It’s so Jover
How Arsenal abandoning their dead-ball strength led to their first home loss of the season
So I wouldn’t normally write one of these, as honestly a match-specific set-piece wrap-up is 1) a bit boring and 2) mostly useless given how our focus on these in the longer term (maybe not score today, maybe score 3 next time — see here). Thursday night however has kickstarted a bit of a meltdown in terms of our finishing and general ability to do ~the whole goals thing~. A lot of this meltdown has looked at the in-play disaster that took place (fair), but personally there’s a real argument that our unusually tame work in dead-balls strongly amplified this problem. Naturally, being a set-piece sicko, I’m going break it down for you.
Logic
When you’re faced with a stubborn block, as Arsenal have done and will continue to do, the focus is on either lock-picking or battering-ramming. The logic of the 90 then went that we (Ødegaard) tried lockpicking the entire time in absence of a forward-line battering ram (Havertz), using very careful jinks and connective players like Jesus, Saka, and White to worm an opportunity rather than “just get it in there lads” — which we tried like once with ESR crashing backpost tamely. What was annoying though is that we do very much have a battering ram option which we turned to nonstop for about ~3 months: corners and set-pieces. What was more annoying than that was how the team collectively did not take advantage of this option despite being given at least 10 opportunities to do so — 10 corners and 2 free-kicks in fact, generating a grand total of 0.57xG per fotmob.
The value of dead-ball situations is doubled in games like this, with an opponent deadset on stifling the other at all costs, also buoyed by the late Christmas gift of an early goal. With open-play shots and chances a fairly gross challenge with 6+ opposition players in the box at most times, corners operate as an efficient way to generate close-to-goal, or closer-to-goal, shots; If not, then there is at very least a period of reorganisation as opposition reset following a clearance or whatever non-ending action happens.
I’ve said before that I really love that Eddie Nketiah first goal vs Man Utd last season at the Emirates: facing a staunch defensive unit, we use the weird post-corner phase to establish control in a way we like, and in turn generate a chance that otherwise is simply not happening in open play. This West Ham game was crying for something like this to help us through the well-oiled Moyes Machine — and the worst thing is that we’re even better at corners/set-pieces this year! So why the fuck didn’t we do it again?
Corners — Attack
Starting with what annoys me most, the LHS corners were diabolical, and a lot of this was to do with the change of taker. Leandro Trossard took over from Gabriel Martinelli as designated inswinger, and neither of Sleepy Leo’s corners beat the first man, nor approached the first man with any danger of reaching the goalkeeper. This is bad! I’ve noted previously that looking at delivery quality limits the analysis as its basically only judging a kick rather than a routine, so I’ll leave it at that, but I will consider how this role swap impacted the rest of our routine.
Martinelli, now relieved, is just… inserted between all the beef in the front post-clog that we often choose to induce? Not only this but he starts there, which I find baffling.
What worked well vs WHU in The Bobbins was how their fairly uniform front post zonal block was quite permeable by runners from deep — Kai and Eddie both had serious joy here.
Their set-up here isn’t much different either (admittedly from a different side, but I think the spacing considerations are still valid): Lots of free men front-post for them, space for free players back-post for us. We have Ben White on firm GK duty again, but WHU don’t give him a marker as before, leaving an extra man than most teams do to track our runners— Gab, Wilo, Rice. Where before we would have a tail backpost, we now have Nelli central on Ogbonna because…? I’m lost here. He ends goal side of Ogbonna just shy of the front post, which means perhaps we are looking for an easy nod in here, but I would much rather Jesus in this zone and Martinelli sprinting back-post for the flick-on — and I would rather not have a player in the clog doing essentially nothing. Not forcing their players forward, not challenging for the ball, just hangin’ out and making our runners have to work harder to get through it all.
