Bruno is one of the best attacking mids in the league. He’s scored 44 in 124 games and assisted 32. Only De Bryune has created more goal scoring chances. Moving him after two games and him just being made captain is silly.
26 and 19 of those goals and assists were from the first season and a half here. Here are more sobering numbers.
18 goals and 14 assists in 73 PL games the last two seasons (De Bruyne had 22 and 24, respectively, in 62 matches)
1 goal in 11 EL matches last season
0 goals in 7 CL matches in 21/22.
He is not one of the best AMs in the league anymore. Sorry.
Interesting to see Arsenal's approach in the last two games.
They're playing a midfield three that is on face value similar to ours. One DM (Rice) behind two AMs (Odegaard & Havertz). But they're also playing another actual midfielder (Partey) as their nominal RB, letting him invert into midfield alongside Rice rather than making a typical fullback do it.
Makes me wonder:
A) If they're only doing that because they don't love their RB options?
B) If we could do anything similar?
C) If Arteta is getting any of the sort of criticism ETH would definitely get for what I think some posters on here would describe as "building an unbalanced midfield and needing to play another midfielder at RB to fix it".
Ye, but that should show to the team and coaching staff that the system ain't working atm. He shouldn't be that alone.These types of stats are the worst. Hes isolated a lot of the time it's going to happen
Rice and Odeggard are better players than Casemiro and Bruno. Cas, I think this legs are gone, so easy to dribble past. Bruno can barely keep the ball, let alone influence a game.
The other thing is, Saka and martinelli are infinitely better than our wide players, so the system emplyed by Arteta, although similar to ours, works for Arsenal because they simply have better players than us.
I think we need to give the coaching staff and the players some patience to get into it.Ye, but that should show to the team and coaching staff that the system ain't working atm. He shouldn't be that alone.
They also have Odegaard and Havertz who keep the ball very well and Rice who’s very athletic and also keeps the ball well. Our midfielders treat the ball like a ticking time bomb.arsenal have literally beaten palace away with the exact kinda midfield set up we have. 1 holder and two 10s. The main difference between us and them is they have been compact through out
arsenal have literally beaten palace away with the exact kinda midfield set up we have. 1 holder and two 10s. The main difference between us and them is they have been compact through out
They also have Odegaard and Havertz who keep the ball very well and Rice who’s very athletic and also keeps the ball well. Our midfielders treat the ball like a ticking time bomb.
arsenal have literally beaten palace away with the exact kinda midfield set up we have. 1 holder and two 10s. The main difference between us and them is they have been compact through out. Talk of having better players is ludicrous
Today I saw Rice dribbled with ease by Eze for exmple. The reason it ended up in naught was Partey and two others were in close proximity. When Casemiro for example got beat first Nunes vs Wolves, then Maddison vs Tottenham, NO United players were in close proximity. The difference there in being compactness. Not ball retention nor athleticism. Even down to 10 men at no point did Arsenal allow the compactness of their shape to dissipate, yet at one point Palace had 80% of the ball for a sustained period.They also have Odegaard and Havertz who keep the ball very well and Rice who’s very athletic and also keeps the ball well. Our midfielders treat the ball like a ticking time bomb.
They bring that argument up because they are plain missing the point. Arsenal were compact. From Rasmdale to Nketiah (depth) From Partey to Tomiyasu/Martinelli (width) A thing that has nothing to do with ball retention nor athleticism. just team shape. Without the ball you had to play around them. For us last two games it has been piss easy to play through us thanks to the acres of spaces we keep leaving between playersAye the fundamental idea is sound. The question is whether we in particular have the personnel to make it work.
As I noted above, they actually fit another midfield player into the team by using Partey as the nominal inverting RB. Do we have players (of whatever natural position) as suited to that role? Some would also argue that the types of midfielders they have populating the system are very different, with someone like Odegaard being better at retaining possession.
........
