Wenger’s New Tactics Represent a Revolution

So tell us how it is Arsene!
Reprtinted by permission of Untold Arsenal
By Tony Atwood
I think I might be getting too old for this football commentary lark, because it is only now that the magnitude of the Lord Wenger’s achievement is starting to hit me in the face. I should have had faith in what I saw at the Celtic game – but I got no further than, “I wonder if…”
Now after watching three home games in person I’m sure. This is one hell of a revolution that is going on.
4-3-3 is what it is all about. But 4-3-3 of the type Wenger is playing is in fact 4-3-3 Variation, ( which I shall call 4-3-3 V, first because it is shorter and second because I am pompous and the opportunity to name something myself is never one I throw away lightly).
But it is not just a simple change of format from the old 4-4-2: it is much more than that.
What I saw at the Ems yesterday was a three man forward line of Eboué on the right, Van Persie in the middle, and Eduardo on the left. I am not sure the rest of the world saw it that way – certainly the BBC commentators had Eboué playing midfield, but as I watched the game it just didn’t look like that at all.
What we had was the two wingers (Eboué and Eduardo) sticking to their channels like wingers from 50 years ago, and Van Persie holding the centre. Now when I first saw Van Persie put out to play the old “number 9″ position I thought it was just an oddity – like Rosicky playing centre forward at Barnet, pre-season.
This is the man who the Lord Wenger described as Bergkamp II and we know where Dennis scored from – about half way up the pitch.
But in fact what happens is that Van Persie slips back as the “wingers” move in from the sides to take up the more established centre forward positions. It sounds obvious when described (although not so obvious when one of the wingers is Eboué, in that you just don’t expect him to be there). Yet it is not that obvious to play against.
You go out onto the pitch as a defender to mark Bendtner and you find him playing on the wing – so you start tracking him back and forth, only to find the bugger has moved into the centre and Van Persie has dropped back. Most confusing.
Meanwhile all sorts of rotations are happening in the middle. The classic midfield that we have is, for me: Denilson, Cesc, Song.
That trio is something else again. Cesc can do everything, Song can tackle, track back, tackle, recover, and Denilson is the utter master of knowing how and where the ball will be as it bounces off a tackle into space.
So you have those three rotating as play moves, and the front three rotating as play moves.
Meanwhile the back four are now playing a different game. I’ve read all the stuff about Clichy being off form this season, and I was starting to get suckered into it, but I am not sure this is true. What the full backs are doing is far less of the overlap, tearing down the wings stuff, more of the traditional left and right back defending behind that rotating midfield of three.
Of course it is not like this all the time, and you can see examples of moments when the players slip back into their old systems – which is even more confusing for the opposition (and unfortunately occasionally difficult for us).
But what is so utterly remarkable is how fast the players have got the hang of this and are making it work, despite huge numbers of injuries. Yesterday (if you accept my analysis rather than the BBC’s) Eboué was a forward, and we had our 3rd choice keeper, no Denilson, no Theo, no Arshavin, no Vela, and only 50% Rosicky.
I am not saying they would all have played if fit, but there would have been some presence from that lot, and an even more exciting bench. As a defender if you are 3-0 down and Rosicky comes on, you probably don’t think too much about it, because you don’t remember too much about him.
But if Theo comes on, fresh and ready to tear into you, or Arshavin comes on… you’ll probably start looking at the clock.
So, if this is all so wonderful, and 4-3-3 V is such a staggering innovation, how come we lost twice in Manchester and had a dodgy start in Belgium? Especially when the system was working so well from the off?
I am going to stick out my neck a long way and say it was three things
- Freakishness – Diaby’s own goal against Manchester U was one of those bizarre things, like Dixon’s own goal against Coventry City where he beat Seaman from 40 yards out. It happens.
- Bad refereeing – even the most rabid anti-Arsenal hack agrees now that the tall geezer who used to play for us and wander around the pitch a bit, should have been sent off both for this attack on Cesc and his violent assault on Van Persie. If either decision had gone our way the result would have been different.