His role is similar on the second corner, with the team tucking tight front post leaving Jesus as the only attacking player within the posts this time (White does not count). Again, even despite Trossard’s “deliveries” disguising what we perhaps ideally wanted to happen, I do not like this, and think Martinelli should be a bit more movement-based given he’s not 6ft4 nor blessed with an incredible leap as far as I can remember.
Looking then at the somehow more wasteful LHS (8 corners), this was Saka and Ødegaard’s domain— and honestly this wasn’t that bad. This side had much better deliveries, and much nicer ideas, but still problems remained from before where West Ham prepared mostly quite well for our front-post, and we mostly neglected the back.
The main positive in the second half was the return of the goalline run which we’d neglected before. This change came about with Rice basically holding White’s hand by the GK, which then allowed him to shake the WHU markers who weren’t willing to break Fabianski’s path to the potential claim (they have this same forcefield above too). He can then swoop round the left-side of the markers and as a result we had a lot more success in causing front-post problems — whether in winning or in causing a potential second ball. Part of this was because our runners were slightly more infield than first half, and West Ham also had far less of an aggressive front-post position which helped. Lots of micro-changes, but it gave us more opportunity to do something with the balls in, and Jover should be praised for this change; albeit within a still very near-post-focused routine.
Another big positive, this time from the first half, was our use of the short corner to create a half-space cross for Zinchenko, with the ensuing header narrowly missed by White. I’m a bit annoyed that despite the volume of opportunity, we didn’t try this at all again. Saka and Trossard on the RHS playing to an open Ødegaard crossing to our resident duel monsters awaiting at the back-post? That sounds like cash money to me. Or tinnitus. Either way, a huge waste given how we struggled to generate this kind of space naturally.
A little (large) nitpick with these is that we need to improve on our second balls on the edge. Reiss, Sleepy Leo, and ESR all had snapshot opportunites and all were tame and/or shit, despite them likely being our clearest shots of the game, even with all the angry WHU bodies flying at them. Our method creates a lot of edge space and a lot of defender bodies congregated outside of the goal-posts (see the screenshot at 74:04 above), so to be wasting these as aggressively as we did is poor. I’m beginning to worry Nelson’s goal vs Bournemouth truly was a one-off for him (both in corner result, and in impact for the club).
Overall our corners didn’t really reflect what we’re known for: innovating using our profiles. We returned to tried and tested formulae and didn’t utilise the space afforded to us far-post, and the only time we went truly different (Zinchenko), we nearly score. A difficult evening, but we did not make it any easier for ourselves, especially vs a side which has conceded 4 and 6.66 xG from corners in the league this season (per Understat).
Corners — Defence
This will be a bunch shorter, focusing on one at 0–1 and the other to make it 0–2.
Their first corner, whilst we ‘defend’ it well, should create worries about the other possibilities it generated, and Arsenal fans will be overjoyed (and perhaps unsurprised) to learn that some of it is Zinchenko’s fault. WHU run the Southgate lovetrain, and split off to cause their markers problems. Rice tracks his well and limits Mavropanos to basically nothing (partially delivery-based admittedly) — Nice! Zinchenko’s man is therefore either Ogbonna or Emerson in this scenario, one would assume, with the likelier scenario that Ogbonna is Saliba’s, and Emerson is the responsibility of Zinchenko — Saka is looking more at Benrahma on the edge, given how he reacts at the end of the corner, and comparing to Trossard’s position for the edge case above too.
Look at this next screenshot and tell me which 2 players look to be having the most joy. The diagonal line we have to clear the ball gives Emerson a clear run in behind for a knock-on without the fear of offside, and Ogbonna is free as a bird in the middle for a header should he be so lucky. This is a general uh-oh, and this penalty spot region for corners vs us is one that Tifo and JJ Bull have talked about very nicely here. Thankfully Raya doesn’t come this time unlike Luton though, so good job Davey Ray(?).
Their goal is a mix of great dummy work from WHU, and worried defending from us. They sit 2 notorious Big Boys to battle in front of Raya, preventing proactive collection, and also entice Jesus to sit tighter to our goal to stop the inswinger onto them. This opens up a channel for Mavropanos who is, once again, free as a bird to attack the ball.
