Arsenal Vs Valencia: The dichotomy of Granit Xhaka

In Arsenal’s win over Valencia, Granit Xhaka was at first awful and then suddenly excellent. This is the dichotomy of the midfielder, and it is why I believe he is such a contentious figure.

Bar Mesut Ozil, there might not be a more controversial and widely discussed figure in the Arsenal squad than Granit Xhaka. From those who hate is every move to others who adorn the very grass he walks on, there is a huge range of opinion on the qualities of his game and the value he brings to the team.

Find the latest episode of the Pain in the Arsenal Podcast here — Death, Decay, Despair

And Thursday night’s 3-1 victory over Valencia, I believe, perfectly demonstrated the dichotomy of the Xhaka experience, and the subsequent difference of opinion that arises because of it.

More from Pain in the Arsenal

• 3 standout players from 1-0 victory over Everton
• 3 positives & negatives from Goodison Park victory
• Arsenal vs PSV preview: Prediction, team news & lineups
• 3 talking points from Arsenal’s victory at Goodison Park
• Mikel Arteta provides Gabriel Martinelli injury update after Everton win

During the opening 20 minutes, Xhaka was at his absolute worst. His defensive misgivings were again present for the opening goal, not aware of the position of goalscorer Mouctar Diakhaby from the moment a corner kick is taken, and then failing to win the eventual header from a far-post knockback right across the six-yard box, though that latter mistake is more forgivable. He looked extremely lethargic in contrast to the far more mobile Valencia midfield, which is a major weakness of his game, and then his passing, his usual strength, went to pot.

Xhaka played three truly horrible passes, two off his left foot and one with his head, either making a poor decision to force the wrong ball into the wrong space or simply mishitting the ball and playing an inaccurate pass straight to a Valencia player. Those that value Xhaka’s utility base their argument on his distribution, ceding that his defensive work is lacking. If his passing collapses, what does he provide the team?

Well, as the game progressed, Xhaka showed precisely what he provides: controlled, conducting, tempo-setting, play-progressing passing, paired with a brutish physicality, clever reading of the game and tough tackling. If you were to just watch the last hour, you would think Xhaka is one of the best central midfielders in the country.

His passing was superb, spraying balls left and right with terrific accuracy and weight. He created three chances, — two from delicious crosses — more than any other player on the pitch, and orchestrated the Gunners’ comeback smartly and conservatively without shrinking into his shell. It was an exemplary midfield display. For two-thirds of the game.

But the excellence of the last 60 minutes does not come without the ineptitude of the first 20. And this is the Xhaka dichotomy: his detractors admit that he, at times, provides great value to the midfield; his supporters also recognise his shortcomings and restrictions. Where you sit on the Xhaka spectrum is likely determined by whether you see what he can and does do or what he cannot and does not do.

Xhaka likely lies somewhere between the two extremes. He is not the all-encompassing, elite central midfielder he was bought to be. But he is also not the liability that others would have you believe. This is the Xhaka conundrum, and on Thursday night, it was on full display.