- Injuries – we are in our third year of continual injuries to key players, and I think the Lord Wenger is now planning for this with an ever maturing back up team. The reason must be the speed of the game – the faster you go, the harder it is on your body when you do a dead stop. But we are having to get the hang of this situation.
The answer to this is that you can excuse anything – and the fact is that as I write this two clubs have 100% records and are not suffering freakish events and dodgy refereeing (or if they are the refereeing is in their favour). That’s true.
Those two clubs also have huge amounts of money. But that does not mean that where they are today is where they will be tomorrow.
Manchester Arab are proclaiming that their future is to be built on a youth development system and the players they have got. Exactly as the KGB in Fulham have repeatedly said that their system is to be built on youth… and then look what happens. Suddenly even the corrupt and meandering UEFA and FIFA catch up with them.
Making changes takes time. The rich who steal the wealth of the poor are used to ordering change and seeing it happen – but it doesn’t happen in football. (Remember the kid who stayed at Charlton and refused to go to Chelsea because “no youth player at Chelsea ever makes it into the first team.”)
Three weeks ago the Guardian called the Chelsea youth development programme “as productive as a one-armed paperhanger in recent years”. Actually that article on 5th September about a Chelsea reserve game really is worth reading
There will be fits and starts but what we have with 4-3-3 V is a stunning development in football, not just because it confuses the opposition, but also because it is a decent way of overcoming rotational fouling (Wigan committed over 20 fouls to Arsenal’s six yesterday) and the “team bus” approach which we saw in Belgium after the fifth minute, and which Wigan looked to achieve before the first goal went in.
And this is what it has all been about. The four years of waiting have been waiting for the evolution of the new system, and the players to make it work.
I don’t think you get the full picture watching it on TV – although of course if I am right then in the coming weeks all journalists will be saying “as I have been predicting for some time…” as they ask for wider shots and chalkboards to show the rotation of the two groups of three players.
But believe me, sitting in the ground, it smashes you in the face. This is something utterly different. And I think it is going to work.
Tony Attwood is editor of Untold Arsenal
17 comments
Leave a reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.


I read Untold Arsenal (Tony’s blog) every day. I can tell you for sure that he is the biggest AKB I know (and I certainly don’t mean it in a bad way). He is at the complete opposite end of the spectrum to Myles. :) His articles are a decent read and I make it a point to visit his blog every day. I don’t agree with most of what he says but it is always good to know the opinion on the other side. :)
As for this article and the general system of play, after 4 years of evolution with the youth strategy and sticking to 4-4-2 / 4-5-1, a move to 4-3-3 does appear revolutionary. Especially in a year which Arsene claims is do or die (and most fans concur).
Personally, I have reached a stage where I simply do not care whether we are playing 4-4-3 or 0-5-5. I want us to play well and win. Win games and trophies. That’s it.
The trophies are nice and that’s about it for me as a fan. I’d like to know what a trophy means to a fan who is not really contributing(apart from cheering on) to the teams success. I don’t mean that in a bad way either.. I’d just like to know what a trophy means to a fan apart from bragging rights.
Sure I’d love one too but not at the cost of imbibing Mourinho’s 1-0 strategy. You would?
i totally agree LDE!! Trophies are good but to be honest just watching arsenal play great football is the BEST!
Personally I just assume that ppl like Fred Stag Mazza coem on here to get out their frustrations with the team that what they say is the very extreme end of how they feel but maybe that is a bad assumption…
i couldn’t believe someone could really feel so badly about the team…I mean its a golden age in Arsenals history people will look back on it as a time when we were always competing for titles with an exciting young team!
I do not think it will go on forever especially after AW is gone..
This is just great stuff!
How exactly do you contribute to the teams success as a fan, other than cheering them on?
Sending money to the team?
So, you like to watch the Arsenal play pretty football, and the trophies are nice, but not really important?!
Are you serious?
Absolutely ridiculous. The Golden Age of the club… that was when we had Patrick Vieira in the team. We played beautiful football AND won things. Is that not a good thing, to win?
It might be OK for you if we don’t win trophies for 5 years running, but when you are charging amongst the most money in the world in ticket prices to watch football, you owe your supporters.
