Arsenal: A team identity that no one wants

Under Arsene Wenger, Arsenal have become synonymous with a distinct style of play, player development, and unfortunately, results.

Every manager and every club have a footballing identity. As such, it’s the shared responsibility of the two to create a team that adopts that identity. Yet, with the average tenure of a top-level manager being as short as it is, most managers don’t get the chance to stamp their mark on a team, at least not the one they envisioned. However, this is certainly not the case with Arsene Wenger.

Catch the latest episode of the Pain in the Arsenal podcast here

Not only has Wenger been able to definitively impart his identity on his team, but also the entire club. For two decades, he has helped shaped everything the club does, including player development and recruitment. The result is a crop of players with a style of play that, win, lose, or draw, is distinctly Arsenal.

More from Pain in the Arsenal

To make my point, my friend (and fellow Arsenal supporter) Alex, recently asked me about Ainsley Maitland-Niles. This was after Maitland-Niles’ first start in the Premier League and, not having previously seen him play, he wondered what type of player he was. My response, “An attack-minded, technically gifted center-mid type… What else do Arsenal produce?”

Again, after seeing the result today, but missing the match itself, he asked, after a series of melancholy emojis, “What happened?”. To which my fingers typed out with muscle memory “Too easy to play against. All pretty playmakers. No grit.”

And that’s the identity Arsenal have embodied since Patrick Viera left all those years ago: too easy to play against.

This was again the story as Arsenal fell to Nottingham Forest in the FA Cup. With a team selection of reserves, fringe players, and, at best, frequently used substitutes, motivation should have been in full supply. They had everything to prove and a good platform to make their case. Yet, there appeared to be an overarching apathy, unmoved by the need to compete.

This was most clear in the 44th minute, as no one was in the remote vicinity of Eric Lichaj for Forest’s second goal. Not a single midfielder or forward had prepared for a second ball as a sloppy clearance fell to him, unmarked and unchallenged at the top of the box.

At no point during the game did Arsenal make it hard for Forest to play. Despite 69% possession on the day, Arsenal rarely looked dangerous. And while Forest predictably set out to counter-attack, the Gunners did nothing by way of nullifying the threat. In a game where they should have put their opponent on the back foot, and kept them there, Arsenal did anything but.

But here’s the thing, I don’t think it’s beyond these players to “get stuck in” or “have an edge”. I firmly believe for anyone to make it to the upper echelon of their respective sport they must have a superior competitive drive. A drive that results in a love a winning, a hatred of losing, and seeps into every match, 50:50, and 1v1 battle.

Yet, this was far from evident when watching the Forest match. So where’s the disconnect?

Could it be man-management and player motivation? Is it tactical in nature? Is it a combination of both? Either way, it seems as if there’s a culture where doing the “dirty work” is not admired. What’s worse, it seems as if the consequences for failing to compete are minimal.

Next: Arsenal Vs Forest: 5 things we learned

Unfortunately, this has become expected. An occasional bad game can be written-off as unlucky. But this isn’t occasional, and you can’t write off an identity.

Home/Arsenal News