Yeah I’ll concede that they’re a much better drilled unit then us. Their players never seen isolated in either defence or attack. I’m just sceptical about whether Ten Hag can get our players to keep our shape so well. Unfortunately, I don’t think we have the athleticism I’m defence to compensate.Today I saw Rice dribbled with ease by Eze for exmple. The reason it ended up in naught was Partey and two others were in close proximity. When Casemiro for example got beat first Nunes vs Wolves, then Maddison vs Tottenham, NO United players were in close proximity. The difference there in being compactness. Not ball retention nor athleticism. Even down to 10 men at no point did Arsenal allow the compactness of their shape to dissipate, yet at one point Palace had 80% of the ball for a sustained period.
Our shape the last two games has had no compactness at all. Be it in nor out of possession. Its both why we struggled in the buildup vs wolves and utterly struggled to contain Spurs in second half whenever we lost the ball
I'm certain we don't. That is why compactness is paramount in terms of the drilled tactics of shape. Not our ability to keep ball or athletic prowess. If we don't improve our ability to be compact we will keep being easy to pick off and play against and will keep finding it hard to impose ourselves. The compactness of Arsenal's shape multiplies the sum of their ability to keep ball and be athletic, whilst minimizing weaknesses. I'm convinced it will have the same effect on us if we can harness it.Yeah I’ll concede that they’re a much better drilled unit then us. Their players never seen isolated in either defence or attack. I’m just sceptical about whether Ten Hag can get our players to keep our shape so well. Unfortunately, I don’t think we have the athleticism I’m defence to compensate.
I believe Mainoo will be out for a couple more weeks unfortunately.Well Mount is out now until after the Int break. I’d consider putting Mainoo in with Case and trying to play Sancho into some sort of form
We 200% need to buy a young energetic DMF, Rice destroyed Palace last night and just shows why that type of player is commanding huge fees now, so important in modern football
Now is it? Ludicrous to say that Rice, Odegaard and Havertz are better than what we have? I'd take that midfield over ours in a heartbeat.arsenal have literally beaten palace away with the exact kinda midfield set up we have. 1 holder and two 10s. The main difference between us and them is they have been compact through out. Talk of having better players is ludicrous
The difference isn’t huge whichever side of the fence you’re on, though.Now is it? Ludicrous to say that Rice, Odegaard and Havertz are better than what we have? I'd take that midfield over ours in a heartbeat.
Which wouldnt matter since our tactics for the last two games would equally expose them. Thats why its ludicrous. Too many are conflating the set up with the players. Anyone who imagines Rice for example would havd faired any better having Nunes run at him without cover. Or being double teamed and tripple teamed by Maddison, Richarlison and Bissouma with no help with in 20 yards in any direction isn't serious.Now is it? Ludicrous to say that Rice, Odegaard and Havertz are better than what we have? I'd take that midfield over ours in a heartbeat.
It's not, but Casemiro either being a slow starter or maybe even start declining has made it an evident difference in favor to their midfield, with the others being Odegaard=Bruno and Mount vs Havertz too early to call.The difference isn’t huge whichever side of the fence you’re on, though.
I don't think it's only about the tactics, Casemiro, Bruno and Mount have been equally appalling in their own conduct, and should bare responsibility. Casemiro probably has the biggest excuse after being left to deal with lots of work, but he has been subpar and there's not hiding from it.Which wouldnt matter since our tactics for the last two games would equally expose them. Thats why its ludicrous. Too many are conflating the set up with the players
Another difference-maker is that Odegaard is more comfortable with possession-based ball recycling than Bruno is. Making Bruno not an ideal player in this 2x#10 system. He’s more suited as a lone #10 chance creator. I’d probably say the same goes for Havertz vs Mount but to a lesser degree.It's not, but Casemiro either being a slow starter or maybe even start declining has made it an evident difference in favor to their midfield, with the others being Odegaard=Bruno and Mount vs Havertz too early to call.
Which also begs the question, knowing Bruno why in the name of reason Mount was bought when ideally we need someone who can at least retain possession and not another CAM who is very similar to Bruno.Another difference-maker is that Odegaard is more comfortable with possession-based ball recycling than Bruno is. Making Bruno not an ideal player in this 2x#10 system. He’s more suited as a lone #10 chance creator. I’d probably say the same goes for Havertz vs Mount but to a lesser degree.