Success in a 4-3-3 is not so much dependent on the movement of the up front players, but domination of the midfield. For Barca, Messi was constantly tracking back into midfield to support. When you have technically and tactically gifted players like Xavi and Iniesta, along with stable support from Ya Ya – it makes it easy for Henry and Eto’o to exploit space
AND
the outside backs time to attack down the wings.
Now for Arsenal:
Arshavin (if he ever gets fit) can be the same catalyst of support as Messi.
When Cesc is working hard, he is on par with Xavi or Iniesta. Neither Denilson nor Diaby have the talent level needed in midfield. If one is inserted and we are successful, its only because Cesc, Song, or Arshavin has carried the water.
A healthy Rosicky and Nasri have the skill sets to make this system work. Young players like Ramsey, Wilshere, and Merida have the skill and understanding – only need time to build strength and stamina.
When it comes to attack, RvP and Eduardo are different style attackers from Henry and Ibrahimovic. They may not have the power and speed as the Barca strikers, but I think these two Arsenal players are more dangerous over the entire match.
How effective would Arsenal be if Song and Vermaelen could not play? I don’t want to watch. Lets hope that AW realizes the need for bolstering these positions in the January transfer window.
RVP and Eduardo. I like them. But they are more dangerous than Henry and Ibrah?
Ummm, in their own bathroom maybe, but not on a football pitch. Sorry!
To me, the KEYS to make the 433 works are:
(1) MOVEMENT up front, especially between the front 3.
The whole point of 433 is to have a more flexible and unpredictable attacking movement. If players do not run more (off the ball), it would become a paper formation.
(2) PRESSING up high.
With our wide players too high up field to protect the full backs, it’s crucial to win the ball back up high, or at least to deny opposition time for playing their way out of their defence.
So far, we have done that. But not CONSISTENTLY enough. And the front 3 still lack of a bit of understanding between them.
At times, they appeared “isolated” from each other.
Sometimes I think the so-called “intelligent discussion” were overrated.
But this is definitely a piece of intelligent article. some of the author’s insight were original. Certainly not something we read on the net from people over and over again. And most importantly, when comes to formation, it’s difficult for the TV viewer to get a clear picture of it watching on TV. I remeber in a few incidents last season, some of the regulars were rubbishing AW playing a 451 yet in fact the actual formation AW played on that particular day was 442.
And when comes to players’ movement, especially off the ball, it’s even more so difficult to watch it on TV.
So it’s nice to have someone who offers us some insight with his personal experience watching the game in the stadium.
Revolution??? LOL!
We bloody COPIED Barcelona. And we only copied it because they won the treble … not because of some other technical study.
Why, even a random fan like me was asking for 4-3-3 back in 2005 when we had Reyes, Henry, Pires, Fabregas, Vieira, Edu and Gilberto! We were already playing the Ajax, Barcelona way so it was only natural for us to move to 4-3-3. It would have greatly helped Henry and Vieira back then and helped us keep Edu and blood in Fabregas.
All those players were PERFECT for 4-3-3. Henry would have been the Johan Cruyff of the formation. We could have cracked Europe like that instead of selling all our silverware and relying solely on Fabregas in a 4-4-2.
Now that the horse has bolted a great distance out of the farm Wenger is now BELATEDLY using the formation (but with the big man, who can head the ball crossing for the one-legged dude who cant).
That is a lot of things, but revolutionary it is not.
—————————————–
PS: “…and Denilson is the utter master of knowing how and where the ball will be as it bounces off a tackle into space.”
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaahhahahahah !!!
Oh dear God!
Mazza how jaded can you possibly be?
I am definitely jaded.
I cant speak for Mazza though. ;-)
I think it’s pretty safe to say that Denilson is the master of nothing. Painting him as perfect for the system seems to be a bit of a stretch.
We’ve just basically copied Barcelona.
Dag – Excellent article to post.
LDE – Nice added points.
That’s a nice piece DAG. I never got around to writing the fluid 4-3-3 myself so maybe I’ll just comment here.
