The top Premier League sides are losing their discipline and ability to compete in Europe, as demonstrated by this season's high-scoring matches
After a fortnight that demonstrated English clubs' inability to control football matches in Europe, Arsenal's 5-2 win over Tottenham Hotspur was a perfect demonstration of the utterly anarchic football favoured by Premier League sides this season.
Arsenal won the game despite their defence looking extremely prone to quick breaks in the opening half hour. Equally, Tottenham raced into the lead and were then unable to retreat into a good defensive shape and withstand pressure. 5-2 was a freak scoreline – but so were 8-2, 1-6, 3-5, 3-3 and 1-5. All these results have come this season between the five English sides that have contested Champions League football in the past 12 months.
None of the top sides want to be submissive, to be seen as the underdog and play reactive football. That is the major difference between England and other major European leagues, where the food chain is more established. In Spain, barely any sides attempt to dominate possession against Real Madrid or Barcelona, and even Real know their place against Pep Guardiola's side. In Italy the game is played at a much slower tempo, and in Germany games between the bigger sides are generally tense, tactical and with counterattacking a key factor.
In England, everyone wants to play football. Arsenal went to Manchester United and played the "Arsenal way" despite having an inexperienced back four, a squad yet to reap the benefit of deadline day signings and a side exhausted after the midweek trip to Udinese. They conceded eight. United threw men forward in the derby defeat to Manchester City, even when down to 10 men and likely to be exposed on the counterattack. They conceded six. Chelsea played a suicidally high defensive line at home to Arsenal, when it was clear Arsenal's attackers would outpace their backline. They conceded five. There are other factors – injuries to key defensive players and some brilliantly inventive attacking play. But naivety has contributed, a refusal to change strategy to suit the situation.
Sunday's game broadly suits the pattern. Tottenham played deeper than usual, but the use of two central strikers indicated they were going to be direct and purposeful with their attacking. It worked well early on, with Emmanuel Adebayor and Louis Saha dragging the Arsenal centre-backs out of position and creating space for midfield runners, but Tottenham found themselves unable to compete in midfield, and invited more pressure than they could cope with.
On the other hand, despite Arsenal eventually winning the game comfortably, their early problems surely could have been avoided with a little more caution. Tottenham were only the second side this season to arrive at the Emirates and put two strikers high up the pitch. (The first was Fulham, who earned a point having gone ahead. Manchester United fielded Wayne Rooney behind Danny Welbeck, but Rooney generally battled with Alex Song rather than the centre-backs). Therefore, unusually at home, Arsenal didn't have a spare man in defence – but still pushed both full-backs high up the pitch, and left two against two at the back. They constantly looked uneasy when they lost the ball, when simply dropping Song or one of the full-backs deeper would have provided some cover.
A separate problem for each individual side is the lack of control they are able to exert upon matches. Control, an intangible quality that is impossible to measure, is the hallmark of every great side. It doesn't matter how a team seek to control a match – whether it is with long periods of possession or sensible defensive organisation, the best sides look comfortable when in the lead, rarely threatened and able to conserve energy ahead of their next fixture.
Yet Tottenham looked nervous when 2-0 up, allowing Arsenal chances to get back in the game. When Arsenal took a 3-2 lead, not even the most optimistic Arsenal fan had the confidence they would be able to kill the game – they had to go for the fourth and fifth goals to make sure. Conveniently, that was when they were at their most dangerous – Tottenham had to push up and leave space at the back for Theo Walcott to exploit. Like away at Chelsea, Arsenal could enjoy facing a side playing high up the pitch, yet putting little pressure on the man in possession.
It is this lack of control that is costing English teams in Europe. With a fluid Barcelona side the template for continental success, it's an inconvenient truth that English clubs perform better in Europe when they are defensive, organised and functional. Manchester United's Champions League win in 2008 coincided with their meanest defence in the Premier League era in terms of league goals conceded. Arsenal reached the final in 2006 with a run of 10 clean sheets, which seems unthinkable now. Liverpool's win in 2005 is inevitably remembered for the goalfest in the final, but that was completely at odds with their approach in the knockout rounds. Chelsea got to the semi-finals or further when José Mourinho, Avram Grant and Guus Hiddink were happy to defend, whereas Carlo Ancelotti couldn't get past the quarter-final when Chelsea were routinely putting seven goals past Premier League whipping boys, and defeating their title rivals.
It's not easy to change from a Premier League mentality to a European mindset, as English clubs have found out this season. Those used to a more patient approach are better equipped. Milan are not four goals better than Arsenal in terms of raw quality, but they had a clearer gameplan and knew how to attack Arsenal. Similarly, Chelsea's willingness to leave spaces for Napoli to counterattack into was bizarre. These matches sum up the lack of adaptability, the lack of control.
This is all anecdotal evidence, but the statistics support the theory that continental success comes at the expense of league excitement. When the Premier League enjoyed its best run in Europe, between 2004-05 and 2008-09, the goals per game average in the Premier League was down at around 2.5. In the previous five seasons, when England had no European Cup finalists, it was over 2.65. Since 2009, it has risen to 2.8.
Small margins, but it fits the pattern. To enjoy putting five past Spurs, Arsenal fans must be content with shipping four in Milan. Well, not quite, but there's a trade-off – and 4.9 goals per game in matches between the top five isn't indicative of great quality.
Source: Michael Cox, The Guardian on 27 Feb 12
No comments:
Post a Comment