The fundamental flaw with the most vociferous Arteta “hater” is that they seem to believe Arsenal exist in a vacuum. That “if only” we hadn’t extended David Luiz’s contract, “if only” we played more attacking football, “if only” we signed Emi Buendia, “if only” we didn’t sign Willian, “if only” we hadn’t handed out contract extensions to a certain number of players, “if only” we played Martinelli in more games….if only….if only….
That’s the thing with “hindsight managers” you can always be 100% correct with your opinions and criticism as you have the benefit of never having to make these decisions in real time that have actual consequences. You are reacting to what has happened not determining what will happen.
The problem is, if you are so set in your agenda or point of view (AKA, partizan) you then become blind to the (many) positives that have emerged since Arteta took over.
Firstly, the current squad are all 100% behind and in support of the manager. This does not happen by accident. This is evident on and off the pitch. Second, the way the manager has dealt with egos, bad apples and arrogant attitudes has been proven to be correct: all the players who thought only of themselves and not of the team are gone. Third, Emile Smith Rowe and Bukayo Saka (two of our brightest lights) have said countless times how much the manager has helped and continues to help their development and there is a defined route to the first team for other younger players. Fourth, we have a clearly defined transfer and squad building strategy. Fifth, we are 5th. I could go on.
Yes, some of what I have mentioned involved a bit of luck rather than judgement. But that’s the same with all clubs. No organisation is run and managed without things going your way, fortunate/unfortunate events dictating your broader strategy, having to adapt to unforeseen events or making mistakes and having to adjust. No club or organisation is run where everything is planned and executed perfectly.
An example. We can all safely agree that Willian was a disastrous signing. But, again, that’s with the benefit of hindsight. When he was signed, not a lot of people thought it was a bad signing – it made sense (on paper) for many reasons. Arteta can be rightly criticised for playing Willian for too long at the expense of younger players (Saka or Pepe). However, ALL managers always err on the side of experience and would rather play experienced players. It’s a results game where points are needed NOW. So any manager (including you, reader, if you were in the hot seat) would play your experienced players before youth. Smith-Rowe and Saka were in the squad, so this narrative that Arteta didn’t “believe” or “trust” them is clearly nonsense. When they got their chances, they excelled. That happens at each and every football club but we never see/hear it as all we look at is Arsenal. The sudden upswing in performance was because Willian was so bad an ESR and Saka were so good.
Again, I say all this with the benefit of looking back on what has happened, but Arteta put his trust in a player with a proven track record and that player let Arteta down. It’s that simple.
One of the biggest issues with the teams performance before Arteta arrived was our shockingly bad defensive record. That has, by and large, been fixed. Yes, there have been games where we have shipped a few goals, but overall its widely reported and observed that we play a more organised shape and play with greater defensive disciplin. The evidence? The clean sheets we have and are accumulating. As has been proven; now Arteta has “his” players to execute his tactics and gameplans, the results are beginning to yield points and clean sheets. All the summer signings were made with Arteta’s involvement, heavy involvement.
Handing contract extensions to players we all would rather see leave the club were done for the following reasons: (1) to amend the terms of their original contract, (2) to retain transfer value for a future sale, (3) there are no takers for the player so they cannot be sold anyway, (4) there are no credible alternatives to sign to replace them. (5) in the case of Xhaka, handing a contract extension is a way of building bridges and refocusing the player into performing for the club after nearly leaving. (man management). I say the last one not being a fan of Xhaka, so I am not totally without the ability to critique the club either. Economically, it’s more expedient to extend a contract than buy a new player – especially if you haven’t identified the new player yet.
At the end of the day, Arteta seems to get the criticism for extending contracts for players he didn’t originally sign in the first place (or were signed by the executive management without his direct or full input) but gets no credit for the ones he has signed – the most recent transfer window for example.
The most popular line of attack is that the club finished 8th two seasons in a row.
So the fact the club and Arteta’s first job in management was hugely impacted by covid isn’t a thing then? Yes, it impacted all clubs, but Arsenal has its own unique problems for a rookie manager to resolve (many already listed above). Arteta inherited a mixed squad of ability and attitude as well as the “Mesut Ozil” situation (which cost Emery his job). The fact we had a broken executive team whose in-fighting destabilised the club and led to questionable transfers (Pepe and those through Super Agents – signed without Arteta’s direct input – sanctioned by Edu). The lack of a defined system of play that Arteta continues to try and correct now? The years of drift we experienced before Arteta arrived? None of that matters then? Set against that is other, more organised clubs spending millions on squad building and subsequently racing ahead of us while we floundered outside the top 6.
Anyway. That is ancient history. No one cares. We are 5th in the table after a solid run of performances. That, and what happens between now and the end of the season, is what matters now.
Another is the “defensive” style we currently play. Not sure I recognise this. In most of the recent games we have played, we have scored first in the opening 20 minutes – after aggressively attacking the opposition. When we go a goal or more up, we hold on to it. Yes, to perform the latter you need to play defensively, but any decent performance starts with a decent defensive performance. And this argument ignores the opposition. Just because Norwich are bottom of the table, it doesn’t mean they cannot create problems or “park the bus”. Even 10 rubbish players sitting in front of their goal can prevent the most potent attack from scoring goals. In some games, we have created record levels of chances. In some, we have created fewer chances but still scored. Arteta has only had “his” first team since the end of August (it’s now early November) and in the intervening time, we have gone from bottom of the table to 5th in the table.
Many Arteta critics announced at the start of the season that we must be in the European places in the table at Christmas – or he should be sacked. With 41 days to go – it seems this Key Performance Indicator will be met. A lot can change, of course, it can, but if Arteta reaches this milestone, l assume the goalposts will remain unmoved? That if we remain in the top 6 by the New Year, there won’t be another arbitrary target imposed by disgruntled fans and pundits like “Arteta must finish 2nd precisely 6 points ahead of 3rd and a goal difference of exactly +64”?
If Arteta continues to improve the team, performances and league placement, I wonder if he will actually get the credit this deserves. Or, sadly most likely, it won’t be good enough and there will always be something else that Arteta critics will highlight that undermines the positives.
It’s a shame such perfectionists aren’t football managers themselves. I am sure under their wise and informed leadership, Arsenal would have won a quadruple by now…
Mikel Arteta haters need to take their blinkers off
