usually changes category is broadly over the last 18 months, we have been building in a three-two. I think it's Arteta's favoured shape from what I can tell, and it makes sense. As in your three-two, you have defensive security, space to carry, favourable angles to bounce off in the midfield, space for your wingers to pull in and out of. You have enough players occupying others further up the field, opportunities to create overloads all over, so much more. It also changes within the game, but if you had to pick one, you would say Arsenal build in a three-two with Saliba as a central centre back. Number three, where and how we build up. This is slightly harder to define, but it's just something I've sensed from watching hours and hours of Arsenal. I think, generally, Arsenal prefer going to the right as their first action. I think it's partly down to having three right footers in Saliba, White and Raya behind the ball, partly because Saka is one of the most reliable wide receivers in world football, and I also think Rice is a bit of a right-sided passing bias, though his left foot is massively underrated. However, this does occasionally change, dependent on where the opposition are standing and where the spaces are. For example, against Wolves we went down the right a lot, where against Luton we were a lot more balanced. I think there's a temptation to say it's entirely random or entirely pre-planned, but of course, neither are true. There's the idea, I think Arsenal generally prefer the right, but also it depends on the game state and what the opposition are doing to you. I would say it's rare that we're pushed to the left. Arsenal like, generally, to build up with two to three touches per player on the ground, trying to work through the thirds with a great degree of patience. You can see that from this brilliant chart from Opta Analyst that says we're both the third slowest to move through the thirds in the league, and have the third most passes per possession in the league. Arsenal move with a degree of caution, though not as cautious as Man City, and we can change it up occasionally, playing more on the transition when there's more space in the Champions League, for example. Mikel generally doesn't like to play on the counter, though he has made use of it. Finally, things that usually change in possession. Number one, personnel. Pretty simple, personnel changes. Injuries, suspensions, loss of form, the players are changing a lot more than they used to, especially in the midfield, and you can't always guess the XI in the way you used to be able to. For me, this is part of a wider cultural shift in football anyway. Mikel gave this brilliant answer in a Q&A a few years back about how football is becoming more and more specific, and players' roles are becoming more refined. For me, certain players like Saka, for example, suit all game states, but there are games where you need differences elsewhere. In a tight match against a low block where you don't expect to be able to open up space, I think Trossard is your perfect left eight, but in a more transitional game where you need to find a target or believe space can be created, Havertz would be your perfect left eight. It just depends. We saw it with Kivijor against Luton. Mikel believed he was the right stylistic choice for that night, even though Zinchenko was available for the game plan that he wanted. I don't think it worked, but it's an example of that. Some consistency, some changes. Fans and pundits are keen to say who's their left eight, who's the long-term right back, left back, but I honestly think there will just be positions in Mikel's football that are always up for debate and picked dependent on the game. For example, tell me who Man City's starting back five are. Ederson, Diaz, Ben, whoever. It's a new way of thinking that I don't think has quite settled in mainstream punditry. Number two, positions and how we attack. And of course, you see the players moving around, they don't all stay in the same position. Erdogan dropping deep, Havertz rotating out wide, Saka coming inside, Zinchenko inside, White on the overlap. Games require different things from moment to moment. I think it's really important for Arteta that the players find freedom within structure, but also that everyone understands that it's not just a free-for-all. If Saka goes inside, because that's where the space feels like it is, Jesus needs to pick up the slack elsewhere. Rice might need to step forward into a pocket, it's just what the game might need. The principles of positional play, brilliantly explained by Tifo here if you're unfamiliar, are aimed at creating that kind of one-brain football that we love. Look at the wolves. Zinchenko doesn't even look up, he knows exactly where Erdogan is going to be because while Zinchenko had the positional freedom to overlap, he also knew the structure would remain in place and there's always someone crushing the box. And with the differences in personnel, the way we attack from game to game changes. Maybe today without White, we have Tomi Asu inside for a wall pass to Saka rather than the overlap to create space. Maybe next week we've gone for Havertz at nine, so we're looking for flick-ons and to play it long a bit more. Maybe the week after we have Trostler at left wing who wants to come inside, so we need someone to hold width there and we pepper them from the edge of the box. The personnel and their strengths in the end define how we attack. So there you go. I'm sure there's things I've missed, but for the sake of Finn, my editor, I'm going to leave it there. Stay tuned for part two at some point, the out of possession stuff, and let me know your thoughts in the comments. I want to finish though with this. For a fan like me with no coaching background to be clear on what's happening, at least for myself, simply from watching Arteta's games, is a testament to the way he's set up his teams. I could watch 10 Hugs United for another 18 months and I still couldn't tell you what he's trying to do. I've not in any way coloured in the detail of, for example, how our build-up actually functions, creating mini-overloads, the detail on the pass, pass selection, movement, so much more, but hopefully I've given a good overview. It's probably worth reminding everyone, Arteta is still in his first professional job. I've been a bit critical over the past few weeks of a few things he's done, including his lack of inclusion of young players against PSV, but this is a remarkable guy doing a remarkable job. The big picture is always more important. And Arteta has us in an amazing position.