So while quality-wise the difference isn’t huge, for this system the results vary greatly, where we come out lacking.
arsenal have literally beaten palace away with the exact kinda midfield set up we have. 1 holder and two 10s. The main difference between us and them is they have been compact through out. Talk of having better players is ludicrous
Today I saw Rice dribbled with ease by Eze for exmple. The reason it ended up in naught was Partey and two others were in close proximity. When Casemiro for example got beat first Nunes vs Wolves, then Maddison vs Tottenham, NO United players were in close proximity. The difference there in being compactness. Not ball retention nor athleticism. Even down to 10 men at no point did Arsenal allow the compactness of their shape to dissipate, yet at one point Palace had 80% of the ball for a sustained period.
Our shape the last two games has had no compactness at all. Be it in nor out of possession. Its both why we struggled in the buildup vs wolves and utterly struggled to contain Spurs in second half whenever we lost the ball
I have said the exact same thing about compactness of our system or lack of. Arsenal, whether they are playing two attacking players or any other combination, they are always in close proximity to each other. No player is too far from each other which create many passing options and also shields the defence. They move like one organism. They push up the numbers, stay compact and squeeze the opposition whereas we push forward, we clog up the attacking third and are always short in numbers behind leaving a huge gap between our midfield and attack with mostly Casemiro alone and when the opposition gets the ball they run free in an open field. Not only it makes us so vulnerable but also makes it difficult for us to get any fluid passing going. We start to take risks( especially with Bruno) and end up losing the ball.I'm certain we don't. That is why compactness is paramount in terms of the drilled tactics of shape. Not our ability to keep ball or athletic prowess. If we don't improve our ability to be compact we will keep being easy to pick off and play against and will keep finding it hard to impose ourselves. The compactness of Arsenal's shape multiplies the sum of their ability to keep ball and be athletic, whilst minimizing weaknesses. I'm convinced it will have the same effect on us if we can harness it.
Which also begs the question, knowing Bruno why in the name of reason Mount was bought when ideally we need someone who can at least retain possession and not another CAM who is very similar to Bruno.
Which also begs the question, knowing Bruno why in the name of reason Mount was bought when ideally we need someone who can at least retain possession and not another CAM who is very similar to Bruno.
Tongues are being held until the end of the transfer window on that score.The other problem is....where is the back up? If we are now playing 1 DM and two 8/10's even if we get it working then where is plan B? Mount is out now. So it's McTominay? That's a whole different set up. What happens when Casemiro is out. McTominay Mount and Bruno?! That scares the fk out of me.
Another thread as a dig to Mount? Everybody is attacking the midfield but problems are higher up. Garnacho was shockingly bad in first game, not once got by Semedo. Rashford not interested, wasteful. Antony ineffective making poor decisions. Bruno wasting balls. Casemiro fitness wise not ready. And surely it is Mount's fault? Eriksen is also not up to speed anymore and a passenger. What we are badly lacking is a carrier of the ball and athletic/combative DM. And above all pa proper striker to be some kind of a focal point of attack. I really hope Hojlund can be that man. Even if not banging them in all the time but to bring others in play, occupy the defenders etc.
The other problem is....where is the back up? If we are now playing 1 DM and two 8/10's even if we get it working then where is plan B? Mount is out now. So it's McTominay? That's a whole different set up. What happens when Casemiro is out. McTominay Mount and Bruno?! That scares the fk out of me.
Exactly. Outside possession we break into two halves with Casemiro as an island between our attacking and defensive halves. In comparison aresnal are a solid block in both phases. We emulate that we'd get far superior performances and control of games.I have said the exact same thing about compactness of our system or lack of. Arsenal, whether they are playing two attacking players or any other combination, they are always in close proximity to each other. No player is too far from each other which create many passing options and also shields the defence. They move like one organism. They push up the numbers, stay compact and squeeze the opposition whereas we push forward, we clog up the attacking third and are always short in numbers behind leaving a huge gap between our midfield and attack with mostly Casemiro alone and when the opposition gets the ball they run free in an open field. Not only it makes us so vulnerable but also makes it difficult for us to get any fluid passing going. We start to take risks( especially with Bruno) and end up losing the ball.
