Who are the supporters’ favourite players. According the the owner of the kiosk opposite the Arsenal tube, the best selling players’ names on scarves = are (1) Saka; (2) Ødergaard; (3) Saliba.
To lose one of your best players may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness, Oscar Wilde may have written. What might he have made of losing all three for huge chunks of this season?
And when each of our key players has been absent, it’s not really surprising that our performances have suffered. Surely, though, that’s what a squad is for? And had not Edu and Arteta been building a squad of quality players, preparing for absences and tiredness so they can slot in and out as needed? Except these three are exceptional, of the highest calibre, with the whole team’s style of play built to revolve around their special skills. As good as the understudies are, like-for-like replacements don’t sign up or hang around when there’s little likelihood – or indeed intention by the manager – of a regular outing. (As Manchester City have found out of late.)
And when they are absent, it’s more than the individuals and their own skills that are missed. It’s the impact on those around them – a ‘Domino Effect’.
BUKAYO SAKA
He is pivotal to a triangle of movement on the Arsenal right, from which many attacks and goals stem. Over the past few seasons, he, Ødergaard and White have worked short passes, overlaps and incursions behind opposition defences. The loss of White cannot be over-estimated to these effective combinations, no matter how well Timber performs. The loss of Ødergaard earlier in the season, alongside White’s absence coincided with what seemed like a loss of form by Saka. It returned as soon as our captain returned, and two-thirds of the right-sided partnership worked nearly as well as the full three. But now Ødergaard is on his own. Not helped by the virus that recently struck him down, he has Martinelli and Sterling to bounce off and these are quite different from Saka. Not that these are poor players – their qualities don’t quite dovetail with Ødergaards strengths and the result of Saka’s absence seems to be affecting the way our captain plays. He has to drop deeper, roam the field, searching to find those masterful openings. But nobody reads his game or makes spaces as well as Saka and his influence is minimised. There were moans by the crowd as it filed out from the Villa match, blaming him for the lack of creativity and ability to break through Villa’s back line. It’s not for lack of effort, just the blend is missing.
And it’s not hard to see that Ødergaard is as frustrated as the whinging fans. Most matches, when he’s on top of his game. he’s windmilling his arms to help whip up crowd noise. When he’s not at his best, he does it less, He didn’t do it at all, as far as I’m aware, after the missed penalty vs Manchester United, and he cut a forlorn figure at the end of the Villa match.
But if the loss of one player is impacting the attack, it was even more in evidence against Villa at the back.
WILLIAM SALIBA
Saiba is central to the way the defence plays. Gabriel has been outstanding, and Timber and Lewis-Skelley haven’t been anything short of top class, shielded by Rice and Partey (mostly), and together they have formed a defensive wall that repels most attacks.
But when Saliba’s missing, and the dominoes moved, the well-oiled machine (to mix metaphors!) begins to creak. Timber, so good defensively at right back, was moved to the centre against Villa where he hasn’t started all season. Partey slid across to full back, where he’s never looked entirely comfortable, exposing Rice to more work, alongside Merino – who had a few significant moments but is continuing to demonstrate how hard it is for a new signing from abroad to join a leading Premier League side and make an immediate impact. A thought worth considering as we bay for additional resources up front. Against Villa, the defending by numbers, with everyone knowing their job, where they had to be, almost doing it instinctively, was missing. Perhaps a lack of muscle memory! No idea where Timber was for either goal, and would Saliba’s presence have saved the day? More significantly, would Timber have allowed the space Partey afforded on the Arsenal right, so preventing the cross that led to the first goal. Or failed to keep tabs on Watkins for the second – in fact, to run in the opposite direction as Partey did? And wouldn’t Rice and Partey together in the middle have seen the run by Tielemans, read it, and instinctively known who was going to deal with it and and snuffed out the shot that ended up min the net?
The domino effect of otherwise top players operating in positions that are not their own seems to affect performances sufficiently for a very sharp Villa side to take advantage. One absentee might be accommodated, but perhaps the domino effect of moving so many players could have contributed to the loss of two points. One might argue why move players around when there were a number of potential replacements for centre-half on the bench, but this is not to criticise, it’s to look for explanations.
As Mikel Arteta points out, there as much that was good on Saturday, as there have been in almost all the matches where points have been lost. But we play with such understanding between the players, where the ball just seems to find a team mate, almost like remote control, that when the dominoes are moved, the patterns break down.
There are still two trophies to win (three, if we take heart from Bournemouth’s performance at Newcastle) so there’s much to be positive about.
Just after the lost points on Saturday, it doesn’t feel like it.
But keep believing!
Richard Smith
20 January 2025