Lets just check who was sat with Mavropanos pre-corner:
Ah.
Like with our corners, this felt like poor individual role selection. In my opinion, Zinchenko is ass at defending corners — he’s slow off the mark and only really attempts headers on his terms, hence his high aerial % —so giving him a threat to defend is #NotSmart. It’s a great header mind you, and a great tactic, but man this is another bad look for our defensive team.
Side note: it may be that Mavropanos is Martinelli’s man as they are both caught in the same moment on Álvarez, but the point remains that this is still not an ideal fit for either.
That’s now 15 shots and 4 goals conceded from 46 corners against: 8.7% of corners against us result in a goal, and these account for 22% of our PL goals conceded.
🙂
I have nothing to add here for solutions just yet, but this is a worrying trend we need to shift.
Free kicks — Attacking
We won’t look at defensive FKs, or even most FKs in this match (you’re welcome), just the 2 we had in attack third.
MAN these were so bad.
To ramp up to my full anger, the Reiss Nelson cross-cum-shot-cum-???? is SUCH a waste of position and profiles. If we go low on the floor, we have 2 on the edge to approach and strike, or Ødegaard to probably do something insane given his performance here (though I don’t actually think this is a wise choice). If we go wider back-post, we have our set-piece gods. WHY boot it this hard when this close? I get the logic of “if this gets a touch its in!”, but we are 2 down in this moment and need something. By blasting high, you eliminate a second ball entirely which is what we’re primed for here. A shame, to say the least.
But Trossard’s attempt is baffling. Absolutely baffling. We have a 3v2 back-post. We scored a front-post danger-zone header vs notorious giants LFC last week which is now vacated as WHU have to build a sturdy wall and deal with a lurking Gabby J. This is also only the second shooting range free-kick we’ve had all season by my count (Rice vs Villa first). To ignore the freedom of an unchallenged shot/cross in a game as clogged as this, for something that looked like it belonged in an Arsenal Soccer Schools drill? Hapless. For a side that had 30 crosses on the day, one more here wouldn’t have hurt given the freedom afforded to our in-box players — just look at the space for Gabriel.
Side note: There is a growing tendency under Jover for our first FK of the game to be dumb and arrogant — see Ødegaard’s scoop flick to Martinelli vs Man Utd H — and this was another weird case. I am currently unsure why, especially given how few central free-kicks we earn, but boy are they infuriating.
I do hope this position for FKs become more common with GJ back and ‘fixed’, as it’s something City and Liverpool reliably rack-up (more than us anyway). We don’t particularly have a final 3rd FK taker as it stands, so it would be nice for a player to establish themselves as that going forward in order to make ourselves feel like a threat in these positions — Ødegaard has scored our most recent direct FK, away at Burnley in 2021, so likely him. This would add the benefit of teams being more scared of us scoring as WHU weirdly were here, creating more space for crosses/other plays in turn — isn’t that nice! This dimension isn’t something you tend to think about, nor has been needed so far this season, but is certainly something we need to add to our… arsenal 😏
More on our FKs at a later date however.
Penalty
Nothing special here, just a bit of love for David Raya. He had another good game after a string of good games, and deserved a moment for it. It’s a shame most fans were on their way out with fears of last trains and a third goal on their mind (me included, thank you Amazon 8:15 KOs and nationally underfunded train networks).
Conclusion
This was a rough game, and one which we made rougher by minimising a true strength of ours. I have no doubt Kai Havertz would have made an incredible difference here, freeing up Martinelli and shifted Gabriel Jesus for a more fitting role too, but we knew what who we had to work with and failed to adapt. Free-kicks will need to be addressed when they become a more reliable part of our gameplan too, but despite some nice adjustments at HT, Jover will not look back joyfully at this one.
Here’s to hoping this is a blip, and here’s to hoping we won’t need Raya to save any more pens.