I think our new formation can be summed up in 3 or 4 main points. As in those are the major changes. Here is what I think:
— The role of Arshavin and Bendtner. This for me is the most crucial piece of the jigsaw. If this clicks it all falls into place. It means a lot of hard hard running when you do not have the ball. It means a closing down space between the touchline and the inside left/right channels in the opposition half. This is something that both attackers have done a lot.
Now offensively it means that both will cut in a lot, leaving more space for the full backs to run into.. more than in a traditional 4-4-2. Its also another reason why Clichy and Sagna have been caught upfield more, they have been told to attack more specially when they see the attacker on their flank infield and 30 yards from goal.
The other reason why RVP isn’t on the wing and NB as a CF is probably twofold. RVP while more dynamic cutting in as for Holland is not going to run around as much as NB nor is he as quick(both slowish but NB edges it) nor is he going to be seen defending like crazy. Wouldn’t want him doing it either – he is too injury prone. The other advantage with NB on the wings is the ability to play long diagonals against shorter full backs. We don’t do that too often I know, but NB can do that as well. All the other creative players in that role are all very hardworking – Nasri, Rosicky, Theo, Eboue(yes) .. they all will track back. And that’s why AW wanted Chamakh.. that position if successful is what will define our season.
— The other key area is Central Midfield. There was a lot of fluidity in all our games with everyone attacking and defending a lot. Denilson added a lot of purpose to his steady game and Song too ventured forward a lot more. The key to a 3 man midfield is not one man sitting and doing a Mascherano, that renders the formation useless. It needs three ball players who can defend adequately.. but it needs..it NEEDS all 3 to defend. The amount of space is much more again.. but it involves more running off the ball..again. I’d be specifically interested in the amount our midfield runs this year if we stick to this formation. Cesc is a little off form again but as long as we win, I’m not too worried.. he too is a big game player.
— The last bit is the defensive midfield.I already mentioned the amount they run. Its also important that they are positionally aware of where the full backs are. If the LB has bombed forward then Denilson/Song/Nasri/Rosicky/ must cover that space. Not necessarily play LB but watch for balls played in that space and track opposition runners as well. Same holds true for RB as well. The Centre of midfield while key is actually not as important because you will have tons of players there anyway.. its the wings that will define our season.. offensively AND defensively… NOT CM.. you can quote me on that.
All in all I’d like to say ..that while 4-3-3 V is NOT an innovation, its a system which is an attacking upgrade to the 4-5-1 last season with two DM’s. It is also the system which suits AFC the best and needs its second strikers to all keep fit.
Its extremely flexible really and can be best explained by thinking of zonal marking. Its most referred to at corners.. but think of zonal football all over the pitch.. total football if you will(cliched) where the ball is received by the player in space , not by a specific player in a specific rigid system and you’ll understand if you haven’t already.
p.s… Of Course some will just say we copied/aped/plagarized Barca’s system. If it were really that easy we’d have multiple world champions everywhere.
“Course some will just say we copied/aped/plagarized Barca’s system. If it were really that easy we’d have multiple world champions everywhere.”
Yes, if it was that easy to win the TREBLE using the 4-3-3 then we would have multiple champions everywhere using that formation.
It is, however, relatively easy to win 3 out of your first five games with it, and lose two out of your first five.
We haven’t done nothing yet, is the point I’m making, and this why I struggle to take articles like this seriously when it eulogises over the qualities over players like Denilson in such a system.
As a general discussion point though, and about no particular team, it’s interesting enough. I still think football is 90% players, 10 % systems.
Well fair enough Mazza. And yes it is players that make a system work.. if it were about systems all the while everyone would always win. I remember Sven Erikson when he took charge of Man City play that attacking formation with Elano roaming everywhere. When asked why he never played that with England.. he just said..”I didn’t ever have a player like Elano there”.. which really is true. It is only if you have certain players, can you play a system and be successful at it. Not everyone can play the Arsenal way and make it look as good. It isn’t easy really..
Point also taken that 5 games is too short.. it means nothing. I’m just saying , it does indeed have much more potential than a traditional 2 striker approach… specially if Arsenal play it.