Does Stoke call for 4-4-2?

Over the last couple of years, the effectiveness of the 4-2-3-1 formation that Arsenal play has often been called into question. Normally when results have not been going the Gunners' way. I have never really had a problem with it. I don't think that it has been to blame for the poor defensive record Arsenal acquired. I think however, that it might be time to change for the last couple of games of the season.

Arteta's injury is a big blow for the Gunners

There has been a terrible recent history with regards to Arsenal and injures, and just when there was a need to maintain momentum and secure third place, that jinx has struck again. Walcott and Arteta, two of the standout performers in Arsenal's resurgent team, are both out until the end of the season.

Arteta has been crucial to Arsenal's balance between defence and attack, suppressing his attacking instincts to play a holding role alongside Alex Song. His signing was questioned on deadline day, many were sceptical about his ability to replace Cesc Fabregas (Arteta really tried to distance himself from being Fabregas' replacement and has played much more of the Wilshere role this season). Fast forward a few months, he has been one of Arsenal's standout performers, and has chipped in with a few spectacular and crucial goals. Ramsey was drafted in to replace him against Chelsea, but did not impress many.

Theo Walcott has been in very good form since scoring a brace in the superb 5-2 victory over Spurs, scoring against QPR, Wolves and Aston Villa since then. Arsenal saw earlier on in the season in the home draw with Wolves how much Walcott's pace and width was missed when he is unavailable. He has been subject to a fair bit of flack over the season but had been playing well and looking like completing a full season for the first time in an Arsenal shirt.

I think that in order to retain the defence/attack balance and width that Arteta and Walcott provided the Gunners may need to switch to formation to 4-4-2. I think that there are a number of reasons for this:

1) Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain: A very promising player with good technical ability, Chamberlain has displayed tactical naivety when playing out wide. He has a habit of dropping back into the central midfield role he prefers. You might be able to do that in League 1, but not in the Premier League. He also can be reckless with the ball, trying to take on one man too many, again he has not quite worked out that he is playing against Premiership defenders now.

2) Gervinho: I am not a fan of Gervinho. He lacks a first touch, any finishing ability, any ability on his weak foot and is unable to cross a football. I do not feel that he keeps up with play and is poor defensively too, often leaving his tracking back until it is too late. I would also question how well he will be able to handle Stoke's physicality.

3) Aaron Ramsey: Ramsey is never going to be at his best playing in the Arteta/Wilshere role. He is a more creative player and does lack some defensive discipline.

I believe that a 4-4-2 offers Arsenal a way out of these problems. In theory, it can work without much width (unlike what is shown in the suggested team below) which would eradicate the issue with the lack of wide players. I think that Arsenal should field the following team versus Stoke:

My team selection vs. Stoke City

 There are some changes that could be made, Chamberlain could be picked ahead of Benayoun for example. I think that Chamakh's aerial presence would be advantageous against a tall Stoke side, he would be able to act as a pivot for Robin van Persie to operate off of.

 

Another alternative, which may suit the players Arsenal have available better is to play a 4-1-2-1-2, as demonstrated below:

 

The 4-1-2-1-2 option

This might work better for the likes of Ramsey and Benayoun, allowing them to play a more central role. Both formations mean that Gibbs and Sagna would be required to provide all the width but provided Song is disciplined enough to play the holding role all game it could work.

 

Would you go 4-4-2 or stick with 4-2-3-1? Let me know through Twitter (@Goonernl) or the comments below.

 

Arsenal, Barcelona & Chelsea

Watching Barcelona passing the ball around the edge of Chelsea's penalty area for 85 minutes on Tuesday gave me a strange sense of déjà vu. That Saturday, Arsenal had spent a fair bit of time in possession, but not really going anywhere. The game plans that Arsenal and Barcelona have are very similar, amounting to pass them off the park until a gap appears in the defence and a beautiful through ball can be played. But what happens when that isn't working?

Arsenal have, on occasion demonstrated that they do have a plan B. Sort of. You know that Arsenal are being frustrated and are desperate for a goal when Marouane Chamakh comes on for the last 20 minutes and the tactics supposedly change to lump it into the box as often as possible, and hope someone gets their head on it. The point that Thomas Vermaelen starts playing up top too, is when you know things are going really badly. The thing is this is a ploy that has been working fairly well for Arsenal, wins against Newcastle and Manchester City demonstrating Arsenal's increased resilience and decreased reliance on passing the ball into the net, but what about Barcelona, what is their backup plan?

Watching Barcelona getting nowhere against Chelsea in the second half, you couldn't help but realise one of their main weaknesses. They're too arrogant. Los Blaugranas pass the ball around, expecting a gap to appear in the defence, too proud to try anything else. There seems to be this swagger about them that says: "We are the best team in the world. Your defence must let us score by presenting us with a gaping hole between the centre backs!" Chelsea didn't, Torres scored. Barcelona crashed out. But there was one thing that Barcelona did not try that may well have won them the tie; shooting from range.

In the second half, I think that Barca had two cracks from distance. Someone blazed one miles over the bar from a position where he was never really going to score and Messi hit the post. I spotted several more opportunities than that after I started trying to spot them on about 60 minutes, but Messi and co were just too proud to stoop to that level. It was the same at Stamford Bridge, pass it around, get nowhere. Other than Messi's penalty, the closest Barcelona got to scoring in the second half was when his long range effort smacked off the post. For me, Barca should have been doing that much more, get someone in space 20 or 25 yards out, and just hit it. If you do that 10 times in a game, one of those is going to go in. The law of averages says so. Forget Messi's missed penalty, forget Chelsea's resolute defending, if Barcelona had been pragmatic, they would have changed tactics, allowed themselves to shoot outside the area, and quite possibly reached the final.

Messi & Barcelona crash out of the Champions League

I do not want to take anything away from Chelsea's defensive performance, it was heroic (especially after John Terry's stupidity) but Barcelona made it easy for them. If Chelsea knew that Barca were going to take pot shots, they would have had to defend higher up the pitch and that would have given Barcelona the space that they needed to play their normal, beautiful game. It is something Arsenal have realised this season, sometimes, you just have to win ugly.

As for John Terry, he is an idiot. Not only to commit the offence in the first place, but to then claim it was an accident after. He knows full well that there are a vast number of cameras filming the game and that pundits will analyse the replays, how he thought that 'it was an accident' would cut it, I would really like to know. There was some speculation in the papers yesterday that he would not be allowed to lift the trophy were Chelsea to beat Bayern, something that was later dismissed by UEFA, but if I was in charge at Chelsea I would not let him. His stupidity so nearly cost them a place in the final he does not deserve to hold it aloft.

I have heard some people criticising the timing of Pep Guardiola's departure from Barca, but I do not think that this is a recent decision. I suspect that he has been planning to step down for some time, and recent results have maybe made that easier to do. He confirmed that in his press conference this morning too: "At the beginning of December I announced to the chairman that I was seeing the end of my era at Barcelona. Obviously we couldn't say that publicly. Now we are out of the two main competitions it is a good time to announce this. I did not want to continue with the confusion. The reason is simple: four years is enough. The new coach will give things that I am unable to give any more. To be in front of the media every three days for four years is very demanding" The Barcelona job comes with immense pressure, managing the best team in the world isn't easy. It means you are the side everyone else really, really wants to beat. Not only that, the expectation is for silverware every season, and that is never, ever easy. I am sure he'll be successful wherever he decides to go next, and I would not be at all surprised to see him back in the Barcelona dugout at some point in the future. We all forget that he is only 41! He will be replaced by Tito Vilanova, who is currently Guardiola's assistant.

Do you think that something else cost Barca? Should Terry lift the trophy? Let me know your views through my Twitter (@Goonernl) or in the comments below.